As I was watching hockey played outdoors and browsing the SportsJournalists.com forum, I ran into an interesting post: Joe Sheehan vs. BBWAA.

It refers to Sheehan’s recent article at Baseball Prospectus stating the Baseball Writers Association, which presents the MVP awards, among others, and votes on the Hall of Fame, excludes most Internet writers such as Sheehan or ESPN.com’s Rob Neyer. (Not all are excluded, several online writers are now members.) Meanwhile, the names on the BBWAA badge list are sometimes confounding and serve to make Sheehan’s point: You don’t even have to cover baseball to be a member, as long as you work for a newspaper that gets near the sport live at least once-in-awhile.

If you want to get frustrated, read some responses on that forum. (Sheehan is a “blogger” to one!) But I don’t want to paint a bad picture, there’s some thoughtful responses from BBWAA members as well as “regular” journalists.

I bring this up because I followed a link to The Biz of Baseball to see what Michigan members might exist (search by Detroit). And remember, if you are a 10-year member of the organization, you have a Hall of Fame vote, but not necessarily a vote for the other awards.

You’ll find oldtymers that make sense like Tom Gage, Lynn Henning, John Lowe and Danny Knobler. You’ll find newcomer Jon Paul Morosi. You’ll find some you wonder about, like Traverse City’s Jeff Peek (does he cover a lot of Tigers baseball? I know the R-E does do a few articles but I’m not a regular reader). You’ll find Detroit News sports editor Ruben Luna and Freep sports editor Gene Meyers and wonder what the point in their membership is. Yet Jason Beck, who covers probably 140 regular season games, Spring Training and the postseason, is ineligible to become a member, period, because he works for MLB.com.

You’ll find a couple of columnists (year is when they received their badge), two or three of whom make you go WHUH? The first four have HoF voting rights.

• Jerry Green, 1960
• Mitch Albom, 1986
• Pat Caputo, 1987
• Rob Parker, 1990
• Drew Sharp, 1999
• Michael Rosenberg, 2001

So there you have it. To the BBWAA, The Little Fella is more qualified than Joe Sheehan in deciding who should make the baseball Hall of Fame. Rob Parker is more qualified than Rob Neyer.

My two cents:

Anyone involved in journalism knows that it is changing, more rapidly each year. Your morning newspaper is updating nearly constantly online, making the paper edition less valuable to the modern reader, but allowing the news gathering organization to remain afloat in the 24-hour news cycle. (Your afternoon newspaper, except in small communities, is dead or dying, as evidenced by the Cincy Post exiting the newspaper world Monday). And suddenly, for some reason, your news paper is becoming involved both in audio (podcasts) and with video(!!). That’s not just the metro papers either, but even smaller newspapers. My own circulation 15,000 paper, will soon add video. Basically, your newspaper and mine learned to evolve to stay alive in today’s 24/7 world by shifting more and more weight to the online world. (Not that everyone likes that. There are fewer journalists and many older ones are struggling with the change. This also tends to mean more work, faster, at the same low pay.)

That introduction was a longwinded way of saying the BBWAA had better figure out that modern newspapers and online-only publications are fast becoming the same beast. It does not matter if one has had a nameplate around for 100 years and the other hasn’t — they are the same beast now. (And the elder folks out there had better learn the differences between online publications and blogs so they don’t come off sounding out-of-touch or ignorant.)

When an important game ends, the online users are looking for news and opinion sources they trust. They want video highlights from the TV folks or the league themselves. They want quotes from people in the locker room — actual substantial quotes. Rote cliche makes an article with quotes no more special than one without them, frankly. They want analysis of what went right or wrong, why A or B happened or didn’t, and how their favorite player’s performance ranked. Oh, and they want it NOW. The deadline pressure applies to everyone. If it’s a big game, you’ll probably find guys from the online publications there. (And you know what? These guys are not “just watching games on TV,” it is their profession.)

This is so important I’ll do a quick recap:

• Sound.
• Video.
• Facts.
• Informed opinions.

