No-hitters, Sweet Swings, Bad Champs

OK, today we’re just goofing around (as compared to other blog days when we were solving the world’s problems). Nothing but offbeat and fun stuff that couldn’t possibly interest anybody but me today. We’ll begin with no-hitters. Bill James was kind enough to send along a formula that allows someone to figure out (using innings pitched, hits and games started) how many no-hitters a pitcher might have been expected to throw in his career. The Top 6 shouldn’t surprise anybody:

1. Nolan Ryan, 2.72
2. Randy Johnson, 1.23
3. Walter Johnson, 1.16
4. Tom Seaver, 1.13
5. Roger Clemens, 1.07
6. Pedro Martinez, 1.05

Those are the only six who actually scored above 1.0 – meaning the only six who were expected to throw at least one no-hitter (Sandy Koufax was next in line, in case you are wondering). Of the six – or even seven if you want to include Koufax – they threw a total of 15 no-hitters, and only Clemens and Martinez have not thrown one so far.

That’s interesting. But then I decided to tweak the formula a little bit because, frankly, I’m stupid. Please don’t tell Bill. I wondered which starters in baseball history (since 1900) were most likely to throw no-hitters on any given day. For instance, J.R. Richard is not on the big list because his career wasn’t long enough. But you know that on any given day, J.R. Richard would be about as likely as anybody to throw the no-no.

Anyway, here are, best I can tell, the 25 pitchers who would be most likely to throw a no-hitter (minimum 1,000 innings pitched):

25. Jim Maloney
No hit quotient: 258
Did he throw a no-hitter? You bet. Threw two of them, in fact.

On August 19, 1965 Maloney no hit the Cubbies for 10 innings. He struck out 12 in that game, but he also walked 10 – how many pitches do you think he threw? Heck, just between the walks and strikeouts he threw a minimum of 76 pitches. He even walked the Cubs pitcher, Larry Jackson … twice. I’ll bet that’s the only no-hitter in history where the no-hit guy walked the opposing pitcher twice. This is one of the more remarkable games in baseball history. It might be a blog item all to itself.

Almost four years later, on April 30, 1969, Maloney no-hit Houston. And in that game he struck out 13 but cut his walks in half – to five. In addition to those no-nos, Maloney threw FIVE one-hitters. It’s amazing, Maloney made 262 starts and in seven of them he threw either a complete game one-hitter or no-hitter. I’m not sure anyone in baseball history can top that percentage.

24. Jose DeLeon
No hit quotient: 259
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? Oh man did he ever.

For a while there, DeLeon was threatening to throw a no-hitter just about every time out. In his second Major League start against the Padres, he took a no-hitter into the seventh (broken up by Alan Wiggins). Four days later, in his third start, he took a no-hitter against the Mets into the ninth – finally surrendering his only hit to Hubie Brooks. Less than a month later, he threw a two-hitter against the Reds, taking that no-hitter into the seventh (Dan Driessen did the honors).

The next year, he threw a one-hitter against the Reds and again took the no-hit bid to the seventh (Dave Parker broke it up – the Reds scored two unearned runs and won that game). In 1989 (again, against those darned Reds – now DeLeon was pitching for the Cards) he threw ELEVEN INNINGS of 1-hit ball, though the one hit did come fairly early (Luis Quinones singled in the fourth inning and was quickly erased on a double play). There were other pretty close calls as well. I’m glad to see him on the list.

23. Cy Morgan
No hit quotient: 266
Did he throw a no-hitter? No
Did he have any close calls? No idea.

Deadball era spitball pitcher still has the A’s record for fewest hits per inning allowed in a season (6.26) and career (6.86). Cy seems like he was probably a pretty interesting case – he walked batters, hit batters (he twice led the league) and gave up an inordinate number of home runs for that era. But nobody hit him much.

22. Jack Pfiester
No-hit quotient: 270
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? Probably, yeah.

Another Deadball era pitcher, they called Pfiester “Jack the Giant Killer,” either because he owned the New York Giants or because he had some sort of wrestling career that does not come up in Internet searches (he went 15-5 against the Giants, so there). In his rookie year he went 20-8 with a 1.51 ERA, which is impressive though it probably sounds more impressive than it really is (his ERA+ of 174 was lower than, say, Jake Peavy in 2004). He had a career 2.02 ERA, though he only managed 128 starts before throwing out his arm.

21. Johan Santana
No-hit quotient: 272
Did he throw a no-hitter? Not yet.

Santana does not have a two-hitter or one-hitter in his career yet, and in both of his three-hitters the suspense was ended early (he three-hit the Royals in 2004, but Desi Relaford led off that game with a single; he three-hit Oakland in 2005, but Dan Johnson got one of those hits in the second inning).

