Red Reporter: FanPosts

Edwin Up Richar Out

2009-07-03T18:24:53Z

Richar tore his labrum and is on the 15 day DL but I imagine that he is out for the year and Edwin has been reinstated from the 60 day DL just in time for a huge series against the Cardinals. He is a big bat that we have been lacking. We need him to come up and play like good Edwin and not bad Edwin. How much of an effect on the line up do you guys think that we will have.

Go Big: Trade for Alex Rios

2009-07-02T01:21:08Z

Acording to Ken Rosenthal from Foxsports the Blue Jays may be willing to part with Alex Rios. Why not make a move for Rios and let him play RF while Jay Bruce moves to LF while Taveras and Dickerson platoon in CF. The Rios is only 28 and is locked up under contract for a considerable amount of time so it may be worth it to part with the prospects and mlb talent needed to pick him up.

The Drew Sutton Era Begins in Cincy

2009-07-01T19:47:37Z

According to Fay, Burton has been sent down and Drew Sutton has been called up to the Reds. Everytime I try to attach the link, my post gets screwed up, so I'll just copy it.

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog07&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ae57bcc87-152a-4f72-96fb-cc08b1f396efPost%3a9e346123-b327-4cee-9fcf-b891cde7bf41&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

Here is part of that text:

"Sutton is the player the Reds got in the Jeff Keppinger trade with Houston. Sutton was hitting .254/.388/.492 with five home runs and 19 RBI in 130 at-bats for the Louisville. He spent time on the DL with mono right after the Reds got him. He can play all four infield positions and he's a switch-hitter."

So, is this the first of several moves? The team may be hovering not too far out of first, but as has been pointed out here, this team is also hovering not too far out of last. I don't think anyone seriously thinks this team will contend for the World Series this year. So, its time to start preparing for 2010. The next month will be interesting.

BURGER TOUR - Stop #5 Next Wednesday

2009-07-01T16:42:31Z

The Burger Hounds are taking the tour to the people and letting their voices be heard. From this point forward we will post a biweekly poll with 4-5 establishments and the one with the most votes wins. RR'ers, its up to you! Jch would be much obliged if you would vote for whichever establishment serves draft beer.

I believe the consensus has the stops ranked as:

92 - Terry's Turf Club

86 - Zip's

83 - Bard's Burgers

77 - 915

I was in dissent, ranking Zip's 4th actually. This upsets Ash to no end and its probably the only reason im mentioning it again. Honk! So far there really hasnt been a clunker on the tour. I've heard a lot about Five Guys but i must be honest and state, for the record, it looks likes its going to be Johnny Rockets-ish. Has anyone out there in RR Land ate there? Feedback? I know the other places on the poll but im open to any comments and future suggestions for places to visit, of course.

Here's a link to a burger article in today's Cincinnati Enquirer put an end to boring burgers.

Poll

Where should we go?

All-White Gold Star Chili Commercial

2009-06-30T20:51:13Z

I can't find a link to post the new Gold Star Chili commercial that lovingly adorns our Fox Sports Ohio commercial breaks. I'd love to post it here, as the spot completely astonished me. The tag line is "This is Cincinnati Flavor." This might be true - assuming that minorities don't count in Cincinnati. You see, I counted 23 people (including parts of people like hands, and people in the background) in the commercial.

And none of them were black. Not a one.

In fact, there are no minorities to be found...perhaps the one's guy's arm is Asian, and the mustache guy might be Latino rather than Italian, but that's as close as anyone comes to being anything other than white (and pasty)

So next time you see this spot, feel free to go minority-hunting. Let use know what you think.

Poll

What do you think of the Gold Star spot?

SIS - Worst movie ever and what would it take to get Holliday?

2009-06-29T17:55:38Z

This SIS is a two headed beast. That's how we roll on Reds' off days.

1) Whats the worst movie you ever paid to see at the theatre or rented? Horrible movies on cable do NOT count seeing as how there must be some form of financial investement to be considered. I dont recall ever walking out on a film at the cinema. I've certainly gotten tired of rented movies, however, and popped them out of the player before the film ended. The last I recall is that aircraft controller movie with John Cusack and Billy Bob Thornton.

2) If the Reds had Matt Holliday and you had to trade him for only Reds minor league prospects....whom would you want in order to trade MH? Billy Beane is an intelligent man with plenty of bravado. Matt Holliday will not come cheap and i'd say the bidding begins at 3 premium prospects, possibly 4.

Which bat should the Reds get?

2009-06-29T15:03:31Z

John Paul Morosi at Fox Sports has a column up about how the Reds wanted DeRosa BADLY and how Walt's really looking hard for a RH bat. He lists a bunch of possible targets. Here are the players he lists with their current wOBA.

1. Ty Wigginton-.301

2. Josh Willingham-.405

3. Matt Holliday-..357

4. Gary Matthews Jr.(!!!)-.267

5. Julio Lugo-.336

So the question is, what would be your preference of the above players, in order? No discussions in a vacuum. You have to consider the package it would take to get each and money considerations.

My thoughts after the jump

My order of preference for the above players would be: 1. Josh Willingham 2. Julio Lugo 3. Matt Holliday 4. Ty Wiggington 5. Gary Matthews Jr.

Reasoning--In my mind we need a SS the most, a LF second, but there aren't any good SS available right now. Willingham is a good player, not too old, and would come relatively cheap. He hits for power, can take a walk (something this team desperately needs), and plays passable defense in LF.

Julio Lugo is expensive and older, but Boston would definitely pick up most or all of his salary, considering the other option is probably just releasing him. His defense isn't great, but getting a league average hitter for SS would help the offense a great deal, methinks.

I would love to get Holliday, but I'm thinking the cost for 3 months of him would just be too steep. Ty Wiggington is the definition of redundancy with EdE coming back, and if the Reds trade for Gary Matthews Jr. I'm turning in my fancard.

Thoughts? And feel free to add a sixth player into the mix, just make it realistic. (No trading for David Wright)

18 game capsule, take 4

2009-06-29T15:03:17Z

Like one of those belated birthday cards you used to get from your aunt, this latest Reds rundown is neither exciting nor filled with cash. Also, it’s late. Now—on to the business of explaining in gruesome detail how the Reds went 7-11 against a very weak slate of opponents. All stats are through Friday’s games.

