Saturday, December 15, 2012
0
comments
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Why NFL Players Go Broke
Do you remember when you raked in $10 million, spent it, and went broke?
No? Yep, neither do I.
But, for three out of four NFL Players, that might jog their memory.
No? Yep, neither do I.
But, for three out of four NFL Players, that might jog their memory.
Who Will Win the NFL's NFC East Division
Well, here we go again.
On Monday night, the Giants had a chance to salt away the NFC East, and comfortably move ahead to thinking about playoff positioning and the like. A win would have given them control of their own fate for a top-3 seed in the NFC, and made missing the playoffs a nigh-impossible proposition.
They left from Washington with the division, once again, very much for grabs. Robert Griffin III led his resurgent Redskins, once written off by their own head coach, to a 17-16 squeaker over the most up-and-down team in football, and so, at least for one more week, all four teams in the NFC East can still point to ways they could win the division. This is crazy – and routine, in the tightest division in the NFL.
Can’t anyone win the NFC East running away anymore? Last year, the Giants won essentially a week 17 play-in game over Dallas to make the playoffs, recovering from a four-game swoon in the middle of November. The year before that, the Giants attempt at a furious comeback failed when they dropped a week 16 game to the future Super Bowl champion Packers. In 2009, the Cowboys and Eagles tied atop the division, and ended up playing each other in the wildcard round. You have to go back to 2008 to find a year when a team won the division comfortably – and those Giants were bounced out of the playoffs by divisional rivals Philadelphia.
It’s only fitting, I suppose. No division has been more successful since the NFL merger, and very few of them can claim the depths of the rivalries the division has to offer. Combine that with the huge markets they play in, and it’s become the in thing to watch every December – which team will survive the bloody battles to emerge victorious. It seems fated that an article like this will pop up every year, like clockwork.
It seemed fated even a month ago. Oh, sure, the Giants, at that time, were sitting pretty atop the division. They were 6-2, looking down on a division that seemed utterly hopeless. The Redskins, as mentioned, had been abandoned by their coach – Mike Shanahan said, of the then 3-6 team, that the Redskins season was over. “Now you’re playing to see who, obviously, is going to be on your football team for years to come. Now we get a chance to evaluate players and see where we’re at,” he said, of the wreckage that appeared to be the Redskins season. The Cowboys were sitting at 3-4, and people were beginning to ask if owner Jerry Jones would fire General Manager … Jerry Jones. The Eagles were also at 3-4, but had lost three in a row due to poor quarterback play, and were calling for coach Andy Reid’s head. But, surely, you didn’t believe that, did you? Not in the NFC East.
Now, the Giants are clinging to a one game lead after their typical November struggles. The Redskins have the most exciting player in football, and the rest of the team has risen to back him, increasing their level of play and making them a threat every week. Dallas is only a game out of the wildcard, as the Romo - arrow spins back around to point towards “clutch”. And the Eagles….well, the more things change, I suppose.
So, all four teams are alive. But what does that mean from here on out? Let’s go down the list, and look where all four stand.
Philadelphia: Well, this should go quickly, at least. The Eagles could have been mathematically eliminated had the Giants been victorious Monday night; instead, they’re hanging by a thread. They’ve decided Nick Foles is their man from here on out, as they try to figure out what a post-Michael Vick or post-Andy Reid team will look like. To win the division, not only would they have to win out – Tampa Bay, Cincinnati, Washington, and the Giants, all of which they’ll be underdogs in – but they would need each of the other three teams in the division to lose their remaining games. A single win by any of the three teams in the next three weeks would officially end the Eagles season, with the exception of a necessary Redskins win over Dallas in week 17. Suffice it to say it’s already time for Eagles fans to be busting out their lists of prospects for the 2013 NFL draft, in between booing fits. Odds of winning the division: somewhere around 1 in 200, and I’m being generous.
Sept. 23, 2012; Glendale, AZ, USA; Philadelphia Eagles head coach Andy Reid talks with quarterback Michael Vick (7) and wide receiver DeSean Jackson (10) on the field during the game against the Arizona Cardinals in the first half at University of Phoenix Stadium. The Cardinals defeated the Eagles 27 - 6. Photo Courtesy By Jennifer Stewart-USA TODAY Sports.