All four things. From every source the reader personally trusts when making his or her own opinion. They’re looking for quality.

Immediately.

That is the online world. That is the world as it exists today.

Newspapers have realized this. Journalists (and their guilds) must as well.

Share/Email This

No matter what you celebrate or how you celebrate it, happy holidays, have fun and stay safe!

Share/Email This

Jon Paul Morosi reports that Dontrelle Willis and the Tigers have agreed to a contract that will keep him in Detroit through 2010. The reported salary will be 7M in 2008, 10M in 2009 and 12M in 2010 for a total of $29M.

That sounds reasonable to me. Keeping Willis around helps cancel out the fact the Tigers traded so many pitching prospects. But it’s not long term deal, so it’s a bit safer for both player and team.

Share/Email This

Jon Paul Morosi (it’s always JPM!) reports the Tigers may be working on extending the stay of Dontrelle Willis in Detroit before the lefty even throws a pitch in the Olde English D. And to me, that’s a good thing.

I’ve touched on this before. And before. I believe the Tigers should extend the contract of Dontrelle Willis by at least a couple years. Sight unseen. It’s a risk, given his 2006 season was the opposite of stellar. But if Willis pitches to the potential I’m pretty sure he’s capable of (and I’m not alone, Bill James’ formula thinks he’ll bounce back this year too) his price will only go up from this point.

If the Tigers get something done to give us a Verlander-Willis-Bonderman 1-2-3 punch for the new few years, all the better.

Share/Email This

Nate Robertson lives in metro Detroit. Yearround. By choice. This fact alone makes him popular with Michiganders, as I think we sort of have a chip on our shoulder and embrace anyone who chooses to be one of us.

Jon Paul Morosi reports today Robertson would like to sign a contract extention to remain a Tiger past 2009. He follows the lead of Dontrelle Willis, who said last week he’d like his contract extended past 2009 as well.

Robertson, a 30-year-old left-hander, was offered salary arbitration last week. So, even if he does not sign a long-term deal, Robertson will receive a raise over the $3.26 million he earned last season, when he went 9-13 with a 4.76 ERA in 30 starts. (Morosi)

This bit of timing brings up an interesting question, the same one the Tigers must answer with Willis’ request: Should the Tigers risk it to possibly save money? Robertson, like Willis, is coming off a bad year. Theorhetically anyway, that should keep their prices down (for the same reason the Tigers can’t trade Brandon Inge with that salary, he isn’t worth it!). So there should be a discount for a deal, especially since it gives the players countless guaranteed millions even though they pitched poorly. The players take the risk they are costing themselves money if they bounce back to past form. That brings up the opposite. The Tigers would like to save money and have a pair of solid lefties. But if either, or neither player bounces back, they’re in the Inge situation, paying too much for not enough production.

Robertson might be seen as a poster boy for ignoring win-loss record. In 2006, he led the MLB in tough-luck losses (7), which is when a player is tagged with the loss even though he had a quality start of 3 ER or fewer allowed in six innings. Looking at the past three years, he made quality starts in 50 percent (2005), 63 percent (2006) and 43 percent (2007) of his starts.

My guess is Robertson’s 2006 season is going to be peak of his career. He was 29. He’ll likely go downhill some as he ages. But I also believe 2007, during which he went on the DL for a tired arm, which he disputed, is not necessarily the Robertson we’re going to see either. Going forward, I expect he’ll be a solid No. 4 guy.

More important — and intriguing — to me is Willis. Due to his age (26) Willis is not exactly in the same situation as Robertson. We can expect Robertson will slide as he ages. But Willis, with much higher peak than Robertson, to date, has a chance to improve.. Maybe he can’t match 2005, when he finished as runner-up in the Cy Young with a 2.63 ERA with a K/9 only a few hundredths more than that of 2007. Willis also hadn’t had an ERA of more than 4.02 before last season, during which he says he pitched injured. But of the two, extending Willis seems safer, though that really depends on the dollar amounts.