2009 Reds, Capsule 4

Overview:

Wins/Losses: 7 - 11 (PSA), 35-37 (YTD)

Strength of Schedule: .484, YTD (16th most difficult in NL; 30th most difficult in ML) [Prev: .509 YTD SOS, 4th most difficult in NL; 5h most difficult in ML]

RPI (ESPN): .485, YTD (12th best in NL; 24th best in ML)

[Prev: .512 YTD RPI, 6th best in NL; 10h best in ML]

Baseball Prospectus playoff odds (based on team stats, YTD): 6.3% [prev: 19.9%]

Baseball Prospectus playoff odds (based on ELO concept): 6.9% [prev: 16.9%]

Baseball Prospectus playoff odds (based on team stats + PECOTA projections): 10.2% [prev: 15.9%]

Offense:

.220/.295/.332 (AVG/OBP/SLG) for the team for the period, compared to NL average of .254/.321/.401.
The runs created per game "stat" is a Bill James creation that attempts to extrapolate a single player's numbers into a team context. With a large enough sample size, it tends to work pretty well for players with non-extreme performances. Occasionally, I'll put the numbers together for an 18-game segment, and the RC/G stat will return a negative number-invariably connected a batter with one or two games worth of numbers, or a pitcher, or some other small sample. Wait, did I say "invariably"? I present to you, Willy Tavares, June 6-26:
14 G, 61 PA, 8 hits, 0 BB, 2 2B, 0 3B, 0 HR, 4 R, 3 RBI, 3 SB, 1 CS, 15 K, 2 GDP, 2 SH. .136 Average, .136 OBP, .169 SLG, .305 OPS...-1.47 RC/G, which is less than zero like whoa.
In non-related news, Chris Dickerson managed a 942 OPS over the same period in 44 PA.
Of the 8 players with the most plate appearances during this period, only two had OPS's over 700: Jonny Gomes (1260) and Ryan Hanigan (817).
11 home runs for the team in this 18 game stretch
Because I know you all love consistency: Alex Gonzalez's OPS, period by period: 461, 562, 621, 579. Like a Rolex.
Jay Bruce's BABIP for the season: .201, after a .188 mark in this last period.
Speaking of Mr. Bruce, he has been essentially an average player for the season, despite his unusual stat line. I'm expecting a monster 2nd half from the guy.
Welcome back, Joey.

Pitching:

2nd straight period of worse-than-average ERAs.
On a period-by-period basis, this was the first in which the team K/9IP rate fell below 6, which tends to be my benchmark for success.
Among starting pitchers, only Aaron Harang had a PSA ERA below 4. However, when you look at expected ERA, based on peripherals, no one had cause to write home to Mom: Harang-4.81 xERA, Arroyo-6.75, Cueto-5.54, Owings-6.22, Maloney-6.06
In addition to the K rate falling, the HR/9IP has spiked. After resting around 1 HR / 9 IP all season, the team allowed 1.5 HR / 9 IP in this period.
The bullpen overall was solid, although perhaps a bit down from their previous level of wow. I thought Masset and Weathers pitched well, in particular.
Speaking of Masset, his YTD ERA of 1.82 speaks for itself. His xERA of 0.92 ain't bad either.
I was wondering if the Reds have a higher percentage of wins that result in saves for the bullpen than the rest of the league. The answer = not especially so (54% for the Reds, 52% for the NL).
The defense continued at its high rate (.708 DER; 3rd best in NL, 4th best in ML), which raises the question: if the 2009 Reds, sans-Votto and with the recent stretch of poor pitching, still had the 2008-level defense, would my head explode or just melt?

The next 18:

9 games at home, 9 on the road
Mercifully see an end to inter-league play with two against the Tribe.
6 of the 18 against divisional opponents
7 of the 18 against 2008 playoff teams
.493 average winning percentage (2009) for the teams in the next 18 games.
An all-star game. I imagine CoCo will get an all-expenses paid trip to St. Louis for his efforts. Maybe Cueto.
Looking back, how do you evaluate the last stretch of games? Without their best player, rotation seemingly falling apart, their 2nd best player unable to shake his case of the Kingmans, 3rd baseman still on the shelf...was the 7-11 record good or bad, given the competition? How much does inter-league play contribute to the struggles?
If I were GM: I think I would sit tight at least until the All Star break. Theoretically, I'm one hot week from being in first place, and Votto looks like he's good to go. If the rotation is really falling apart, I'm screwed anyway and won't be able to overcome it with any quick moves. Homer stays up at the MLB level for the remainder of the season, as a long man out of the pen if necessary. Dickerson is the new starting CF, per the memo I just wrote to the field manager. Hanigan keeps getting at-bats. Otherwise, I think we play out the next 3 weeks and re-evaluate.

Ozzie Guillen thinks Cubs fans are stupid. I agree.

2009-06-29T14:28:28Z

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-29-cubs-britejun29,0,5303027.story

Looks like Ozzie is being Ozzie again.

After Cubs manager Lou Piniella pointed out the spike in attendance from 22,000 when the Dodgers faced the White Sox last week to a full house when the Cubs visited U.S. Cellular Field this weekend, Sox manager Ozzie Guillen was asked why attendance was so low for the Dodgers series.

"Because our fans are not stupid like Cubs fans," Guillen said. "They know we're [expletive]."

Guillen said Cubs fans will watch any game at Wrigley Field because "Wrigley Field is just a bar."

Reds' coiffure code

2009-06-29T03:36:37Z

After looking at the homepage Harang pic again, and his vaguely Amish facial hair, I started to wonder about a few things. Do the Reds' have some kind of dress code or "hair code"? Someone told me a while back that Marge Schott would not allow teh players to have any facial hair. I believed it, but I suppose it could have been made up lol.

This is superficial and pointless, but tomorrow is an off day (sorry if this was double posted I had issues with my browser)

Poodle

Derosa's Been traded!!!

2009-06-28T03:09:13Z

Mark Derosa has just been traded to the Cardinals for Chris Perez and a Player to be named later as reported by baseball tonight. That explains Derosa not being in tonight's lineup.

All I can say is the Reds a bat quickly. Can somebody say Matt Holliday? Derosa provides the Cards with a solid defensive utility man as well as a good offensive unit. The Reds have as good a shot as anyone for this division and are only shy offensively. Our pitching is among the best in the game. Jocketty needs to come up with something quick or we may be out of the race.

Poll

Who should the Reds go for at the trade deadline?

Let's get Andruw Jones

2009-06-26T18:12:17Z

Jones is Strokin' the ball with 9 taters in 127 AB's and has an OBP of .351 and OPS of .879. Rangers have a full outfield and with Josh Hamilton coming back before too long they will need Jones even less. I can't imagine the Rangers wanting too much for him. Let's get another slugger in the line up. He 1 (ok maybe 2) bad/pathetic seasons and has a history of being a super stroker. This is a bat that could galvanize the lineup big time.

