Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
scott@scottlongonline.com
While there is a great wildcard pennant race going on in both leagues, most of the division titles (AL West excepted) seem pretty well in hand, so these future playoff teams are now focused on getting their pitching set up for the post-season. While the call-up of teen phenom Felix Hernandez has been taking the headlines, under the radar, the White Sox Brandon McCarthy has pitched nearly 15 shutout innings in his 2 first two starts, after being brought up from Triple A. What makes McCarthy's recent performances most special is they occured versus the American League's best offenses, Boston and Texas. His strikeout/walk ratio was 9/2, which is in large part because he's throwing a nasty changeup for strikes.
The White Sox are in a situation, where they had a doubleheader and no off-days, so they were able to go to a 6-man rotation, but now they need to figure out what to do with McCarthy and if he will be on their 25 man playoff roster. Considering that Buerhle, Garland, and Garcia are locks as the first 3 starters, the decision is basically, who out of Contreas, El Duque, and McCarthy should be the 4th starter. I would lean towards one of the first 2, as Contreas has pitched great over the past month, while Hernandez is the one Sox pitcher with a sterling playoff record. For the rest of the year, I would test McCarthy in some high stress relief situations, as he has great stuff and is the best strikeout pitcher on the team. With Hermanson's nagging back injury, this is the only potential pitching weakness for Chicago. If the rumors were true that the Reds turned down the offer of McCarthy and one of the top Sox minor league outfielders for Griffey Jr., it's just another case of Ken Williams getting lucky when a trade is voided by a dumbass owner. (see 2003 Jon Garland for Darin Erstad near debacle)
****************************
So I turn on my local news and see that Bob Denver kicked the bucket. The next story featured was about the funeral of William Rehnquist. Yeah, that seems about right, if you were watching E! Gilligan outpoints the Chief Justice of the US on local news. I think the great Russian philosopher, Yakov Smirnov said it best. "America, what a country!" Actually, I just got done watching the E! channel's coverage of the Supreme Court and according to Todd Newton, the 2 most qualified to be new chief justice are Judge Judy and Amy Brenneman. Actually, I would choose Judge Amy over Scalia and Thomas. I mean she does have a degree from Harvard and she can't be as dense as Judge Long Dong Silver or the Vice President's favorite Duck Hunter.
****************************
Will and I have both been pretty passionate in our praise of Rock Star:INXS and the show just continues to have performances that blow away anything seen on American Idol. Where Will and I disagree is on who our favorites are. Initially I thought Susie was one of the three or four Holiday Inn lounge singers that should be axed, but she has really grown over the weeks. Still not sure how she sings INXS songs, though. Will doesn't like Jordis, where I think she is the best singer on the show, but as host Dave Navarro mentioned, she does seem to have lost her passion, some, from her original, spectacular performances. J.D. generally sings in only one register, which would fit the moodier INXS songs best, but wouldn't work at all for the more energetic tunes. At this point I would say Marty is the best fit for the band, though he would change the dynamic, making the group more rock and less funky. Marty has a range somewhere between Layne Staley and Peter Murphy. He might be better suited, fronting his own band, as he seems to have the most talent as a songwriter.
Ultimately, I would watch any of these singers work their stuff, as long it isn't Mig. This Bay City Roller look-alike, annoys the steamy dump out of me, as his breathy singing style makes me want to wretch. I've got to guess his biggest influences were Peter Frampton (I'm in You) and Rex Smith (You Take My Breath Away). Mig has a huge advantage, as he is the only one on the show not from North America, so when the rest of the world votes, he is pretty much guaranteed not being in the bottom 3. And for those who slag INXS, I would state that listening once again to the wide variety of music they produced, INXS was one of the best bands of the past 20 years. There will be no replacing Michael Hutchence, as his charisma and vocal range was one of a real rock star, but it should be interesting to see how they change.
I also don't think McCarthy will be a big strike out pitcher on the major league level. Not unless he gets more zip on his fastball at least. -- He throws a straight 91 MPH, and those don't tend to lead to high K totals -- He's got good offspeed stuff, so I envision him being a 6+K/9 in the bigs, but I can't see him approaching 10+K/9 like he had in the minors. Maybe he'll surprise me. I know I selfishly want to see him get more starts down the stretch. -- Jenks (11.47 K/9) is clearly the Sox best strikeout pitcher.
