Retroactive January Recap

Evidently nothing happened this month. Move along, folks.

VII: Another Chance

Voice-over: We'll be returning to our feature film in just a few short moments, but first, we'd like to take a moment to tell you about a product certain to replace Tickle Me Elmo and Canadian whiskey straight from the bottle as THE gift of the holiday season.

Man #1: Thanks Ed. Now, Brad, I don't know about you, but I often spend the weeks and months before Christmas standing in never-ending lines subsisting on pemmican waiting for the year's newest toy that my child absolutely needs to keep up the will to live, only to find out that they sold the last one to the woman in front of me in the line, and I get the feeling I'm not alone here. How often does this happen to you?

Man #2: Never, since I bought a gun.

Man #1: (Silence)

Man #2: Kidding! (Mouthing to camera: Not really kidding)

Man #1: I can see you, you know.

Man #2: Oh. Well Chad, now you'll never have to do that again, because we've got this holiday season's hottest gift right here, and you can get it shipped directly to your home for the low, low price of just 17 easy payments of $14.83!

Man #1: Wow! That is a low, low price! But enough about how good a deal this is, and it's certainly a good one. What's it for?

Man #2: I'm glad you asked. Chad, how often have you wanted to own your own dinosaur?

Man #1: Ever since I saw Jurassic Park!

Man #2: Are you mocking me? I can't tell. (Pause) Well, what if I told you we've got something even better than that. A dinosaur....

Man #1: Yes?

Man #2: With a rocket launcher!

Man #1: Wow! That sounds like such an amazing idea, I'm surprised Bill Gates hasn't already filed for a patent on it!

Man #2: Actually, he has. We took it (Mouthing to audience: The gun).

Man #1: Well, let's hope he doesn't press charges! But what kind of dinosaurs are we talking about here?

Man #2: With this introductory offer at the low, low price of just 14 easy payments of $19.85, we'll even let you pick the dinosaur!

V-O (Over shots of TOTALLY AWESOME dinosaurs with rocket launchers): That's right guys. You can get your very own rocket-wielding velociraptor! Or a Tyrannosaurus Rex! Or a brontosaurus with side-mounted missiles!

Man #1: What about my very own Maiosaurus?

Man #2: No, because that one's a pussy.

Man #1: (Sulks)

Man #2: Be the envy of what's left of your block! Get yourself a dinosaur with a rocket launcher today for just 182 easy payments of just $103.74! Heck, at that price get them for the whole family!

Man #1: I will, Chad! And I'm never standing in line again!

Man #2: Because your dinosaur will kill everyone in line?

Man #1: No, because people are going to order these to come in the mail. What is wrong with you?

V-O: So just call 1-900-AWESOME and don't check your monthly statements too closely! Satisfaction probable! We now return you to It's a Wonderful Life, already in progress.

The Sabathia-Hernandez Debate

It's AL Cy Young Day! Hoorays! Anyway, here's something I started a while back and forgot about, then revived before it becomes even less timely. Hopefully I caught all the tenses and things which needed changing now. Alright, here we go.

There's a spirited yelling match currently going on between the old-school writers who believe that the Cy Young award should be given to the grittiest player regardless of results (Because "You can't trust them statistics.") (Also: This player is David Eckstein. Even though he doesn't pitch) and the sabermetrics crowd, who want the award to go to whoever their Excel spreadsheet says it should (These caricatures are completely hackneyed by this point. Sorry for any groan-induced pains reading them may have caused). So, with bedlam gripping the nation as we wait to see who will finally be deemed the best by a small sample of the BBWAA in the voting this afternoon, I have decided to submit a completely unscientific entry that proves absolutely nothing to the discussion. You're welcome.

Most of the disagreement is coming from the 'Wins' statistic. Sabathia (Record of 21-7) led the league in wins, which, it should be noted, are technically something a team earns, rather than an individual player. Hernandez had a record of 13 wins and 12 losses. Which does not sound all that impressive. However, Sabathia also led the league in run support, the runs his offensive players, who he has no control over (Unless he is injecting them with steroids between innings), scored in his starts, whereas Hernandez finished dead last in this, as his teammates are still hoping that someday a coach will tell them which end of the bat they are supposed to hold. This may have had some slight impact on that 'Wins' statistic. So, to complicate things further, I am now going to match up game logs, and keep Sabathia's statistics from each game, but give him the run support Hernandez received in his corresponding start. To make things slightly tipped in Sabathia's favor (And balance out park effects, which are completely ignored here, a bit), it shall be assumed that all run support was scored while he was still in the game, and all relievers who followed him gave up no runs. Also, his runs allowed will be used rather than his earned runs, because, at the heart of it all, the concept of an 'earned' run is fairly convoluted and stupid. Either it scores or it doesn't. Anyway, there are many, many flaws in this method which prevent it from being a tool that is actually useful, but it seems like fun, so I'm going to do it. Basically, pitcher wins are a stupid stat, so I am using a fairly stupid method to point that out. Feel free to point out its flaws in the comments!