SIS - Best Living Ballplayer and the New King of Pop

2009-06-26T13:42:49Z

Two questions: Who is the best living ballplayer? Who, now, is the reigning King of Pop?

The best living ballplayer usually comes down to just a couple men but i wonder if there arent a few dark horse candidates to consider(none named Rosales, I might add). I'd be interested to get nominations from RR Nation.

The new King of Pop is much more cloudy. Pop singers used to have long careers and enjoy household name status but it seems that the shelf life of today's entertainers is remarkably short. Shortly after Elvis died MJ released "Off the Wall" and "Thriller" and redefined the concept of a worldwide entertainer. i think that Prince has an amazing portfolio of songs written and recorded but I dont see him as the the biggest thing going currently. Who do you think that title should be bestowed upon?

It's not too late Reds. But you gotta do SOMETHING.

2009-06-25T03:15:14Z

This team is driving me crazy.

If the talent on this team was sub-par, I'd be resigned to the fact that we were destined for another sub-.500 season. But it's not. This is a team that played like gangbusters earlier in the season, even without their best players. The Cincinnati Reds are a team that, once they get their collective heads of out their collective sphincters, they can take the Wild Card, if not the division. Now is the time. Tonight's loss in Toronto shows that.

I am all for trading Bronson. I love the guy, I think he's a great pitcher and I think he's a great presence in the clubhouse. But the guy is so hit and miss that it's driving me and everyone else bonkers. He's the guy I would put on the trading block and get someone in there to drive in some runs.

I think we need a new manager. I like Dusty but as Jim Morrison once put it, "the time to hesitate is through." It's one thing to try to help a guy work through a slump. It's another thing to keep playing a guy when he's gone 0-170 (or 0-34 or whatever the hell it is Willy is hitting). You're putting players over the team and that needs to stop, and it needs to stop now.

I love and have faith in this team but it's time to stop being ridiculous and start playing baseball.

On trading Bronson...

2009-06-24T22:56:56Z

As much as I like what Arroyo's done here, I think he's the guy you have to trade if you want to make a run this season. Trading prospects for FA's-to-be would be unwise, as this is still a flawed team with most of its core players several years from their respective primes. It's not worth wasting Jay Bruce's best years because you went all-in on a 2009 team whose best possible outcome is a one-and-done in the playoffs.

But, the division is there for the taking. You never know how often these kind of chances will come around, so you have to do something, right?

If this team is to go to the playoffs without mortgaging the future, the most probable scenario (really, the only scenario in my mind) is to add a bat, get Volquez back healthy, and have some combination of Bailey/Maloney/Ramirez cobble together enough quality innings to maintain the strong pitching we've enjoyed thus far. That last part is a lot easier to do when all you need to do is equal the 5.16ERA Bronson's given you to this point. You can't ask rookies to replace Harang's production.

So, where to send him? I look at Minnesota; a .500 squad in a division that's eminently winnable, with a 109 OPS+ and a 93 ERA+ as a team. They have 4 outfielders with at least 170 PA's, plus a DH who's a nominal LF. One of those OF's happens to have a career 109 OPS+ (Bronson has a career 106 ERA+), happens to have a contract that pays him $16.5mil over the next 2 seasons with an $11mil option for 2011 (compared to Bronson's $22mil over the next 2, plus an $11mil 2011 option), and happens to bat righthanded.

Bronson Arroyo and $3mil to the Twins for Michael Cuddyer?

After calling up Drew Stubbs and demoting Willy Taveras (riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight) we'll be able to roll out this lineup:

CF Stubbs R
1B Votto L
LF Cuddyer R
RF Bruce L
2B Phillips R
3B Encarnacion R
C Hanigan/Hernandez
SS Shit, what's that one guy's name?

Playoffs?

via i154.photobucket.com

Dusty Baker-A Critical-Historical Study

2009-06-24T13:31:04Z

So a comment made over on Fya's blog yesterday got me to thinking. Here's the quote:

LETS HOPE SO.. seeing Mr Out batting lead off and then Dickerson who looks good on his swings of late, batting ninth.. i turned the game off!! Baker cant win without a All-star caliber lineup.. like heck would i as a manager trying to win, keep letting players that dont get the job done, continue to make outs and bat leadoff!!!!! Ask dusty why he continues to let Patterson/Taveras types continue to bat leadoff and make outs!! the fans are not stupid and see it, WHY doesnt he???

Apart from the ridiculous spelling, grammar, and punctuation silliness (5 exclamation points? Really?), the poster makes an interesting point.

Does Dusty need an all-star caliber lineup to win? I decided to check out the years his teams won the division or wild card to see if there are similarities amongst the teams. I'm going to use OPS+ as the main standard for offensive performance. We'll start from the beginning.

1993-San Francisco Giants, 103-59

This was Baker's first year being an MLB manager, and he won manager of the year for leading the team to 103 wins. 5 of his 8 position starters posted an OPS+ above 100, led by big-head himself Barry Bonds, who sported a sparkling 204(!). The only position starters that were below average offensively were the SS, C, and CF (sound familiar?) Now obviously, those are the three least offensively important positions, so the question is, did Dusty have better options that he ignored? In this case, not really. The only significantly below average starter was CF Darren Lewis, and there were no other decent OFs on the team that year except Dave Martinez, who I'm pretty sure wasn't a CF and was below average himself. Add 4 average to above average starters and a 24 year old Rod Beck closing and kicking all kinds of ass, and this is the definition of a Dusty-proof roster.

1997-San Francisco Giants, 90-72

This team was again led by Bonds with an OPS+ of 170. This year the two significantly below average starters were C Rick Wilkins and SS Jose Vizcaino, 51 and 78, respectively. Dusty did have a much better catcher in Brian Johnson available, OPS+ 123, but he and Wilkins basically split time, so that's not a big deal. At SS Dusty had a 25 year old Rich Aurilia, who in 113 PAs put up a 113 OPS+(symmetry anyone?) That looks like a good example of blind veteran favoring we've come to expect from Dusty. But at only one position, combined with another solid rotation and bullpen, and you've got your 90 wins.

2000-S.F. Giants, 97-65

This team was an offensive juggernaut, led by Bonds (188) and 2B Jeff Kent (162). Rich Aurilia had won the starting SS job by this point, and every starter was above average offensively except 3B and CF. There weren't any better options at either position, though, and Marvin Benard in CF was just slightly below average (92). The rotation was once again very solid, and the bullpen had Felix Rodriguez setting up (ERA+ 161) and Rob Nenn closing (284!). Once again, a Dusty proof roster.

