New podcast up
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 17, 2009 3:47 PM CST
48 comments
We have a new podcast up, which features special guest Will Carroll. Hopefully, Ted edited out the times I interrupted Will and talked over him.
You can check it out here, or download the iTunes version here.
0 recs |
48 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
It's disheartening to know that our overlord can't bench 300 pounds.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 17, 2009 6:32 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
If he was committed,
he’d pump roids til he could.
Get off my lawn.
by DJCahill on Feb 17, 2009 6:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Is Carroll implying that McCarthy is stubborn in changing his mechanics?
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 17, 2009 6:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
He said something about having a Kerry Wood complex.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 17, 2009 6:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Something I'd like to hear talked about for the next podcast:
Ben Sheets coming back after the All-Star Break: should the team take a risk and sign him for a stretch run as he gets closer to coming back? Or let him take the entire year off to rest his arm?
I can see Sheets coming back too soon ala Milton Bradley and being effective for a month before going down with something else.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 17, 2009 6:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Carroll's
assessment of the changes in the Rangers philosophy about 30 minutes in is good. I also like Adam’s response about the Rangers front office sometimes trying to be too smart.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Feb 17, 2009 8:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
+1
I thought that was a pretty good way of looking at it.
Yeah. Spies. They're little guys with beady eyes and long fingernails. They plant bugs that can pick up the hush of a man's heartbeat - or the whisper of a falling hair.
by lonestarJon on Feb 17, 2009 9:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I did a poor job verbalizing it, I think
But yeah, I think they sometimes get into trouble overthinking things and trying to be too clever.
by Adam J. Morris on Feb 17, 2009 9:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope they get over that
before next winter when the 40 will be a big deal.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Feb 17, 2009 10:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Seems like a waste to
have Will Carroll and spend a good portion of the podcast on steroids instead of Rangers specific topics for ’09 and going forward.
"A good start would be not giving up 900 runs again." -Jon Daniels
by Randy Richardson on Feb 17, 2009 11:24 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Jeeeeez, nearly 75 minutes o' baseball talk. Good stuff.
Will Carroll was really, really good.
The steroid talk beat me a little bit but Caroll mentioned something about steroid use by baseball players starting in the late 60’s & early 70’s (I never heard of this) and sure enough you can find articles with Tom House saying that he thought 6 or 7 pitchers from each team were dabbling with steroid use during that time. Really wanna know how those boys were able to survive in 4 man rotations, throwing 275-350 IPs a year?
House said he did it and ballooned up from 190 lbs to 220 lbs but his fastball remained the same so he’s not sure how much steroids helped him (he did have a career year in ’74).
Jamey has the Rangers winning 83-85 games. That doesn’t happen unless McCarthy goes 17-8 in 200 IPs with an ERA under 4.00 AND everything else goes right.
I loved all the talk from Carroll talking about the different sophisticated software/technology different teams are now using not privy to fans.
Also, talk of two Newberg Nights this year?
Lots of other good things I didn’t cover.
A good listen, one of the best so far.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 12:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think there is much question
that the Steroid era really began way before the Bud Selig era. I think training techniques improved dramatically between then and now, and better PEDs came out.
I think its hilarious when you hear some fools think the steroid era started in the mid ’90s and only a few players were using them. Its also hilarious when you hear some folks say that the NFL and NBA are “clean”.
Get off my lawn.
by DJCahill on Feb 18, 2009 7:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Josey
Even setting aside the “everything else goes right” comment, how many more games would the Rangers have won in 2008 if Brandon McCarthy went 17-8, had an ERA under 4.00, and logged 200 innings?
by Jamey Newberg on Feb 18, 2009 7:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not an easy question to answer
because you have to guess who wouldn’t have made their starts or been here if McCarthy had that kind of year.
Here’s a guess…Plug McCarthy in (with a 17-8 record, 3.80 ERA/ 200 IPS) for Harrison, Ponson, Mendoza (who made 35 starts last year). That’s a collective 16-12 record with about 203 IPs and an estimated ERA of 5.80. I’d guess the Rangers would have won a few more games and finished maybe….83-79.
Now for 2009…You say on the podcast that you don’t like PECOTA but it’s still a useful tool when projecting how teams are going to do. PECOTA/BP have the Rangers winning 72-73 games next year which is in lockstep with most of the other projections I’ve read (Bodoglife.com did set the Ranger over/under at 81.5 though).
It makes sense because the Ranger Pythagorean record last year was 76-86 and only subtractions have been made to the team. You have a team that is projected to score 80-90 fewer runs in 2009. We’re breaking in a rookie SS and moving Young to 3B. There will be growing pains and it’s not going to be a seamless transition. We have the same manager.
You like to cite the Kinsler & Murphy injuries as the turning point last year but their replacements (Arias, Boggs/Cruz) carried the water quite well when called up. With Kinsler & Murphy doing their stuff, the 2008 team was always lagging in their Pythagorean win/loss totals (under .500 almost the entire season) and it caught up with them at the end.
