Ask Rotoman

ESPN.com – MLB/PLAYOFFS2003 – Klapisch: Yanks facing eventful offseason

Rumors that the Yankees will trade Alfonso Soriano are rampant, and for all I know they may be accurate. What’s funny is that for two years all the talk about Soriano’s profound free-swinging ways and his defensive deficiencies were overshadowed by his rather large talents. But a truly woeful stretch in the postseason has made it seem as if he’s a horrible ballplayer.

Soriano was screwed up for sure during the playoffs, and like all players who don’t really know what’s a strike and what isn’t, he’s going to have times when he looks dreadful. But we don’t have to look any further than Reggie Sanders, whose career seemed even more tenuous than Soriano’s last year at this time, but whose perfectly fine 2003 campaign demonstrates that even when pitchers know how to get hitters out, they can’t always do it.

ESPN.com – MLB – Kreidler: Got juice?

I’ve got to agree with Kreidler that this is just the tip of a substantial story that isn’t going to go away, ever. And certainly most all of us would prefer that everybody played on the up and up and nobody cheated (especially those we admire) and we could simply revel in the pure athleticism and smarts of all the best performers.

But it has never been that way and it will never be that way, and to raise holy hell about the immorality of it all seems to me to miss the point.

Athletes are special. They achieve the way they do because they work hard, but also because their bodies generate more aggressive muscular athletic hormones and who knows what else that helps them excel.

To excel even more some athletes exercise, take in good nutrition, avoid bad habits. Some take vitamin supplements. All of which helps them build bigger muscles and do other things that help. To outlaw performance enhancing drugs you have to draw a line, and then you have to make sure that line cannot be crossed by any hypothetical drug or activity (think of the process of drawing blood out of the system, pumping it full of oxygen and then returning it to the athlete’s system, aka blood doping).

No one has figured out how to do it, yet.

And they may not. If this up and coming scandal has legs it will be because Bonds and Giambi and others took this designer steroid that actually undermines the chemicals in tests that look for steroids. And if you think that’s the last possible innovation you’re sadly mistaken.

The only way to effectively police the use of performance enhancers is to measure and release each athlete’s “stats,” their blood chemistry, regularly. Maybe we should even limit the amount of each component they’re allowed to have. This is the technique used in women’s sports now, for testosterone, which is naturally produced in women’s bodies. But if the athlete has too high a ratio she is banned.

The same could be said for testosterone and whatever other chemicals are deemed to make great male athletes great. This will help level the playing field, and could eliminate some freaks who are naturally juiced, but it would be fair. It might also lead to a great leveling, so that consistent good performance on the field could accurately be attributed to heretofore intangibles like heart and gameness, rather than having more muscles and roid rage.

All I know is that whining about the moral breakdown that steroids are causing is just plain silly. Competition makes competitive people do everything they can to win, and if there’s a way to beat the rules you can be sure someone will. We can either categorize players by their chemical makeup, or we can refuse to spend money on the corrupt athletes and the corrupt sporting leagues that exploit them.

But what happens when we find out that many artists used drugs to derange and rearrange their senses before painting their masterpieces? Eek.

ESPN.com – Gammons: Little certain in Grady’s future

At the risk of beating a long dead horse into submission, Peter Gammons makes the two points I’ve been trying to make about Grady Little. And Gammons comments are based on knowing Grady Little and how he kept a rather dysfunctional Boston squad from spinning out of control.

He deserves credit for that, but during the playoffs he screwed up over and over and over. You can argue that his decision to leave Pedro in was a judgment call. I don’t think it was. But he did so many other totally stupid things that he deserves all the blame he’s gotten, even if he doesn’t deserve all the blame there is to go around.

ESPN.com – MLB/PLAYOFFS2003 – Neyer: That’s inexcusable

My first thought last night was that Joe Torre should bring in Mariano, too, while the game was tied. But then I remembered that Mariano pitched two innings the night before–one that was crucial, one that earned him a save.