2002-S.F Giants, 95-66

This lineup was again led by Bonds, who posted an OPS+ of 268 at the age of 37....yeah, he wasn't on anything. The only significantly below average starter was CF Tsuyoshi Shinjo (78), but other than a 35 year old Kenny Lofton, there wasn't much else to choose from. Once again, the starters were good and the bullpen was great: 8 pitchers had an ERA+ of 120 or higher. Again, Dusty proof.

2003-Chicago Cubs, 88-74

Dusty's first year in Chicago, the year of the Bartman, did not feature an offensive superstar like Bonds, but he did have 6 solid starters led by Corey Patterson................yes, him. (114) The only below average starters were C Damien Miller and SS Alex Gonzalez (the other one, but what is it about light hitting SS named Alex Gonzalez?) Dusty truly didn't have better options, though. His backup C that year was Paul Bako. (Seriously, the more I look at this the more I think Dusty has MAJOR influence over Walt on roster decisions. Look how many former players he brings in. But that's another fanpost) The star of this team was the pitching staff, led by 26 year old Kerry Wood and 22 year olds Carlos Zambrano and Mark Prior. (This is the year that Dusty "ruined" Prior by having him throw 211 innings. But Zambrano threw 214 innings that year at the same age. Lesson? Prior's a mangina) The bullpen was also stellar and stable all year: Dusty proof.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In all of these years, there was only one example of an older player playing over a clearly better younger player (Vizcaino and Aurilia in '97. That was also the Giants' weakest playoff team) Also, in SF Dusty always had Bonds, who in his steroid-infused prime could singlehandedly carry an offense.

Another lesson is that Dusty really does love older players. Of the 5 teams listed above, 30 of the 40 position starters were 29 or older. (18 of them were 32 or older) They were good older players though, not Paul Bako. Also, looking back at these years, I couldn't find any examples of a younger player getting a chance to play over a more established veteran. Not to say there weren't any, I just couldn't find one.

Looking at some of Dusty's crappy teams (Giants from '94-'96, Cubs '05-'06) there are a bunch of examples of younger, promising players (or just a better player, regardless of age) being trapped behind fading veterans. Rich Aurilia was showing promise long before he got his chance in 97-98, but he was trapped behind the always crappy Royce Clayton. For years he had both Matt Williams and Bill Mueller at 3B. Williams was great, but Mueller was very good too, and instead of finding Mueller a place to play, he stayed as Williams backup for years.

In 2005 in Chicago, Patterson was given 481 PAs in the OF, even though he put up an OPS+ of 54! That's as bad as Bonds was good, and he had a young Matt Murton putting up a 132 at the age of 23 in only 160 PAs. (But Murton isn't a CF you argue...good point, but Dusty's LF that year was Todd Hollandsworth, sporting a 77.) That year Neifi Perez (75) stunk it up at SS all year with Nomar Garciaparra (97) and Ronny Cedeno (90) riding the pine.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is an admittedly biased and simplified summary, but it's clear that Dusty shows zero flexibility in his managing. He seemingly assigns his players roles in his head at the outset, and if they fit those roles well, the team succeeds. However, if creativity or out-of-the-box thinking is required to put the best team on the field, Dusty can't handle it. With the team the Reds have, they will never succeed with Dusty as their manager. Perhaps in a year or two when there is a more established starter at every position, but not now. Dusty doesn't necessarily need an all-star caliber lineup to win, but he needs a roster that keeps decision making to a minimum. That certainly doesn't apply to this year's Reds.

Please feel free to point out any gaps in logic or lazy research on my part.

Bereavement: Graveheart, the Update, wherein celebrities die in fives

2009-06-23T15:12:25Z

(Note: A lot has happened since the star of Star Search became a Star Man, but Johnny Carson's favorite drunken Irishman is what I had to start with, so I'll dance with the corpse that brung me. -boobs) Ed McMahon, one of my favorite dudes growing up, passed away, leaving a legacy of placating Johnny Carson, showcasing future stars and lending Chandrathan and nlt-Andrew 39 points. He was 86. Anyone seen any good Star Search YouTube clips?

Despite McMahon's passing, Brian B is still miles ahead of the field with his unique selections of Jack Kemp and Millvina Dean. It's going to take some work to catch up with that. (UPDATED with Farrah Fawcett, Michael Jackson, Karl Malden and Billy Mays deaths.)

1. Brian B: 205 points (Michael Jackson, Jack Kemp, Millvina Dean)
2. boobs' mom: 116 points (Farrah Fawcett, Karl Malden)
3. Cesar Hernandez: 108 points (Michael Jackson, Dom DiMaggio)
4. Petey Hendrix: 103 points (Dom DeLuise, Karl Malden)
5. Brian B's wife: 86 points (Paul Harvey, Karl Malden)
6. RedinWrigleyville: 75 points (Michael Jackson)
7. Chandrathan: 67 points (Ed McMahon, Karl Malden)
8. nlt-Andrew: 39 points (Ed McMahon)
9. Madville: 33 points (Dom DiMaggio)
10. boobs' coworker Steve: 28 points (Karl Malden)
10. Joshuar9476: 28 points (Karl Malden)