The thing is, Santana only has five complete games in his career so far, and one of the requirements of throwing a no-hitter (at least in my book) is going nine innings – I don’t buy those combined no-hitters. So pitch counts could hold him back.

20. Addie Joss
No-hit quotient: 275
Did he throw a no-hitter? Two of them.

They say that Addie Joss threw 74 pitches in his perfect game against Chicago. So, seriously, were the White Sox even trying? Seventy-four pitches? Joss struck out three that game, so that’s at least nine pitches there. That means the other 24 went down on 65 pitches – fewer than three pitches per at-bat. Hey, wouldn’t you at least TRY to make him throw a few strikes?

I love this description of that game, which Cleveland won 1-0 (opposing pitcher Ed Walsh gave up, four hits, one run and struck out 15): “A mouse working his way across the grandstand floor would have sounded like a shovel scraping over concrete.” Now that’s quiet. I guess.

Joss really was amazing. Sure, it was the Deadball era, but he threw the two no-hitters and seven one-hitters. He died at 31 of tubercular meningitis. He had a career ERA of 1.89.

19. Mario Soto
No-hit quotient: 285
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? Yep, as close as you can get.

On May 12, 1984, Mario Soto had the no-hit nightmare. He took a no-hitter into the ninth inning and had a 1-0 lead. Wow, he was good that day. He had 12 strikeouts. His amazing change-up – one of the best in baseball history – was blowing away the St. Louis Cardinals. He got Ozzie Smith to ground out leading off the ninth. He got Lonnie Smith to hit an infield pop-out.

Then with two outs he faced George Hendrick, who was hitting .227 on the season. And you know what happened – Hendrick bashed a home run to: ruin the no-hitter; spoil the shutout and tie the game. The Reds did win the game in the bottom of the ninth, but Soto never did pitch a no-hitter though he was one of the more unhittable pitchers in baseball history (he had 10 complete games where he allowed three hits or less).

18. Dave Boswell
No-hit quotient: 286
Did he throw a no-hitter? No
Did he have any close calls? Yes.

It’s sort of sad that Dave Boswell is really remembered (if he is remembered at all) for being the guy Billy Martin punched out and sent to the hospital in 1969. He caused one of the last big-time bidding wars before the amateur draft, and he was up in the big leagues briefly at 19. He won 20 games when he was 24 years old and pitched brilliantly in the ALCS. And like that, he was completely done. In 1969, Martin wasn’t the only guy to hit Boswell. He went 3-7 with a 6.42 ERA.

Still before that he was remarkably unhittable, and on July 30, 1966 he tossed a one-hitter against Baltimore. That Orioles lineup had three Hall of Famers in it (Luis Aparicio, Brooks Robinson, Frank Robinson) along with Boog Powell and Davey Johnson. But it was Russ Snyder who broke up the no-hitter in the seventh with a single. That same year, he took a no-hitter into the seventh against Cleveland (Rocky Colavito ended it).

17. Jeff Tesreau
No-hit quotient: 289
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? I’m sure he did.

These Deadball era pitchers are kind of screwing up the fun because there’s no easy way for me to look up their game logs. Tesreau only pitched seven years but three times he led the league in fewest hits allowed per nine innings.

16. Ed Reulbach
No-hit quotient: 290
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? How am I supposed to know?

Great, another Deadball pitcher. Reulbach, though, is worth mentioning because on Sept. 26, 1908, he threw two shutouts in a doubleheader. Wouldn’t it be great if a manager did that in modern times. “Hey Ace, you didn’t really throw too many pitches in that first shutout, so how about you go out there and at least start the second game?” There are really only two problems. One there are no more double-headers. And two, nobody throws shutouts anymore. Also, managers probably don’t call pitchers “Ace.”

15. Orval Overall
No-hit quotient: 292
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? Don’t know.

You know, I might have started this search AFTER the Deadball era. Overall, Overall was a good pitcher. I just wanted to do that Overall Overall thing. He struck out four batters in an inning in the World Series. He twice led the league in shutouts.

You know, it’s semi-interesting that all of these dominant Deadball pitchers didn’t throw more no-hitters. I count 44 no-hitters thrown between 1900 and 1920. That’s a little more than two per year.

But over the last 20 years – with the offensive explosion and everything – there have been 40 no-hitters. Two per year. Don’t you think that’s weird? I realize that there are many more games being played now, many more teams, many more chances for pitchers these days and all that. But still … it seems to me that you would have had more no-hitters back in those Deadball days.

