Bats:Both

Max Carey

Archive for category Cincinnati Reds

For Starters, Yanks-Sox a Hit

Apr 4

Posted by Jerry Milani in Boston Red Sox, Cincinnati Reds, New York Yankees, Sports on TV | No Comments

Jack Chesbro

“You always get a special kick on opening day, no matter how many you go through. You look forward to it like a birthday party when you’re a kid. You think something wonderful is going to happen.” - Joe DiMaggio

For most of the 30+ years that I have been a baseball fan, I’ve looked forward to Yankees Opening Day almost from the last game of the previous season.  Because the Red Sox have been the Yankees’ Opening Day opponent only four times in the past 36 years, it seems like the matchup is a rare one.  The Yanks have opened on the West Coast, in Tokyo, and against Central and Western Division teams, but only in 1985, 1992 and 2005, and now tonight, have the Yanks and Sox gone at it in game one, since 1973.

But the teams have actually met 29 times in the opener, with New York holding an 18-10-1 advantage.  Just about every other year from 1917 through the 1930s, the rivals squared off for the first game, though not with the same anticipation as the 2005 game presented.  That, of course, was the first meeting between the teams after Boston’s first World Championship in 86 years (when they also opened the following season against the Yanks), and of course the Red Sox’ historic comeback from 0-3 in the ALCS.  That day, Randy Johnson beat David Wells as the Yanks won, 9-2.

The first time the two franchises met in the season opener was 1904, when the Highlanders’ Jack Chesbro won the first of his A.L.-record 41 games, beating none other than Cy Young, at the old Huntington Avenue Grounds, the team then known as the “Americans” coming off the first World Series title in 1903.  The Yankees won 14 of the 16 Opening Day matchups with Boston from 1923-1960, when expansion and increased air travel made it less likely that the teams would meet in the opener.  Indeed, they have played just seven times since then, the Sox winning five.

Some have argued that the Cincinnati Reds should host he first game of the year, as they did for more than 100 years because of their status as the first recognized major league team.  I think this former tradition, while nice, is easily usurped by a showcase of one of the two or three biggest rivalries in the game in prime time on ESPN on Sunday night.

Tags: , , , ,

Baseball Bracketing

Mar 21

Posted by Jerry Milani in Boston Red Sox, Cincinnati Reds, Detroit Tigers, History, New York Yankees | No Comments

It seems this time of year there’s a “bracket” for everything, modeled after the NCAA basketball tournament.  Some work well (SI.com’s “Best in Swimsuit”), some not as well (The Big Lead’s “Culture Bracket”).

Two baseball “bracket” setups are coming this week, as Was Watching is preparing a “Greatest/Favorite” Yankees tournament.  I hope that site proprietor Steve Lombardi decides on one of the two, because they are quite different questions.  I look forward to participating.

The other is on Baseball Daily Digest, which is teaming with Strat-O-Matic for a comprehensive, bracket-type elimination tournament with the 64 best teams of all time.  I’d be interested to see if they seed by record, or a subjective perceived greatness, or weighing teams against their own competition, rather than against teams all time.  I don’t know if those generally accepted superteams like the ‘27, ‘61 and ‘98 Yankees, ‘75 Reds, ‘84 Tigers and late-80s A’s teams translate to Strat.  And will the deadball era Cubs, Pirates and Red Sox be included?  “Selection Show” coming soon.

Tags: , ,

Over/Under a Fun Preseason Game

Feb 16

Posted by Jerry Milani in Baltimore Orioles, Boston Red Sox, Cincinnati Reds, Kansas City Royals, Los Angeles Dodgers, New York Mets, New York Yankees, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates, Washington Nationals | No Comments

I’m not much of a gambler, as my results in various pools would attest, and baseball is an especially difficult sport to handicap on a day-to-day basis.  But I do think it’s interesting to look at the pre-season over/unders for teams, even more so than the straight odds on winning the pennant.