Dallas: America’s Team gets written off
every week, only to come back strong the next. The loss to the Redskins
on Thanksgiving Day led people to write the team’s obituary, and then a
win over the Eagles this week led them to point to the standings, and
note that they were only a game out of first place! Now they’ve got
DeMarco Murray back, too, which will be a huge help from here on out,
having missed him since early October – and that immediately paid
dividends, as it’s clear the team just works better with him rather than
Felix Jones toting the rock. There’s a level of physicality the team
just was missing, and they’ll need that the rest of the way. To win the
division, they’ll probably have to win out, and next week’s matchup in
Cincinnati will be tough - -not to mention Week 17’s rematch of their
Thanksgiving turkey. That game in Washington might be for everything –
the division, a wildcard berth, you name it. But the Cowboys players
probably are still having nightmares of RGIII dancing past them – a
thorn that’s likely to stick in their side for years to come. Odds of
winning the division? I’d put it somewhere around 1 in 4, as they’re
going to have to go into Washington, in what’s likely to be a playoff
atmosphere, and pull out a win. Just for the playoffs? A little higher
– maybe 3 in 10, given the chance of a Seahawks collapse. Still, that
game in Washington could really determine the Cowboys season.
Redskins: After being left for dead, the Skins have rattled off three straight in-division victories, an impressive feat no matter WHO you are. It’s not just RGIII, either – the entire team has raised their level of play from that start. Alfred Morris would be a rookie of the year candidate in a year when his quarterback peers were mortals and not apparently some sort of super-perfect breed. Pierre Garcon’s Redskins are 5-1 – he’s missed so much of the season with foot trouble, but now that he’s back and performing, the passing game has opened up. The big question is whether or not the Redskins dug themselves too deep a whole with their rotten start. Their remaining schedule is certainly doable – Baltimore just lost to a Charlie Batch-led Steelers team, Cleveland is improved but still bad, and then they close with the divisional pair of doomed Philadelphia and the Dallas team they demolished on national television. Further good news: in a tie with New York, Washington will likely have the division tiebreaker, as the Giants have already lost three games in the division. Don’t get too excited – it’s still a longshot; say, 1 in 4 of them winning the division, and 1 in 3 of them getting a playoff spot. But the way the team has responded after their poor start bodes well for seasons down the road – and three wins will more often than not get them into the dance.
Giants: And that leaves us with a team that defies description. Are the Giants the team that beat the Packers 38-10 and the 49ers 26-3? Or are they the team that got blown off the field by the Bengals? Will they continue one of their patented late season swoons, or not? I don’t have the answers to those questions – only time will tell. What I can do is point to the two games that will decide the Giants fate, in weeks 15 and 16, when they go on a little road trip to Atlanta and Baltimore. A win in either of those two games will probably be enough to give them the division. That’s going to be the proof of this team – can they go to a division leader in December and come home with a victory. If not, they might be watching helplessly on Sunday night in week 17, knowing that their fate is out of their own hands. But for now, at least, they’re the only team with their destiny entirely in their own control – win out, and they’ve got the division, regardless. That’s a powerful place to play from – they don’t have to scoreboard watch yet, they just have to take care of business. They blew their chance to end this divisional fight in one blow, but they’re still ahead on points. Give them a 1 in 2 chance of taking the division outright, and a 2 in 3 chance of at least holding on to a playoff spot. If they can’t handle Flacco or Ryan, however – we might have yet another week 17 come with no idea what will happen in the always crazy NFC East.
On Monday night, the Giants had a chance to salt away the NFC East, and comfortably move ahead to thinking about playoff positioning and the like. A win would have given them control of their own fate for a top-3 seed in the NFC, and made missing the playoffs a nigh-impossible proposition.
They left from Washington with the division, once again, very much for grabs. Robert Griffin III led his resurgent Redskins, once written off by their own head coach, to a 17-16 squeaker over the most up-and-down team in football, and so, at least for one more week, all four teams in the NFC East can still point to ways they could win the division. This is crazy – and routine, in the tightest division in the NFL.
Can’t anyone win the NFC East running away anymore? Last year, the Giants won essentially a week 17 play-in game over Dallas to make the playoffs, recovering from a four-game swoon in the middle of November. The year before that, the Giants attempt at a furious comeback failed when they dropped a week 16 game to the future Super Bowl champion Packers. In 2009, the Cowboys and Eagles tied atop the division, and ended up playing each other in the wildcard round. You have to go back to 2008 to find a year when a team won the division comfortably – and those Giants were bounced out of the playoffs by divisional rivals Philadelphia.
It’s only fitting, I suppose. No division has been more successful since the NFL merger, and very few of them can claim the depths of the rivalries the division has to offer. Combine that with the huge markets they play in, and it’s become the in thing to watch every December – which team will survive the bloody battles to emerge victorious. It seems fated that an article like this will pop up every year, like clockwork.