14. Bob Turley
No-hit quotient: 300
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? Yes.

He never threw a no-hitter, but in the song “St. Louis Browns” he’s called a “no-hit pitcher.” … I wonder why he was “Bullet Bob” and Bob Feller was “Rapid Robert.” I mean there has to be a reason for that … Turley led the league in strikeouts in 1954, and in hits allowed per nine innings pitched four times. I’m sure he had some close calls before 1957, but that’s as far back as Baseball-Reference’s Play Index goes. From 1957 on, he had three one-hitters:

The first was against the Yankees in 1958 – Hank Bauer led off with a single, he was erased on a double play and nobody else managed a hit.

The second was against Washington in 1959, and he took the no-hitter into the ninth. It was broken up by Julio Becquer, who couldn’t hit much (he too was erased on a double play).

The third was against the White Sox in 1963 (he was pitching for the Angels then) and he took his no-hit bit into the sixth. Pete Ward, a talented rookie, singled.

13. Babe Ruth
No-hit quotient: 301
Did he throw a no-hitter? No
Did he have any close calls? Sort of.

Ruth famously did start a no-hit game on June 23, 1917 – hey, we’re coming up on the 90th anniversary of that day. Ruth walked the leadoff batter Ray Morgan and was ejected for arguing with umpire Brick Owens. According to several reports, the Babe actually hit Brick Owens. I wonder if this is where the expression “hit the bricks” came from.

Anyway, Ernie Shore took over. Morgan was thrown out stealing, Shore retired the next 26 batters in a row.

Interlude: I wonder how many pitches Ernie Shore got to throw before he came into the game. If an umpire throws out a pitcher, does the reliever get an “unlimited number of pitches?” I've always been told that if a pitcher gets hurt, the reliever gets an unlimited number of pitches. Is it the same thing?

I have a whole other question about “unlimited pitches” anyway. On Wednesday, Royals pitcher Brandon Duckworth got hurt during the game. So reliever Joel Peralta came in and on the scoreboard (in the press box too) it was announced that Peralta would be given an unlimited number of pitches. At the time, the Royals were down 6-0 – so my question is could Peralta have literally stayed out there and thrown warm-up pitches forever? I mean, could he have tried to filibuster the game by just throwing warm-up pitches until past midnight, until 10 a.m. the next day, until the umpires would have had no choice but to call the game?

And what if it’s about to rain and your team is down by 10 runs? Could your starter get “hurt,” have a reliever come in, throw his “unlimited number of pitches” until the rain pours and the game is canceled? I’m just not sure “unlimited number of pitches” is a good phrase. (OK, I just looked in the rulebook – that’s not the phrase used in there. The rule actually states that a pitcher will be given “as many pitches as the umpire deems necessary.” So that’s not unlimited)

12. Randy Johnson
No-hit quotient: 310
Did he throw a no-hitter? Yes. Two of them.

In addition to the no-hitters he threw in 1990 (against Detroit) and 2004 (against Atlanta), he also has four one-hitters. He took a no-hitter into the ninth against Oakland in 1991 (Mike Gallego hit the single with nobody out), he took ANOTHER one into the ninth against Oakland in 1993 (Lance Blankenship broke it up with nobody out – a bloop, if I recall correctly), and he took one into the eighth against Minnesota in 1998.

The formula has him 12th, but honestly if told that my life was on the line, and the pitcher of my choice needed to throw a no-hitter -- Randy Johnson would be on my very short list. I really don't think this scenario will come up anytime soon, though. I certainly hope not.

11. Joe Wood
No-hit quotient: 315
Did he throw a no hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? Yes … he threw a no-hitter in 1908 for Kansas City in the Western Association.

Joe Wood only started 158 games in his brilliant and short career, and he was injured for many of the last 40 or so. If he could have stayed healthy and gotten, say, 500 starts, he figured to be a no-hit lock.

10. Ed Walsh
No-hit quotient: 315
Did he throw a no-hitter? Yes.

He threw a no-hitter against Boston in 1911, and he was one walk away from a perfect game. He likely had numerous other close calls because he was always among the league leaders in hits per nine-inning pitched even though he threw as many as 464 innings in a season.

Big Ed’s pitch was the spitball, and I love that pitchers back then had no shame at all about spitting on the ball. I’m just trying to imagine Tim McCarver today saying something like, “Well, Ed throws a fastball, a curve, but his money pitch is the spitball. Nobody can spit on them like Big Ed.” I’m wondering how someone found out they had a good spitball. I mean did everyone back then spit on the ball just to see how effective their spitter might be?

9. Sam McDowell
No-hit quotient: 338
Did he throw a no-hitter? No
Did he have any close calls? He threw four one-hitters, but surprisingly: No.