To really decide on the two, we have to imagine the Tigers’ rotation in 2010-2011. Right now, it looks like the rotation could be, in order: Justin Verlander, Jeremy Bonderman, Dontrelle Willis, and two open spots. One spot could be taken by Rick Porcello in 2010, but almost definitely 2011. Given I can’t think of any up-and-coming pitchers left who could crack the rotation at No. 5, I’ll say signing Robertson could make some sense. That gives 3 power righties to go with two lefties. I could see it.

So to me, if Robertson accepts No. 4 money to stay through 2011, great. If his aims are too high, I’d take the wait-and-see approach. Maybe a prospect bubbles up (or is traded for). There could be something on the free agent market by then. But if not, keeping your No. 4/5 is quite often cheaper than signing a free agent version of the same. In any case, I see no reason to rush.

Ian seems to agree.

Share/Email This

As we try to return to some baseball normalcy….

• Jim Price will only do color commentary on the radio

Tom Gage reported that in today’s News. Price previously did play-by-play on the middle three innings. No reason was given for the change. If you ask Tigers fans, however, I think you’d receive a few reasons pretty quick. Price wasn’t very good at PBP. His descriptions lacked, er, description. And they weren’t timely. And he would breathe into the microphone. I like him fine for color. The former Tigers player says “we” too much though. Dan Dickerson will do all the PBP. That’s fantastic news, because I really enjoy his calling of games. He does everything right that Price did wrong, so it was a jarring switch in the middle of the game.

• The Tigers contacted the agent of Miguel Olivo, former catcher for the Florida Marlins.

Ian at BYB wonders if he could be talked into backup money (he earned $2M last season) for this season and given the chance to become the Tigers starting catcher in 2009. Ian points out he threw out a similar percentage of runners as Pudge did, but he also had the worst WP/PB numbers in the National League. So I’m not really certain that’s a direction I’d want to go fulltime, especially if his NL OBP was only .262, though he had some pop in his bat.

• Ian says: reliever available. Should Tigers act?

Texas did not retain the services of Akinori Otsuka. His ERA was 2.51. The Tigers may have been interested in him at the trading deadline last season. Yes, their payroll is high. But their weakness is the bullpen. Do they have any change left in the piggybank to help shore up that problem? I agree that Otsuka would make a fine solution if they can find a way. Apparently he wants a longer-term contract though. And apparently he may have an elbow problem, making him sorta risky. Still. He could definitely help if that risk drives the price down. I’m not sure it will, a lot of teams are desperate for relief. I don’t really expect the Tigers to pursue any more higher priced free agents.

• Lynn Henning has burning questions.
• Big Al answers them.
  

The topics include the value of Brandon Inge on the trade market (not much), Lynn’s views on the rotation (it’s good, don’t look at 2007’s numbers alone), the bullpen (still scary) and other things.

• A glance at Rick Porcello by Take 75 North.
• Prospect lists: good or bad? Matt at T75N isn’t a fan.

If you aren’t reading T75N, you should be. Especially now with needing to figure out who is still left in the Tigers’ farm system. Porcello hasn’t had a whole lot of words written about him since the draft, but it’s a good primer with a lot of nice links.

The prospect list post is interesting with a great analogy. Lists are fine, but how much can you really rank prospects and list them top to bottom? Is it more useful to group them together and talk about traits? Matt says yes. I am apt to agree. I really don’t see how you can say “This guy is No. 7, this guy is No. 8.” After No. 1 or 2, does it really matter much? I don’t think so.

• Finally today, a Spartans basketball blog.

I have meant to tout this thing for weeks and I’m pretty sure I haven’t mentioned it. Maybe I have. Two mentions is OK, I’m sure. For us MSU faithful, it’s nice to have a team to root for during the winter months and that’s a great new blog about it. And when college basketball season comes to and end, the Tigers are just getting ready to go north, and then we have baseball season to enjoy (especially this year!)