Format: Start #: Seattle Runs-Sabathia Runs Allowed, Decision (Pitcher record)

1: 5-5, ND (0-0)
2: 4-0, W (1-0)
3:11-1, W (2-0)
4: 4-4, ND (2-0)
5: 1-3, L (2-1)
6: 3-1, W (3-1)
7: 0-3, L (3-2)
8: 5-6, L (3-3)
9: 5-1, W (4-3)
10: 1-6, L (4-4)
11: 1-5, L (4-5)
12: 4-3, W (5-5)
13: 1-2, L (5-6)
14: 4-3, W (6-6)
15: 5-0, W (7-6)
16: 2-1, W (8-6)
17: 7-2, W (9-6)
18: 4-1, W (10-6)
19: 4-1, W (11-6)
20: 2-4, L (11-7)
21: 2-4, L (11-8)
22: 1-4, L (11-9)
23: 0-3, L (11-10)
24: 0-2, L (11-11)
25: 2-3, L (11-12)
26: 1-2, L (11-13)
27: 6-0, W (12-13)
28: 4-5, L (12-14)
29: 3-0, W (13-14)
30: 3-6, L (13-15)
31: 4-0, W (14-15)
32: 2-3, L (14-16)
33: 0-7, L (14-17)
34: 3-1, W (15-17)

So fictional CC Sabathia pitching for the Seattle Mariners with a perfect bullpen put up a 2010 record of 15-17, tying for the major league lead in losses. Now, this is an imperfect exercise, but it does nicely show how poor the reasoning behind voting for Sabathia this year is. Still have doubts? We can move onto some advanced statistics that matter immensely if you'd like. Hernandez led Sabathia in innings pitched, strikeouts, and runs allowed (Like, he gave up fewer runs). To vote for Sabathia, one has to announce to the world that the only statistic they care about is pitcher wins, and nothing else matters to them. Considering this is what mainstream media writers often like to accuse statistically-minded people of doing (If you sub in, say, VORP for pitcher wins), well, I find this rather amusing. Even though the writers who vote for Sabathia will never understand why.

The Marlins Strike! Wait, That's Too Dramatic.

The Florida Marlins are one of the most intelligently-run organizations in baseball. After winning two World Series championships in the last fifteen years and being almost annual playoff contenders these days despite a ridiculous shoestring budget, it's safe to say that if you don't understand the moves the Marlins are making, the fault is on your end. The team always seems able to summon young, cost-controlled talent at will from its farm system, and they have an absolutely unlimited supply of power arms down there, waiting for a chance to pitch for the parent club.

That said, I have no idea what the Marlins are doing right now.

The offseason has just begun, and the Marlins have already struck with three trades and one free agent signing following each other in rapid succession. Let's take them approximately chronologically.

Traded LHP Andrew Miller to the Boston Red Sox for LHP Dustin Richardson. This one is easy enough to figure out: The Marlins are attempting to save money. Both Miller and Richardson suck, but Miller has a history of being a top prospect with electric stuff that he has somehow misplaced, and therefore is getting paid a mid-range sum of money this year, whereas Richardson sucks on the cheap. Essentially, the Marlins are betting $1.5 million that Miller never recovers from whatever ails him.

Traded CF Cameron Maybin to the San Diego Padres for RHP Edward Mujica and RHP Ryan Webb. Now, both Webb and Mujica are quality pitchers, albeit relievers rather than starters. But Maybin is still very young, cheap, and while his bat is still a work in progress, he has hit very well in AAA and plays excellent defense in center field. This is usually the sort of player the Marlins look for, not trade away. He is out of minor league options, so maybe they didn't think he'd be good enough to make the team out of Spring Training next year and wanted to move him before that became a problem. Which is weird, because he hit very well in AAA this year, and they have no centerfielder on the roster.

Traded 2B Dan Uggla to the Atlanta Braves for LHP Mike Dunn and utilityman Omar Infante.This is just strange and/or awful. Uggla is an All Star-caliber second baseman under team control for one more year. Infante is a utilityman with no patience or power at the plate who is also signed for another year, and Mike Dunn is a cheap reliever who once heard rumor of a strange land called the strike zone, but dismissed it. Again, though: The Marlins do save money.