It seemed fated even a month ago. Oh, sure, the Giants, at that time, were sitting pretty atop the division. They were 6-2, looking down on a division that seemed utterly hopeless. The Redskins, as mentioned, had been abandoned by their coach – Mike Shanahan said, of the then 3-6 team, that the Redskins season was over. “Now you’re playing to see who, obviously, is going to be on your football team for years to come. Now we get a chance to evaluate players and see where we’re at,” he said, of the wreckage that appeared to be the Redskins season. The Cowboys were sitting at 3-4, and people were beginning to ask if owner Jerry Jones would fire General Manager … Jerry Jones. The Eagles were also at 3-4, but had lost three in a row due to poor quarterback play, and were calling for coach Andy Reid’s head. But, surely, you didn’t believe that, did you? Not in the NFC East.
Now, the Giants are clinging to a one game lead after their typical November struggles. The Redskins have the most exciting player in football, and the rest of the team has risen to back him, increasing their level of play and making them a threat every week. Dallas is only a game out of the wildcard, as the Romo - arrow spins back around to point towards “clutch”. And the Eagles….well, the more things change, I suppose.
So, all four teams are alive. But what does that mean from here on out? Let’s go down the list, and look where all four stand.
Philadelphia: Well, this should go quickly, at least. The Eagles could have been mathematically eliminated had the Giants been victorious Monday night; instead, they’re hanging by a thread. They’ve decided Nick Foles is their man from here on out, as they try to figure out what a post-Michael Vick or post-Andy Reid team will look like. To win the division, not only would they have to win out – Tampa Bay, Cincinnati, Washington, and the Giants, all of which they’ll be underdogs in – but they would need each of the other three teams in the division to lose their remaining games. A single win by any of the three teams in the next three weeks would officially end the Eagles season, with the exception of a necessary Redskins win over Dallas in week 17. Suffice it to say it’s already time for Eagles fans to be busting out their lists of prospects for the 2013 NFL draft, in between booing fits. Odds of winning the division: somewhere around 1 in 200, and I’m being generous.
Sept. 23, 2012; Glendale, AZ, USA; Philadelphia Eagles head coach Andy Reid talks with quarterback Michael Vick (7) and wide receiver DeSean Jackson (10) on the field during the game against the Arizona Cardinals in the first half at University of Phoenix Stadium. The Cardinals defeated the Eagles 27 - 6. Photo Courtesy By Jennifer Stewart-USA TODAY Sports.
Redskins: After being left for dead, the Skins have rattled off three straight in-division victories, an impressive feat no matter WHO you are. It’s not just RGIII, either – the entire team has raised their level of play from that start. Alfred Morris would be a rookie of the year candidate in a year when his quarterback peers were mortals and not apparently some sort of super-perfect breed. Pierre Garcon’s Redskins are 5-1 – he’s missed so much of the season with foot trouble, but now that he’s back and performing, the passing game has opened up. The big question is whether or not the Redskins dug themselves too deep a whole with their rotten start. Their remaining schedule is certainly doable – Baltimore just lost to a Charlie Batch-led Steelers team, Cleveland is improved but still bad, and then they close with the divisional pair of doomed Philadelphia and the Dallas team they demolished on national television. Further good news: in a tie with New York, Washington will likely have the division tiebreaker, as the Giants have already lost three games in the division. Don’t get too excited – it’s still a longshot; say, 1 in 4 of them winning the division, and 1 in 3 of them getting a playoff spot. But the way the team has responded after their poor start bodes well for seasons down the road – and three wins will more often than not get them into the dance.
Giants: And that leaves us with a team that defies description. Are the Giants the team that beat the Packers 38-10 and the 49ers 26-3? Or are they the team that got blown off the field by the Bengals? Will they continue one of their patented late season swoons, or not? I don’t have the answers to those questions – only time will tell. What I can do is point to the two games that will decide the Giants fate, in weeks 15 and 16, when they go on a little road trip to Atlanta and Baltimore. A win in either of those two games will probably be enough to give them the division. That’s going to be the proof of this team – can they go to a division leader in December and come home with a victory. If not, they might be watching helplessly on Sunday night in week 17, knowing that their fate is out of their own hands. But for now, at least, they’re the only team with their destiny entirely in their own control – win out, and they’ve got the division, regardless. That’s a powerful place to play from – they don’t have to scoreboard watch yet, they just have to take care of business. They blew their chance to end this divisional fight in one blow, but they’re still ahead on points. Give them a 1 in 2 chance of taking the division outright, and a 2 in 3 chance of at least holding on to a playoff spot. If they can’t handle Flacco or Ryan, however – we might have yet another week 17 come with no idea what will happen in the always crazy NFC East.