One addition

• Lee posted the Tigers Fielding Independent Pitching numbers

… After I did my roundup but I would be remiss if that wasn’t on the required reading list. I love FIP! It’s a nice way to see if the pitcher was helped or hurt by his defense and luck. For that reason, it’s useful in finding out if any pitcher had a particularly lucky or unlucky year, so you can figure out if he may return to earth or bounce back. It shows up Dontrelle Willis probably was that bad in 07, but he was also pitching injured, he wrote in a Yardbarker comment (scroll down to 28).

OK, so two additions

• Dontrelle has a new post up at Yardbarker about being called up to The Show.

I like DTrain’s blogs there, but even more fun for me is reading the comments. He responds to fans all the time over there. For a guy coming off a bad season personally and with a team that piled up losses, his excitement with becoming a Tiger really comes through. Which is awesome, because it matches our excitement as Tigers fans; we have experience in such matters ourselves, from the seats anyway.

Share/Email This

Hey, it’s later.

In the 12 hours since Senator George Mitchell’s Report first come out, we’ve had a chance to hear from him, from MLB commissioner Bud Selig, from the Players’ Union, and from some people named in the report. A lot of people have come to the conclusion it’s a weak, useless report. Some claim it’s useful. Most agree, however, it’s important. I believe the Report must be reflected upon, and hope that it’s a call to make further progress to try to keep the sport clean.

I’ve heard ESPN and its lawyers hype the fact a lot of the peopled named in the report are based on circumstantial evidence given by a select few individuals facing prosecution and talking. That’s a good point.

At SI.com, Jon Donovon writes

When we’re considering the weight of evidence in the report, it’s probably smart to remember this: Mitchell is a former federal prosecutor and judge, and the people running these investigations — people who compelled the testimony of Bigbie, former Mets batboy Kirk Radomski and former Yankees and Blue Jays trainer Brian McNamee, all of whom gave the Mitchell report the weight that it has — are professionals. They know what constitutes solid evidence. They know what they’re doing.

Logically, that’s called appeal to authority. You expect because he’s a former prosecutor, you can trust it. He’s the authority there. But on the other hand, you really have to let the report speak for itself, and the parts I read were really mixed, some areas stronger than others.

But I’m not really going to address that. I’m more interested in the “What should happen” portion of the story. Bud Selig, in his press conference, said he’ll take it by a case-by-case basis and decide punishments. The counterargument “It wasn’t against the rules then” can’t really fly, as Mitchell says in the report (as David Pinto pointed out):

There is a widespread misconception that the use of steroids and other performance enhancing substances, such as human growth hormone, was not prohibited in Major League Baseball before the inclusion of the joint drug program in the 2002 Basic Agreement. In fact, as early as 1991 baseball’s drug policy expressly prohibited the use of “all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids or prescription drugs for which the individual … does not have a prescription.”

So, there is reason to punish players. It’s allowed I’d say. But should Selig? Mitchell says no. I agree.

For one, the report singles out the wrongdoers who happened to deal with limited sources. What about the other ones? Are future reports coming out that tells us about a Midwest steroids kingpin? Second, the evidence is not always compelling. Sometimes (Brian Roberts, for example) it’s flat out weak. Third, some are retired. You only punish the ones who have the gall to keep playing or what?

I think the punishment has to come from the public. Whether or not Selig and MLB fine someone, or take a few weeks off their upcoming season, is ultimately a short event. Rogers Clemens and his accomplishments should never be looked upon the same again, if the allegations are true (He denies them). Same with Andy Pettitte. Same with Miguel Tejada, and all the former All-Stars. The late 90s-early 2000s era was already considered tainted. Now we have better proof of that. Ultimately, how we remember these players 20, 30, 40 years from now, means more than anything Selig can do to them during the 2008 season. If we choose to forgive and forget, that’s fine, too. But it’s up to baseball fans, not baseball, to dole out punishment.