3fast 1. Stephen Hawking 2. Margaret Thatcher 3. Billy Graham 4. Amy Winehouse 5. Kirk Douglas 6. Nelson Mandela 7. Stan Musial 8. Ariel Sharon 9. John Wooden 10. Jerry Lewis 11. Dick Clark 12. Ted Kennedy 13. Elizabeth Taylor 14. Betty Ford 15. Robert Mugabe $$ 16. Charlie Watts $$ 17. Fidel Castro 18. Eunice Kennedy Shriver 19. Buzz Aldrin $$ 20. Walter Cronkite	BengalRed 1. Amy Winehouse 2. Fidel Castro 3. George Steinbrenner 4. Art Donovan 5. Bob Feller 6. Hugo Chavez $$ 7. Dick Clark 8. Jimmy Carter 9. Frank Gifford $$ 10. Patrick Swayze 11. Queen Elizabeth $$ 12. Robert Byrd 13. Mickey Rourke $$ 14. John Daly 15. Tony Bennett 16. Keith Richards 17. Nancy Reagan 18. Peter Falk 19. Ted Kennedy 20. Mike Wallace $$	boobs 1. Elizabeth Edwards 2. Ted Kennedy 3. Seve Ballesteros 4. Patrick Swayze 5. Fidel Castro 6. Ariel Sharon 7. John Wooden 8. Muhammad Ali 9. Billy Graham 10. Fyvish Finkel $$ 11. Robert Byrd 12. Soupy Sales $$ 13. Gertrude Baines $$ 14. Zsa Zsa Gabor 15. Lil Wayne $$ 16. Bob Barker 17. Steve Jobs 18. Myles Brand 19. Stephen Hawking 20. Jim Johnson (Eagles) $$	boobs' coworker Brian 1. Andy Rooney 2. Barbara Walters $$ 3. Pete Townshend $$ 4. Roger Daltrey $$ 5. Mick Jagger $$ 6. Ted Kennedy 7. Robert Byrd 8. John McCain $$ 9. John Chaney $$ 10. Dick Cheney 11. Dick Clark 12. Dick Vitale $$ 13. Bill Cosby $$ 14. Hamid Karzai $$ 15. Nouri al-Maliki $$ 16. Pete Rose $$ 17. Jack Nicholson $$ 18. Robert De Niro $$ 19. Nancy Reagan 20. Joan Rivers $$
boobs' coworker steve (formerly boobs' roommate) 1. Elizabeth Edwards 2. John Wooden 3. Ariel Sharon 4. Billy Graham 5. Lee MacPhail 6. Bobby Doerr 7. Susan Atkins 8. Fidel Castro *9. Karl Malden* 10. Margaret Thatcher 11. Robert Byrd 12. Wendy Richard $$ 13. Myles Brand 14. Kirk Douglas 15. Patrick Swayze 16. Bob Novak 17. Steve Jobs 18. Ted Kennedy 19. Seve Ballesteros 20. Dick Dale $$	boobs' mom 1. Patrick Swayze 2. Farah Fawcett $$ 3. Ted Kennedy 4. Nancy Reagan 5. Steve Jobs 6. Eunice Kennedy Shriver 7. Robert Byrd 8. Fidel Castro 9. Dick Clark 10. Kirk Douglas *11. Karl Malden* 12. Phyllis Diller 13. Billy Graham 14. Rose Marie $$ 15. Barbara Billingsley $$ 16. Walter Cronkite 17. Nelson Mandela 18. Shirley Temple Black $$ 19. Betty Ford 20. Jerry Lewis	Brendanukkah 1. Patrick Swayze 2. Steve Jobs 3. Tim Conway $$ 4. Russell Johnson $$ 5. Shia LaBeouf $$ 6. Carol Channing $$ 7. Jeff Conaway 8. Fidel Castro 9. Billy Graham 10. Jake "The Snake" Roberts 11. Gene Wilder $$ 12. Jimmy Carter 13. Henry Kissinger $$ 14. Charles Grodin $$ 15. Mick Mars $$ 16. John "Big Dawg" Thompson $$ 17. Michael J. Fox 18. Ted Kennedy 19. J.D. Salinger 20. C. Everett Koop $$	Brian B *1. Jack Kemp $$* 2. Harry Morgan 3. Ted Kennedy 4. Robert Novak 5. Les Paul 6. Lauren Bacall $$ *7. Millvina Dean $$* 8. John Wooden 9. Elizabeth Edwards 10. Ariel Sharon 11. Steve Smith (running back, Raiders) $$ 12. Orlando Thomas $$ 13. Carl Lindner $$ 14. Michael Jackson 15. Seve Ballesteros 16. Susan Atkins 17. Miep Gies 18. Claude Levi-Strauss 19. Sargent Shriver 20. Ronnie Biggs
Brian B's wife 1. Fidel Castro 2. Robert Novak 3. Ariel Sharon 4. Kirk Douglas *5. Paul Harvey $$* 6. Zsa Zsa Gabor 7. Miep Gies 8. Amy Winehouse *9. Karl Malden* 10. Steve Jobs 11. Patrick Swayze 12. Don Baylor $$ 13. Dick Cheney 14. Ted Kennedy 15. Oscar Niemeyer 16. Claude Levi-Strauss 17. Luise Rainer $$ 18. Art Linkletter 19. Seve Ballesteros 20. Merle Haggard $$	cesarhernandez 1. Patrick Swayze 2. John Wooden 3. Seve Ballesteros 4. Tony Dungy $$ 5. Mean Joe Greene $$ 6. Deacon Jones $$ 7. Marv Levy $$ 8. Bobby Doerr 9. Bob Feller 10. Dom DiMaggio 11. Michael Jackson 12. Jean Stapleton $$ 13. Bob Barker 14. Walter Cronkite 15. Kirk Douglas 16. Billy Graham 18. Zsa Zsa Gabor 19. Myles Brand 20. BB King	Chandrathan 1. Patrick Swayze 2. Artie Lange $$ 3. Andy Rooney 4. Peter Falk 5. George Steinbrenner 6. Jake Lamotta $$ 7. Ted Kennedy 8. J.D. Salinger 9. Steve Jobs 10. Nancy Reagan *11. Ed McMahon* 12. Chyna $$ 13. Fidel Castro 14. Seve Ballesteros 15. Bobby Heenan $$ 16. Jake "The Snake" Roberts 17. Steve-O *18. Karl Malden* 19. Oscar Niemeyer 20. Claude Levi-Strauss	ctnyc 1. Steve Jobs 2. Patrick Swayze 3. Art Linkletter 4. Ariel Sharon 5. Eunice Kennedy Shriver 6. Ted Kennedy 7. Robert Novak 8. Fidel Castro 9. John Wooden 10. Margaret Thatcher 11. George Steinbrenner 12. Seve Ballesteros 13. Andy Griffith $$ 14. Claude Levi-Strauss 15. Billy Graham 16. Jeff Conaway 17. Amy Winehouse 18. Muhammad Ali 19. Zsa Zsa Gabor 20. Les Paul
Joshuar9476 1. Nancy Reagan 2. Rick Majerus $$ 3. Dick Clark 4. Seve Ballesteros 5. Kim Jong Il 6. Tony Bennett 7. Verne Troyer $$ 8. Larry King 9. Peter Falk *10. Karl Malden* 11. Richard Petty $$ 12. Larry Flynt $$ 13. Yogi Berra 14. Steve-O 15. Emperor Akihito of Japan $$ 16. Gary Coleman $$ 17. Mindy McCready 18. Tommy Lasorda $$ 19. Michael J. Fox 20. Art Donovan	Joshuar9476's Wife (ashes) 1. Sacha Baron Cohen $$ 2. George HW Bush 3. Barbara Streisand $$ 4. George Strait $$ 5. Dennis Rodman $$ 6. Sheryl Crow $$ 7. Kat Von D $$ 8. Peter Graves $$ 9. Robin Williams 10. Meryl Streep $$ 11. Sean Connery $$ 12. Ozzie Osbourne $$ 13. Betty White $$ 14. Bob Barker 15. Tony Hawk $$ 16. Hugh Hefner $$ 17. Ray Anthony (Big Band Leader) $$ 18. Elizabeth Edwards 19. Eddie Murphy $$ 20. Clint Eastwood	Justin 1. Bob Dole $$ 2. J.D. Salinger 3. Fidel Castro 4. Jack McKeon $$ 5. Harry Morgan 6. Rod Blagojevich $$ 7. Jimmy Carter 8. Jose Conseco $$ 9. Bob Huggins $$ 10. Pete Van Wieren $$ 11. Bob Gibson $$ 12. Bruce Froemming $$ 13. George Voinovich $$ 14. Elizabeth Edwards 15. Lindsay Lohan $$ 16. Dan Rather $$ 17. Andy Rooney 18. Magic Johnson $$ 19. Peter Gammons $$ 20. Harold Ramis $$	Madville 1. Patrick Swayze 2. Kirk Douglas 3. Eli Wallich $$ 4. Olivia DeHavilland $$ 5. Beverly Cleary $$ 6. Hal Holbrook $$ 7. Jon Forsythe $$ 8. Mary Tyler Moore $$ 9. Bob Feller *10. Dom DiMaggio* 11. Phyllis Diller 12. Lee MacPhail 13. Dick Cheney 14. Whitey Ford $$ 15. Sparky Anderson $$ 16. John Paul Stevens $$ 17. Wolfgang Puck $$ 18. John Dingell $$ 19. Daniel Akaka $$ 20. Robert Byrd
nlt-andrew 1. Steve Jobs 2. Ted Kennedy 3. Elizabeth Edwards 4. Fidel Castro 5. Margret Thatcher 6. Patrick Swayze 7. Ariel Sharon 8. Kim Jong Il *9. Ed McMahon* 10. Sargent Shriver 11. Yitzhak Shamir $$ 12. Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth $$ 13. Seve Ballesteros 14. Robert Byrd 15. Zsa Zsa Gabor 16. Billy Graham 17. Bob Feller 18. Helen Thomas $$ 19. John Wooden 20. Kirk Douglas	Petey Hendrix 1. Fidel Castro 2. Roger Ebert $$ 3. John Madden 4. Billy Graham 5. Patrick Swayze 6. Mindy McCready 7. Sen. Robert Byrd 8. Teddy Kennedy 9. Kirk Douglas *10. Dom DeLouise $$* 11. Ariel Sharon 12. B.B. King *13. Karl Malden* 14. John Wooden 15. James Earl Jones $$ 16. Betty Ford 17. George Steinbrenner 18. O.J. Simpson $$ 19. Myles Brand 20. Steve Jobs	RedinWrigleyville 1. Robert Redford $$ 2. John Wooden 3. Ken Griffey Sr. $$ 4. Margaret Thatcher 5. Larry King 6. George HW Bush 7. Clint Eastwood 8. Al Sharpton $$ 9. Steve Jobs 10. Michael Jackson 11. George Steinbrenner 12. Howie Mandell $$ 13. Bill Murray $$ 14. Barack Obama $$ 15. Bode Miller $$ 16. John Daly 17. Ryan Freel $$ 18. Bernard Madoff $$ 19. Chad Kroeger $$ 20. Carrot Top $$	Red Menace 1. Seve Ballesteros 2. Ron Springs (NFL) $$ 3. Patrick Swayze 4. Ron Santo $$ 5. Louis Farrakhan $$ 6. Sir Bobby Robson $$ 7. Ted Kennedy 8. Robert Novak 9. George Steinbrenner 10. Ronnie Biggs 11. Jack Kevorkian $$ 12. Ariel Sharon 13. Peter Falk 14. Fidel Castro 15. Eunice Kennedy Shriver 16. Stan Musial 17. Billy Graham 18. Kirk Douglas 19. Robert Byrd 20. Steve Jobs
Seattle Slim 1. Robin Williams 2. George HW Bush 3. Johnny Rotten $$ 4. Manuel Noriega $$ 5. Boy George $$ 6. Steve Forbes $$ 7. Ross Perot $$ 8. Keith Richards 9. Sara Jane Moore $$ 10. DMX $$ 11. Wayne Newton $$ 12. Kim Jong Il 13. Dick Van Dyke $$ 14. Robert Byrd 15. Mohammed Ali 16. Pat Robertson $$ 17. Oscar Robertson $$ 18. Ron Jeremy $$ 19. Yogi Berra 20. Dick Clark

