My Football Picks So Far

Photo: Russell Wilson throwing against the Packers, from nfl.com.

6-3 so far with my football picks, including the Patriots loss that I felt was coming, but refused to admit to myself. Today, the surprise of the day for me was the Jaguars, who beat the Texans by 22. (I should've considered the Harvey factor there; dumb on my part.) But I still wouldn't have picked them by 22. The last one I swung and missed on was Cardinals/Lions, which I thought would be a toss-up, but that Detroit won by 12. And though I was right about the Browns losing, Cleveland actually super-impressed, losing just by 3.

And the best tackle of the weekend still is the Friday night play by the security guard at Fenway who obliterated a drunken fan before both his feet touched the outfield grass. I'm watching the players jog into the dugout when suddenly I see a guard running full-tilt into a fan just barely touching the right field dirt with one of his toes. The guard was a blur and the fan didn't know what hit him.

UPDATE: Finished 10-5 for the week. I'll do better.

Week 1 NFL Picks

Photo: Main image promo from NFL.com

This week's NFL picks:

KC vs NE: Patriots, by 7, max. Close game for them, by comparison. This one could go bad. Go Pats!

Bills vs. Jets. Bills, by at least 5. If I could get 10 other guys together, we might be able to beat the Jets, who may go 1-15 this year. I'd pick most teams by more vs. Jets, but the Bills offense isn't great, either.

Falcons vs. Bears. Falcons by 4, max. Bears may surprise.

Ravens vs. Bengals. Ravens by 3; could go either way.

Steelers vs. Browns. Steelers by 7, maybe more.

Cardinals vs. Lions. This one's a toss-up. Cardinals finished 50 points more vs. their opponents last year, despite losing record (7-8-1). Stafford never impressed me, and he's not totally healthy. And the Lions find ways to lose. So...Cardinals by 3, but this could go either way.

Texans vs. Jaguars. Texans by at least 10, because the Jags are unbelievably terrible and J.J. Watts raised millions of dollars (expecting to raise just $200,000) for Houston, which has nothing to do with anything related to this post.

Raiders vs. Texans. Carr is impressive, but Mariota is almost as good, and underappreciated. Raiders by 3 in a close one.

Redskins vs. Eagles. Eagles by 3 in another close one. Lots of those this week. Redskins could pull this one out. Both teams may be borderline postseason contenders, up until Week 16.

Rams vs. Colts. Go to the front of the class if you're very familiar with the Colts' QB, career back-up Scott Tolzien, who has started 3 NFL games. Rams by 6, maybe more.

Green Bay vs. Seattle. Probably the best game of the week, and maybe the closest, probably by 4 max, and maybe less. Green Bay wins because I'd pick Rodgers over almost anyone not named Brady. But this could come down to the final play.

Panthers vs. 49ers. Low-scoring game, won by Panthers by 5, max. Neither team excites, but it'll be interesting to see how SF begins its new era.

Cowboys vs. Giants. Prescott betters Eli Manning, but not by much. Cowboys by 4.

Saints vs. Vikings. Saints win, but it won't be a Brees. (sorry) NO by 4.

Chargers vs. Broncos. Denver's QB could impress, but I'm picking the Chargers by 5. But Rivers could find a way to lose, because he does that like it's actually his #1 priority.

[My apologies to those who may have wondered why a non-sports novel review was on my sports blog. Posted to the wrong blog, so my bad.] 

M101-2 Sporting News Supplement Bob Harmon

Photo: 1911 M101-2 Sporting News Supplement Bob Harmon of the St. Louis Cardinals, from my own collection.

First, I had a helluva time getting this picture into my computer, as it would only scan as a .pdf, and then wouldn't load into this software for this website.  I had to scan it again, CONTROL + ALT + PRINT SCREEN, save it into Paint, then crop that, then save that as a jpeg., then bring it to this page. I don't know if you can see the big size of it like you could my other cards written about here.  If someone knows of a better way around this for me--or how I can make my scanner not scan larger images as a .pdf, please comment here and let me know.  Or send me an email, if you'd prefer.  I appreciate it!

Anyway, I saw lots of these images up for bid on ebay from PWCC, where I get a lot of stuff.  I've heard of these before, but had never seen them.  The inages were striking, and I saved them all from my Watch screen on Ebay before I deleted them from it when the bids climbed too high.  In good condition, these can go for hundreds, and a good condition HOFer, like Ty Cobb, can bring crazy prices.  I really wanted a Jake Stahl one of these, and I forget why I deleted it.  I didn't know much about the cost and value of these, and this one climbed over $30, so I backed off.  It was one of the best shots I saw, right up there with Clark Griffith standing on the dugout steps, and Connie Mack standing in his suit.  Truly awesome pics, but they got really expensive.  If only I were rich.

So this one of Bob Harmon is ripped in the lower left corner, as you can see, so it cost me only $9.50. The shipping was $12, but when I won other cards (some Ted Williams and Clementes and a few others), those were only $.25 more after that, so it averaged out to $1.15 for each of the 13 (yes, I know it's crazy) items I got.

These very large photos are not considered cards, per se, as there were actual Sporting News cards published after these supplements proved popular with the public.  The photographers must've been amongst the best of their time, because these images are all classically striking.  I wish I could've gotten them all. Unfortunately, this is the only one I got.

