Ding Dong The Rich Are Dead

by Tyler Bleszinski on Oct 16, 2005 9:01 PM PDT in News

If Houston wins one more game. The following teams have been eliminated this postseason, and their payroll follows.

The Yankees - $208.3 million
The Red Sox - $123.5 million
The Angels - $97.7 million
The Braves - $86.4 million

And if the Cardinals follow suit, they have a $92.1 million total in 2005 salaries. Those are five of the top 10 teams in total payroll in the majors. The Yankees and Red Sox being 1-2 and the Angels being fourth.

What does this say? A huge payroll may buy you a look at the playoffs, but it doesn't guarantee you anything.

And I know a lot of you have said that a huge payroll doesn't bother you, but I like to root for underdogs and any team with $22 million less in total salary is a team I'm going to cheer for.

Congratulations to the White Sox who go to their first World Series since 1959. Their pitching was just remarkable this postseason and shows that pitching still is key to win a championship. Or at least get there. And I would still love to see Billy try and get Konerko.

One last note...congrats to Jermaine Dye, a guy who never seemed to be able to get fully healthy with our A's after his current teammate El Duque broke his leg. Go Vacaville!

Tweet Comment 77 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

It's also really nice to see Scioscia

go home. We don't have to see him whine again until 2006.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Oct 16, 2005 9:03 PM PDT reply actions

Great post Blez.

The Yankees - $208.3 million
The Red Sox - $123.5 million
The Angels - $97.7 million
The Braves - $86.4 million

Seeing them all lose?

Priceless.

"Meanwhile, Kirk Gibson's a coach with Detroit and I'm in the Hall of Fame.'" - Dennis Eckersley

by El Payo on Oct 16, 2005 9:04 PM PDT reply actions

i agree

great post blez. i have always been been for underdogs. must explain why i was for cubs before we moved to bay area 20 + years ago

by smasfan on Oct 17, 2005 8:25 AM PDT up reply actions

Astros $76.7 million, WSox $75 million

pretty close, but if this is a consideration then my original preference for Chicago over Houston also stands

by OaklandSi on Oct 16, 2005 9:05 PM PDT reply actions

But cheering for Ozzie

Isn't it like cheering for people that steal candy from babies?

Does Ken Hawk Harellson get a ring if the Sox win?

by Hit4TheCycle on Oct 16, 2005 9:08 PM PDT reply actions

It Is

So cheer for the Astros.

sure they'll win
//any day now
//La Rooosa is an a** and a bad example for kids

by Dan_Honolulu on Oct 16, 2005 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions

It's Also Cheering for Jerry Reinsdorf

...who's not only a despicable narcissist, but is as responsible as anyone for most of what's wrong with baseball today. Or to put it more succinctly, he's close friends with Bud Selig, and is the principal reason that Bud became commish.

by GreenNGoldSooner on Oct 16, 2005 11:43 PM PDT up reply actions

I also remember

when the Sox were a division rival of the A's. For some reason, and it could be the long memory, I just can't bring myself to root for the Sox.

by IndianaAsfan on Oct 17, 2005 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions

WAHHHH!

I CANT BELIVE ITS OVER! I'M JUST SO HAPPY!

... and it was at that point that I realized that by thinking outside the box, I had simply walked inside a cube...

by Zonis on Oct 16, 2005 9:09 PM PDT reply actions

re Dye and Konerko

How ironic that a nice addition to our '06 lineup would be a guy much criticized for being kept so long: Jermaine Dye.

Unfortunately, I think Konerko's success is what will prevent him from donning the green and gold. A guy in his prime who hit 40 HRs and followed it up with a kick-ass post-season...sounds like a bidding war waiting for Beane to bow out early. Which is sad, because of all the guys out there for the getting, he might be my very first choice.

Nico

by Nico on Oct 16, 2005 9:10 PM PDT reply actions

I don't mind cheering for Ozzie.

I can't though, bring myself to cheer for Hawk. Gag. Go Houston!

"Don't you play the flute, Huddy?"

by capper3 on Oct 16, 2005 9:10 PM PDT reply actions

I like Ozzie, actually

I couldn't care less about Hawk and Jerry.