Of McDowell’s four one-hitters (three against the Athletics), he gave up the hit in the third inning, fourth inning twice and sixth inning. Sudden Sam did have an amazing THIRTY complete games where he allowed three hits or less. It’s flat ridiculous that he never threw a no-hitter.

8. Hoyt Wilhelm
No-hit quotient: 342
Did he throw a no-hitter? Yes

Wilhelm is remarkable. He didn’t make it to the big leagues until he was 29 years old, and yet he’s one of the most unhittable pitchers in baseball history. But of course he was unhittable almost exclusively out of the bullpen – he only made 52 starts in his 21-year career,

Fifty two starts, as it turns out, was enough. On Sept. 20, 1958 against the Yankees he threw a flutterball no-hitter. Three Hall of Famers hit for the Yankees that day (Mickey Mantle, Yogi Berra, Enos Slaughter), not to mention outstanding players like Hank Bauer, Moose Skowron, Elston Howard and Bobby Richardson. Funny, that Yankees team – which led the American League in every conceivable offensive category – was no-hit by Wilhelm and was almost no-hit by Bob Turley.

In 1959, Wilhelm had a remarkable year as a starter. He went 15-11 with a 2.19 ERA and was tops in ERA+, second in WHIP, third in hits allowed per nine innings. That was the only year in his career he made most of his appearances as a starter.

7. Kerry Wood
No-hit quotient: 352
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? Yes.

Was Kerry Wood on May 6, 1998 the most dominant pitcher in baseball history? You could certainly make the argument. That was the day he threw the complete game shutout, didn’t walk anybody, struck out 20 and allowed the one infield hit. That hit belongs to Ricky Gutierrez, incidentally.

Probably the five most dominant pitching performances ever are:
1. Kerry Wood, May 6, 1998: 1 hit, 0 walks, 20 Ks.
2. Nolan Ryan, May 1, 1991: 0 hits, 2 walks, 17 Ks.
3. Curt Schilling, April 7, 2002: 1 hit, 2 walks, 17 Ks.
4. Nolan Ryan, July 9, 1972: 1 hits, 1 walk, 16 Ks.
5. Sandy Koufax, Sept. 9, 1965: 0 hits, 0 walks, 14 Ks

6. Andy Messersmith
No hit quotient: 363
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? Yes.

OK, yeah, I’m surprised to see him up here too. But he was often unhittable – three times he led the league in hits per nine innings pitched. And he had his no-hit shot on June 4, 1976 against Montreal. He took the no-hitter into the ninth, got one out and then gave up the hit to the unforgettable Pepe Mangual. Sigh.

5. J.R. Richard
No-hit quotient: 381
Did he throw a no-hitter: No
Did he have any close calls? Close enough.

He threw a one-hitter against the Dodgers in 1980 (Reggie Smith with that hit) and he threw five two-hitters. For four years – 1976-1979 – Richard was by far the hardest pitcher to hit in the National League. He also led the league in strikeouts two of those years. He was an awful lot like Nolan Ryan (he walked a lot of guys too) and he undoubtedly lost a no-hitter or two when his career was cut short because of the stroke.

4. Sid Fernandez
No-hit quotient: 388
Did he throw a no-hitter? No.
Did he have any close calls? You betcha.

I am so happy to see El Sid up here, because it seems like when I was young he was ALWAYS threatening to throw a no-hitter. Sixteen times in his career, he pitched seven innings or more and gave up two hits or less. I don’t have any pure examples – that is of games that he went into the eighth inning with a no-no – and this blog item is getting too long anyway. But he was always a threat.

I’ve also thought that Sid Fernandez could have been the greatest closer in baseball history. He would simply blow people away early in games. In fact, from innings 1 to 3 in his career, batters hit .192 against him with a .323 slugging percentage. And that includes the later, fatter, injured El Sid.

OK, we’ll do one more bit of math. From 1984 through 1992 – that’s the year Sid turned 30 – he allowed league batters to hit .183 against him in the first three innings, and they slugged .297. Yeah -- .297. He gave up 444 hits in 697 innings and struck out 729. I’m telling you – he could have been the greatest three-inning closer in modern baseball history. He could have CHANGED baseball history.

If you’re curious (and I can’t believe you are), Sid was really good in first innings (.198 BA against) but his dominant inning was the third. In those years, batters hit just .168 with a .258 SLG. I realize this is because he faced the bottom third of the order so often in the third, but that should also tell you how dominant he was in the first and second inning that he was facing the bottom of the order in the third so often.

3. Pedro Martinez
No-hit quotient: 390
Did he throw a no-hitter? Yes, sort of.
Did he have any close calls? Yes.

It’s easy to confuse Pedro’s amazing games. He threw a one-hitter against the Reds in 1997, but that was the game when Bret Boone got the only single in the fifth inning. He threw the nine-inning perfect game against San Diego in 1995, but in the 10th inning he gave up a double to Bip Roberts (the Bipper!) and so that one isn’t in the record books as a no-hitter.