These supplements were just that: included in issues of The Sporting News between 1909 and 1911, which in itself looked more like a newspaper than a magazine, just like it does today.  They were often folded, which is not considered a detriment to their value, but they are extremely thin and therefore very fragile.  Mine would've sold for over $30 had it not been a little torn, and Bob Harmon was just a common player.

He was a tough-luck pitcher who could've done much better, or much worse.  He led the league in 1911 in game starts, earned runs and walks, but finished 23-16 with a 3.13 ERA and was 14th in the MVP voting.  His WHIP was a bad 1.35, and he walked more than he struck out, so this was a rather lucky season.  His luck would not last, though, as he went 13-17 and 16-17 for Pittsburgh a few years later, but with ERAs of 2.53 and 2.50.  He had losing records every year and spent 1917 out of the majors, but returned with Pittsburgh in 1918 and had the best WHIP of his career, a very good 1.06--though he still walked more than he struck out.  He finished 2-7 that year, which proved to be his last.

His career record was 107-133, with a 3.33 ERA and a 1.3 WHIP, but only gave up 1,966 hits in 2,054 innings.  If he could've found the strike zone a little more often, he may have been one of the best, because they couldn't often hit him.

But, then again, had he been much better, I wouldn't have been able to afford him.

2015 Red Sox 78-84, and My Playoff Picks

A few thoughts about your last-place 2015 Boston Red Sox

--Had the season started after the All-Star break, the Sox would be in the playoffs.  But it doesn't work that way.

--Letting Don Orsillo go is a travesty.  I'm actually angry about it and I'm going to miss him.  Finishing last place 3 out of the last 4 years is bad enough; without the pleasant silliness from Orsillo and Remy, it would have been unbearable and unwatchable.  Despite the last place finishes, they've been a mainstay for me at 7pm most nights.  It was nice just to hear their silliness.  And it wasn't all inane banter, like Sean McDonough used to do.  (And he was miserable, too.)  Orsillo and Remy, and not the team, were the most consistently good 3 of the last 4 years.  (And let's face it: 2013 was an awesome overachievement, as was the 2013 ALCS, especially.)

--And firing Arnie Beyeler is a mystery.  The first base coach is essentially an irrelevant position.  His primary responsibility is waving runners on to second base.  Since I don't recall a tremendous number of Sox players thrown out at second this year, he seems to have done a decent job.  I saw him time the pitcher like he's supposed to.  Not a lot of runners got picked off.  He carried the players' elbow pads.  And the third base coach, bench coach and manager are all coming back--all of whom have much more to do with the Sox record than Beyeler does.  Plus, Beyeler was the PawSox manager for a few years, so he knows many of the Sox players pretty well.  Unless the players asked for him to be let go because of some kind of lousy clubhouse presence, or unless he said the wrong thing at the wrong time to the wrong person, this firing is a mystery.  I won't care as much as Orsillo going, but I have 2 Beyeler autographed balls because he was at the Pawtucket HotStove a few years.

--Speaking of Orsillo, he got a six-year contract and a huge raise each year from the San Diego Padres, so he has the last laugh.  But I'll still miss him.

--David Ortiz led the majors in RBIs after the All-Star break.  He had such a terrible first half, I thought he had no chance for 30 homers and 100 RBIs.  I was wrong.  But the sudden and inexplicable upsurge is curious, if you know what I mean.

--Tory Lovullo deserved the 2-year extension he just got.  He'll be the manager should Farrell be physically incapable of managing--or if Farrell is told to take more time off and get well, if you catch my drift.  I wouldn't be surprised if that happened.  In fact, I hate to say it, but I'd be in favor of it.

--Hopefully, Betts, Bradley and Castillo are the outfielders next year.  But if the Sox want a #1 starter, one or two of those are going to go.  The best overall player is Betts, so I hope he stays.  (I need a Betts autographed ball with a COA, if any of you care.)

--Bogaerts and Bradley were completely different players this year.  Bogaerts had almost 200 hits (the vast majority of them singles) and became almost a Gold Glove-caliber fielder.  Bradley always was Gold Glove, but improved his average by about 50 points (!!!) and finished with a slightly-above .500 slugging percentage (!!!!!).

--Having said that, Betts was still overall a more valuable player than either Bogaerts or Bradley.

--Pedroia looks healthy again, and he fielded and hit like he never missed about two-thirds of the season.  But he needs to stay healthy, which he hasn't done since he signed that mega-contract.  They're honest injuries, but he has to stay healthy for the whole year.  When he does, the Sox finish with a great record.  When he doesn't, they don't.

--Buchholz also has to stay healthy all year and win the 17+ games he's capable of, every year.  When he stays healthy, the Sox finish with a very good record.

--I'm hearing that Hanley Ramirez has played his last game for Boston.  He had a tremendous first half--but he was a disaster in left.  He'll be terrible at first, and I've heard he's terrible in the clubhouse.  I've heard that the Sox players have complained about his attitude all year.  I can't wait to see him go.  The word is that the Sox will deal him for almost nothing and eat most of his contract.

--And Sandoval needs to go, too.  I wrote at the beginning of the year that I was concerned that nobody on the Giants was sad to see him go.  And I wrote that I didn't like the idea of someone winning 3 World Series in 5 years with one team, and then leaving that team.  Sandoval gained weight all year and purportedly weighs more than Ortiz (!) and is also a disaster in the clubhouse.  I wasn't wrong about him since the beginning of this year.  He needs to go.

