So I've now had a full day to recover from Wednesday morning's All-Star game, and it's gotten me wondering a few things.
First and foremost, I start thinking about where that game ranks among the great sporting events I've seen this year. On the surface and looking at the box score, I'd be inclined to say that it could make a push for the top 5, and should definitely fit in the top 10. But then I think about the first 6 innings, and just how slow the game was and how the best players, the ones everyone really wanted to see, were on the bench as the game reached its dramatic climax. But I suppose that's the way baseball's showcase has always been. Makes me wonder if the game would be better in those late innings, particularly extra innings, if the starting position players could return to the field. Maybe then we wouldn't have Grady Sizemore, an All-Star reserve, getting five at bats in the game.
Is baseball's All-Star Game the best in sports? Given how little these exhibitions seem to mean anymore (did they ever mean that much?), it seems baseball is the one where you're most likely to find all the players trying their hardest. In basketball, it usually turns into a glorified streetball game/slam dunk contest within the first few minutes. In football, the players that don't come up with some "injury" to miss the game spend much of the game playing not to get hurt, and rules changes make the game different from any other game, a big negative in my book. In hockey, well, they're playing hockey. So yeah. But with baseball, it's all about the 1-on-1 matchups, and every pitch has serious pride on the line. No players want to risk the embarrassment of giving up a homer or striking out or making an error, something that's impossible to hide. Poor play in other ASG's is usually hidden because of the number of players involved in the action and the pace of play, but in baseball most players are out on an island and every error is magnified.
Is baseball's All-Star Game the best?
=======
What are the chances the Rockies make major changes this season? I've been saying for years that Clint Hurdle is nothing special as a manager and I think last year's Series run was the worst thing that could have happened for the franchise's future. Even as the team made its playoff push, Hurdle was more spectator than he was the reason it happened. Now, with the pressure of slightly more national media attention and the expectations that come with being the defending NL champions, the Rockies have been slightly better than horrible this year and are deluding themselves into thinking they're still alive in the pennant race because they're in the NL West. I think the seat will only get hotter for the Gum Chewer.
Another question seems to be getting more and more evident for my Rox: What do you do with Matt Holliday? His contract expires following next season, and his agent is the much-loathed Scott Boras, the man responsible for A-Rod's big contracts, among others. Boras has evidently made it clear to Rockies management that there will be no hometown discount for Holliday so if he's going to remain a Rockie, it'll cost them. And given the Monforts' (Rockies owners) history of tight spending, it seems almost assured that Holliday will land elsewhere. So the Rockies have three options as an organization:
First and foremost, I start thinking about where that game ranks among the great sporting events I've seen this year. On the surface and looking at the box score, I'd be inclined to say that it could make a push for the top 5, and should definitely fit in the top 10. But then I think about the first 6 innings, and just how slow the game was and how the best players, the ones everyone really wanted to see, were on the bench as the game reached its dramatic climax. But I suppose that's the way baseball's showcase has always been. Makes me wonder if the game would be better in those late innings, particularly extra innings, if the starting position players could return to the field. Maybe then we wouldn't have Grady Sizemore, an All-Star reserve, getting five at bats in the game.
Is baseball's All-Star Game the best in sports? Given how little these exhibitions seem to mean anymore (did they ever mean that much?), it seems baseball is the one where you're most likely to find all the players trying their hardest. In basketball, it usually turns into a glorified streetball game/slam dunk contest within the first few minutes. In football, the players that don't come up with some "injury" to miss the game spend much of the game playing not to get hurt, and rules changes make the game different from any other game, a big negative in my book. In hockey, well, they're playing hockey. So yeah. But with baseball, it's all about the 1-on-1 matchups, and every pitch has serious pride on the line. No players want to risk the embarrassment of giving up a homer or striking out or making an error, something that's impossible to hide. Poor play in other ASG's is usually hidden because of the number of players involved in the action and the pace of play, but in baseball most players are out on an island and every error is magnified.
Is baseball's All-Star Game the best?
=======
What are the chances the Rockies make major changes this season? I've been saying for years that Clint Hurdle is nothing special as a manager and I think last year's Series run was the worst thing that could have happened for the franchise's future. Even as the team made its playoff push, Hurdle was more spectator than he was the reason it happened. Now, with the pressure of slightly more national media attention and the expectations that come with being the defending NL champions, the Rockies have been slightly better than horrible this year and are deluding themselves into thinking they're still alive in the pennant race because they're in the NL West. I think the seat will only get hotter for the Gum Chewer.
