Oakland Scrap Heap

Despite the fact that J.P. Riccardi has, as of yet, been more warmly received than the Blue Jays last general manager, the deconstructive Gord Ash, I would like to argue that Riccardi has in fact inflicted a woeful disease on the blue birds.
This disease's title? Oakland Trashitis. Since Riccardi was instated as the general manager of the Toronto Blue Jays he has, for lack of a better analogy, picked from the Athletic's plate. Hinske, Lilly, Kielty, Thomas and most recently the mediocre Marco Scutaro have all been brought to Toronto by J.P. from Riccardi's former home in Oakland, with mixed results. In Hinske we had a utility corner infielder who won the Rookie of the Year award in 2003 due to a lack of better options. In Lilly Toronto received a 15 win-a-year pitcher with limited faculties. In Thomas an aging slugger who managed to lead the club due to an absence of offensive prowess elsewhere. And then the worst sin of all; obtaining Marco Scutaro when another former Oakland shortstop, Miguel Tejada, was readily available.
J.P.'s merits include a fantastic eye for pitching talent but he seriously lacks sufficient sense to make trades and free agent deals. Aside from temporary success Riccardi's dealings often involve over payment and injured results. Glaus, Burnett and even Ryan are all great examples of this. It seems that in only the most accidental cases, see the case of Canadian Matt Stairs, J.P. manages to score on his off season dealings.
The most recent mistake, obtaining Scutaro when a deal for Tejada could have been made may be the final nail in the coffin for Riccardi and his now defunct and unmentionable 7-year plan. Let's look at how their stats match up over the last three years:




















Scutaro

2005 2006 2007
Hits: 97 94 88
HR's: 9 5 7
RBI: 37 41 41
OPS: .260 .266 .247

Tejada

2005 2006 2007
199 214 157
26 24 18
98 100 81
.304 .330 .296

Clearly, Tejada outclasses Scutaro in all offensive categories. Add in the fact that Tejada is a premier offensive player who can fill a defensive position such as short stop for the likes of John MacDonald and his Miguel's only real drawback is that he is right handed - while the Jays really need another lefty. I believe that his down season in 2007, where he only played 133 games, is an upside as he can be gained for less from Baltimore (it has been suggested that a package who's best player is AA Ricky Romero would have sufficed) and Tejada is still young enough to produce at a high level for the next couple of years. The bottom line is that Tejada is roughly a million times the player that Scutaro is and could have been had for next to nothing - so why not?

Alas J.P. saddled Toronto with a super-utility man to fill holes that should be filled with full time player of a high caliber. To compete in the AL East, a division that does not stand to ever get any easier, the Jays are going to have to make a move on a more aggressive general manager. Hope, a topic I address often in sports, is my faculty for wishing for a Gillick-like GM to return to baseball's Northern front.

For Randy

This ain't so hard afterall.

A raucous debate

Recently Hugo Chavez was heard remarking: 'I think it's imprudent for a king to shout at a president to shut up. Mr. King, we are not going to shut up.'

Answering, his majesty King Juan Carlos made this observation;

"Es Hugo evidente, soy de goma y usted es pegamento."

Just a hope

Here's hoping - my Red Sox affiliations aside (which usually weaken as the Sox win) I am going to put this out there -

Miguel Tejada in Toronto for 2008!

Despite our general bad luck with free agents and Tejada's recent post steroid stat slump he constitutes a monumental upgrade at short, even if his defense is lesser than that of John MacDonald, and he will upgrade what is already a fairly powerful lineup.

The other reason why I am supporting this move is the alternative: nothing.
If the Jays do not make a trade for Tejada they will do nothing, bringing their underachieving 2007 squad into 2008.

Make mine Miguel.

DB

Pillar or Pillars?

It seems that some of the major figures of the new conservatives (meaning sarkozy , harper, merkle) are portrayed as being largely centralized and personally controlling. I don't buy that there is something inherent to liberalism or conservativism about this, so is there a structural reason? I'm not dispute the fact, just wondering why it is. Now given we’re dealing with just a few examples, it might be a coincidence that these leaders have this personal style. But maybe its not, and if not, why? I came up with three reasons, though I'm sure there are lots more.

One reason is the media. All are commonly portrayed as having a “hidden agenda”, and so reporters scour the public record, looking for candidates, staff, etc who might say something off message, since it will be taking as what Harper “really is planning”. The incentive is to vet every statement centrally, to make sure it doesn’t say anything they don’t mean to say.

At least in Canada, the Reform movement (populist, grassroots, very decentralized) was the total opposite of the current trend in Conservatives. That movement watched the Liberals win majority after majority, no wonder they’ve changed their minds.

Or maybe there is something to Naomi Kline’s new book “shock capitalism”. People always want the easy way out (government should fix it), and since conservatives generally denies them. Karl Rove was wrong, people are generally tend not to be conservative, so selling the conservative “self-help” message is innately harder to sell, requiring greater communications skill, meaning you have to rely on the best people (person).

The Democratic Way

Even though Bill is campaigning for his wife these days, he still finds time to renew old passtimes. Regrettably, interns aren't what they used to be.

Tickets to a Giants game: $40
A personalized Barry Bond's autograph: $100
Realizing that a phantom report naming numerous players allegedly linked to the BALCO steroid scandal is about to emerge as Mr. Bonds waltzes over to the American League to take a cushy DH role, thus avoiding the wrath of MLB's steroid fury: Priceless

Am I too old for blogger humour?

I am issuing a challenge to the fellow posters on this blog: explain why this: http://raymitheminx.blogspot.com/ is the second most popular blog in Canada. Ok, so she posts the odd boob pic, but thats hardly something new to the web. As one of her fans says, "Alot of people don't "get it"...it's above their head for the most part, or at least until they become more regular viewers and start to see the genius and hilarity behind it." Exactly. Like me. Is this humour like Sinfield "show about nothing" funny? Or like "The Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny" funny? Absurdist? Dadaist? Help me here joel. Or maybe its like Awesome Town? (thos guys won an emmy for "dick in a box" apparently. I will admit that I like how Raymi sticks it to the Queen of Canadian establishment, but its over my head I guess.

R. Paul

Blogger lies. It may "save your drafts automatically", but it doesn't give them back to you later. I feel like a student who just lost his nights work on his essay. Wow I'm glad I'm not one of those unwashed masses anymore

R.Paul

While remotely entertaining, MMA has its limitations in space.

For your viewing pleasure

After reading Joel's post most recent, Randy and I are struggling to find our sense of audience. Perhaps garnering a single reader may assist in that. The hunt is on.


DB