Drop Em While Theyre Not: 10 Fantasy Basketball Players to Cut Loose
f there are players you should be adding at this point of the season -
even as short-term solutions to your fantasy NBA team’s statistical
shortages - there are also those you need to say goodbye to until they
get their act together. IF they get their act together. Here are ten
of the most disappointing NBA players on a fantasy standpoint who
deserve to be cast off to the waiver wire due to their underwhelming
performance.
An Unconventional Look at the James Shields Trade
We take a break from your regularly scheduled football musings to look at a big trade on the baseball front – the Tampa
Bay Rays have dealt All-Star pitcher and home grown talent James
Shields, along with Wade Davis, to the Kansas City Royals for four
prospects from the loaded Kansas City farm system
Count me as one who was surprised when this first broke – I had read the rumors that Washington and Arizona were kicking the tires on possible Shields trades, but I really wasn’t expecting a deal to be made. The Rays missed the playoffs last year, but not by much, finishing just three games behind the Orioles and Rangers for the wildcard slots, while arguably being better than both squads – had the Rays been located in the West or Central, they would have had very good shots at winning their division outright, from the easier schedule and competition. So, why are they selling?
The answer, as it so often is in baseball, is money. The Rays had the lowest attendance in the American League last year, and the sixth smallest payroll, topping out under $65 million. Moreover, they have to stay that low – they don’t play in the sort of market that allows them to dole out Yankee-style contracts, or even Blue Jay-style contracts. They’ve got to win on the cheap, finding maximum value in trades and their farm system to compete with teams with deeper pocket books. The fact that they’ve been so good despite playing in the Tampa market is one of the amazing success stories of the past decade.
This year, Shields’ contract had nearly doubled to $7 million, and it’s due to rise up to $9 million in 2013, making him the most expensive player on the entire Rays roster. Add in the contractsfor Davis, scheduled to make$2.8 million in 2013, and the one for David Price, who last year surpassed Shields as the Rays ace, and you’re talking more than $20 million of payroll already right there – and the Rays simply can’t afford that. Trading Shields and Davis is going to give them significant payroll flexibility, especially since they’re getting prospects in return, who they can control cheaply until they accumulate enough major league time for THEM to become top trade prospects. Such is the circle of life for a lower budget team.
So, why did the Royals make the move then? I think it’s best summed up by this quote from Royals staff, relayed via tweet by John Perrotto of USA Today: “We need to win NOW. There is no more time for waiting.” Ain’t that the truth – the Royals haven’t a winning season since 2003, or a playoff berth since their 1985 World Series win. Heads are always on the line when you’re running a team with that little historical success; heads that they’d prefer to keep, if at all possible. Nothing scares the pink slips away like winning. Furthermore, the Royals farm system, long ranked one of the better ones, has finally begun to bear fruit over the past five years or so – Alex Gordon, Billy Butler, and Mike Moustakas, to name just three, were all Royals draft picks and all contributed significantly last season. One thing they have been lacking, however, is pitching, so this trade helps fill a hole. The timing is right for another reason, too – the AL Central is weak. Yes, the Tigers made the World Series last year, but they were only an 88-win team, the worst record of any division leader in 2012. Going from 72 wins to a divisional title isn’t easy, but if you’re going to go all out for it, the AL Central is the place you want to operate in.
So, how did the Royals do? Shields is a bit on the older side, as he’s about to turn 31 – but he instantly becomes the ace of the Royals staff, a staff that’s been looking for an ace since they got rid of Zack Greinke in 2010. If they go through with their plan to put Davis into the starting rotation as well, he’d probably slot towards the bottom of their rotation. A Shields / Ervin Santana / Jeremy Guthrie top 3 is all of a sudden a fairly formidable lineup in a weak division. Shields numbers keep improving, too – don’t let his missing this year’s all-star game fool you; Shields was still performing at his 2011 level – his ERA increase can be basically summed up by an increase on his BABIP – batting average on balls in play – essentially meaning he was unlucky, or rather, that elements beyond his control were responsible for lowered performance in his traditional stats.
Sept. 15, 2012; Bronx, NY, USA; Tampa Bay Rays starting pitcher James Shields (33) pitches against the New York Yankees during the first inning at Yankee Stadium. Photo Courtesy By Debby Wong-USA TODAY Sports.
The issue then, is not whether or not they improved their rotation – I
think that’s fairly obvious. The question is it worth what they gave
up to do it. If you can win a division, the answer is almost always
yes, no matter how many prospects you give up. The problem is, we’re
not talking about an 80 win team that’s trying to get to 90; we’re
talking about a team that finished 16 games out of the division, and
more out of the wildcard. Shields/Santana/Guthrie is lightyears beyond
the Bruce Chen / Luke Hochevar / Jonathan Sanchez team from last year,
but the 2013 Royals won’t be competing against the 2012 Royals. The
Twins and Indians won’t put up much of a fight in all likelihood, but
the Tigers have a better set of starters in Verlander, Fister, and
Scherzer – and the White Sox put out Peavy and Sale. They’re not going
to slide back significantly – or, at least, I’d bet against both teams
doing so – meaning the Royals are going to have to find improvement
elsewhere. Eric Hosmer and Jeff Francoeur drug the team down last year
offensively, and Francoeur might well have been replaced by one of the
prospects Kansas City’s just shelled out – more on him in a second.