Signed C John Buck to a 3-year, $18 million dollar contract. And there goes that money. I know you need a catcher to prevent the ball from rolling to the backstop every play, but it seems to me that if your catcher is going to cost you $6,000,000 guaranteed each season, he should probably not suck. Unfortunately for them, the Marlins do not agree with me about this. Because they signed Buck, who sucks. I could detail how he sucks, but it will be far less painful for all parties concerned if you just take my word for it. You want something anyway? Fine. Here's an unfair comparison: Buck's career .301 on-base percentage is slightly worse than the career OBP of Smoky Joe Wood with the Red Sox. Don't make me actually break Buck down. I will do it. And it will be long. And I'm starting to kind of want to.

Unless there's going to be a sudden pandemic that affects only relief pitchers, I'm mystified here. The Marlins are trading away assets to stockpile players at the least valuable position on a baseball team (Well, okay, more valuable than 'The Guy Who Backs Up Albert Pujols'. But that's about it). Normally the Marlins are a very sharp ballclub, but they suddenly seem to have a dearth of outfielders after jettisoning Maybin and (Slightly more distantly) Cody Ross, and announcing that Chris Coghlan will move back to the infield this season. The relievers will be useful if the team contends, but with the lineup they currently have, that seems unlikely. However, they are moving into a new stadium soon, and should have a rise in revenue from that. And while they've already wasted about 2/3 of what they've saved in the trades on Buck, there's still some left over from that. I wouldn't be surprised if that money plus some more gets invested in a player or two more as the offseason continues, with a goal of moving the team up into contention this year, be it via free agency (Baseless speculation that will never ever happen: Carl Crawford?) or a trade for a high-salaried player (With the Dodgers' reported financial issues, Matt Kemp, perhaps?). These moves just feel like the precursor to something bigger, something that will make the Marlins a Team To Beat in 2011. Because otherwise they just screwed up royally, and a team this smart wouldn't do that. Right?

Update - They will move Coghlan to centerfield. So I figured hey, when's the next time I'll be in Haiti?

Signs Your Cough Drop Isn't Working Well

1. You cough so hard that you accidentally swallow it.

Oh Wow

I just saw this on TV.



You're welcome.

Who Wants To Be A Millionaire Has Ruined Everything

In the beginning there were only two game shows, as God intended. Jeopardy and (For those who had suffered frontal lobe damage and enjoyed the fine sport of competitive clapping) Wheel of Fortune. Sure, there were rumors of something called The Price is Right, but I am a blogger. I have no time for vague legends. These two shows kept everyone happy, and for everyone else, there was America's Funniest Home Videos (Quote from a wise man upon a shot of Bob Saget on this program:"Look closely at his face. That's the face of a man who hates himself.") Then in 1999, a show imported from the Brits as part of their most recent attempt to destroy America emerged: Who Wants To Be A Millionaire. This programme (SEE WHAT I DID THERE?) was in the form of Jeopardy in that it was a quiz show, but featured only a single contestant attempting to answer questions of increasing difficulty, with possible answers being listed in a multiple-choice format. If this sounds extremely straightforward, well, that's because it is. What the eventually will be known for is something other than these things. Millionaire's legacy is the

Interminable




Pauses



Employed by host Regis Philbin after the contestant has ALREADY GIVEN HIM THEIR ANSWER. These are presumably done to heighten the tension or some absolute crap like that, but all they do is drag out the proceedings and make this vein in my forehead start pulsing. I really should get that checked out now that I have a job that gives me benefits. Eventually Millionaire left primetime for syndication, but while it is now removed from the spotlight, the pauses have taken over everything (Except Jeopardy. Thank God for Jeopardy). The Official Girlfriend has been watching a lot of The Gameshow Network lately, and for each one-hour programme (I DID IT AGAIN), I would estimate there is approximately 3 minutes of actual gameshow combined with 572 minutes of pauses. My math may be off there, but let's just go with it. It is no longer limited to gameshows, either. NBC's smash only hit show The Biggest Loser each week features 25 minutes of actual show (In a two-hour time slot) and a full hour of people standing on a giant scale while the number goes up and down at random despite the fact that IT'S A DIGITAL SCALE AND DEAR GOD JUST SAY WHAT THEY WEIGH AND GET ON WITH IT. This is why, when the multitudes ask me on a daily basis "Mike, why is network television dying?" I tell them that it's all Regis Philbin's fault.

Baseball Storytime!

Wait, don't leave! This one's fun! And also short! Promise!