$$ -- Unique pick.
Note: Though Wendy Richard died, her obituary did not appear on cnn.com, thus no points were awarded.

A fan's guide to baseball photography

2009-06-22T19:33:47Z

via Red Hot Mama

I'm often asked what equipment I use to photograph baseball games. It's kind of long and complicated to explain in a comment, especially repeatedly, so I thought I'd devote a post to it. There's a lot of info out there on how to photograph sports, but most of it directed toward the pro, not the fan. Consider this a fan's guide to baseball photography.

I'm not going into too much detail about photography terms, full frame vs. crop-frame, how many megapixels, and other photo neepery, because it would take too long, and there's lot of other sites with that kind of information. (But if you have any particular questions, I'll do my best to answer them.)

Gear

The most common question I get is, "What camera do you use?" Actually, the camera doesn't matter that much. It's the glass (the shutterbug's term for lenses) that makes the difference. Smart photographers on a budget will save money on the camera, and spend the big bucks on a lens. Camera snobs may laugh at you for having a pricey professional "L" lens on a consumer Digital Rebel, but those with more brains than money will totally understand.

I use Canon digital SLRs, because Canon lenses are the best for sports. Nikon may catch up eventually, but for now, no one can touch Canon for sports. Almost all the pros you see on the sidelines of pro baseball and football games are using Canon gear.

I have two camera bodies: the Canon Digital Rebel XTi, and the Canon 40D. They are both not the newest models in their respective lines, and hence much cheaper. The 40D was bought used.

The Digital Rebels in general give you great bang for your buck. Though they are aimed at non-professionals, they accept pro lenses. They have just about all the features you could want, for a fraction of the cost of a pro camera.

The Canon 40D is sort of a prosumer camera, I guess. It's heavier and more durable than the Rebels, with more metal and less plastic. (This is not necessarily an advantage. Lighter is better if you're going to be hiking all day with it hanging around your neck.) I like it because it can do 6.5 frames per second (as compared to 3 fps for the Rebel). Pro cameras can do 10 fps, but you can expect to pay $3,000 or more for one of those.