They were vastly below average on offense, and will need to get those
numbers up, no matter how good their pitching staff performs, to really
compete. I’m not sure they even get to 80 wins – and if they don’t,
this trade was a disaster.
Why is that? Well, look at who they gave away. Ignore Mike Montgomery and Patrick Leonard for the moment; they’re effectively lottery tickets. Instead, look at the two players you might well see in a Rays uniform next season – outfield Wil Myers and pitcher Jake Odorizzi. There’s no such thing as a can’t-miss prospect, but Wil Myers might well be the closest thing to one. He hit .314 with power at Triple-A Omaha this year, and has consistently been ranked one of the top five prospects in all of baseball. He should have been starting for the Royals last year, 21-year old or not – Jeff Francoeur should have been sent packing. He’s a middle of the lineup hitter down the road, once he gets some more experience and plate discipline, and could start this year in centerfield, replacing the departed BJ Upton. Plus, remember, this is the Rays we’re talking about – they’re always looking for players they can keep cheaply. Myers is under team control through 2018! The Rays could get all six of those years in the big leagues, too – this could be a huge boost to their offense.
And he’s not even the only prize. Shields for Myers would have been a fairly even trade, but the Rays got Jake Odorizzi as well. Odorizzi isn’t on the same level as Myers, but he’s big-league ready too, having made some appearances for the Royals at the end of last year. I don’t think he’ll be hitting the Rays rotation this year – though I could be wrong – as he still has a tendency to serve up a few too many gopherballs, and his fastball is on the low end of the 90s, albeit with great control. If he learns to keep the ball low, though, he could be a solid, middle of the rotation starter for the Rays down the line. I’d give him some more seasoning, but if the injury bug starts coming hard on the Rays, Odorizzi could see time in the starting lineup in 2013.
The bottom line is that the Royals are too far out of contention to be making this move – they’re mortgaging key parts of their future in an attempt to win now, when I think they’re just too far out of the race to have a real shot in 2013. The Rays got a treasure trove from a trade they essentially had to do, and will reap the rewards of this one for a long, long time.
Count me as one who was surprised when this first broke – I had read the rumors that Washington and Arizona were kicking the tires on possible Shields trades, but I really wasn’t expecting a deal to be made. The Rays missed the playoffs last year, but not by much, finishing just three games behind the Orioles and Rangers for the wildcard slots, while arguably being better than both squads – had the Rays been located in the West or Central, they would have had very good shots at winning their division outright, from the easier schedule and competition. So, why are they selling?
The answer, as it so often is in baseball, is money. The Rays had the lowest attendance in the American League last year, and the sixth smallest payroll, topping out under $65 million. Moreover, they have to stay that low – they don’t play in the sort of market that allows them to dole out Yankee-style contracts, or even Blue Jay-style contracts. They’ve got to win on the cheap, finding maximum value in trades and their farm system to compete with teams with deeper pocket books. The fact that they’ve been so good despite playing in the Tampa market is one of the amazing success stories of the past decade.
This year, Shields’ contract had nearly doubled to $7 million, and it’s due to rise up to $9 million in 2013, making him the most expensive player on the entire Rays roster. Add in the contractsfor Davis, scheduled to make$2.8 million in 2013, and the one for David Price, who last year surpassed Shields as the Rays ace, and you’re talking more than $20 million of payroll already right there – and the Rays simply can’t afford that. Trading Shields and Davis is going to give them significant payroll flexibility, especially since they’re getting prospects in return, who they can control cheaply until they accumulate enough major league time for THEM to become top trade prospects. Such is the circle of life for a lower budget team.
So, why did the Royals make the move then? I think it’s best summed up by this quote from Royals staff, relayed via tweet by John Perrotto of USA Today: “We need to win NOW. There is no more time for waiting.” Ain’t that the truth – the Royals haven’t a winning season since 2003, or a playoff berth since their 1985 World Series win. Heads are always on the line when you’re running a team with that little historical success; heads that they’d prefer to keep, if at all possible. Nothing scares the pink slips away like winning. Furthermore, the Royals farm system, long ranked one of the better ones, has finally begun to bear fruit over the past five years or so – Alex Gordon, Billy Butler, and Mike Moustakas, to name just three, were all Royals draft picks and all contributed significantly last season. One thing they have been lacking, however, is pitching, so this trade helps fill a hole. The timing is right for another reason, too – the AL Central is weak. Yes, the Tigers made the World Series last year, but they were only an 88-win team, the worst record of any division leader in 2012. Going from 72 wins to a divisional title isn’t easy, but if you’re going to go all out for it, the AL Central is the place you want to operate in.