There was the game in 1994 when he had a perfect game going into the eighth inning, then plunked Reggie Sanders who – and I know he regrets it to this day – charged the mound. I say Reggie regrets it, but that was the year when they called Pedro “Senor Plunk” and though I’ve never asked him (I should) I’ll bet Reggie still believes Pedro hit him on purpose even with a perfect game going.

There was the Yankees game in 1999 when he gave up one hit in the second inning (a homer to Chili Davis) and retired the next 23 in a row – 15 of them by strikeout. You could certainly say there haven’t been many pitchers more dominant than he was that day.

There was the no-hitter he took into the ninth against Tampa Bay in 2000 – he finally gave up a single to John Flaherty (he actually led off that game by hitting Gerald Williams and then he retired 24 in a row).

There was the eight innings, one hit game he threw in KC – the one hit was by Mike Sweeney and it came right after a Boston error that should have ended an inning. I was there that night – and I cannot remember a Major League pitcher toying with a team quite the way Pedro did that night.

We don’t have nearly enough time to go into Pedro’s two hitters.

2. Sandy Koufax
No-hit quotient: 408
Did he throw a no-hitter? Four of them.

The no-hit quotient shows you how likely a pitcher was to throw a no-hitter, with 100 being exactly average (1000+ innings). So Koufax is one of only two pitchers who was four-times more likely than the average pitcher to throw a no-hitter.

But how about Koufax from 1962-66 – the years he threw his four no-hitters? Well, in those five years, he scores a 612 no-hit quotient – he was SIX times more likely to throw a no-hitter. But here’s what’s even more amazing – because he made 176 starts during that time, you could not say he was “expected” to throw a no-hitter.

Basically, if you are as good as Koufax was in those five years, it would still take 228 starts for a pitcher to score a 1.0 on the Bill James no-hit expectation formula. That’s how hard it is to throw a no-hitter.

1. Nolan Ryan
No-hit quotient: 489
Did he throw a no-hitter? How about seven of them?

Yes, he threw the seven no-hitters. He threw an absolutely ridiculous 12 one-hitters. And what the heck, he threw 18 two-hitters. He was, inarguably, the most unhittable pitcher Major League Baseball has ever seen.

So that’s why, we will finish this off not by talking about his no-hitters, but talking instead about Sept. 23, 1973. That was Nolan Ryan in his heat-throwing prime. He won 21 games that year, threw two no-hitters, and struck out 383, which remains a modern-day record (one more than Koufax in 1965).

So what happened on Sept. 13? Ryan faced the Minnesota Twins, a nondescript team except – that team could hit. They led the league in hitting that season. Ryan’s Angels scored five runs in the first Ryan responded by getting the Twins out in order in the first inning and again in the second. He retired without giving up a hit in the third, and then allowed a single to Rod Carew in the fourth – no shame there.

No hits for the Twins in the fifth. So Ryan’s got a one-hitter going. In the sixth, the Twins trailed 11-0. Steve Brye single, followed by Carew’s single. Jim Holt singled later, the Twins scored two runs. You know this is obviously leading somewhere.
Two more hits for the Twins in the seventh including Carew’s third. That’s six for Minnesota. Another hit in the eighth. That makes seven hits. And then came the ninth.

Jerry Terrell singled. Dan Monzon walked. Then Glenn Borgmann singled, Steve Brye singled, Rod Carew doubled (his fourth hit of the day), Tony Oliva singled. You’ve got to be kidding me. You think Nolan Ryan was spent then? But they didn’t pull out pitchers in 1973 – certainly not Nolan Ryan. He got a strikeout, gave up a hit to Jim Holt, got another strikeout and ended the game when Jerry Terrell flew out. That’s 13 hits – the most Nolan Ryan ever gave up in a single game.

He was worse one other time, though, against the Orioles in 1978 when he gave up 12 hits in only 5 1/3 innings.

WHEW I thought that entry was going to be shorter and a lot easier. Why did I go with the Top 25? I could have just as easily done the Top 10. You wouldn’t have minded, right? Anyway, the rest of the blog will be a lot shorter.