Just like other gambling lines, the numbers don’t necessarily represent the win total that the oddsmaker thinks each team will hit, but what number can entice action on both sides.

I checked out SportsInteraction.com, which listed their preseason odds here.

Not surprisingly, the Yankees, at 96.5, and Red Sox, at 94.5, are the two highest listed.

I found it interesting that the next team is the Cubs, at 91.5, the only other team listed over 90.  The Phillies and Mets are both at 89.5, which seems to be completely against what their respective off-season moves would indicate.  Philadelphia won 93 games in 2009, added Roy Halladay and Placido Polanco, kept the rest of the lineup intact and still have the best offensive team in the National League.   The Mets won 70 games, and added Jason Bay and… well… Henry Blanco. I just can’t see the Phils and Mets battling it out for the NL East crown.

Here are a few over/unders that stand out for me, and my thoughts:

Orioles OVER 70.5 – I think this could be the surprise team in the A.L.  They won’t have enough to challenge the top three in the division, and it won’t help that they have to play 60 games against the Sox, Yanks and Rays, but 71 wins is very doable.

Reds UNDER 79.5 – The Reds have gotten a lot of notice among baseball circles for some strong off-season moves, and they’d only need to improve by 2 games from last year to hit this number, but their top-to-bottom pitching and inexperienced outfield make me think around .500 might be ambitious.

Royals UNDER 74.5 – That’s a low number to come under, and even with Zack Greinke going every fifth day and probably winning 15 to 17, the Royals would still need 60 or so wins in the other 130 games.  But Jason Kendall is the starting catcher, Yunieski Betancourt is the shortstop, and Luke Hochevar, Kyle Davies and Brian Bannister are pitching three of the other four games.  Or Kyle Farnsworth, who may be tried out as a starter.  No, thanks.

Dodgers OVER 84.5 – I feel like they’re really teasing me here.  After all, the Dodgers won 95 games last year, and it’s basically the same team, with a couple of exceptions, albeit in what I think will be a stronger division across the board.  Still, I don’t see this team being 11 games worse than last year, with Kershaw, Billingsley, Kuroda and Padilla going four of every five games.

Mets UNDER 89.5 – This could be a trap. But I don’t think it is.

Phillies OVER 89.5 – Ditto.

Pirates OVER 68.5 – Maybe I just want this once proud franchise to break through, and there isn’t a whole lot to be optomistic about, except some good young talent and a so-so division that could maybe just lead to about 70 wins.  If God drops everything.

Nationals OVER 65.5 – The division is going to be tougher, but there’s some hope, and 66 wins is still a pretty low bar, so I’ll take the over, especially if Stephen Strasburg gets some innings beginning mid-year and Ryan Zimmerman gets some help from young guys like Nyjer Morgan and Elijah Dukes.

As for the Yankees, 97 is a lot of wins, with Boston and Tampa fielding strong teams and the Orioles improved.  But they won 103 last year, pretty much coasting to the finish, so I think the number is set at an interesting spot.  I’d reluctantly take the over, even not knowing how the outfield situation will settle, especially since the rotation is so strong.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Reds, Twins Score with Dual Orlando Signings

Feb 5

Posted by Jerry Milani in Cincinnati Reds, Minnesota Twins, free agency | 6 Comments

Two underappreciated Gold Glove middle infielders named Orlando signed with new teams this past week, Cabrera with Cincinnati and Hudson with Minnesota.  They are the kind of signings (Cabrera, 1 year, $3.02 million; Hudson, 1 year, $5 million) that can fit into the middle-market plans of teams like the Reds and the Twins, and give exceptional value.

I think these are two of the best signings of the off-season, filling needs for both teams.