--As of a few games ago, Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez were tied as the worst WAR players in the American League.  Dealing them and eating their contracts would be addition by subtraction.

--I'm more than happy with Travis Shaw--and his almost-.500 slugging percentage and his slightly above average defense--at first base and Brock Holt at third, even if Holt has to platoon with Merrero and / or Rutledge.

--Merrerro and Rutledge are basically paler versions of Brock Holt, and I mean that as a compliment.  You probably can't keep both of them, but they are great back-ups.  They field very well, hit decently to well, and do the little things well, like hit-and-run and bunt.  I hope they can stay.  If just one stays, I prefer Rutledge, but I don't know if he can play short and / or third.  Holt can be my third baseman, or back-up infielder and outfielder, until he retires.  Love his hustle, his defense, and his ability to do all those little things that win games: move the runner over; drive him in from third with less than 2 outs; bunt; hit-and-run.  His defense is almost Gold Glove, and he can even steal a few bases.

--My guess is that Tazawa and Uehara are both done.  Tazawa's not automatic in the 8th for me if he comes back, and Uehara is the closer only because nobody else on the current roster can do it.

--Rich Hill should start the year on the team.  He or Steven Wright is my #5 starter.  Either one would eat lots of innings and overall be a very good #5.  But I don't know if the Sox can keep both in the rotation.  Probably neither is good enough to be #4.  Hill, maybe, but I'm concerned about how well he'll hold up all year.

--The highlight of 2015 was the outfield.  Defensively, especially, but at the plate, too.  They made me want to watch.  Speaking of that, Bradley might have been one of the best #9 hitters in the majors.  How many #9 guys had over a .500 slugging percentage?

--And Mookie Betts has one of the best baseball names in the majors.

--For umpires, it's Fieldin Culbreth, of course.

--You know you've seen a lot of ballgames if you know most of the umpires' names.

--Besides being traded during the 2014 or 2015 season, what do Jon Lester, John Lackey, Mike Napoli, Andrew Miller, Andrew Bailey and Jonny Gomes all have in common?  They're all in the 2015 playoffs.  And Shane Victorino missed by a game or two with the Angels.

--But Miller's trade to the Orioles for the rookie Rodriguez this year might end up being a steal for the Sox.  Last-place teams don't need good closers, and a good starter is more important than a good reliever, even a closer.  Starters pitch 200+ innings if they're #1s or #2s.  Closers pitch maybe 70 innings.  A closer would have to be Mariano Rivera not to make that trade a win for the Sox.  Miller isn't quite there yet.  But he'll have a very long career after his closing days are over if he doesn't mind going back to the lefty specialist he used to be.

--Speaking of relievers, Ross may have a good career if he can tone down his act.  Ogando finished well this year, but I'd show him the door if I ran the team.  Overall, the entire relief corps needs to be revamped.

--That, and somehow, at any cost, getting rid of Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval, and getting a #1 starter, are this team's most important needs.

--If there are any Sox developments, come back here and you'll hear about it.  I'll post a lot about baseball in general, the Patriots, and baseball cards.

--Although the Wild Card Game in the A.L. will be in Yankee Stadium, look for the Astros to win.

--Toronto and Kansas City will play in the ALCS.  Winner: ...Kansas City, despite Toronto's home field advantage.  I say this only because of the theory that good pitching and defense will beat good hitting in one series.  But if it goes 7, it's a flip.

--The N.L. is a tougher call.  The Cubs won 8 straight to end the season, and Pittsburgh and Chicago are awesome teams and are not limping into the Wild Card Game like the Yankees are.  It's unfair that the Yanks may go on, but either the Cubs or Pirates must go home, despite each winning at least 10 more games than the Yanks.

--It's hard to count the Dodgers out, and the Mets could surprise, but I pick the Cardinals to play the ...Cubs in the NLCS.  Winner: St. Louis.

--World Series winner: St. Louis.  I'd never bet on the playoffs, because I know better ways to waste and lose my money, but this year's playoffs, especially in the N.L., are especially tough to pick.

--Feel free to comment on how wrong you think I am about my picks.  You'll probably be right.

Offseason So Far

Some very quick things to say about the offseason so far:

--Fans who spurt vitriol Ellsbury's way--and Johnny Damon's way before him--are simply ignorant of the fact that the Yankees offered much more money both times.  The Sox offered Ellsbury a three-year deal.  Even at $20 million per year, that would be "just" $60 million.  The Yankees offered him seven years for $153 million dollars, which by my simple math is four years and $93 million dollars more.  Bottom line: More security via a longer contract, and $93 million.  Plus whatever endorsements he can get in New York, which I'll bet will be incredible, especially after one or two very good seasons.  Would you turn down $93 million?

--Robinson Cano, don't ya know, going to Seattle is a shocker, though the 10-year, $240 million contract isn't a surprise.  It's just surprising that Seattle gave it to him and not New York.  Though the Yanks did spend roughly $280 million so far, it was on three full-time, high-impact players at three different positions, rather than just one high-impact player at one position.  And Cano won't win too many playoff games in his ten years in Seattle, though he will have a good pitching staff.  But he's now the only weapon offensively.

--I guess Jay-Z came through for his client--albeit a client who wants dollars more than he wants rings.

--Signing Napoli is a good move.  Though nobody can K like he can, it's also true that nobody around the team can field first base and motivate his team like he can.  And he likes Boston like college students do.

