Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

And did I mention I moved out
I got my own place off of South
And I've been living hand to mouth
For going on a year by now
And yes I still see El around
It's different but I can't say how
She cut her hair it's back to brown
She's living with her boyfriend now

I haven't written anything on this site for.. well.. ever, so I thought it was time.

So here's a bunch of stuff I've been thinking about lately. Some of it is even about baseball.

Less than Zero: Did anyone see the Red Sox-Indians game last Thursday (Aug. 3)? Bottom of the 6th inning, Boston at the plate, down 7-3. The Bo Sox manage to load the bases with nobody out and who should come up to the plate but Ken Freakin' Huckaby. You know, the former Jay with the .282 lifetime slugging percentage. I swear every single person watching the game KNEW he was going to ground out into a doubleplay. Why the Red Sox didn't try putting the squeeze on, I'll never know. Anyhow, Huck swings away and sure enough, grounds out to the 2nd baseman and the Indians turn two. Red Sox wind up losing the game by one stinking run. Honestly, Huck should have just stood there at the plate, hoping for a walk or to get plunked or possibly for divine intervention. Dad thought it was absolutely hilarious. He is an Indians fan, though.

Topps of the Pop: I've noticed lately that if you look at Topps sets from the late 1970s and early 1980s, they only have like five different shots. That's it. I was flipping through the 1981 set last night and it certainly holds true. The shots are:

Guy sitting in the dugout/standing beside the dugout looking bored.
Guy standing around the batting cage (occasionally holding a bat) looking bored.
Guy standing at the plate.
Guy standing on the mound, looking like he's about to throw a warmup toss.
Extremely closeup of some ugly looking dude with bad hair. If you've seen the 1981 Topps card of Bobby Bonds, you'll know what I mean.

Paging Dr. Jobe: I was at the Dome on Sunday and I couldn't get over the difference in pitching styles between the different White Sox relievers. Mike MacDougal looks like he's having some sort of seizure when he's on the mound. Limbs are being spastically thrust in every direction and you swear his arm is going to come flying off at the shoulder socket. Contrast that to Neal Cotts, who pitches like he's filming an instructional video. Everything is so flawless.

Speaking of Injuries: We talk about 1980's baseball a lot around here, but one guy you never hear discussed anymore is Kal Daniels. Does anyone else remember when that guy looked like he was going to be the next Frank Robinson? At 23 he hits 26 homers with a .334 batting average. By the time he was 28, he was out of the majors. If he could have only stayed healthy.

Catcher of the Future: So who is going to be the everyday catcher for the Jays next year? I had been saying that at 36, it won't be Gregg Zaun, but Coach points out that he's an awfully young 36, as far as catchers go.

Posted by Pepper Moffatt on Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 08:48 PM EDT.

Random Musings | 39 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Mike Green - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 09:27 PM EDT (#152693) #

Kal Daniels, Gary Redus, Eric Davis. The shooting stars of Cincinnati.

I am hoping that Gregg Zaun is back in 2007. I figure that he's still good for 400 PAs. I wouldn't start him 4 days running though, and 3 might be pushing it.

VBF - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 09:30 PM EDT (#152694) #

I was looking through some old cards of mine, and I'm not sure if anyone's seen this set, but it's basically a collection of Nolan Ryan doing various things with captions at the bottom explaining what he's doing.

"Nolan getting a bite to eat"

[Picture of him biting into a hot-dog]

"Nolan taking a rest"

[Picture of Ryan resting his chin on his glove]

"Gearing Up!"

[Picture of Nolan Ryan tying his shoelaces]

I imagine the full set would include Ryan at some Disco with the caption "Gettin' Jiggy With It".

Then a few weeks ago I bought a pack of cards from a vending machine at the RC, which included the "Stan Musial Face Puzzle" where fans can collect various pieces of his nose, eyes and mouth which will form one giant closeup of Stan Musial's face. Quite bizarre.

CaramonLS - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 09:34 PM EDT (#152695) #

I like Zaun for 2006, and then to move to a split duty role in 2007 when Thigpen is (hopefully) ready.

Zaun is likely in the best shape of his life too, and it shows. And to be quite honest, I don't see many other viable catching options either.

Pepper Moffatt - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 09:38 PM EDT (#152696) #

Did the Reds have more good young talent than anyone else in the late 80s, other than possibly the Rangers and A's?

Besides Daniels, Redus, and Davis, there was Paul O'Neill, Barry Larkin, Nick Esasky, Joe Oliver, Chris Sabo, Jose Rijo, and a whole bunch of others. But other than 1990, where they won 92 games and the Series, the team never seemed to climb the hump.. a perrenial 85-87 win team.

The Rangers had Sierra, Browne, Incaviglia, Oddibe McDowell, Mike Stanley, Jose Guzman, Bobby Witt, Ed Correa, and Mitch Williams all come up as rookies between 1985-87. Has any team ever had more quality rookies in such a small time? Unfortunately a bunch of these guys flamed out and the team accomplished a whole lot. But for awhile, they looked like they were going to be a powerhouse.

Pepper Moffatt - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 09:39 PM EDT (#152697) #

errr.. and the team accomplished NOT a whole lot.