For that reason, I am ultimately against putting an asterisks by Barry Bonds’ home run record, or Clemens’ Cy Young award, or Tejada’s MVP award, or anything else. If it really is important, we’ll remember. At this point, like not following up with punishments, I feel baseball has to let history be history. Nothing can be done to change the past. Don’t drag it on.

Rather, Baseball should hopefully learn from the report. Further testing year round, unannounced, would be a great start. I like the punishment levels as they are. But you want to make sure there’s no tipping of the hand to players or teams when they might be tested.

As for the report, I feel like it didn’t tell us much new or much of importance. It was too much like gossip with innuendo stepping forward where strong ties couldn’t be made. . I don’t know that it told us anything we didn’t know. And I don’t know if it gave any recommendations anyone with half a brain couldn’t have come up with. The hope, in having a report at all, is that it carries enough weight to force both baseball executives and the players to act.

On that point, we’ll have to see. Otherwise, it could be an ugly blemish for the careers of many players and tarring of the sport in general with little good coming of it yet our puerile curiosity served.

Share/Email This

The Mitchell Report was announced today. (AP story. Downloadable copy of the report)

A list of alleged names appeared this morning, and included two Tigers, but the list appears to be false, David Pinto reports.

Initial media reports on the Mitchell report seem to come back mostly clean for players now with the Tigers, though Gary Sheffield seems to be implicated. I think most of us probably expected a Tiger or two to be on the list. That doesn’t mean everyone is clean, but it does mean your suspicions are not necessarily dirty, anyway. However, the team did have a report of anabolic steroids in the 2004 season, but no names were known.

At the end of the 2004 season, a clubhouse employee was cleaning out the Detroit Tigers locker room when he found a black toiletry kit that was locked. He and another Tigers employee opened the bag and found unused syringes and vials that they determined were anabolic steroids. They did not report the incident. The employee said that he could not remember who the bag belonged to. (Page 111)

Alex Sanchez was a Tiger in 2004, and suspended for steroids in 2005 while a member of the Tampa Bay Rays. Who the bag really belonged to, though, probably won’t be known, so we can’t really tie it to Sanchez. Two other Tigers (see below) during that time were also alleged steroids users.

SHEFFIED

Gary Sheffield is also a player in the report. Victor Conte of BALCO did say he taught several players, Sheffield among them, how to use “cream” and “clear.” (Page 113). Greg Anderson is alleged to have obtained “cream” and “clear” for Sheffield. (Page 114).

The Chronicle also reported that New York Yankees outfielder Gary Sheffield
testified that when he was training with Barry Bonds before the 2002 season, Bonds “had arranged for him to receive ‘the cream,’ ‘the clear’ and ‘red beans,’ which the prosecutors identified as steroid pills manufactured in Mexico.” Sheffield was reported to have testified that he did not interact directly with Anderson and that he was never told that the substances he was given by Bonds were steroids. (Page 120).

In fact, there’s a whole section on Sheffield. I’ll include it verbatim.

g. Gary Sheffield
On March 16, 2006, a federal magistrate judge from Idaho, Judge Larry M. Boyle, wrote a letter to Commissioner Selig in which he enclosed a copy of an earlier letter he had sent on February 26, 2004 to the United States Attorney for Idaho. In that earlier letter, Judge Boyle reported that on June 11, 2002, after a flight from Boise to Minneapolis, he boarded a shuttle bus and was seated across the aisle from a man who later identified himself as Greg Anderson. Boyle had a conversation with Anderson during the ride in which Anderson said he was in Minneapolis because his “best client wanted him to help his close friend Gary Sheffield who was in a slump and struggling at the time.”

According to the letter, Anderson told Boyle that Sheffield’s team was playing the Twins that week and Anderson had “come to work with him.” When Boyle asked what in particular Anderson did for his baseball player clients, Anderson responded:

[H]e will usually reserve the hotel exercise facility and work privately with Sheffield on body mechanics, weights and also take a blood or urine sample, test it to determine if his body chemistry is what it should be, and then give him nutritional supplements. Anderson confirmed to Boyle that his “best client” was Barry Bonds. Boyle concluded the letter by stating he “felt his conversation was sufficiently important to report it to you in light of the legal proceedings pending in another federal district.”