I’ve been a Cabrera fan for a few years; I know he’s been on seven teams since 2004, but I don’t think that it’s a coincidence that four of the previous six have made the playoffs (every year except 2006) with him as starting shortstop.  Cabrera’s stats don’t look so gaudy, with just a career OPS+ of 86, and some of his defensive numbers from last year seem to show that he’s slowed a step at short at age 35, but I think he solidifies the Reds defense, gives them a veteran presence with a knack for clutch hits.  And at $3 million, I really like the deal for the Reds.  It looks like the Twins will instead go with former Brewer J.J. Hardy at short, who I like, but I think Cabrera would have been a better choice for one more year.

Hudson, 32, has been known as a top fielding second baseman for the past few years, but he’s now on his fourth team since ‘05.  But he’s won Gold Gloves with each of them, and represents a nice upgrade for the Twins over Nick Punto, who looks like he’ll move to third base, though his best role may be in utility across the infield.  Last off-season, some were advocating that the Yankees dump Robinson Cano in favor of “O-Dog,” a sentiment that I did not agree with, but he should be a great fit for the Twins, especially between budding star Denard Span and reigning MVP Joe Mauer in the lineup.  With a new ballpark and a payroll at more than $90 million for 2010, Minnesota is starting to shed its “little engine that could” feel and looking more like the clear favorite in the AL Central.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Shoeless Joe and Charlie Hustle

Dec 14

Posted by Jerry Milani in Cincinnati Reds, Collectibles-Memorabilia, Cooperstown, History | 7 Comments

crackerjack_JacksonFor years I’ve had something of a fascination with Shoeless Joe Jackson.  It’s one of what seem like thousands of sports history related obsessions I’ve harbored since my dad bought me my first pack of Topps cards and the “All Star Baseball” spinner game in 1977.

My interest in Shoeless Joe perks up around Hall of Fame selection time, or whenever I research through deadball era stats or photos, or if I see that Field of Dreams or Eight Men Out is being shown on TV.

There have been some good books, articles and full websites devoted to Joe and/or the 1919 Sox.  Most portray him in a positive light, arguing that his .375 average and errorless play prove he wasn’t throwing the World Series.  Others note the fact that he took money from the gamblers, which lumped him in with the others who are generally believed to have fixed the games.

It was a different era, with numerous other scandals rumored involving star players such as Ty Cobb, Tris Speaker and Hal Chase.  The thought of a player being influenced by a gambler’s cash in that time is much more viable than in today’s multi-million dollar salary environment.  I lean towards the sentiment that Jackson may have been less culpable than his contemporaries who went largely unpunished, but didn’t have the clout to keep the authorities at bay.

I’ve always been interested in the tie between Jackson’s situation and that of Pete Rose.  People arguing for — or against — Rose’s Hall of Fame candidacy often bring Jackson into the discussion, the common reference being gambling.   Both are on Major League Baseball’s “Permanently Ineligible” list.

I’ve found this connection to be dubious.  Rose has never liked the comparison, since Jackson was involved, even tangentially, in the fixing of games, while Rose maintains that he never bet against the Reds; indeed, the idea of not playing to win is anathema to a man who lived to win.  I have always felt that unless Rose bet on every single game, the same amount, this still leaves open the possibility of player usage (particularly pitchers) and other decisions that affect other games, being applied differently based on these bets rather than what is best for the overall team.  Thus I see both bans as valid.

But the point here is that they are quite different circumstances.  More court documents and info from the famed “Black Sox” trials have surfaced recenty, and it is hardly in dispute that Jackson took and spent the money.  Rose, after many years of denying he bet on the game, admitted that he wagered on the Reds to win.

I thought about the connection again today when I read a blog post about a new Jackson baseball card Upper Deck will issue for 2010.  The author, Sports Collectibiles Digest editor T.S. O’Connell, wonders if a “modern” Rose card should also be created.

Rose has done well for himself with memorabilia and collectibles, and more power to him.  Jackson, of course, never had that chance, passing away in 1951, decades before the explosion of the business.

He never really had the chance to defend himself, either.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,