Dave Till - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 09:43 PM EDT (#152698) #

The extreme closeups in Topps cards served a purpose: every player had an extreme closeup shot done, in case he was traded between when the shots were taken and the cards were issued.

As for the bad hair: well, everybody had bad hair in the late 1970's and early 1980's. I know I did. :-)

Pepper Moffatt - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 09:44 PM EDT (#152699) #

Makes sense, Dave. Particularly for Bonds, who was traded every year anyway.

Named For Hank - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 10:42 PM EDT (#152701) #

I could explain in a longwinded way why exactly those old cards were limited to photographs of players not in motion, but I won't unless someone is really interested. But let me just say that they are that way because of the limitations of equipment and media available at that time.

Mike Green - Wednesday, August 09 2006 @ 10:50 PM EDT (#152702) #

The Reds did have as much young talent as anybody. Mind you, if you had suggested in 1987 that Paul O'Neill would end up with the best career among the outfielders with his best years as a Yankee, I would have laughed. Mario Soto was a terrific young pitcher in the early 1980s.

Mick Doherty - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 12:21 AM EDT (#152704) #

Oh, the Reds of the 1980s -- a team I followed very closely, living in Ohio at the time; I was more into the Reds at that time than I am into the Yankees even now. And though they didn't win anything, did you know they finished second in the NL West four years running, 1985-88, and in the current setup probably would have made the playoffs at least twice. The frustrating thing to fans like me was the team finished second four times to three different teams -- LA, HOU, SF and LA won the division those years, so it's not like there was some dynasty to overcome. Great, exciting team to watch, though, even when they fell apart in '89, only to bounce back and win the whole thing in 1990.

Soto was a great young pitcher, and for a while I would have bet that he, Frank Pastore and Joe Price would be Seaver-Koosman-Gentry for the '80s set, but of course that never happened. Oliver, Morris/Benzinger, Doran/Duncan, Larkin/Stilwell and Sabo were at times as good an all-around infield as any in the game, and the aforementioned Davis-Daniels-O'Neill (and lest we forget, Tracy Jones) outfield was really something.

Now I'm all nostalgic. Sure wish Lou Piniella, or even Tommy Helms, had been guiding those '85-'89 teams rather than "Double Down" Peter Edward Rose.

Chuck - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 06:33 AM EDT (#152705) #

All this talk of old Reds and Rangers teams filled with young talent -- most of which fizzled, some to injury -- should serve as a reminder that ball players are designed to break your heart. There is no guarantee that the Alex Rios we saw in the first half this season will become the norm, or even return. Or that Aaron Hill will continue to develop and become a 370/450 hitter. Or that amidst all those young pitchers, that there is a future star or two. Or even that Russ Adams will still be in baseball four years from now.

We project the best case development curve on the players we follow, almost with the expectation that it's the norm. We forget why there are a million reasons why that curve won't be followed.

Bruce Sutter didn't share his day in Cooperstown this year with Eric Davis and Oddibe McDowell. As far as I know, they still have to pay to get in. And so do Mario Soto and Edwin Correa. And Nick Esasky (a Hitchcock favourite) and Pete Incaviglia.

Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 10:36 AM EDT (#152708) #

"I could explain in a longwinded way why exactly those old cards were limited to photographs of players not in motion"

It's not just that the players weren't in motion, though some of the cards do have the tail end of a swing or a windup. Plus the 1982 Topps series had the famous "In Action" series with such classics as "Tony Perez's helmet falling off".

There were a lot of shots from earlier sets (early to mid 1970s) that don't seem to show up around 1980, for some reason. Such as:

1. Guy standing in the outfield, looking bored.
2. Guy shagging balls in the outfield, looking bored.
3. Catcher about to receive throw from outfield.
4. Players wandering off the field during a Spring Training game. (Barry Foote's 1975 Topps card is a classic example of this).

You never seemed to see any of the position players standing at their positions, except for the occasional third or first baseman. That wasn't true for all sets, though. Think 1982 Fleer Cal Ripken.

Anyhow, it's just something I noticed.

Mick Doherty - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 10:45 AM EDT (#152711) #

4. Players wandering off the field during a Spring Training game. (Barry Foote's 1975 Topps card is a classic example of this).

Ah, a classic!

Adrock - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 10:55 AM EDT (#152713) #

Ah, nostalgia. I have a soft spot in my heart for the 1988 Score set (or whatever their first year was). My friend Geoff and I figured out the order in which the cards appeared in the rak paks (cellophane wrapped) so we could tell exactly which cards we were going to get from looking at the player on the front.

On an unrelated note, I just finished Joe Dimaggio: The Hero's Life by Richard Ben Cramer.

It's a great book that I would recommend to anyone.

Named For Hank - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 10:55 AM EDT (#152714) #

though some of the cards do have the tail end of a swing or a windup

That's the non-action part of the action -- the part where the player is in the least motion.

First and third base are the closest positions to the camera bays, and therefore the easiest to get a shot of. Consider that the lens i'm using to shoot Photo of the Day was a crowning, glorious achievement when it was released in 1986, and when you add on the 1.5x crop factor that I get because I'm using it on a digital body it finally allows for nice stuff of second base and shortstop.