Another question seems to be getting more and more evident for my Rox: What do you do with Matt Holliday? His contract expires following next season, and his agent is the much-loathed Scott Boras, the man responsible for A-Rod's big contracts, among others. Boras has evidently made it clear to Rockies management that there will be no hometown discount for Holliday so if he's going to remain a Rockie, it'll cost them. And given the Monforts' (Rockies owners) history of tight spending, it seems almost assured that Holliday will land elsewhere. So the Rockies have three options as an organization:
- Trade Holliday before this month's trading deadline, a move that would likely get more teams into the running because he'd be available for all of 2009 for that team, not just for a pennant run this year. Considering the quality minor league talent the Indians got for CC Sabathia who is a legitimate "rental player," the Rox could hope for a major haul, ideally including a Major-League ready, or at least AAA, pitcher.
- Trade Holliday during this offseason like the Twins did last offseason with Johan Santana. This would give all the possible suitors a better idea of what their finances look like for 2009 and beyond, and could get the big spenders like Boston and the New York teams involved because they could potentially re-sign the slugger.
- Trade Holliday before the trade deadline in 2009. This move, to me, seems the riskiest as Holliday's value doesn't seem like it can get any higher than it's at right now. Waiting a full year allows for the possibility of a slump or an injury that could significantly change his trade value and cost the Rockies precious prospects. It also will mean that the acquiring team will only have Holliday for roughly 3-4 months of the season before having to worry about re-signing him, and my guess is Boras is going to use Alphonso Soriano's huge deal with the Cubs as a starting point in negotiations. So these teams will be reluctant to give up major prospects for a rental player.
I'd love to add a fourth option of "Re-sign the best player the team's developed since Todd Helton" but that really seems like an impossibility. Especially if the Rockies are out of contention this year and early next year. Holliday deserves a lot of credit for giving the Rockies even the three options I've just listed, as it's unlikely Boras would have agreed to a 2-year deal last offseason were it not insisted upon by Holliday.
Regardless of which option Rockies management chooses, one thing is clear: the Rocks will never be a dominant team in baseball over a long period. They just can't afford it.
So please tell me what you think they'll do. If your favorite team had to trade its best player, where would you be okay with him going?
Posts
4 comments:
I agree baseball's ASG is the best of the major sports. I particularly like how all the players wear their own team's uniform in the game. It just looks cool. But if they take away the home-field advantage aspect of the ASG, I think it becomes just another meaningless exhibition. I think the game needs to have SOMETHING on the line, even if it's perhaps an extra day off between the end of the regular season and the start of the postseason. Maybe the winning league gets to start their divisional series a day later, or maybe they start their LCS a day earlier so they have a better chance of having time off before the WS (though that clearly was the opposite of helpful for the Rockies last year). It need SOME meaning.
On the topic of Holiday, from what I hear it sounds as if the Rockies will keep him through the end of this season, at the least. The places I'd like to see him end up are all long shots since they're all small market clubs. I just do NOT want to see him in Yankee pinstripes. He could go anywhere else, even the... gulp... Cubs, and it would be better than if he was a Yankee. I suppose I wouldn't mind seeing him go to the Mets, where he and Santana might give me reason enough to like the Mets (but somehow I doubt that would be enough).
My big problem is that I don't like the All-Star game, which is just an exhibition game, to have so much at stake. We've seen constantly over the last decade how important it is to play the first two games of the World Series at home, and although there's only been one game 7 recently, it too was won by the home team. I think the off-day idea is an interesting one, because having that extra day before the start of the postseason could really help teams set up their rotation better for the playoffs. Not a bad suggestion at all.
As for Holliday (that's with 2 L's, by the way), I think I'd actually rather see him as a Yankee than a Cub, because at least then he's not in the same league as the Rockies and Astros. I also wouldn't mind the Red Sox or Angels, either. It'd be cool if the Rockies could keep him for the rest of the year if they can make a run in the awful West, and I think you're right that he's not going anywhere this year. Here's a question for you: if you were the Rockies and you could trade Todd Helton (eating part of his salary, of course) and 5-6 other high salary guys to keep Holliday and rebuild with youngsters, would you do it?
Sure, I would do it, but I think it's never going to happen. Helton's been on a decline for years and no one is going to want to take his contract, or even just most of it, and I didn't even know the Rockies had 5-6 other high-priced players on the team!
Here's the address of that Paige article http://www.denverpost.com/paige/ci_9964564. He outlines the highest paid players on the Rockies and how much they could free up by moving them and promoting some minor leaguers.
Yes, Helton has lost most of his power, but in the right situation, his high-average approach and still premium defense could be a significant help to a team on the verge. Maybe someone like the Los Angeles Angels could take his contract.
Post a Comment