So, how did the Royals do? Shields is a bit on the older side, as he’s about to turn 31 – but he instantly becomes the ace of the Royals staff, a staff that’s been looking for an ace since they got rid of Zack Greinke in 2010. If they go through with their plan to put Davis into the starting rotation as well, he’d probably slot towards the bottom of their rotation. A Shields / Ervin Santana / Jeremy Guthrie top 3 is all of a sudden a fairly formidable lineup in a weak division. Shields numbers keep improving, too – don’t let his missing this year’s all-star game fool you; Shields was still performing at his 2011 level – his ERA increase can be basically summed up by an increase on his BABIP – batting average on balls in play – essentially meaning he was unlucky, or rather, that elements beyond his control were responsible for lowered performance in his traditional stats.
Sept. 15, 2012; Bronx, NY, USA; Tampa Bay Rays starting pitcher James Shields (33) pitches against the New York Yankees during the first inning at Yankee Stadium. Photo Courtesy By Debby Wong-USA TODAY Sports.
Why is that? Well, look at who they gave away. Ignore Mike Montgomery and Patrick Leonard for the moment; they’re effectively lottery tickets. Instead, look at the two players you might well see in a Rays uniform next season – outfield Wil Myers and pitcher Jake Odorizzi. There’s no such thing as a can’t-miss prospect, but Wil Myers might well be the closest thing to one. He hit .314 with power at Triple-A Omaha this year, and has consistently been ranked one of the top five prospects in all of baseball. He should have been starting for the Royals last year, 21-year old or not – Jeff Francoeur should have been sent packing. He’s a middle of the lineup hitter down the road, once he gets some more experience and plate discipline, and could start this year in centerfield, replacing the departed BJ Upton. Plus, remember, this is the Rays we’re talking about – they’re always looking for players they can keep cheaply. Myers is under team control through 2018! The Rays could get all six of those years in the big leagues, too – this could be a huge boost to their offense.
And he’s not even the only prize. Shields for Myers would have been a fairly even trade, but the Rays got Jake Odorizzi as well. Odorizzi isn’t on the same level as Myers, but he’s big-league ready too, having made some appearances for the Royals at the end of last year. I don’t think he’ll be hitting the Rays rotation this year – though I could be wrong – as he still has a tendency to serve up a few too many gopherballs, and his fastball is on the low end of the 90s, albeit with great control. If he learns to keep the ball low, though, he could be a solid, middle of the rotation starter for the Rays down the line. I’d give him some more seasoning, but if the injury bug starts coming hard on the Rays, Odorizzi could see time in the starting lineup in 2013.
The bottom line is that the Royals are too far out of contention to be making this move – they’re mortgaging key parts of their future in an attempt to win now, when I think they’re just too far out of the race to have a real shot in 2013. The Rays got a treasure trove from a trade they essentially had to do, and will reap the rewards of this one for a long, long time.
Why the Los Angeles Dodgers Are Headed for a Fiscal Cliff
If you want to know the difference between the United States
government and the Los Angeles Dodgers, look no further than their
activity during the month of December.
But Los Angeles is headed for a fiscal cliff.
En-route to re-defining baseball’s pay-walls, shattering the contract dollars record for a right-handed pitcher, and adding nearly $200 million in new salary from trades alone, the Dodgers have created a payroll in excess of $220 million. That in itself is not the problem, the problem is that payroll contains five contracts with over $20 million in average annual value for 2013.
And 2018.
Yes, you read correctly. Counting an inevitable extension for ace Clayton Kershaw, the Dodgers will have those same five contracts for over $15 million on their payroll five years from now. And those players will be ancient: Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, and Andre Ethier will all be over 35 years old, while Zach Grienke and Matt Kemp will each be well on the wrong side of 30.
Worse, the newly-uber rich Dodgers will be saddled with baseball’s highest taxes and revenue sharing payments, which will eat into their record TV revenues. It is hard to calculate what those taxes will be five years out but they could easily exceed $75 million annually if the Dodgers’ spending continues to accelerate.
What does that add up to? Nearly $200 million in dead-weight contracts and payments by 2017; plus a first baseman, two outfielders, and a stable of pitchers to replace in the off-season.
