links for 2009-05-28

18 Comments

  1. Rich in Mt P

    May 28, 2009 at 10:49 am

    thats gammons article is great.

  2. Ryan P.

    May 28, 2009 at 10:54 am

    Chewing tobacco is disgusting and turns me off a bit. Which Tigers do, besides Dontrelle?

  3. Kyle J

    May 28, 2009 at 11:06 am

    The curveball thing is, like, way cool.

  4. Matt in Toledo

    May 28, 2009 at 11:23 am

    I think Carlos Guillen is probably the most obvious dipper, but they’re easy enough to spot. They’re the guys with something the shape of a hockey puck in their back pocket. Unless, of course, that’s just Bubble Tape.

  5. beejeez

    May 28, 2009 at 2:47 pm

    Well, chewing tobacco might affect my opinion of the player. It wouldn’t effect it.

  6. David

    May 28, 2009 at 3:03 pm

    Loved the article by Petah.

    No they shouldn’t ban tobacco, if players want to turn screw themselves over they’ll have to live with it, and should be allowed to do so – just like anything else that only harms the user. If they use the stuff I just think they look goofy as he**, and don’t think they are very wise, but I believe strongly that they have the right to do what they want with themselves. And as long as it doesn’t affect their performance on the field during their playing days why does MLB even care? Why not ban smoking and drinking for players and fans alike while they are at it? Those probably cause as much if not more harm. When you start restricting peoples rights assuming they aren’t hurting you I believe it to be a very bad thing.
    End Rant.

    That curveball site was one of the coolest things I’ve seen in a long time. WOW!

    He has the Tigers BAA wrong at .318 and says they are second, which is also wrong. They are first at .247.

    See here http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/.....8;type=reg

    All in all though I hope they continue to keep the pitching (for the most part) on a roll. It is the MOST important thing.

    Lee’s research was cool too. Just by watching I figured as much. The huge jump in center puzzles me. Granderson wasn’t that bad last year was he? Maybe there is more to it…

    I think by the end of the season the Everett/Santiago tandem will break even. I love the outfield speed when Maggs isn’t out there. Inge of course is stellar, and Polanco is solid (although it’d be nice if he was a bit faster). Laird has been a good low cost pickup as well.

    I’m looking forward to who they can get in this year’s draft. I’m hoping to heck that they don’t draft another reliever in the first round(no offense to Ryan Perry).

    Still they’ve got an earlier slot position(eighth? ninth?), so we should be getting a good guy regardless.

    • Chris in Dallas

      May 28, 2009 at 3:13 pm

      Conventional wisdom is that the Tigers are going to pick Missouri high schooler Jacob Turner with the #9 pick. A Boras advisee who hits 98 on the radar gun.

      • David

        May 28, 2009 at 3:21 pm

        98? Is this the guy Chris? http://www.nomaas.org/draft/?p=149
        I assume so.

        If they draft him I hope they can sign him and also make sure he has excellent control right now.

        • Chris in Dallas

          May 28, 2009 at 6:18 pm

          Yeah, that’s the kid. KLaw had the Tigers selecting him in his mock draft, and also said this:

          Avocado (Grand Rapids): Detroit’s minor league system is pretty barren, who might they target in the first round?

          Keith Law: Everyone seems to think they’re taking Jacob Turner, but I know they’re interested in Myers, Fuentes, and Trout, at the least.

          http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/.....t_id=26658

    • Joel in Seattle

      May 28, 2009 at 4:15 pm

      I’m all for personal freedom but, just like everyone else, you check portions of that freedom when you’re at work. I’m free to smoke/drink/chew away from work, but it’s prohibited on company property. Same would hold true for baseball players. I don’t think anyone is saying that MLB should test for the stuff like they do for PEDs.

      I think the crux of this matter is in Billfer’s post – this is a “baseball thing,” not a positional or cultural one. Most baseball players who do it picked up the habit because they were playing baseball and that’s just what baseball players have always done.

      MLB prohibiting it on the field would likely do a lot to prevent young baseball players from ever picking up the habit. If that’s a PR thing baseball wants to do, I say go for it. I think this particular issue impacts a lot more kids negatively than the steroids thing.

      • David

        May 28, 2009 at 6:28 pm

        Where do you get your supporting information for your last paragraph? Any studies?

        • Joel in Seattle

          May 28, 2009 at 6:54 pm

          Check the qualifiers. “I think” and “would likely” indicate that I’m speculating. I was asked for my opinion. Aparently, I’m not alone in my speculation: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/articl.....8;c_id=mlb

          Again, I’m speculating here, but I’d imagine the proportion of baseball players who use smokeless tobacco is much higher than the general population, because it’s part of the culture of baseball. The tone there is set at the professional level.

          Did you read my post? I didn’t say that chew was as big a problem as drugs/booze and smokes. I said (inartfully, I admit) that MLB players influence a lot more kids to use chew than to use steroids.

          As far as your final sentence, if I’m your employer, I absolutely have a right to enforce my views on you, within the bounds of the law. If MLB thinks that players using chew on the field is a problem, they’re perfectly within their rights to ban it on the field. Off the field, I agree with you, the league has no right (or even interest) in dictating that kind of behavior.

          • David

            May 29, 2009 at 12:15 am

            I just don’t see it. I don’t see how a MLB player chewing tobacco could influence and change the minds of kids. These guys are good/talented at one thing – baseball. Many of them aren’t role models in my opinion.

            I guess your right. I just don’t see it as a good thing to do. Let guys be themselves. Let them get tats or have long hair, or wear their sox high or wear a golden thong ;) under their uni for all I care.

            In my opinion I think people are the most productive/happy when you let them be themselves and don’t try to impose restrictions on them that they will try to bypass anyways.

            Oh and sorry for sounding like a jerk.

      • David

        May 28, 2009 at 6:33 pm

        Also I have yet to walk around seeing many 10 year olds or 15 year olds chewing tobacco. I didn’t realize it was such a problem ie Drugs/Booze and Smokes.

        Why don’t they ban smoking? It’d be a nice way to piss Leyland off and I’m sure a lot of kids would stop doing it. ;)

        I’m not against roids either for the same reason. It isn’t my say what you do with yourself. I have no right to enforce my views on you, and you have no right to enforce your views on me.

    • Mark in Chicago

      May 28, 2009 at 6:00 pm

      this apparently is a deeper draft for pitchers than position players, and given DD’s love for power arms, I would put a high probability on them drafting a pitcher.

  7. David

    May 28, 2009 at 3:19 pm

    If anyone is in need of a good laugh read this

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn.....ortCat=mlb

  8. Coleman

    May 28, 2009 at 6:55 pm

    One place where defense could still be improved to help the pitchers–which isn’t covered by Lee–is the pitchers’ own defense (having recently seen Ed-Jack go all WS ’06 out there)…this season we’re short one old dude with record-setting glovework in the rotation…