--Napoli will make more with this two-year deal, plus last year, than he would have with that three-year, $39 million contract that he lost because of the physical that found his deteriorating hip.  But he'd better rest more the next two years, or that hip will end his career.

--Signing the ex-Cardinals reliever Mujica is a good move, too.  He's a solid reliever who can pitch frequently, and for two innings at a time.  Two years for $9.5 million isn't bad for him.  Bailey's gone, and Hanrahan is just happy to be around.  Uehara will still close, and Tazawa and Breslow still have the eighth, and when one of them falters, either Mujica or Hanrahan can step in.  Relief still looks very good in Boston.

--As does their starting pitching.  Everyone's stayed.  They're a year older, but Lester and Buchholz are still young in baseball years (though Buchholz needs physical coddling and Lester needs emotional coddling), and Workman, Doubront, and other younger players in Pawtucket are ready to step in when needed.  The Sox are poised to get younger, and their farm system looks great.

--Which is why the Yankees had to spend $153 million for Ellsbury, $85 million for McCann, and $45 million for Beltran, for 7 years, 5 years and 3 years, respectively.  And the Sox?  Not a dime.  Because the Sox have a good farm system, and the Yanks don't.  And won't for quite awhile.

--Though, I would've liked to have seen Beltran in right, and Victorino in center.  But maybe Fenway's right field is too big for Beltran, though Beltran is a good athlete and a very good fielder, and he gives 100%--all of which we saw in the playoffs.  Plus, he's one of the best playoff hitters of all time.  (Which made the game-ending pickoff of that Cardinals rookie even more inexplicable--because Beltran was at the plate.)

--I still say that Choo would be a good fit in center or in right, as well.  He's an on-base machine, which the Sox covet, and he can run and steal, though not as prodigiously as Ellsbury.  Still, a very good fielder and a very good leadoff guy.

--Right now, the leadoff position is a little murky.  Victorino can, but you don't want him to, since he was great hitting second, plus he's getting older.  Pedroia can, but you don't want him to, since you want him at third.  Is Jackie Bradley fast enough?  Is he a good enough hitter?  If he is, he's your answer.  But I'm not sure that he is.

--I'll take Pierzynski over Saltalamacchia any day.  Fewer Ks, more walks, about the same batting average with better production and OB%, and a much better play-caller.  I like the Sox catching corps for 2014.

--They're both old, sure, but they can play the position very well, DH on rare occasion, learn first base, and get relieved by one of the Triple-A catching stalwarts every now and then.

--Salatalamacchia and Middlebrooks never played again after that horrible, game-ending play.

--And I'm not crazy about seeing Middlebrooks at third, so I hope the Sox re-sign Drew to play short, and put Bogaerts at third, and make Middlebrooks the first- / thirdbaseman to begin some games.  He's still great trade-bait, as he does have a great upside.  I just don't think he'll ever meet it.

--Though I'd hate to break up whatever he's got going on with Jenny Dell.  Did you notice how her before- or after-game interviews with him were a little sweeter than they were with anyone else on the team?

--Speaking of the off-field talent, I hope Jerry Remy is better and ready to go.  Sox fans will take him back, no problem.  Hopefully his lungs and head are well, and he wants to return.  If he's up for it, I think he will.

The Boston Red Sox Win the 2013 World Series

One of my favorite teams, and favorite baseball years, ever.  An over-achieving Cinderella team of mostly baseball nobodies that wins a World Series just as improbably as the much more talented 2004 team.  Francona's team is still the emotional highlight of my baseball life, but you cannot ignore the feel-good of watching this team keep on winning, going from "worst to first" and climbing that mountain all the way.  Even David Ortiz said that this team was one of the least-talented (and I mean that with affection) that has ever won a World Series.  Consider:

* No pitcher on the team won more than 15 games.  Nobody had the chance to win 20.

* No pitcher (besides Buchholz, who didn't finish with enough innings to qualify) was close to winning an ERA title.

* No pitcher was in the Cy Young conversation.

* Only one player drove in 100 RBIs.  And he didn't drive in more than 110.

* Only two everyday players hit over .300.  Neither hit over .310.

* No player came close to leading the league in homers, RBIs, or average.

* No player was in the MVP conversation.

* Players in the top-10 in the league in any positive category were in the middle of the pack, or the back of it.

* And that player was either Ortiz (for average, on-base %, slugging %, and maybe homers and RBIs--but, again, placing 5-10 in the top-10 for any of those), Pedroia (for average and maybe on-base % only) or Ellsbury (for stolen bases, stolen base %, and, maybe, batting average).

* World Champions--and Division and League Leaders--always have someone in the Cy Young or MVP conversation, with eye-popping stats, like those of Chris Davis, but not these guys.

So how did they win? 

How can a guy who almost led the league in strikeouts also lead the league (and the majors) in pitches seen per at-bat, and be the offensive star of the 1-0 win over Verlander in the ALCS? 

How can a player like Daniel Nava, who finished in the top-10 in the league (but who just barely qualified with his low number of ABs) not play in the World Series, or many of the postseason games in general, and be replaced by a guy who, literally, didn't hit his own weight?  And not one Sox fan, including me, complained! 

How can a staff without a 20-game winner (or even a 17-game winner) and without a Cy Young or MVP candidate win the World Series? 

How can such a team beat a Tigers team in 6 games, when the Tigers have the MVP (Cabrera), the Cy Young (Scherzer), the perpetual Great Pitcher (Verlander), the overlooked Gold Glove-candidate (and ROY-candidate) and the wise sage as manager? 