Long lenses with fast enough apertures to shoot baseball just were not common or affordable before the mid-80s. And when I say affordable, the sticker price on the lens I'm using now was $15,000.

I actually tried a couple of times to use a lens from 1976 for baseball -- it was the fastest, longest thing you could get back then -- and it just wasn't enough. Even with 2006 media and capabilities I was hitting my head against its limitations -- I can imagine how much harder it would be with the speed limitations on colour film back then.

You really have to appreciate the quality of historical baseball photographs, because the photographers had to face both the challenge of getting the timing of the shot and the technical challenge of just being able to capture the image in the first place.

Named For Hank - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 11:00 AM EDT (#152715) #

And speaking of baseball cards, I'm going to take a moment to plug a feature I have going on over at The Hardball Times: THT Baseball Cards.

Here's a Jays-related sample:

Nick - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 12:00 PM EDT (#152719) #

I love Zaun as a player and as a leader, but the Jays will need a catcher that can at least split time with him 50/50. Young 36 or not, Zaun is once again fading badly in the 2nd half of the season. Here are his splits pre and post All Star break the last 2 seasons:

2005 Pre All-Star: 277 / 378 / 420

2005 Post All-Star: 224 / 331 / 324

2006 Pre All Star: 316 / 392 / 529

2006 Post All Star: 145 / 319 / 218

I thought Zaun would fare better in the 2nd half this year with Molina spelling him more oftern than the other catchers last year, but I was wrong. I am fairly certain the Jays' management is aware of Zaun's 2nd half slide the last 2 seasons and that it will figure prominently in the decision as to how the catching duties will be managed next year.

Of course, we have a month and a half left this season and Zaun could possibly turn it around.

ken_warren - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 01:01 PM EDT (#152721) #

Zaun is once again fading badly in the 2nd half of the season.

Well not nearly as much as one might think.

2005 Pre All-Star: 277 / 378 / 420 - BABIP - .300

2005 Post All-Star: 224 / 331 / 324 - BABIP - .260

2006 Pre All Star: 316 / 392 / 529 - BABIP - .322

2006 Post All Star: 145 / 319 / 218 - BABIP - .179

In both seasons he was much unluckier after the all-star break. In particular 2006. He has only seven hits on 39 balls put into play. 12 or 13 would be the norm. His walk rate (which is an actual skill and not luck dependent) has actually soared since the all-star break.

These types of comparisons are pretty meaningless unless put in some sort of luck neutral context. A large chunk of his decline, but not all, is simply a change in his luck.

Thomas - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 03:20 PM EDT (#152727) #

One caveat here is that we're talking as if Zaun himself has no say in the decision-making process. As he had made clear many times (although not in a Shea way), Zaun was unhappy that Molina was brought in and still considers himself to be a number 1 catcher. He's said he'll consider resigning with Toronto, but he's also made it clear that he doesn't want another Molina brought in to handle 65-70% of the playing time. To resign here, I think Zaun will need a verbal commitment from the front office that he will be the primary backstop. Without it, he'll look elsewhere.

Maybe he'll find that nobody else is willing to hand the reigns over to a 35-year-old who has just established himself as something more than a lifelong backup catcher and he'll have to reconsider his stance. But I believe Zaun would prefer playing 65-70% of the time in Kansas City over 30-35% in Toronto.

I agree that the Jays office is no doubt aware of Zaun's second-half drop the last couple of years and the fact that the evidence seems to support the position that the more he plays the more he is likely to wear down. However, they also are likely aware that they'll have to tolerate this in order to keep him around, because Gregg believes he can be a regular catcher. If JP believes that Zaun's production is likely to drop with near-every day playing time to a point where the team wouldn't want him as their primary catcher, Toronto may have another hole to fill on their roster. Unless they can convince him to split time with someone, there's a chance the team will need to find two backstops in the offseason.

HoJu - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 04:33 PM EDT (#152733) #

Nick - Thursday, August 10 2006 @ 10:35 PM EDT (#152759) #

These types of comparisons are pretty meaningless unless put in some sort of luck neutral context. A large chunk of his decline, but not all, is simply a change in his luck.

OK, luck is part of it. But when a player is slugging .218 for a month, he is struggling - period. He has been striking out at more than double the rate he did in the first half.

My question is that given all the factors - his luck-neutral stats the past couple years, the actual production the past 2 seasons, overall career production, and age, how confident would you be that Zaun will produce adequately in the second half of 2007 if his role next year is that of a typical #1 catcher? Personally, I would not be confident he could do it. I also agree with Thomas' point that Zaun will likely want to get the majority of playing time next year, wherever that may be, if anywhere. If the Jays had to offer him a "number one" job to keep him, I would pass. Of course, that is assuming there are better options available at a reasonable price, which there may not be. Not being aware of what all the options are via trade or free agency, I can't make an educated guess at this time as to whether Gregg will be back next year. My uneducated guess is that he'll be on the team Opening Day 2007.

Random Musings | 39 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.