I also like Chicago, and my friends there have told me some things about how supportive Ozzie and many of the players have been in the community.

All of the teams that I actually dislike -- for various reasons -- are no longer in the running for the World Series. So I'm not actually that passionate about who I'll be rooting for.

by OaklandSi on Oct 17, 2005 12:04 AM PDT up reply actions

my feelings exactly

besides how good is it that a team which wins the world series is a team the A's beat up.

by china bob on Oct 17, 2005 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions

You don't see this too often:

Roger Clemens: age 43
Ozzie Guillen: age 41

Nico

by Nico on Oct 16, 2005 9:12 PM PDT reply actions

Well not in baseball

Jerry Rice 40 something
Jon Gruden 40 something

But I can say Rice 40 something > Gruden 40 something

by Hit4TheCycle on Oct 16, 2005 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions

Nico Already Pointed to It

How do teams run a marathon and then run a sprint to the WS?

You can't predict sh** in the playoffs. You get the aforementioned "look" at the WS if you win in the regular season. And nothing more.

So how do teams properly adjust from marathon mode to sprint mode in short series, to get to the WS?

It's pitching. Fix the pitching for the playoffs and you're likely to cruise into the WS.

White Sox, Astros. Pitching.

As. Have pitching, too. We're in good company. 2006 is promising.

by Dan_Honolulu on Oct 16, 2005 9:16 PM PDT reply actions

Because

every day that you are running one of your best starters out there, you have a good chance to win. Whether you're the Astros running Oswalt out there, the Twins running Santana out there or the D-Rays running Kazmir out there. So if you have 3-4 "best guys," then you are always on the verge of winning your next game. And that's how the White Sox and Astros have done it. And it's how the A's will do it in '06, with just a little more offense and a lot more health.

Nico

by Nico on Oct 16, 2005 9:19 PM PDT up reply actions

I was impressed with their pitching but...

the Angels offense isn't that great, and the Sox did score 5, 8, and 6 runs in the last three games, which is usually enough to win. They split the two games where they scored 2 runs.

So even though the pitchers get props for the complete games (thanks Angels hackers!), I think at least half the difference this series was the long ball.

by Apricot on Oct 16, 2005 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah; watching them against the A's...

...suggests that the ChiSox pitching needs to face hackers to thrive. The Angels actually played well against them too, but ... well, despite the "keys to the series" I posted before game 2, the real keys to this series were injuries to Benji Molina and the Impaler. Without them, the '05 Angels' lineup is the punchline to a bad joke.

(Visiting Cubs fan)

by Loon from Left on Oct 16, 2005 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah...However...!

Chicago had the Angels on their heals all seris long, by consisently distracting Anel pitchers and fielders by running the bases.
Whether it was Podsednick stealing, or White sox runners taking the extra base, the results were exposed holes to hit through and pitchers unable to establish a rythm to totally focus on the hitters.
The Whitesox offensive philosophy to attack from all angles with small ball, running, longball will be more resourceful than our A's at scoring runs. Our flaw is our narrow philoshy when it comes to strategy.More than any player acquisitions the A's (Billy) should, develop a more balanced offensive approach first and foremost!

by green Suede on Oct 17, 2005 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions

You need more than just pitching..

The A's lost 3 (Wasnt that good the first ALDS, Gil Heredia, cough) series with the pitching. You need to be able to score enough runs to make that pitchign worthwhile.

It's always a complete game of all 3 phases that wins, but people always tend to concentrate on one thing.

The Sox won last year with a huge offense. It takes more than one phase to win.

Bring back Hammer.

by OaktownPower on Oct 17, 2005 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions

one day..

we will see this day..

lets hope its next year :)

by Snuffaluffagus on Oct 16, 2005 9:19 PM PDT reply actions

Well Said, Nico!

Totally true. The A's are seeing, as are we, that we can do this next year. Wouldn't that just be the best! And so doable! Next year in the promised land of World Series Champs! Any team that can afford to part with Barry Zito, although I hope the we don't, can definitely win it all. And we have enough veterans on the team to touch home plate this time! Go A's!

by A'sfansince1970 on Oct 16, 2005 9:26 PM PDT reply actions

Woops!