Now comes the hard part: what lens? The ideal sports lens would be fast (have a large aperture), with a good zoom range, and have strong telephoto power. Unfortunately, a lens that has all that would cost as much as a car, and weigh as much, too. Compromises must be made.

I chose to sacrifice zoom power. Like many pro sports photographers, I use mostly fixed lenses at the ballpark. Fixed lenses are sharper than zoom lenses, as well as lighter and cheaper (compared to zoom lenses of similar focal length, aperture, and quality).

The drawback, of course, is that you must "zoom with your feet" - move closer or further away from the subject if it doesn't fit in the viewfinder. Alternately, you can crop your photos later, using Photoshop or something similar. This works fine for images you plan to post on the web or make normal prints from, but you probably don't want to crop a photo too much if you're planning to make it into a large poster or mural.

And you won't be able to photograph the entire field or stadium with a 300mm fixed lens (or most telephoto zoom lenses, either). You need a wide-angle lens for that. You can bring one, or you can tuck a point-and-shoot camera in your pocket for situations where your fixed lens doesn't cut it.

One advantage zoom lenses have is that it's easier to find your subject. If you can frame the entire outfield, then zoom in on Jay Bruce sprinting to make a catch...that's a lot easier than trying to track a speeding outfielder with a fixed telephoto lens. When you first start, you'll find yourself frequently lost in the outfield, focusing mostly on grass. A little practice, and you'll be fine.

What I won't sacrifice is speed. I like fast lenses; that's what lets you freeze the action. I don't like using any lens slower than f/2.8 for sports. But f/4 is lighter and more affordable, and fine for bright daylight. It will be noticeably slow for night games. Rather than using sports mode, put the camera in aperture-priority mode, set the aperture wide open, and crank up the ISO. The images will be a bit grainy, but not as blurry.

Some comments on specific lenses...

The classic sport photographer's lens is the 400mm f/2.8. That may be lens Mr, Dunn is using above. (Though it could be the 500mm f/4.) It's a great lens, but too large (not to mention expensive) for the average fan. It's too heavy to use without a tripod or monopod, and it's so long it's likely to annoy your neighbors if you use it in the stands.

The 300mm f/2.8 is a more reasonable choice for a fan. It costs half as much as the 400mm f/2.8, and weighs half as much, too. It's still heavy enough that you need a monopod, and still wicked expensive. For spring training and minor league games, using this lens with a monopod usually isn't a problem. They won't allow monopods at Yankee Stadium (and probably many other major league parks).

The 200mm f/2 is a relatively new lens, and it is excellent. The f/2 means it's very fast, and thus a great choice for night games or indoor games. With a 1.4 extender, it becomes roughly equivalent to the 300mm f/2.8. (You gain some focal length but lose some speed with an extender.) This lens is smaller than the 300mm f/2.8, but just as heavy. You will still need a monopod to photograph a 3-hour baseball game.

The 200mm f/2.8 is something of a forgotten lens, but it's probably the one I use most often. It's not as fast as the 200mm f/2, not as long as the 300mm f/2.8, and it doesn't have image stabilization. But it's relatively light and cheap. You can use this lens without a monopod, making it an excellent choice for major league games.

If you'd rather have a zoom lens (and they are more versatile), here are a few:

70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (3.2 lbs) - The favorite general purpose lens of many a pro, but a little too heavy to use handheld for a 3-hour baseball game.

70-200mm f/2.8L USM (2.9 lbs) - The same as the above lens, only without image stabilization. That saves you some weight, and a few hundred bucks.

EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM (1.7 lbs) - Not fast as the f/2.8s, but much lighter and cheaper.

EF 70-200mm f/4L USM (1.6 lbs) - The same as the above, only without image stabilization. Light enough to hand-hold, and much cheaper than the IS version. Good general-purpose lens.

EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (1.8 lbs) - I see a lot of fans using this lens at the ballpark. It's got a lot of zoom range, and is relatively cheap and not too heavy. However, it's a little too slow for my taste, and the image quality isn't as good.

Do I actually own all these lenses? No. I'm not made of money. But I've used most of them. Your local camera store will let you try lenses. You can also rent them, from a local store or on the Internet. Some I've borrowed from friends, and some I've bought, used for awhile, then sold. (The good thing about Canon lenses is that they hold their value well. You'll be able to get almost what you paid for them if you decide to sell them, as long as they're in good condition and you have the original packaging. The bad thing is that buying used doesn't really save you a lot of money.)

There are also lenses made for Canon cameras made by third parties, like Sigma and Tamron. I'm afraid I don't know much about those. They are cheaper, and might be worth a look.

Ballpark hazards

Stadium security: Minor league parks generally treat fans very well, and won't bother you much about what you bring in. They're starting to crack down at spring training, and they can be real Nazis at major league parks. If you want to avoid any hassle, make sure your camera bag is soft-sided and no larger than 16"x8"x8". As mentioned above, minor league and spring training games usually don't mind if you have a monopod, but major league parks often do. Occasionally they'll get on your case just because they think your lens is too long. Offering to move somewhere out of the way will usually appease them.

The net: The netting that protects the people behind home plate from foul balls can be a pain to a photographer. If you're far enough away from it, it will be visible in your photos, but won't bother your autofocus too much (the netting and the players will both be in focus). If you're sitting very close to the net, you can usually set your camera or lens so the autofocus ignores the net, because it's too close. But if you're in the scout seats or thereabouts, your camera will focus on the net, leaving the players blurry.

The solution is to focus manually. One pro sports photographer taught himself to quickly focus manually by going out to a nearby highway and practicing by focusing on the cars speeding by at 70 mph. That's probably a bit much for the average fan, but you can use your knowledge of the game to your advantage, by focusing in advance where you expect the action to be.

Weather: Be prepared for rain, even if the forecast doesn't call for it. Bring a clean garbage bag you can use to protect your camera from rain, or, better yet, buy a rain cover.

Tips

Where to sit: It depends on what kind of photos you want. Action photos are often best taken from higher up in the stands. Those seats are usually less crowded, too, so you have more room to swing a lens.

If you want portrait-type photos of the players, you need to be in the box seats. Any higher, and their faces will be shaded by their hats. Right above the dugout, midway between home plate and first or third base is pretty good. You'll get good shots of the players as they enter the dugout, or look toward the coaches. Sitting in the fourth or fifth row is better than sitting in the front row. Being a little above the field gives you a better view.