Sept. 30, 2012; Los Angeles, CA, USA; Los Angeles Dodgers third baseman Luis Cruz (47) congratulates first baseman Adrian Gonzalez (23) and right fielder Andre Ethier (16) after a 2-run home run in the fourth inning against the Colorado Rockies at Dodger adium. Dodgers won 7-1. Photo Courtesy By Jayne Kamin-Oncea-USA TODAY Sports.
If the Dodgers want to spend in free agency to fill those holes with a
fresh crop of stars, it will add up to over $100 million in new annual
spending, at least in part because of the Dodgers’ work this off-season
to shatter previous contract records. Combined with other contracts
they will inevitably add to the payroll, that would be $450 million in
annual payroll-related expenses.
No TV contract will cover that kind of spending.
In many ways, the Dodgers’ spending resembles the U.S. government’s spending between 2001-2006. Fresh off the surpluses of the late 1990s, which look eerily similar to the Dodgers’ sudden windfall, the government funded a huge stimulus package, a $1.5 trillion tax break, and a massive extension to Medicare: Part D for prescription drug coverage. In Dodger-speak, a trade for Hanley Ramirez, taking all the Red Sox’s bad contracts, and a massive contract for Zach Grienke.
The U.S. government spent because it could. The money was there, the economy was strong, and the country looked invincible. What could go wrong?
The Dodgers are in the same position: their new owners and TV windfall have the franchise feeling invincible. But, like America’s expenses did during the 2008 recession, and will continue to do as entitlement obligations grow heavier, the Dodgers will feel their current obligations when they are trying to build a new contender in 2017.
The Dodgers bought up every free agent in sight, including ace
pitcher Zach Grienke, while the U.S. government threatened to default on
the national debt because President Obama ordered new toilet paper
rolls for the White House.
But, to every jubilant Dodgers fan, a message: there will be a
reckoning for all this spending. You have to admire the Dodgers’
commitment to win and the organization will reap the benefits in the short term.But Los Angeles is headed for a fiscal cliff.
En-route to re-defining baseball’s pay-walls, shattering the contract dollars record for a right-handed pitcher, and adding nearly $200 million in new salary from trades alone, the Dodgers have created a payroll in excess of $220 million. That in itself is not the problem, the problem is that payroll contains five contracts with over $20 million in average annual value for 2013.
And 2018.
Yes, you read correctly. Counting an inevitable extension for ace Clayton Kershaw, the Dodgers will have those same five contracts for over $15 million on their payroll five years from now. And those players will be ancient: Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, and Andre Ethier will all be over 35 years old, while Zach Grienke and Matt Kemp will each be well on the wrong side of 30.
Worse, the newly-uber rich Dodgers will be saddled with baseball’s highest taxes and revenue sharing payments, which will eat into their record TV revenues. It is hard to calculate what those taxes will be five years out but they could easily exceed $75 million annually if the Dodgers’ spending continues to accelerate.
What does that add up to? Nearly $200 million in dead-weight contracts and payments by 2017; plus a first baseman, two outfielders, and a stable of pitchers to replace in the off-season.
Sept. 30, 2012; Los Angeles, CA, USA; Los Angeles Dodgers third baseman Luis Cruz (47) congratulates first baseman Adrian Gonzalez (23) and right fielder Andre Ethier (16) after a 2-run home run in the fourth inning against the Colorado Rockies at Dodger adium. Dodgers won 7-1. Photo Courtesy By Jayne Kamin-Oncea-USA TODAY Sports.
No TV contract will cover that kind of spending.
In many ways, the Dodgers’ spending resembles the U.S. government’s spending between 2001-2006. Fresh off the surpluses of the late 1990s, which look eerily similar to the Dodgers’ sudden windfall, the government funded a huge stimulus package, a $1.5 trillion tax break, and a massive extension to Medicare: Part D for prescription drug coverage. In Dodger-speak, a trade for Hanley Ramirez, taking all the Red Sox’s bad contracts, and a massive contract for Zach Grienke.
The U.S. government spent because it could. The money was there, the economy was strong, and the country looked invincible. What could go wrong?
The Dodgers are in the same position: their new owners and TV windfall have the franchise feeling invincible. But, like America’s expenses did during the 2008 recession, and will continue to do as entitlement obligations grow heavier, the Dodgers will feel their current obligations when they are trying to build a new contender in 2017.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Sehwag century and Pujara give India control
Welcome to India. The greeting came from Virender Sehwag and, this being Sehwag, rather than scatter rose petals on the bed he scattered England fielders in all directions with a buccaneering century which brought a rousing start to the opening Test in Ahmedabad. This being India, where Test cricket no longer draws the crowds, there were only a few thousand in the stadium to watch it.