I meant who can touch home plate this time!

by A'sfansince1970 on Oct 16, 2005 9:26 PM PDT reply actions

re: Ding Dong The Rich Are Dead

The figures are pretty revealing: all the teams under approx $75 million/annual salary that were in the hunt and competitive through late August imploded in the home stretch. The truth really is in the numbers; it is awful tough to remain in the top of the division and play competitive baseball through the late season without the dollars to keep the train on the track.

Of course the flip-side is also true (if the red birds do fold) - and then we'll have a WS between two teams with a combined annual salary of just over $150 million. So the sweet spot must be somewhere in the middle (between the Athletics and the Cards).

Will Beane and Wolfe pony up the cash to get us into the first round and beyond?

by PhillyCraig on Oct 16, 2005 9:30 PM PDT reply actions

Sample size: ~1 month

The Red Sox had the second highest payroll in the known universe when they won it all last year, and the only team that came close to knocking them out was the one with the very highest. The Florida Marlins won in '03 without a "sweet spot" payroll. There's no magic number of dollars that makes a team win; all you can do is field a good team with what you've got. It's just really great to see that this year at least, though the hundred-million-dollar gorillas filled most of the postseason berths, the little guys have manage to get past them so far.

(Visiting Cubs fan)

by Loon from Left on Oct 16, 2005 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions

Exactly, loonfromleft!

The goal is to put the best team on the field, not to put the most expensive/least expensive/best bargain/best value/smartest use of money team on the field.

It seems that if two teams have equally smart GMs, the one who can spend more money on salaries will come out ahead; he'll just have a lot more margin for errors in judgement or injuries.

As the other GMs get smarter, the small payroll GMs have to become super geniuses or just get luckier in the draft.

Yes, there were a lot of problems with the Yankees, Red Sox and Angels this year, but their problem WASN'T their payrolls. Hey, the big money teams all made the playoffs. And didn't the smartest of all GMs call the playoffs a crap shoot?

by Eck on Oct 16, 2005 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions

Sorry, I'm Wrong

The Mets (#3), Phillies (#5), Giants (#7), Mariners (#8), Cubs (#9) and Dodgers (#11) didn't make the playoffs
while the Padres (#16), White Sox (#13) and Astros (#12) did.

So not all the big money teams made the playoffs. Still, four of the top six did make it.

What's neat is how close the Indians came with the fifth smallest payroll.

by Eck on Oct 16, 2005 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions

tomorrow will be

interesting to talk to angels fans and their blaming the ump. "if the shoe fits, wear it".

so much on my mind, i just can't recline -respiration

by ucla kid on Oct 16, 2005 9:31 PM PDT reply actions

Rhich old rich?

by iglew on Oct 16, 2005 9:32 PM PDT reply actions

If you want some good laughs

I suggest you read the posts at HalosHeaven, what a bunch of babies.

by Pucking Insane on Oct 16, 2005 9:40 PM PDT reply actions

Been So All Year

Obsession with posts and post count at AN.
Overuse of the F-word.
Inane references to punk rock lyrics.
Amaeturish analysis (which thankfully reflected in the amateurish coaching of the Ahn-hells in the playoffs).
Childish demeaning of other SportsBlog sites.
Tattling on SportsBlogs sites that talked about Halos Heaven posts.

I almost registered, just to shake their tree, but couldn't be bothered in the end.

by Dan_Honolulu on Oct 16, 2005 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Gee

A lot of those things you list happen here too.

I sipped the Kool-Aid, and it tastes gooooooooood!!!

by kaweahkaweah on Oct 16, 2005 10:52 PM PDT up reply actions

Don't Think So, kaweahkaweah

Not all of them happen here a lot.

by Dan_Honolulu on Oct 16, 2005 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions

I also think

the writing is on the wall that (off-season moves aside), the Angels will have some problems next year. They rely heavily on Vlad's health--more than the A's rely on any single hitter. Garret Anderson is getting older, less powerful, and less scary by the day. K-Rod really looks like he is headed for a decline or the DL the next 1-2 years. Cabrera is just too much of a hacker for a guy with so little power. And their "hot young guys" are progressing slower than they expected.