How can Shane Victorino win games in the ALCS and in the World Series with a grand slam and a three-run double, and yet still hit way below .200 in each series? 

How can a team win two out of three in another stadium when they lost the first one in the bottom of the ninth due to an obstruction call? 

For that matter, how can a team go without a World Series title in 85 years, and then win three in the next ten?

God help us cynics, but I think the Sox did it with....teamwork?  Consistency?  Preparation?  Desire?  And a lot of luck, of course.

How lucky were they in the postseason?

Lucky enough that the best hitter in all of baseball had such a bad groin injury that it needed to be operated on at the end of the World Series--and it made him unable to get to the outside fastball.  How did Tazawa get him out in all of those clutch situations?  Outside fastballs.  It even hurt him to foul them off.

Lucky enough that a rookie pinch runner gets picked off first base, with one of the best hitters in postseason history at the plate, to end the game.

Lucky enough that they won although Ortiz had just two hits in all of the ALCS.  That's right--he was 2 for 22, or something horrible like that.  The second hit was a little blooper over second base.  The first was the grand slam that tied the second game and woke up Boston.

Lucky enough that Boston had one hit in the first fourteen innings of the ALCS--and still won the second game, and lost the first just 1-0.

Lucky enough that Victor Martinez decided to stop rather than run to second.  And lucky enough that Prince Fielder decided to stop rather than score from third.  On the same play.

Lucky enough that a magician at shortstop booted an easy double-play ball--and then watched as Victorino hit his grand slam.

Lucky enough that an umpire didn't see that Stephen Drew's foot was a zip code away from second base when Drew started the first of the many double plays that sank the Tigers.

Lucky enough that the Cardinals inexplicably decided to pitch to Ortiz in every single clutch situation in the first five games of the World Series.  Or did Napoli scare them that much?  Was Napoli the guy they couldn't let beat them, and not Ortiz?

Lucky enough that the other teams ran themselves, or fielded themselves, into all of their losses.  The Sox certainly did not hit themselves into all of their wins.  Their scarce hits were enough to win the game because the other teams kept shooting themselves in the foot, and not hitting with men on base.

Lucky enough that the one or two hits that a particular player got in an entire series was enough to win one game apiece in that series.  Ortiz in the ALCS.  Napoli in the ALCS.  Ross in the World Series.  And Victorino in both the ALCS and in the World Series.

Lucky enough that they were able to win despite David Ross being an offensive improvement over another catcher.

Lucky enough that, during the regular season, they lost their legit closer to injury, then lost their other legit closer to injury, and then plugged an embattled 7th and 8th inning guy as the closer--and got the best results of all!  (Bailey and Hanrahan return next year, BTW, so where do you pitch them if Uehara still closes?)

Lucky enough that the team loses three more games than it should have, according to the Pythagorean W-L Theorem--which is a huge sway in the wrong direction--and still handily wins its division?

Lucky enough that, during the regular season, Uehara (4-1), Breslow (5-2), Bailey (3-1), Brandon Workman (6-3), Jake Peavy (4-1), Alfredo Aceves (4-1) and Steven Wright (2-0) go a combined 28-9.  Read that one again.

Lucky enough that they win it all even though their top five starters (Lester, 15-8; Lackey 10-13; Dempster 8-9; Doubront, 11-6; Buchholz, 12-1) go a combined 56-37.  Which is pretty damn good, but not in the same universe as the top-5 starters for the Tigers, Rays, or Cardinals.  Or did you think most World Series-winning teams have two of their top-5 starters finish below .500? 

And little things--but lots of little things--like great baserunning, good starting pitching and great relief pitching, and awesome defense.  And timely hitting, to the extent that they were either hitting in the clutch or they weren't hitting at all.

And--by far the most important thing this whole year--fouling off pitches, taking the pitch just outside or inside, driving the pitch count up, and getting the starters out of there and slapping around the bullpen.

And having a Gold Glove-winner at second base, and in right field, and--with a combination of Iglesias and Drew--at shortstop.  And Napoli was very smooth, and a great scooper, at first.

Unbelievable.  What a great team to watch all year, especially after the catastrophe of last year.  Especially in the playoffs, when they hit under .220 total and still won each series in six.

We won't see anything like it anytime soon, maybe not even next year, so I hope you were watching as many games, and appreciating them, as I was.  You know how we hear all that B.S. about chemistry, about leadership, about working hard and sticking together, about playing hard until the very last pitch?

This year, it was all true.  All of it.  

World Series Tied, 2-2.

Quite a bit, so let's get to it:

--I've never seen a World Series game--or any game--end on an obstruction play.

--But when you commit lots of errors over two games in the World Series, you're likely to lose them.

--I've never seen a World Series game end on a pick-off.  But, as a holder of useless information, I can tell you that Babe Ruth, of all people, was thrown out trying to steal second to end a World Series.  Not just the game--the entire series.

--Ortiz singles, and Tim McCarver says that Napoli should come in at first for the bottom of the eighth.  With that, McCarver finally said something in this World Series that I agreed with.

--No matter what happens tomorrow, it's going back to Fenway.  What else could you ask for?

--The Sox are hitting a combined .189 in this World Series.  The Cardinals are hitting .234.  Also not good, but they're Murderer's Row by comparison.

--Considering this, the Sox are lucky to be 2-2.