That England recovered some ground by the close of the first day was almost entirely due to Graeme Swann, who, as their only specialist spinner on a chronically slow surface, bore an onerous responsibility and took all four Indian wickets to fall. In the process he passed Jim Laker as the most successful England offspinner in history. Roughly half of them have been left-handers, an advantage Laker never enjoyed in an era when lefties were in shorter supply.
Only Swann, late in his innings, was able to stem Sehwag's progress as he struck a run-a-ball 117, his first Test century for two years. It was a strange first session, dominated by Sehwag, who was adventuresome but far from explosive. His innings was typically more reliant upon eye than footwork as he manipulated the ball with disdain, drove at an excess of wide deliveries and defended only as an afterthought.
He is a character cricketer in the manner of Chris Gayle or Kevin Pietersen, an unconventional batsman with a commanding presence and a style all of his own and, at 34, especially on low, ponderous pitches such as these, he is not quite done yet.
Swann's wickets served to strengthen the conviction that England had erred in omitting a second specialist spinner in Monty Panesar. This is a virgin surface, of lower clay content and with no time to bed down, which threatens to drive the pace bowlers to distraction and turn sharply as the Test progresses. Doubts about Stuart Broad's fitness will have made England especially reluctant to field only two fast bowlers and they will wave all manner of statistics to support their selection but the evidence of the game was against them.
Swann's success was in strict contrast to the mood elsewhere. The only impression England's pace bowlers made was on the footholds. Anderson was wearing his worried expression, his new-ball spell limited to four overs. Broad stubbornly dug balls into an unsympathetic surface, saw them bounce no higher than the top of the stumps and looked at them quizzically as if he could stare it into behaving differently. Tim Bresnan went at nearly six an over. It was a huge toss for India to win.
By lunch, at slip, Alastair Cook pondered whether his elevation to the Test captaincy really was a good idea after all. By the close, Swann had reminded him that in a four-Test series Sehwag's assault was merely the beginning, but a trial by spin still awaits England.
Gautam Gambhir was Swann's first victim after an opening stand of 134 in 30 overs, bowled trying to fashion one of his high-risk carves through point and beaten by a hint of turn and weary bounce. Sehwag had briefly fallen into contemplative mood in mid-afternoon, as if recovering energy for his next assault, when he was bowled, sweeping.
Swann's third wicket the most remarkable of all, that of Sachin Tendulkar who lofted to deep midwicket in an extraordinarily misconceived manner only a few minutes before tea. Finally, Virat Kohli, who had played circumspectly, was deceived in the flight and bowled through the gate.
A Gujarati hero emerged for the crowd to applaud. Cheteshwar Pujara, upright and accomplished, was two runs short of his second Test century by the close and looked a convincing replacement for Rahul Dravid in an understated innings, showing a collected manner and good timing. But he needed a let-off on 8 as his gentle leading edge against Bresnan was misjudged by James Anderson, who ran in too far at mid-on.
England spurned three other opportunities. Sehwag was dropped on 80, glancing Anderson, whereupon Matt Prior spilled a difficult chance and Prior also missed a stumping against Gambhir. The most embarrassing drop, though, belonged to Jonathan Trott, who fluffed a slip catch off Swann from Kohli and rolled the ball into the turf before shamelessly claiming the catch in a slightly perplexed manner. The umpires sought replays; for Trott they did not look good.
Gambhir and Sehwag had been an alliance in decline, and fleetingly there were hints of vulnerability, but these were not conditions to ask questions of defensive technique. Gambhir had proclaimed before the match that they were the best opening duo in the country and few would find much cause to question that as India sailed to 120 without loss by lunch. It was their first century opening partnership since India faced South Africa in Centurion in 2010.
Sehwag spoke of playing watchfully,and met by a deep point, he did glide regularly to third man, but his 50 still came in only 45 balls and by lunch he had 79 from 66 with 12 fours and a six. England's pace attack strayed wide too often and runs came at a tempo that Test cricket rarely sees: 50 by the 12th over; 100 by the 20th. Sehwag possessed a hunched, insouciant air that suggested the match was of little consequence and he was just having a bit of a bash.
England calculated that the ball might reverse for Bresnan, as it did as early as the ninth over in a warm-up match on the adjacent B ground, but Bresnan had a dispiriting day, never worse than when Sehwag took him for 4-4-6 in his sixth over, the second boundary, a drag through mid-on against a ball that crept past the fielder verging on the insulting; the six over wide long-on that followed, a full swing at a length ball.
India have never lost a Test at home after beginning with a century stand. That statistic tells England that their chances are already slim. It was all a long way from England's domination of India in English conditions last summer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