I'm not saying they won't challenge the A's next year, but I like the position the A's are in--unless the Angels land Konerko and a couple others, which they could do, and the A's can't.

Nico

by Nico on Oct 16, 2005 9:42 PM PDT reply actions

Damon

I read that they, along with the Cubs, and some other teams that I cannot recall are in the running for Jonny D. Facing him 19 times a year would be nice.

I ask how the hell they can afford the 5 year deal he wants?

by Pucking Insane on Oct 16, 2005 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions

I would think

the Yankees would love to add a CFer by stealing the Red Sox' guy.

Nico

by Nico on Oct 16, 2005 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions

this is true

Did you see how the Yanks picked up Alan Embree from the R.Sox even though he had a 7.65 ERA? Can't say this was the greatest acquisition, but you know they love trying to duplicate what happened with the Babe.

"You can't get any more 'Oakland' than the Coliseum. Get any more 'Oakland' and you're in San Leandro!" -Random Drunk Bum at Game

by rungood on Oct 17, 2005 4:46 AM PDT up reply actions

well...

...not picked up from the red sox, but picked him up after the red sox designated him for assignment. you know what i mean.

damon in pinstripes, though? this would be strange but would make me happy in a sadistic way. 4 years of college in Boston has made me hate 95% of red sox fans!

"You can't get any more 'Oakland' than the Coliseum. Get any more 'Oakland' and you're in San Leandro!" -Random Drunk Bum at Game

by rungood on Oct 17, 2005 4:50 AM PDT up reply actions

How: They draw a TON of fans...

and have LA radio and TV deals plus a rich owner. They can afford who they want.

Bring back Hammer.

by OaktownPower on Oct 17, 2005 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions

So they'll spend $7 million

on a backup CF, Finley?

Wouldn't put it past them.

"Great guys, great teams, great fans, great organization. No matter where I go, if I go, it's going to be hard to compare to what I've experienced here." - Zito

by Checkswing HR on Oct 17, 2005 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions

Don't underestimate the Angels,

especially when one considers their ability to buy what they lack.

They'll still have an outstanding rotation of Colon, Lackey, Washburne, and Santana. Escobar will be back for a full season next year. Look at the huge difference he made for them down the stretch, especially in terms of resting Shields.

We'll see what McPherson can do when he's healthy. They have high hopes for him.

The Angels system has a shortstop named Brandon Wood who had an OPS of 1.055 in A-Ball this year and an OPS of 1.428 so far in the AFL (with a home run in every 4 at-bats). I don't think Stoneman is worrying too much about Cabrera.

And rumors have it that we could see Bonds bat behind Impaler next year. How fun would that be?

"Great guys, great teams, great fans, great organization. No matter where I go, if I go, it's going to be hard to compare to what I've experienced here." - Zito

by Checkswing HR on Oct 17, 2005 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions

Dor-K

What was up with his mechanics last night? He looked like a cross between Rob Dibble and the Rally Monkey. If he's not already injured, he keeps pitching like that and he will be.

The best conkers to play with are uncracked, firm and symmetrical. Make a hole through the middle of your chosen conker.

by monkeyball on Oct 17, 2005 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions

I was rooting for the White Sox

but I still hate AJ Pierzynski, or however you spell it, for kicking his trainer in the nuts.

I sipped the Kool-Aid, and it tastes gooooooooood!!!

by kaweahkaweah on Oct 16, 2005 9:43 PM PDT reply actions

A.J. has a face

only a mother could love. And she probably only loved him until he spoke his first word and it was, "BOO-YA!!!"

Nico

by Nico on Oct 16, 2005 9:48 PM PDT up reply actions

i'm a fan of curses

the white sox haven't won since the black sox scandal, right?
how come that doesn't get discussed along with the billy goat curse and the curse of the bambino?

i'm pro-curse. i was pissed (as were all a's fans i'm sure) when the red sox won. trading babe ruth should be like a 250 year curse. the white sox and the cubs are all us curse lovers have left.

go astros!