--With two more errors tonight, they've now committed six in the past three games.  Again, lucky to be 2-2.  This is after they won Game 1 because of the Cardinals' errors.

--I don't want to see Middlebrooks in the field for the rest of the Series.

--I already didn't want to see him at the plate.  Neither, for that matter, did his manager, John Farrell.

--That goes for all of next year, too.  I'm happy with Drew at short for his defense, and Bogaerts at third.  Middlebrooks can go.  Get whatever you can for him, even if it's just a middle-of-the-road reliever.

--With the game ending on a pick-off, does the batter--Carlos Beltran--get credit for an at-bat, or a plate appearance?  I think the at-bat has to end before you get credit for it.  Feel free to weigh in if you know the (irrelevant) answer.

--Sox World Series ERA after this game: 2.27.  St. Louis's ERA: 3.60.

--That tells you how many Sox errors there've been.  Many, if not most, of the runs are unearned for St. Louis.  They still count, of course.

--Craig Breslow needs to sit for awhile.

--Seven total errors for the Sox in four World Series games.

--That was Gomes's first, and only, hit of this World Series.

--Kudos to John Lackey for coming in for a scoreless eighth for his first relief appearance at all since 2004.

--And kudos to Big Papi for firing up the troops in the dugout.

--Speaking of Ortiz, he doesn't make the pick-off tag that Napoli did to end the game.

--Doubront is suddenly effective in the past few games.  He can be Breslow for now.

--Why was Tazawa allowed to just face one batter, especially since he got him in the most tense part of the game?  I'm guessing his tank is empty.

--Just found out why I've never seen a World Series game end in the way the past two games have: Because neither has ever ended a World Series game before.  If it's never happened, I won't see it.

--Stephen Drew can hit zip for the rest of this World Series, and all of next year, and I'll still play him at short for his defense alone.

--At one point in this game, David Ortiz had 7 of the 21 total hits the Sox had in this World Series at that moment.  That's one player having 33% of his team's hits, for you math lovers out there.

--Buchholz was maxed out after just four innings.  He topped out in the mid- to high-80s.  Worried?

--I hope Uehara doesn't have to pitch tomorrow so he can have two days' rest.

--Has it occurred to anyone that, incredibly, the Cardinals have been better without Albert Pujols?  With the money they saved by not re-signing him, they signed two good starters and two relievers.

--For that matter, who would've known that the Angels would be much worse after they sign Pujols and Josh Hamilton?  And with Mike Trout leading off for them to drive in, if he doesn't drive himself in?

--Take a look at my regular blog soon to read about an actual nightmare I had with Will Middlebrooks in it.  Bizarre, is all I can say.

Sox Win ALCS; Face Cards in World Series

A few thoughts after an exciting Game Six victory that opens the door to the 2013 World Series:

--I said in the last post that a commentator said the Tigers were a glorified softball team, and that I "sort of" knew what he meant.  Now I definitely know what he meant.  Great softball teams are usually big, slow sluggers who can't run or defend.  They throw hard and they hit hard, and that's usually enough for softball tournaments.

But that's not enough for baseball's postseason.  You have to be much more balanced.  You have to hit, but more important in a series is that you pitch, run and defend.  Though their starting pitching was perhaps the best ever in an ALCS, the relief pitching, the baserunning and the defending was terrible--perhaps the worst I've ever seen in an ALCS.  All of that reared its ugly head in Game 6:

* Austin Jackson, usually a very good baserunner, gets picked off first base by rookie Brandon Workman.  By a mile.

* Rather than get caught in a rundown so the (very fat and slow) runner from third can score, Victor Martinez--otherwise a very smart player--just stops in front of Dustin Pedroia.  Perhaps he wanted to block Pedroia's view and throw home, but Pedroia simply stepped around him, saw that Fielder had inexplicably stopped running home, and tagged Martinez out.  If V-Mart continues running, he at least makes it to second base, so there's one out and not two.  Or he gets caught in a rundown, which is what he should've done (and which he was taught in Little League to do), and so he's out but the run scores.  This is a common play, one he perhaps has done over a hundred times.

* Prince Fielder, one of the more seemingly-uncaring players I've ever heard and seen play in the ALCS (when told fans would get angry about his uncaring attitude, he said, "They don't play."), unforgivably stops halfway down the baseline and doesn't try to score on the aforementioned groundout.  Why?  If he's tagged out, again, there's just one out and runners are on first and second.  He shouldn't have tried to score at all, of course, with the ball never leaving the infield and his, shall we say, lack of speed.  Leaving third base is bad baserunning, but not continuing home to try to score is an unforgivable mistake that had his manager looking defeated and had Tim McCarver, who usually babbles incessantly about nothing, saying, "That's bad baserunning."  Fielder's unstylish bellyflop back to third base, which he missed by a few feet, will be a Defense Exhibit A of poor baserunning for years to come.  Adding insult to injury, he was signed last year to a 9-year / $215 million contract.  And he hasn't driven in a run in 18 consecutive postseason games.  No wonder why Detroit fans are booing him.  He would've already been driven out of Boston, a la Carl Crawford.

The Tiger defense was okay, since Iglesias is usually a magician in the field, and he loaded the bases, but he didn't give up the grand slam.  (And Pedroia booted an easy double-play ball earlier in the game.)  But the Detroit relief pitching was the worst in memory, or can you name another relief corp that gave up two grand slams in the same series?  The Tigers had the best starting pitching, and the worst relief pitching, in the same postseason series, at the same time.  Amazing.