This team also finished the season 19-29 which is a big red flag going forward and there were no meaningful additions made to the team – only subtractions.
So yeah, if McCarthy goes 17-8 with 200 IPs and an ERA of 3.80 and everything else goes right, I can see the Rangers winning 85 games in 2009.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 8:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So many things I want to say in response.
But I already violated board policy by engaging the discussion in the first place.
by Jamey Newberg on Feb 18, 2009 10:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Out of curiosity
What would you pick on from there?
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Feb 18, 2009 10:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
There is no "board policy" that was violated in
engaging the discussion.
You asked for a direct response from me (and received one).
If I said something blatantly wrong or that you vehemently disagree with (“so many things I want to say in response”), please advise.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 11:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll leave it at this.
Starting with graf 2 (“Here’s a guess…”), your analysis is seriously flawed.
My apologies to the board for pushing this issue.
by Jamey Newberg on Feb 18, 2009 11:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Whose starts does McCarthy replace?
That’s why I said it was not an easy answer because I have to plug McCarthy into the starts that were given to somebody else. I could have given him some of Feldman’s starts or Nippert’s starts, Hunter’s starts but the threesome I chose had close to the same number of innings. If you have a different way of applying those starts, let’s see it.
Everything else I wrote was spot-on.
I don’t get it…you asked me a question, it was directly answered.
Apparently you don’t like the answer so we get “I already violated board policy by engaging the discussion in the first place.” What is that?
I’m not going to get into a protracted argument with you on the subject of last year because my statement pertained to 2009. If you disagree, so be it.
PECOTA, who is not emotionally tied to the Rangers and wants to be accurate more than anything else, has the Rangers going 72-90 in 2009. Bill James sees McCarthy going 7-7 with a 4.26 ERA in 121 IPs.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4662&position=P
If Andrus works out at SS and McCarthy goes 17-8 in 200 IPs (with the 3.80 ERA) and the team doesn’t get killed by the injury bug, 85-77 is very do-able.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 11:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Will Carroll's take on McCarthy:
I think it would be fair to say that Carroll’s opinion is that BMac is toast.
Doctor please. Some more of these.
by tricer on Feb 18, 2009 5:47 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
That is exactly what I was thinking.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 11:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Haven't read Hamilton's book
Is it possibly more honest or genuine than ARod’s press conferences?
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Feb 18, 2009 9:28 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Just finished
Yah you should get Will Carroll again.
I love his gift of agnosticism: yes, teams know more than you do. Trust me, it’s their job.
And between his connections and specialized knowledge, he just keeps it affable and bemused. Just a dude.
Probably my favorite installment, just a lot of opinions flying. Great stuff.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Feb 18, 2009 11:38 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I agree, hightower.
That segment rates with the very best they’ve done.
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 11:42 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Teams know more ...
Yeah, I perked up then, too. One of my web forum pet peeves is people who get rancorous with each other over FO issues when all we can do is speculate with our fraction of info that the brass has at hand.
The moves being made are too extra for my taste.
by shroomer on Feb 18, 2009 1:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ditto
assessing any trade or draft decision is really just shooting in the dark. It’s still a not-brainer to say the SD trade sucked, but most other things you really just don’t know exactly what they were looking at. We get small peeks behind the curtain and try to extrapolate.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Feb 18, 2009 1:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Dons asbestos suit...
I don’t think you were around to know who wufdog was … but this is the thing I never got with people demonizing the guy. It always seemed to me that his schtick was reminding us forum GM’s that there is so much more info behind the scenes that we fans don’t see – makes criticizing the franchise’s every move seem unfair. Seemed like a valuable reminder to me. But I honestly didn’t read his NMLR board stuff – so I missed the really big wars with him. That’s just my ESPN board take on him.
The moves being made are too extra for my taste.
by shroomer on Feb 18, 2009 1:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
wuf was/is abrasive as hell.
But anymore, it seems only to the “internet GM” crowd. I agree we know 1% of what the FO is thinking…but some have to make their opinions heard, after all, this is just a movie about their life, and they are the star.
"...my balls are really like a veiny flesh color" blueballlefty on Jun 4, 2008 7:44 PM EDT
"you gonna lose your horse. seriously." FX2
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
by Rodney on Feb 18, 2009 2:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
“The Hartwalter Conspiracy” he called it. A concept with heuristic value, yep.
He skewed ad hominem, I know that was a problem with some posts.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Feb 18, 2009 2:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The problem with him isn't that
Its that he approaches every post as if he is all knowing, chooses to take parts of a post and argue their validity, throws his minor league career from 40 years ago as proof of his genius, and generally just acting like a douche. Other than that though, he’s a great guy.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Feb 18, 2009 3:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My imagination goes wild when I wonder
what type of technology major league FOs may have access to and Carroll gave a lot of love to JD saying the Rangers were at the vanguard of these things but then I catch myself wondering, “If our front office really is so smart, why are they rolling with Ron Washington this year? Why did they give so many abs to Sosa v. RH’s? Why would you trade Danks for McCarthy??”