Here are (according to an unscientific poll of friend) the five sweetest swings in baseball history:

1. Will Clark
-- This list was inspired by seeing Will Clark at the Royals-Cardinals game on Wednesday. You know how when you see an old hero you are supposed to think, “Wow, he could still play.” Well, I can’t say that thought crossed my mind seeing Will with his son, but I did immediately think of that awesome swing Will Clark had. It’s the best I ever saw. If I could have anything in history, well, maybe I should take Bill Gates money or Aristotle’s brain or something like that. But I would probable take:

-- Roberto Clemente’s throwing arm.
-- Ernie Els’ golf swing.
-- Al Green’s voice
-- Larry Bird’s jump shot
-- Prince Ranier’s wife
-- Pete Sampras’ serve
-- Frank Sinatra’s hat
-- Carlos Beltran’s stride
-- Will Clark’s swing

You know that Woody Allen, when asked what he’d like to come back as in a future life, said: “Warren Beatty’s fingertips.” That’s not bad either.

2. Darryl Strawberry
3. Ken Griffey Jr.
4. Billy Williams
5. Don Mattingly

Note: For a swing to be considered “sweet” by my definition, the batter must hit left-handed. Non-negotiable. The swing also has to be so beautiful to watch, it even looks good when the batter strikes out.

Note 2: The sweetest swing in the game today is Joe Mauer’s.

Note 3. Rafael Palmeiro’s swing probably belongs on the list – which would mean that two of the five sweetest swings would have gone to Mississippi State at the same time. But, with apologies, I just can’t put Palmeiro on the list.

A BRILLIANT READER asked me to come up with the worst World Series teams ever, so of course I went to Bill James for assistance. Bill and I agree on a basic principle that if you are going to pick the worst World Series team ever, you should not have a limited view of that team in just that year.

For instance, the 2006 Cardinals had the worst record ever to win the World Series. They only won 83 games. But were the Cardinals an atrocious team? Probably not. It was largely the same team that won 100 games in 2005 and 105 games in 2004. There were numerous core players (Pujols, Rolen, Carpenter, Suppan, Eckstein) who you can build a championship around. I think the reader wants me to put the 2006 Cardinals as the worst World Series team ever … I think they’re probably one of the five worst. I’d probably list them third on the list, maybe second.

Here are the five others Bill and I came up with:

2000 New York Yankees.

It’s easy to forget that these Yankees – who came into the season as back-to-back champions – had real problems. They only won 87 games, Their pitching staff had a 4.76 ERA – third starter David Cone went 4-14 with a 6.91 ERA. The offense was middle of the pack at best. They were really floundering before they got veterans David Justice (.305, 20, 60 in 275 at-bats) and Glenallen Hill (.333, 16, 29 in 132 at-bats). Dwight Gooden (4-2, 3.36 ERA) helped the cause too.

Now these Yankees, like the 2006 Cardinals, were certainly a better team than the record indicates. Obviously they had a whole bunch of great players. But that year, they did it with mirrors, moxie and Mariano.

1985 Kansas City Royals.

By fan consensus, I would rank the best Kansas City Royals teams this way:

-- 1977 Royals. The only Royals team to win 100 games. On August 17, the Royals were 1.5 games out of first place. The team won 10 games in a row, fiddled around for four games, won 16 in a row, lost a game, and won eight in a row. That’s a 35-5. After that, they had a 10.5 game lead. They lost that a heartbreaking series to the Yankees despite have a two-games-to-one lead going into the final two games at Royals Stadium.

-- 1980 Royals. Won 97 games, finally beat the Yankees, lost in the World Series. That was the year Brett almost hit .400 and Willie Wilson had 100 hits from both sides of the plate. Dennis Leonard won 20 and Quiz was phenomenal.

-- 1976 Royals. The first really outstanding Royals team. George Brett barely (and painfully) beat out Hal McRae for the batting title In Kansas City they still think that team wins the World Series if Amos Otis had not gotten hurt.

-- 1978 Royals. That was Whitey Herzog’s great running team – they led the American League in doubles, triples and stolen bases. Third straight loss to the Yankees.

-- 1985 Royals. And there you go. Most people in town will tell you that 1985 Royals team was fifth-best all-time. But that was the team that won the World Series. There was something unique about that team, no doubt. They were 13th in the American League in runs scored. That lineup was so anemic that George Brett was intentionally walked 31 times, and that was the era when you challenged hitters. The pitching staff was filled with kids (one of them was Bret Saberhagen, who won 20 games).

1959 Los Angeles Dodgers.

That team only outscored its opponents by 35 runs all year. As Bill points out that was an odd team that mixed some of the old Boys of Summer (Gil Hodges, Junior Gilliam, Duke Snider, Carl Furillo, Carl Erskine) and some of the Dodgers that would make up the Dodgers mini-dynasty in the 1960s (Sandy Koufax, Don Drysdale, Maury Wills, Ron Fairly).