Should Mariano have come out Tuesday night, to be replaced by Jeff Weaver perhaps? In a clockwork world, sure. The game was decided and not having to throw 15-20 pitches has to be less stressful than throwing those pitches.

On the other hand, when Mariano comes into the game, he is essentially the Yankees last pitcher. I’m sure Joe didn’t have anyone warming up as the Yankees top of the ninth inning rally started. And if he didn’t have someone going at the start of the inning he probably wouldn’t have someone ready when the bottom of the ninth started.

Once Rivera’s out there does it make sense to pull him?

Also, given that Rivera pitched on Tuesday, even one inning, I don’t think Torre would lean on him to pitch two innings on Wednesday.

The fact is that the Yankees lost because they didn’t score in extra innings. If they had they would have had a huge advantage. Would it have been any greater if they used Rivera before they had the lead? I don’t see it. At all.

ESPN.com – MLB – Little defends not pulling Pedro sooner

I find this to be an incredible story. Pedro takes responsibility, Little takes responsibility. Now Jason Varitek takes responsibility.

The bottom line is that for three years Pedro has been on a pitch count. He rarely tops 100 pitches. What Grady Little did in Game 7 was to deviate from the system. He may say that Pedro was pitching as well in the 8th as he was earlier in the game, but if you were watching the game it sure didn’t look that way.

But even if that’s the case, even if Little thought Martinez’s control was as crisp as it had been earlier and his velocity was as strong, clearly there were good reasons to take Martinez out against Matsui, who had hit Martinez hard all game (and in Game 3 as well).

Little decided to ride his horse rather than trust the game to his untrustworthy (recent success notwithstanding) bullpen. He and Pedro have taken the blame for what happened. The rest of us are on to another series of games. A World Series.

I think Little may well deserve a ton of credit for making this Boston team resilient enough to survive and thrive this year. I’m not really in a position to judge overall whether or not he’s a good manager. But he made some of the dopiest most indefensible strategic decisions possible in the series against the Yankees. And nearly everyone could see that Martinez’ was losing his bite in the eighth inning.

It’s good to see him taking responsibility, but I think he clearly shoudl have been fired even if Boston beat the Yankees. Why go into battle with a manager who can’t parse the most simple of strategic situations?

Well, the reason is because making players comfortable and helping the to play at their best may well be worth more than all the genuinely strategic decisions a manager makes all year. But that’s just a theory. Until we have some evidence, strategy wins. And Little is out (or should be).

End of Year prices

It took me a week to get them out the door. Incorporating prices for the preseason projections proved to be a major pain. Remind me not to do that again.

One goal this winter is to find some way to figure won-loss percentages for each player. Jerry Heath, a legend in the rotisserie stat keeping industry, before it was an industry, used to look at all his real rotisserie leagues and count the number of times each player was on a first place team and the number of times he was on a last place team.

This seems a brilliant solution to the problem of measuring the effect of a player on the final standings. But over the years I’ve recommended to many others that they use the stats they spend all season collecting to do just such a report.

I can’t pay, but I would promote. My guess is Juan Pierre proves to be nearly as valuable as he appears in these prices. And if he doesn’t then we all know something of value more.

ESPN.com – MLB/PLAYOFFS2003 – A’s take issue with Lowe’s celebration

The shot I saw of Lowe’s celebration after crushing the A’s hopes was so close I got no sense of a sexual act. I did get a sense that Lowe was damned happy to have won the game.

I don’t think it’s a bad thing that player’s take these silly situations personally. The only thing that binds us to them is the sheer emotion that comes with winning or losing. If they treated things the way a doctor might we could end up healthier. Certainly Tim Hudson wouldn’t be involved in any barroom brawls, but I doubt that would make us feel richer.

I probably didn’t give the Yankees enough respect, especially after that first game. The pitchers are all very good and there is a hitter at every position. Still, the defense is bad and in a short series it takes just one or two bad breaks to change things. Which is why it’s great fun watching these guys play their hearts out, and doesn’t really seem to prove all that much about which is the better team.

Will anyone be rooting for Oakland tonight?