"Dying ain't hard. It's living that's hard."
by Josey Wales on Feb 18, 2009 1:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I can't imagine you wondering those things.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
by Gdawg on Feb 18, 2009 3:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
However,
there are always FO moves that look ridiculously stupid, and turn out to be ridiculously stupid (can you sayCYoung etc. for Eaton etc.?, signing Broussard for $4 million, etc.).
So, saying the FO knows all doesn’t seem to cover the Rangers FO.
Get off my lawn.
by DJCahill on Feb 18, 2009 2:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Saying the FO has a lot more info than we do
is hardly the same thing as saying the FO “knows all”.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Feb 18, 2009 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Carroll's (possibly larger) point was the org's improving on talent eval, ML and MiL.
Even with the Eaton deal there was room to wonder…maybe he’ll get better…maybe they know something…
It makes me think of Smoak and Castro.
To a man, people call it a win.
Remains to be seen whether Smoak’s the better player.
The draft is even more obfuscated than MLB, really. The arms behind the barns. I read tons about Justin Smoak, and 100% of it was secondhand.
Go Strangers.
by hightowersmith on Feb 18, 2009 2:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Drabek
Draft? Or not to draft? That was the scenario that popped into my mind rather than low-hanging fruit like Cahill pointed out.
The moves being made are too extra for my taste.
by shroomer on Feb 18, 2009 2:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But the low hanging fruit
is always the annoying stuff. When the Rangers make a move and almost everyone goes “what the hell are they thinking”, and it doesn’t pan out, you always wonder if the FO found a way to outsmart themselves.
Drabek I could kind of understand. I wasn’t happy about it, but I could kind of understand it. Its a lot of money, and you are worried about him becoming Matt Bush, fine, I get that.
On the other hand, the Drew Meyer/John Mayberry Jr. “we drafted them in the first round, but we are going to have to completely reteach them how to hit a baseball” thinking is so monumentally stupid, I have no idea how an allegedly smart front office could think its a good idea.
Get off my lawn.
by DJCahill on Feb 18, 2009 2:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Drew Meyer/John Mayberry Jr.
were both drafted on somebody else’s watch…not who/what Carroll was referring to.
You’re better than that.
"...my balls are really like a veiny flesh color" blueballlefty on Jun 4, 2008 7:44 PM EDT
"you gonna lose your horse. seriously." FX2
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
by Rodney on Feb 18, 2009 2:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Great podcast
as always.
The contrast in styles between Adam and Jamey, teamed with Ted being a great speaker and host makes it a nice listen every time.
by cmkelly29 on Feb 18, 2009 12:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the kind words
I am doing my best to get this “revolving fourth chair” thing going – I think it adds a great dynamic to the show and offers up viewpoints that readers of this and Jamey’s blog don’t see or hear.
There are still some behind the scene technical issues I’m working on, but on the whole, I think the three of us have been very happy with the way the show has evolved over the past year.
If you guys keep downloading and listening, we’ll keep doing them.
Thanks for your support.
The Poster Formally Known As: UrbanDad
"Listen to Ted. Trust him. If he cuts you off, switch gears and go with it." -- Shroomer
by Ted Price on Feb 18, 2009 3:23 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
I'll green ya' Ted, nice job.
Even though you are a footy fan :)
"...my balls are really like a veiny flesh color" blueballlefty on Jun 4, 2008 7:44 PM EDT
"you gonna lose your horse. seriously." FX2
Yes we can! November 04, 2008
by Rodney on Feb 18, 2009 3:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You need three recs to green.
You just don't know when to keep your mouth shut, do you Saxy boy?
by oc on Feb 18, 2009 4:10 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
lol
"My mother always taught me that if the only thing you have to say is,
‘(Expletive) Dave Samson,’ then don’t say anything at all.
So I’m not going to say anything at all.
Is my mother the greatest or what?"
- Mariners GM Bill Bavasi, after signing Ichiro to a $90 million contract
by tyd3311 on Feb 18, 2009 4:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
JIC Jamey's still checking on this thread ...
… if you get a Blalock question for your Q and A, can you tack on a few sentences on what it would take for Hank to still be a Ranger next season? Or is that simply an impossible scenario to imagine?
The moves being made are too extra for my taste.
by shroomer on Feb 18, 2009 3:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'd say chances of him being a Ranger in '10...
…are no greater than 10%.
by Jamey Newberg on Feb 18, 2009 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fari chance, by the way...
…that the Q&A will go up tonight or in the morning.
by Jamey Newberg on Feb 18, 2009 4:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