I never heard McCarthy's name attached to the Griffey rumors either. I thought it was Rogo, Young, and another unnamed lower level prospect.
I feel like I'm just railin on you now, sorry, but I also think the Erstad for Garland & Singleton rumors were back in 2001. Not that it matters, but trading for a Gold Glove centerfielder who was just coming off a .950 OPS season is a lot more defensible than a one coming off of back to back .700 ones.
McCarthy doesn't have Jenks like steam, but I do think he would have the highest strikeout numbers in a relief role, as his changeup pitchers like Hoffman and Foulke have shown. Now, I don't want him to become a relief pitcher over the long-term, but for this year, he might really add more as a reliever. I thought he was part of the deal for Griffey, which is the reason I never liked it.
Maybe Will can help us on this?
In regards to Lefty, I was a little bit off in my description on Scalia, but the guy is "a major league asshole". And as someone who is generally a moderate, a supreme court run by him would have been a mess.
Dense, obtuse, stupid, repugnant, brazenly idiotic....I'm sure there are others.
Basically Nino believes that God 'ordained' our government. (What the framers 'framed' is that WE are ordained with unalienable rights, then we elect our rulers.) That equates to not having learned the history of the country from which he sprouts. Of course that would be passable if you're average Joe Six Pack. But when you're on the Supreme Court, that qualifies you as a wacko, and intellectually dangerous.
And to everyone who says this is a "viewpoint" or liberal thinking. That's exactly the problem. Until ten years ago (or so) basic tenants such as these would have been deemed heretical.
Black is white...up is down...etc, etc.
Hello!?! Pot, Kettle, meet Black.
It's so discouraging to be an American these days.
So basically, religious people are disqualified from sitting on the Supreme Court. I think you have your American History backward. Until ten years ago nobody would have thought this was a problem.
Start electing atheists, of which I consider myself one by the way, and you won't have any religious people on the Supreme Court. Unfortunately the U.S. is a religious country and those people are allowed to vote. As long as religion is not a civic requirement we have no Constitutional beef.
What you can't believe, based on our system of government, is that God ordained, or is the ultimate arbiter, of our system - - the feredalist democracy. God, or our creator, gives US the rights....he/she does not give those rights to the 'government' - - which Nino has been on the record as stating is fact (thus a nut-job.) It is our job after being bestowed these unalienable rights to elect our leaders, who then become accountable to us...not to God or their ruler!
/lecture
I don't really feel passionately about this, I just like saying "Scritti Politti."
He can believe what he wants to believe. I don't think it takes his jurisprudence to an extraconstitutional level. If you disagree with me on that, then we have a normal judicial philosophy debate.
As far as being a nut job, that by itself wouldn't necessarily disqualify him either. I can't believe a lot of people believe what they believe. But without them the world population would be quite sparse.
No we don't. That's exactly my point. Ten years ago you're a heretic, but because of the noise machine those views are all of a sudden acceptable. The right-wingers make fun of post-modernists all of the time, "they believe there's no such thing as the truth", yet they spout these complete NON-TRUTHS (that is if you've bothered studying history and are half-learned.)
Anyway, black is white...up is down, etc.
Lefty, you're being used for political gain, without coming to conclusions on your own. There is such a thing as the truth in this case....go find out what it is - - on your own.
(BTW, of course he can believe what he wants to believe, that doesn't mean he's not wrong. When liberals say "you're wrong" righties automatically say "you're trying to supress my speech, you're elitist!" No...you're just wrong, but you are entitled to your beliefs, certainly.)
I'm sorry, you've totally lost me. But I resent some of your personal accusations because you know absolutely nothing about me. I'm probably better educated than you are and I probably have a higher IQ. So perhaps someone is using you.
I called Scalia a dunce, idiot, etc. because he believes God ordained our system of government instead of what our framers framed (if you will): God ordained us with rights and we elect our government. In essence the government is accountable to us not our creator. That's it. And it's not a disputable issue. Are you with me now? See why he's a dope? See why "dense" is actually an apropos comment?
BTW, the only person I know smarter than me is chris in illinois, so....
BTWII, are you new to these parts? I'm guessing yes by your 'personal' remark.
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.