Last night Yankees pitcher Javier Vazquez, attempting to pitch well enough to be included on the team's postseason roster, hit three straight batters with pitches. Which, it turns out, ties a record for consecutive hit batters set by Dock Ellis in 1974. Dock Ellis is also famous for throwing a no-hitter while on acid. Yes, that sort of acid. Apparently in 1974, someone on the Reds called the Pirates, Ellis' team, dumb. Ellis said to a teammate that he would hit every one of them. The teammate bet him a steak (And a good one at that) he wouldn't. The teams played near the end of the season, and Ellis decided his teammates had lost their aggresiveness. So he took things up a notch. Before the game he took several uppers, then went out and hit the first three batters of the game. He walked the fourth, not for a lack of effort, but because the batter dodged the four straight pitches that were thrown at him. After the fifth batter dodged two straight beanballs, Ellis' manager removed him from the game. Even though it wasn't technically the whole Reds team, Ellis' teammate payed up on the bet. Ah, the Seventies.

So what was the point of all this? I don't remember. But congratulations, Javy Vazquez.

Awesome

Get yr nerd on!

Yes, I Would Love the Job

Well, not so much me, as I am now gainfully employed in a manner I can report to the IRS. The Official Girlfriend is currently job-hunting, an activity which often leaves her frustrated for all the obvious reasons. She spends a lot of time on job-related internet sites, which are known for their startling veracity in all regards. This state of affairs led to her receiving the following email in response to her application for a babysitting job. Please excuse the mangled English. It cannot be helped, as the family in question recently moved to the country, according to an email which accompanied this one, and has now been sadly lost. Where did they move from?, you may well ask. England. I swear I am not making that up.

Hello Dear,

I have listed some questions from for you below as i was adviced by the nanny site that these questions should be the basis for for us to make a choice of a good baby sitter.Our kids mean everything to us and we would do all withing our best of efforts to give him the best of things in life.I hope the questiions are not so breath taking , we are only trying to act as we have been directed by the nanny site so we can know we are having someone with enormous experience when it comes to baby sitting.

Questions are listed below:

Do you smoke?

How well do you like pets ?Any allergies?

Do you drink alcohol?

Do you speak any languages other than English?

Would you work in a position with a mom how far? how long?

What are your education goals?

Have you ever been treated for mental illness/depression?

How many children do you feel comfortable caring for?

What ages do you prefer?

Are you CPR and first aid certified?

What are your weaknesses/limitations?

What are your strengths?

What do you like to do your free time?

How many people are in your family?

What is your relationship like with your parents and siblings?

What jobs have you had in the past?

Have you been a past nanny ?where do you get a job?

Are you interested in taking classes?

How assertive are you?Do you feel you communication?

How much do you charge and what hours are you available?

I hope to get your response back soon enough so we can get on with this.

Thank you and stay blessed lastly kindly send atleast one of your reference (s) so we can contact them and know more about you.

Despite the fact that this is very clearly a legitimate job and not at all sketchy in any way, she decided not to respond to this Englishwoman's very reasonable questions. Being myself, and therefore completely ridiculous, I decided to handle her response for her. It follows.

Dear Nancy,

My breath was initially taken away by your enormous list of questions, but after I regained it I decided that I would try to suppress my anger over your obvious distrust of me long enough to answer your questions. Based on the length of the list, I suspect you are an overbearing person. You should be careful of that, as it could lead to your children having emotional problems later in life, and therapy bills are expensive. Also, I will helpfully number your questions in my response, even though numbers are a tool of science, and therefore against God's will.

1. I do not smoke cigarettes.

2. I like all pets except fish, reptiles, cats and dogs.

2b. I used to have allergies, but God cured them.

3. Not before lunchtime.

4. I speak Latin as well as English, in case the College of Cardinals chooses to appoint me Pope.

5. 17 feet.

5b. A fortnight.

6. To someday stop eating the paste.

7. The court records have been sealed, so no.

8. Up to one. Ideally less.

9. I like 'em young.

10. If God has decided it is time for someone to die, we should not interfere.

11. I have no weaknesses or limitations, and am insulted that you would even ask that.

12. I can leg-press 1,500 pounds.

13. In my free time, I usually hunt the most dangerous game.

14. 28. We're Catholic.

15. Very poor, but it's their fault, not mine.

16. I mostly work for tips.

17. Yes, in a past life.

17b. Usually on the corner.

18. If God wants me to know more things, he will implant that knowledge directly into my brain.

19. I am very assertive, especially when I am holding my metal bat.

19b. I are excrutiatingly skilled at communications.

20. That depends on what the client wants, and am busy at nighttimes.

21. That is not a question.

I hope this has helped you realize that God wants me to watch your kids, and if you don't give me the position than you must be stupid. Pray to him, as he is my reference.

In His name,

-Dani Stock

I think I turned her into some kind of Catholic hooker there. Anyways, being completely unreasonable and a notorious hater of fun and/or lulz, she refused to allow me to send this. So Nancy, I'm sorry you so rudely received no response (You're reading my blog, right? Cool). She'd love the position. Stay in touch.