Through his lawyer, Boyle confirmed to us the events described in his letter.
In September 2003, when federal agents executed a search warrant on Greg
Anderson’s condominium, they cited a February 2003 FedEx receipt from Gary Sheffield to BALCO as evidence of probable cause to conduct the search. In his 2007 book entitled Inside Power, Sheffield acknowledged he had received a bill from BALCO for what he called “vitamins” and claimed he did not know whether the “cream” he acknowledged using during his grand jury testimony had contained steroids.

In his book, Sheffield recounted his grand jury testimony as follows: “‘I applied
this cream to my knees.’ I told them ‘I didn’t know it was steroids. Whatever it was, it didn’t make me stronger.’” Sheffield then claimed in his book: “I had no interest in steroids. I didn’t need them, and I didn’t want them.” His book asserted that he “never touched a strength-building steroid in [his] life – and never will.”

In his book, Sheffield attributed the increase in home runs in Major League
Baseball after the 1994 strike to widespread steroid use, and he claimed that at the time he asked the Commissioner to investigate the issue, only to be ignored. Selig denied that he ever received such a request from Sheffield.

OTHER NAMES

Several players who played for the Tigers at one point in their career are alleged by the report to have used performance enhancers: Mark Carreon, page 163; Hal Morris, page 164; Rondell White, page 165; Phil Hiott, page 194; Fernando Vina, page 213; Nook Logan, page 229. All of those come from interviews with former Mets clubhouse employee. White is alleged to have done them during his time with the Tigers, and the report claims he introduced them to Logan during his time with the Tigers. There’s a check from White to Radomski included in the report from the 2005 season. It’s unclear if Vina did them while with the Tigers in 2004. He’s said to have from 2000 to 2005.

Updated for order of presentation and some wording at 4:15-:20.

WILL BE UPDATED (or followed up) LATER TONIGHT

Update 4:23: Baseball Digest Daily has a list of all players named in the report. (Hat-tip Pinto)

Share/Email This

The Tigers decided to non-tender (read: not re-sign) Chad Durbin, who served as both a starter and reliever last year. They did decide to keep Tim Byrdak around, for about $700k.

Sorta uneventful.

Durbin was going to be a starter in emergency only and probably command a bump in his $385k salary after a pretty decent 2007. I thought his split stats showed a pretty nice job as a reliever (higher K/9, lower H/9) and thought he might stand a chance of continuing in that position this upcoming year. There was no chance he was going to start, the rotation is set. He told the Freep he’d prefer to start. Freep also reports he turned dow a $500k offer.

Byrdak did his best when serving as the lefty one out guy last year. Jim Leyland used him for more, of course. He gets a bit of a bonus as a reward for decent numbers. It’s a pretty good story for him, a guy who scrapped by living on minor league peanuts for pay for years. Now he’s being rewarded a bit.

Now I hope he keeps pitching as well. He had a nice K/9 last year and his batting average on balls in play of .310 means that his low batting average against (.230, better against lefties) probably wasn’t a fluke. The Bill James projection at that Fangraphs link seems to believe he’ll continue from his 2007 season as well.

Share/Email This

About 10 days ago, I wrote:

And let’s face it, Timo [Perez] was useless (thank god the Perez temptation is gone for Leyland!) and Shelton was not going to be a Tiger in any case.

Uh yeah. Spoke to soon.

Perez is expected to compete for a spot on the 40 man roster, the article by Jon Paul Morosi states. (He states this with every strange addition by the Tigers).  That puts him in direct competition with Ryan Raburn, who is better, and for that fellow the Tigers traded Chris Shelton for, who has no options left. And this Perez addiction addd $500k+ to the payroll.

What was the point?

Seriously.

Share/Email This