The problem is, none of them were particularly good AT THAT TIME. Koufax won eight games. Furillo got 90 at-bats. Maury Wills was in the minors for much of the year. Snider and Hodges had enough to be the middle of the lineup, but they hit 23-25 homers and drove in 80-88 runs (Snider’s 88 RBIs led the team). Don Zimmer got most of the at-bats at shortstop, and he hit .165. Drysdale led the team with 17 victories.

Milwaukee had a better team that year, probably, with Eddie Mathews (.306, 44, 114), Hank Aaron (.355, 39, 123) and Joe Adcock (.292, 25, 76) in the middle of the lineup and Warren Spahn (21-15, 2.96), Lew Burdette (21-15, 4.07) and Bob Buhl (15-9, 2.86) anchoring the staff. But the Dodgers somehow won two more games and won the World Series. They are real contenders.


1987 Minnesota Twins.

They are the only World Series team to have been outscored during the year. That was a team with only two legitimate pitchers (Bert Blyleven, Frank Viola) and a lineup with one truly great player (Kirby Puckett).

But they had that Dome. You look back on that team, and it’s really amazing. They weren’t just bad on the road, they were AWFUL on the road – 29-52. Look at that – on the road they were a 100-loss team. But in the Dome they were almost unbeatable, 56-25. That’s one of the weirdest World Series champs ever – and my choice for the worst. But I can’t argue with Bill’s choice either …

1990 Cincinnati Reds.

OK, I loved that team. How could you not? They had nothing but a bullpen. They were terrible in 1989, and they were terrible in 1991. But somehow … SOMEHOW … there was magic in 1990.

Bill: “The 1990 Cincinnati Reds had ten players with 200+ at bats, 7 of whom were:

Chris Sabo
Billy Hatcher
Mariano Duncan
Joe Oliver
Todd Benzinger
Hal Morris
Glenn Braggs

The other three were Barry Larkin, Eric Davis and Paul O'Neill, who were pretty good, but Larkin hit 7 homers and drove in 67 runs that year, O'Neill hit .270 with 16 homers, and Davis hit .260. And nobody won more than 15 games for them, either, and their starting rotation included Norm Charlton and Jack Armstrong.”

Those Reds did have a great bullpen. And they had Lou. Which reminds me: Has there been another manager in recent memory who has ticked off more people and had more embarrassing moments than Lou Piniella in the first two-plus months of this season. At some point, don’t you have to look hard at a manager’s disciplinary skills when there are TWO fights in the dugout?

I HAD MY IPOD on shuffle on the way to the ballpark today, and these 12 songs played in order:

-- “I Wish I Were In Love Again,” Tony Bennett
-- “In Da Club” 50 Cent
-- “Digging Your Scene” Blow Monkeys
-- “We Will Be Silhouettes,” The Postal Service
-- “Love For Sale,” Ella Fitzgerald
-- “Release” Pearl Jam
-- “Crazy,” Patsy Cline
-- “Jesusland,” Ben Folds
-- “Birds Fly (Whisper to a Scream),” Icicle Works
-- “Across the Universe,” Rufus Wainwright
-- “Rusty Old American Dream,” David Wilcox
-- “Incident on 57th Street,” Bruce Springsteen

I’m trying to figure out what this says about me, except that I have pretty shaky musical tastes.

The Ballad of Buddy

Editor's note: We've got a second icons blog coming in the next few days so we can fill in some gaps and report some findings (Eddie Mathews and Richie Ashburn are making a push!). We might even have a couple of special guests help with that as well.

He was born in Pittsburgh on an August Monday in 1951, the same day his father’s Pittsburgh Pirates were shut out by Brooklyn’s Ralph Branca 5-0. It was a fitting way for Buddy Bell to enter this cruel world. Ralph Branca would go on to have a pretty tough finish to his 1951 season.

Buddy Bell would go on to have a much tougher baseball life.

Buddy would spend much of his childhood in Cincinnati watching his father toil for some mediocre-to-bad teams in the 1950s. He was too young to remember seeing his Dad play for the 112-loss Pirates of 1952. But he remembers the Cincinnati teams. They weren’t much, for the most part. The things that stood out about those 1950s Cincinnati teams: A temporary name-change from Reds to Redlegs (to satisfy the McCarthy crowd); the immense power of Ted Kluszewski and Wally Post; the emergence of a young Frank Robinson and the every day professionalism of Gus Bell, Buddy’s Dad.

Gus was picked to four All-Star teams, he drove in 100 runs four times, and he was by all accounts a wonderful and honorable guy – he once got into a dispute in Pittsburgh, not over money, but because he wanted his family to travel with him.

When Gus was 32, he finally played on a good team – the 1961 Cincinnati Reds. He was not an everyday player by then, but it would still be his favorite year. He got three at-bats in the World Series against the Yankees, and even though he went 0-for-3, even though the Reds lost in five games, it was a thrill of a lifetime. As we will see, it was the thrill of TWO lifetimes.