--Speaking of $200 million and no playoffs, wave goodbye to the Dodgers.  I still don't get why they lost.  Puig, Adrian Gonzalez, or Clayton Kershaw are each able to win a postseason series, just by himself.  But they didn't, and Puig made more mistakes than even a rookie should make.

--The postseason brings out the worst in some players' personalities.  See: Alex Rodriguez.  Case Exhibit A was when he slapped the ball out of Bronson Arroyo's hand in the 2004 ALCS as the Yanks were blowing it.  Players learn in Little League that they can't do that.  And if they do it anyway, they don't have the nerve to look shocked, arms stretched out in surprise, while standing on second base.

--The two teams with the best record in each league are in the World Series for the first time since 1999.

--Stephen Drew doesn't get hits, but he does take them away.  He helped save Game Six with his great play in the seventh.  That's been heavily covered, but nobody remembers his athletic grab of John Lester's errant throw to second base to turn an important double play.  Lester has Roger Clemens's illness: Neither can throw the ball to any base with accuracy.

--Ortiz hit .091 in the ALCS.  Both hits were opposite extremes.  A little blooper over second base.  And a game-tying grand slam that woke up Boston in Game Two.

--Victorino hit .125, with just three hits.  But, like Ortiz, he made the big one count.

--Drew went 1 for 20, with 10 strikeouts.  But, again, the hits he didn't get aren't as important as the ones he took away.

--I'm okay with Drew at short and Bogaerts at third throughout the World Series.  Middlebrooks can sit.

--Middlebrooks and Mike Carp will be important pinch-hitters in the World Series while in St. Louis.  Though here's hoping the Sox don't need them.

--Good to see Uehara win the MVP of the series.  If for no other reason than to show that I don't just pluck these predictions out of thin air.

--I don't remember a single game in which two different players on the same team lost homeruns by about half a foot--combined.

--The Sox relief was perhaps the best I've ever seen in one series.  The whole bullpen deserved the MVP.  Tazawa, especially, manhandled the best hitter (only less so when injured) in the majors.

--I wouldn't want Fielder on my team, even with his homers and RBIs.  I just read that he's already over his offensive ineptitude--at the plate and on the basepaths--because he has two kids to raise, and he has to show them how to be men.  Like he doesn't have his wife and some hired help raise them during the season?

--Note to Prince: Not caring is not being a man.  Real men accept responsibility for their mistakes, internally if not externally.  (He doesn't have to say it to the press, but it doesn't sound like he's saying it to himself, either.)

--I wouldn't let Buchholz throw more than 85 pitches in the World Series, unless he has a huge lead, and / or he's just breezing along.

--Ditto for Lester, who, like Buchholz, start walking everyone when they're losing it.

--Peavy gets the chance to redeem himself.  He's the only one on the pitching staff who needs to.

--Like I said in the previous entry--Having come this far, let's go all the way.

Luke Sewell--1933 Goudey

Photos: Luke Sewell's 1933 Goudey, front and back, from my collection

Important recent card in my collection because a) my better half bought it for me for Christmas, and b) I love Goudeys.  The 1933 set is an iconic set to begin with; it was one of the few sets since the early Cracker Jack cards, the famous T205 and T206 cards, or the ones made in triptych in the late 1800s, to be considered art.  The 1933 Goudeys are smaller than today's cards, almost square, with a painting likeness of the player (sometimes accurate, sometimes not) against a solid color background.  The likeness of the player was often outlined very sharply against this background, as Sewell's is.  The cards, individually and as a set, are of high aesthetic value: the colors hold together well; the cardboard is thick and sustains (except around the corners, notoriously for this set); the printing conditions were very high; and, most importantly, all of the major players of the day are there, including 3 or 4 Ruths and Gehrigs.  A rarity in this set is that many of the players have duplicate cards, and not always because they changed teams, retired, etc.

Family lore has it that my father probably had a ton of these when he was a kid growing up in the 40s or early 50s.  He didn't remember which ones.  One day his mother came in and cleaned up his room, which involved throwing many of them away.  He had maybe three or four left over, which he either demolished by attaching them to his bike spokes, or lost by playing betting games with them--usually by flicking them against brick walls; he who had his card land face-up took the lot.  If this is accurate, he lost some HOF players, and maybe a few grand worth of cards.  But nobody thought of collecting and making money from these things back in the day.

This card:

This one is probably in G-VG condition.  It's not professionally graded, but since I'm holding on to it forever, I'm not going to bother.  It has slight creases of wear in the upper portion, noticeable only in a slanted light, and even slighter ones in the upper left corner, beneath the name, and in the direct center.  The corners are very rounded; this is notoriously common for this set.  Someone had to have the mindset of a collector in 1933 to somehow protect the card (probably in a book, or maybe a cheese box, back then) and its corners.  (There's a set of 114 cards of this condition on ebay right now, going for just over eight grand.)  That just wasn't the case most of the time back then.  Schoolboys played with them, folded them, flipped them, put them in their bike spokes, etc.  Some kid definitely played with this one back in the day; the creases tell me that it's been flipped on its head or tail quite a bit; it's probably seen its share of walls.  That means more to me, somehow.  It's got more character, more story, behind it, then if some guy just put it between the pages of a hardcover book in 1933 and didn't often look at it.  Mine's been used and abused.  It's got patina, as a picker would say.  (Though if someone wants to give me a 1933 Goudey of any player in great condition, please feel free.)