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Oct 16, 2005 10:31 PM PDT reply actions

Mrs. Blez is calling a curse on the Angels

because they changed their name to Los Angeles this year. She says karma won't let them ever win another world series again. I really like that idea.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Oct 16, 2005 10:38 PM PDT up reply actions

don't forget the yanks

ever since giambi and a-rod came aboard.

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Oct 16, 2005 10:42 PM PDT up reply actions

Can she amend the curse to no more

AL West titles? :-)

Bring back Hammer.

by OaktownPower on Oct 17, 2005 12:14 AM PDT up reply actions

As an L.A. girl born and raised...

..I like to call it The Curse of the Angeleno.

by mami blez on Oct 17, 2005 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions

Maybe curses

only have a shelf life for the century in which the original sin originated? How else do you explain the dual year of the "Sox's"?

If this is so, maybe the Yanks are ass out for the next century or so. If that's the case, long live curses. Hopefully this would include the Giants too. The curse of the Roid rage?

"It's better to sit quietly in a room and be thought a fool, rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt."--Mark Twain

by alox on Oct 16, 2005 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions

curses

What about the Indians (1948) and the curse of their racist caricature logo Chief Wahoo?

"I sure hope this team doesn't make the playoffs..." ---Mark Buehrle, after being smoked on 2 consecutive weekends by the A's

by emperor nobody on Oct 17, 2005 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions

I like the sig

See, I'm a murderer, I kill what I eat. I'm a hunter-gatherer, I kill what I eat. I'm a steelworker, I kill what I eat. I'm a bricklayer, I kill what I eat.

by Cutthemullet on Oct 17, 2005 1:24 AM PDT up reply actions

Agreed...I like the Indians'...

...players and management, but that logo's got to go.

AN Member Location Surveys: Results | Take part

by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Oct 17, 2005 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions

they are apparently in process

I read something this weekend (maybe a link at Ben Maller?) saying that the Indians are apparently allowing all of their Wahoo inventory to move without replenishing it, with an eye to an announced phaseout when they have attritted the stocks on hand down to near zero.

The Indians are my #2 team, but Chief Wahoo is an abomination.

The best conkers to play with are uncracked, firm and symmetrical. Make a hole through the middle of your chosen conker.

by monkeyball on Oct 17, 2005 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions

I love rooting for the Astros

I've always allowed myself an "NL favorite" because I don't really feel disloyal to the A's that way, and the Astros have been my guys for the last three seasons. This season, it felt painfully like the A's season in the beginning...and then they totally turned it around and when the games matter, they never folded. So many of their players are so underrated, and so many of the names of their players will get you a blank "huh?" stare from people who aren't big baseball people.

Great starting pitching, a great bullpen, and just enough offense to win against one of the best offenses in the National League... very little not to like.

by nycfan @ Athletics Nation on Oct 16, 2005 11:08 PM PDT reply actions

as long as Clemens messes up

I'll stay sane. Other than that I feel pretty indifferent about the rest of the playoffs.

by Apricot on Oct 16, 2005 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Actually, good point

Clemens is easy to hate... but there's something about seeing him go out there start after start and be so damn good that's just a little awe-inspiring.

Also, I've always heard that Andy Pettitte is one of the nicest, really good guys in the game and him and Clemens are inseparable, so I guess that lends Roger a little character in my eyes.

It's just nice to be able to enjoy baseball for as long as possible. I can't help it, I love the sport too much to not watch as much as I can.

by nycfan @ Athletics Nation on Oct 16, 2005 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions

I think the WS will be great this year

because the team that wins the World Series will do so after a long, long drought. The White Sox haven't won since '17, the Cardinals haven't won since the early '80s ('82?), and the Astros haven't won since, like, never.

The regular season didn't go my way -- not just the A's, but the Indians, too. But the postseason has been like a fantasy. The three highest-payroll clubs make it into the four slots for the AL playoffs, and they all get knocked out. Sweet.