A lot of the most desirable seats in the park aren't that great for photographers. The premium seats behind home plate offer a great angle to photograph the pitchers, but mostly I try to avoid sitting behind the plate. You only see the backs of the batters, and the players and umpires often block your line of sight to plays at the plate or at first base. And of course, there's the darn net.

Sitting in the box seats by first or third base has similar problems. The umpire or first or third base coach often blocks your view of the action. And the players usually have their backs turned to you, since they're looking in toward the batter or pitcher. Pictures of people's backs aren't terribly compelling.

Of course the ideal situation is to be able to move around the park and photograph the game from different angles. I often do this late in the game, after people start leaving.

Lighting: Bright light is better for freezing action, but overcast days or late afternoon light are better for portraits of the players. Midday sun is too harsh and contrasty. Sunny day games are great times to photograph the ballpark, though. With the sun directly overhead, you'll avoid the shadows on the field you get later in the day.

My top tip: Work with what you've got. If you can't afford pricey camera gear, use what you have. Get down to the box seats so you're close enough, or take pictures during quieter moments during the game. Maybe you can't freeze a 94mph fastball in flight, but you can still take interesting photos. Some seats are better than others, but there's usually something you can photograph from any seat. If you get stuck out in the outfield bleachers, photograph the outfielders.

This photo of Ray Olmedo fielding the game-ending grounder is one of my favorites. I was behind the plate for the game, which was pretty lousy. My view of home plate and 1B was blocked, and I was tired of taking pictures of the pitcher, so I focused on 2B. Which is where it was hit.

And I love the photo of oranges and the stadium lights Daedalus posted here. Really captures the essence of Florida spring training.

Calling Kash...or boobs

2009-06-22T19:05:53Z

I have, at times, called for for the removal of Red's manager Dusty Baker. Although I'm frustrated by Dusty I've become more frustrated by the tactical mentality of MLB managers/management in general. The general baseball consensus on how teams should be organized, players utilized and monies spent is grindingly unimaginative and relies on the following premise: Create your team by determining the player roles and then sign or develop players to fill those roles. I believe that there is a consensus among most MLB baseball 'people' that management comes to agreement on the roles for their team and then proceeds to fill those roles with the best affordable players available. The expectation is that if those players perform their roles well enough - the team will contend.

This approach results in manager's trying to squeeze players into roles that they often aren't very good at performing, For example CF's are fast and make good lead off hitters, SS's are contact hitters who can 'move the runner over, good #2 slot guys - or you need to have a utility guy on your bench as the 'last resort' player and that guy is always the same guy - e,g, Paul Jannish or your best RH bat on the bench is your extra OF and he'll PH eve if he's not a good pinch hitter, no matter if there's a better option - e.g. Jonny Gomes and Micah Owings.

The converse approach would be to look at the specifics of each player's abilities and build the team around player's strengths. This approach makes sense for smaller market/lower payroll teams. It especially makes sense with a team like the reds who have a fair amount of exciting prospects and have guys who are able to to be flexible in their roles.

The Reds appear not to recognize that there is more than one way to skin a cat, Even Chris Welsh has defended Dusty's use of Wily Taveris as recently as this week, stating: (my paraphrase) "You have to stick with Taveris and let him work through this slump. He is the team's Center Fielder and you go with him, that's why he was brought over here to play center field and be your lead off hitter". Then yesterday (after I'd been thinking Doc Rogers was starting to see the light) I heard Doc say (my paraphrase)"The loss of Alex Gonzales is a tremendous one as he is one of the finest shortstops in the majors. Because he's been injured I forgot how incredible of a defensive shortstop he is and he's a good contact hitter and is exactly what the Red's need to bat 2nd in the order".

Why not abandon this archaic approach and change it around a bit? Sparky Anderson was only 36 years old he took the helm of the Reds and by the time the BRM was winning back to back WS he had instituted some pretty innovative tactics. He gained the nickname 'Captain Hook' because he didn't wait around until the 7th or 8th inning to replace a pitcher who was struggling on a given day. The 'role' of a starting pitcher wa to go out and pitch until the 7 or 8th even if they were getting hit pretty badly or more importantly they were expected pitch to players who were poor match ups...the manager would leave a pitcher in to face a hitter who 'owned him' or was on a hot streak (etc) and then after the batter beat the pitcher the manager would remove the pitcher. Not Sparky he didn't wait around he was afraid to use his bull pen extensively and successfully. He also moved players around position to position, Tony Perez from 3rd to 1st to keep his bat in the line up, Rose from LF to 3b to get Foster into the line up. He had a fairly set batting order but would not hesitate to adjust it to the pitcher of the day. By the time 1976 rolled around Sparky was only 42 and had 6 years of MLB management experience and had won back to back WS. Certainly the Red were a very talented team but it was how Sparky utilized the talent that made it work, esp, the again the bullpen. So maybe we need some younger managers in this game.

The average age of a MLB manager is 54.2 years old. From my viewpoint that's actually not very old. From a corporate or business point of view age 55 is prime time. From an academic, artistic or professional(Dr. Lawyer, Architect, Indian Chief) 50's to 60's are about the prime ages when folks are just hitting their stride. This doesn't seem to be the case in baseball. by the time the average manager is 55 hie is so myopic and unimaginative that the only thing that saves his team from a losing malaise is the amount of sheer talent on it. I think that the Reds need a young and fresh manager,By fresh I mean one who understands the accepted approach to managing but also has the creativity and courage to get of of the box and play to the player's strengths and not be so rigidly consumed with roles. who knows in this scenario Paul Jannish might even get a chance to play.

Poll

who would you hire as 2010 Red's manager?

Come see me catch the first pitch on July 1st.

2009-06-22T17:30:03Z

As I eluded to in a game thread last week, me and my family will be responsible for throwing out the first pitch for the Wednesday July 1st Reds game. My brother in law won a drawing and was going to have his son throw out the first pitch, but as luck would have it, his ex-wife is taking their children to Florida and leaving that day (to be fair the flights were purchased before the winning.) So Jereme offered them up to me to have Trey throw out the pitch to me. Unfortunately I fear that Trey's throw would be more errant than Malory's so Jereme will visit the mound with my wife and son to toss it to me.

Our seats are somewhere in the middle of the lower first base section, so that is where we will be.. If anyone would like to come on out to that game and hang out, let me know so I can be looking for you. If someone wants to photograph or video it, I would be most greatful. July is going to be an awesome month! First pitch, 9 days of vacation, hot pass at the Kentucky Truck Race. I'm pretty excited!