The player:

Some interesting tidbits from his Wikipedia page: He came up fast, after just 17 minor league games, and was probably signed by the Cleveland Indians to begin with because his brother was already an infielder for them.  He was part of a righty/lefty platoon; he never hit in League Park, the home park, which had a right field fence only 290 feet from home plate.  Known for his defense, he threw out 71 runners one year, 60 another, and so on, which tells me that not only did he have a very good throwing arm--but, apparently, everyone ran, all the time, once they got to first.  (Babe Ruth famously ended a World Series by getting thrown out at second base.  The old sped-up clips show his spindly legs moving quicker than you would think, but that's not enough to convince me that he had any business stealing bases, at any time.)

His defense was so good, and maybe his handling of the pitching staff so well-respected, that he did very well in MVP voting at a time when hitters stats were comparable to the steroid era.  For example, he finished fifth in the MVP voting in 1937, and was an all-star.  The league average, batting, that year was .281, and the average OBP was .355.  That means that your average ballplayer, who nobody's ever heard of before, could be a good to decent leadoff or number-two hitter today.  (A slightly below average year for Pedroia would be .281/.355 right now.)  The #10 hitter in the league hit .331 with a .407 OBP and a .546 slugging %, with 111 runs scored, 25 homers and 110 RBIs.  Sewell, as I mentioned, finished 5th in MVP voting, way ahead of all the guys whose stats are mentioned above; Sewell had 111 hits, with 1 homerun, 61 RBIs and a .269 batting average--all very, very, very below the league average.  More than five guys finishing in the top-25 behind him had over 25 homers and 100 RBIs each.  The guys in front of him were your DiMaggios, Greenbergs and Gehrigs, with over 37 homers and 159 RBIs apiece (those were Gehrig's stats, whose numbers were lower than the guys in front of him on the MVP list).  Guys in front of him hit .371, .346, .337, .351, and .332., with RBI totals of 167, 183, 159 and 133.  Then Sewell, hitting .269, with 1 homer and 61 RBIs.

Now that's respect.  Or else, he had pictures.  I don't know.  I'm guessing respect.  He must've been some defensive catcher and handler of pitchers.  The equivalent today would've been Jason Varitek finishing #5 in the MVP voting between 2000 and 2007.  Not happenin'.  Sewell finished 9th, 12th and 15th in the MVP voting in other years.  You can find these stats at baseball-reference.com, here.  He threw out 53% of the baserunners for two straight years, and was annually in the mid- to upper-40s.  That's incredible, for any era.  For his career, he struck out just 307 times in over 6,000 plate appearances; this averages to just 30 strikeouts per 600 plate appearances, per season.  In 1933, he had 24 strikeouts in 536 plate appearances.  Of course, he walked about as often, too.  In those 536 PAs in 1933, he walked just 48 times--though this is, of course, double his strikeout total.  With his good MVP standing, I'll bet he made the most of all those outs--moving the runners along, hitting to the right side, bunting, sacrifice flies.  All that.  He still holds the American League record for most consecutive seasons as an active catcher, with 20.  This also speaks to his defensive prowess.  Something else that also does is that he caught three no-hitters from three no-name pitchers.  Varitek, who also caught three no-hitters, probably caught them from pitchers of higher caliber.

His brother, Joe Sewell, is a Hall of Fame shortstop.  As I've barely heard of him, I'll bet it's because of his defense, as well.  Let's look 'em up...Woops!  I'm wrong.  Clearly one of the better hitting shortstops of the 20s, if not the best, and his strikeout ratios are even better than his brother's, to the point of silliness.  He struck out 114 times in just over 8,300 plate appearances for his career.  (By comparison, many of the best hitters today K well over 114 times in about 600 plate appearances in just one season.)  On average, per season, he would K just 10 times in over 700 plate appearances, with 72 walks, 189 hits, 90+ RBIs, a .312 batting average and a .391 on-base percentage.  He once had 115 consecutive games between strikeouts.  He still holds the MLB record for fewest strikeouts per AB, averaging just one K per 63 at-bats for his career.

Pappa Sewell taught his boys to make contact.

Though this was a great time to be a hitter, the juiced-up ball and smaller ballparks didn't lead to Joe Sewell walking as much, getting as many hits, and K'ing so rarely.  His D was good, too.  Overlooked player by the HOF and voted in by the Veterans Committee in 1977 in one of their rare good moves.  He died in 1990, aged 91, so he saw himself inducted into the Hall, which is rare for an overlooked ballplayer from a bygone era.

In an odd coincidence, Luke Sewell (back to him; sorry for the brother sidetrack) was traded by the Washington Senators, with cash, to the St. Louis Browns for Bump Hadley--whose 1933 Goudey I had just bought at a flea market a few weeks before.  (Hadley, a pitcher, had hit him in the head and knocked him unconscious in 1934, ending his season.)  Until Christmas, Hadley's was only one of the two Goudeys I owned.  (I got his card, and Bing Miller's--both in Good condition--for $20 total at that flea market.)  Weird.  He won two awards for Manager of the Year (one in the majors, one in the minors) but never seemed content anywhere and stepped down all the time.  Just kept moving around.  (He had a .622 record over two seasons for one team as manager, but stepped down and re-signed elsewhere anyway.)  In 1944, he led the St. Louis Browns to its only World Series in its 52-year existence, losing to the St. Louis Cardinals.