"Great guys, great teams, great fans, great organization. No matter where I go, if I go, it's going to be hard to compare to what I've experienced here." - Zito

by Checkswing HR on Oct 17, 2005 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions

I'm sorry, but

I just can't cheer for a team that has Roger Clemens on it. C'mon Cards! Pick it up!

by atomopawn on Oct 17, 2005 12:49 AM PDT reply actions

Dang

We sure could have used 4 straight complete game wins back in Sept along with an anemic Angels offense.

by OaktownRajah on Oct 17, 2005 1:01 AM PDT reply actions

Yeah, baby.

Good one, Blez.

Money can't buy happiness or a World Series.

But it can buy a power hitting DH to bat behind Chavvy.

So ... yeah. It's comforting to know you don't need to be the richest team to make the Series. But it wouldn't be bad to have a player of Konerko's ability playing for the A's.

"It's easier to stay in last place than it is to stay in first." ... Bill James

by Edwinwinwin on Oct 17, 2005 1:49 AM PDT reply actions

i hate to say it

but we're not signing a free agent slugger, at least not an elite one.
if one comes here, it will be through a trade. and you know what that means: losing other valuable players (ie not "cruz and a prospect") in the process....

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones." -BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Oct 17, 2005 2:03 AM PDT reply actions

The best part about the White Sox

winning was getting to see them celebrate on the Angels field. I know I hated watching them celebrate on ours the last 2 years.

by 3up3dn on Oct 17, 2005 3:22 AM PDT reply actions

Re: Jermaine Dye

Amazing how many players just seem to find the fountain of youth after they leave us? It still irks me that Mark McGuire spent literally his last two years in Oakland on the DL.

by Rob @ Athletics Nation on Oct 17, 2005 7:46 AM PDT reply actions

Fountain of Youth...

...or, Needle in the Ass.

One or the other.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Oct 17, 2005 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions

McGwire

I'm talking about McGwire, of course. JD has always been legit...IMO.

Let's Go Oak-Land!

by Colorado Fan on Oct 17, 2005 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions

Wouldn't mind if the Astros win...

Heck, why not. They haven't won it all before.

I would like to see the Cardinals at least make the NLCS a series, though.

AN Member Location Surveys: Results | Take part

by FormerHuntsvilleStar on Oct 17, 2005 8:23 AM PDT reply actions

I always want the AL team to win

with the exception of when the Yankees are playing. I hope the White Sox break the curse, seems like a lot of good guys myself, even AJ is funny in a strange way, I like guys with a littel emotion, Swisher will be that way soon.

by china bob on Oct 17, 2005 8:41 AM PDT reply actions

Big money teams

there's a huge advantage teams with deep pockets have over ones with small pockets: the ability to get better bench players. Obviously, the Yanks misspent their cash, but I think the A's would've been able to get better replacement parts for their team's weaknesses, especially when injuries hit.

"To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no choreography, and the dancers hit each other." - Jack Handey

by JJ on Oct 17, 2005 8:59 AM PDT reply actions

I agree...

I love the "underdog" factor of the A's small-money success, because it requires a lot of creativity and foresight in the front office when it comes to spotting & developing talent. But, unfortunately, winning with this philosophy also depends on having few or NO major injuries to starters.

by Poppy on Oct 17, 2005 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions

Re: Instant Replay

I think that instant replay should be used to reverse bad calls so that bad calls don't determine the game's outcome. Kevin Kennedy, echoing Nico, said after the Pierzynski strikeout in the dirt that you don't want to have instant replay because it would take away the human element.

Well, given the many errors by the umps in the Cards game yesterday, I expected Kennedy to sing a paen to human frailty in the postgame, but instead he complained that we don't want the umpires determining the outcome of games! Well, Kevin, on plays where the umps are blocked from the action or the action happens too fast, how else can you get the correct call, except through instant replay? Didn't it warm your heart, that called strike at Edmonds' armpit?

There's no worse feeling in the world than a bad call that makes your team lose. (OK, maybe bullpen blowups.) I don't see how fans can object to a system that tries to get the calls right.

"Great guys, great teams, great fans, great organization. No matter where I go, if I go, it's going to be hard to compare to what I've experienced here." - Zito

by Checkswing HR on Oct 17, 2005 11:47 AM PDT reply actions

There is a time and a place for IR

And balls and Strikes is not one of them. I think that is one place where it needs to be avoided totally. For one, the game would take a lifetime and a half.

Close plays on the field, that is something that I could understand having an instant replay for certain calls. The problem is, certain managers <cough>scoscia<cough> would end up abusing the privallage of the Instant Replay. If they could set up some ground rules, say, a limit on the number of times you can request an instant replay during one game, I would be all for it. But it does take something away from the unpredictablity and the humanity of the game. Which are two things that most people love about the game.

For the most part, I think the umps get the calls right. The only call in the Angels/White Sox series that I truly believe should have been reversed (that wasn't) was when Finely claimed catcher interference on that double play ball. The others I thought were fair and correct. Of course, to me the best part was the fact that in the long run, that didn't make a difference in the outcome of the game. They still would have lost, but that is another topic.

My point is, I can understand it for certain things and on a very limited basis, but not as a resource and certainly not a replacement for the umps. If we wanted machines determining the outcome of a baseball game, we would all be playing it on a Playstation or X-Box.

"We play our best ball when we're goofing around and having a good time" ~Bobby Crosby

by BobbyCrosbysGirl on Oct 17, 2005 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions

I agree

that managers should be limited to two or three challenges per game, and that IR on balls and strikes is probably unworkable.

Do you remember, on that grounder in the 9th against Cleveland during the stretch drive, when Bob Wickman fell down like a beached whale (sic) behind 1st base, blocking the view of the ump while Band Camp stepped on 1st? We really needed that game. Wouldn't your desire for the correct call, through instant replay, have outweighed your machines-taking-over-for-humans qualms?

The ump didn't even see the play. He mentally flipped a coin in order to determine the call; THAT was the truly machine-like move.

"Great guys, great teams, great fans, great organization. No matter where I go, if I go, it's going to be hard to compare to what I've experienced here." - Zito

by Checkswing HR on Oct 17, 2005 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions

Oh my goodness, I totally agree with that!

That is why I think they should be allowed to consult the IR in certain cases, but there needs to be some control over it so it isn't abused. I only think the game will become mechanical if we use IR on balls and strikes. But on a call like that, I would say, please, Roll the tape!!

"We play our best ball when we're goofing around and having a good time" ~Bobby Crosby

by BobbyCrosbysGirl on Oct 17, 2005 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions

The NFL was the proving ground.

The NFL originally allowed replay on practically any mildly controversial play. When that proved to be as fast-paced as the OJ Simpson trial, they switched to a system where the coaches were limited to three challenges per half, or something like that.

Eddinger made a bad call the other night, but I feel sorry for him for all the abuse heaped on him from the right field fans in Angels Stadium. SportsCenter did a feature yesterday on Don Diekinger (sp?) and all the death threats he and his family received for the bad he call he made that might have cost the Cardinals the World Series in '85. Why should we have a system that ensures fans' frustration and threatens umps' families? What's more important, preserving "The Human Element," or eliminating death threats against umps?

Over the next 5-9 games in the postseason, I think that all those who favor "The Human Element" in umpiring should be honor-bound to wax lyrical whenever they see a bad call. Especially Kevin Kennedy.

"Great guys, great teams, great fans, great organization. No matter where I go, if I go, it's going to be hard to compare to what I've experienced here." - Zito

by Checkswing HR on Oct 17, 2005 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions

A's payroll- 55M vs. 66M

Sporting News has posted the A's 2005 payroll as being 66M instead of opening day 55M, which I assume includes the additions of Kennedy, Payton, Witasick & the Rivercats that spent time in the bigs. In fact there may have been more added salary than ever because of the guys going back and forth this year from AAA to MLB but I never wouldn't have thought min. salaries could greatly affect that number.

If anyone can provide clarity as to why this number is so high, I would greatly appreciate it? I'm catching crap from some friends who claim that the A's payroll was pretty high for missing the playoffs again. I wanted to stick a needle in each of their voodoo dolls but I'm in too good of a mood now since watching K-Fraud blow the game last night.

I have explained that we lost around 8-10 mil on Dotel & Durazo alone so that would put us close to our original number.

"The first thing I realized in this game, there are no weekends."

by ohtobe21likehuston on Oct 17, 2005 1:49 PM PDT reply actions