The next year, things returned to normal for the Bells. Gus was drafted by the 1962 Mets, the worst team of the 20th Century. He was a player to be named later in a trade to Milwaukee. He kicked around for a couple more years, but his career was pretty much over.

Less than 10 years later, in 1972, Buddy Bell began his astounding career. He had learned a lot from his father. He was a good, sometimes great, ballplayer. He was a good glove, a class act, a family guy, a man respected and loved throughout the game.

He also had picked up another trait from his Dad.

Buddy Bell had an almost miraculous knack for losing baseball games.

* * *

Buddy Bell is the Wayne Gretzky of losing. I say this with great respect – I love the guy. But Buddy’s 35-year life of playing and managing baseball games is a marvel of mishaps. He has never played or managed in a postseason game. Never. He has never really come CLOSE to playing or managing a postseason game (well, there was the first half of the 1981 strike season when they finished four games out …).

Take a look at this chart (updated from Kansas City Star friend Brad Doolitle):

Most games played/managed without reaching the postseason.
1. Buddy Bell, 3,550
2. Mickey Vernon, 2,772
3. Ernie Banks, 2,528
4. George Sisler, 2,517
5. Nap Lajoie, 2,470
6. Luke Appling, 2,462
7. Doug Rader, 2,271
8. Ron Santo, 2,243
9. Toby Harrah, 2,231
10. Don Kessinger, 2,184

Wow, there is just so much to say about that list. Let’s start with the fact that it has Buddy Bell and Toby Harrah on it. The two were traded for each other straight up in 1978, one of those rare trades that hurt both teams’ karma. Also, they are very close friends. Between them, we’re talking THIRTY-SIX SEASONS of no playoff baseball.

The second thing worth noting is that three of the players on the list – Banks, Santo and Kessinger – all played for the Chicago Cubs in the 1960s, and were in the same infield for five seasons. The fourth member of that infield, Glenn Beckert, played 1,320 games without reaching the postseason.

But let’s get to the main point … Buddy Bell has played and managed almost EIGHT HUNDRED more games than anyone else on the list. That’s almost five full seasons. And even that doesn’t tell the full story. Look: Most of the people in the list played or managed before the expanded playoffs in 1969 – they played a time when only two teams made the postseason. Buddy played in a time when four made it.

Look again: ALL OF THEM EXCEPT ONE played or managed before the wild card was added in 1995, before a time when eight teams made the playoffs.

That one exception, of course, is the Leonardo of losing, the Mozart of misfortune, the Captain of Calamity, my friend and hero, Buddy Bell.

* * *

How much blame must Buddy Bell take for his almost unbreakable record of mediocrity? Well, he did hit Shane Costa cleanup for the Royals on Saturday. So you can’t say he’s entirely blameless. That Royals’ lineup is worth a brief mention because Buddy didn’t just hit Costa fourth (he’s hitting .197, though he did manage a bunt single in the game), he also batted Alex Gordon fifth (.183) and Ryan Shealy seventh (.211). Yes, I’m a believer than lineup order is overrated – and that there is only so much any manager can do – but some lineup orders are exceptions to the rule.

And to prove the point, Philadelphia’s Jon Lieber faced that lineup, threw a three-hit shutout and struck out 11. That’s Jon Lieber. He hadn’t struck out 11 in his three previous games combined.

But let’s get back to Buddy and take a tour of his unlikely career.

Cleveland (1972-78)
Team record: 519-598
Closest playoff call: Indians had a winning record in 1976 (81-78) and finished 16 games behind the New York Yankees.

Buddy’s role: The Tribe was a complete mess before Buddy Bell ever got there. They lost 102 games in 1971, and then Buddy walked in. He was an outfielder at first (the Indians had Graig Nettles at third base when Buddy was called up), And despite Buddy’s heroic lack of speed (Buddy Bell is, percentage-wise, the worst baseball stealer in baseball history – he was caught 79 of the 135 times he tried to steal), he played reasonably well out there.

The next year, the Indians made one of their many boneheaded trades, sending Nettles to the Yankees for John Ellis and Charlie Spikes. The only good thing that came of that was that Buddy Bell was moved to third.

He was a terrific third baseman and a pretty good hitter for the Indians. The Indians’ only real moment of hope came in the 1977 off-season, after they had signed 20-game winner Wayne Garland and looked to have one of the better starting rotations in the American League. I think it’s fair to say the staff of Garland, Dennis Eckersley, Jim Bibby and Pat Dobson (with Al Fitzmorris as swing-man) didn’t quite live up to expectations.

Texas (1979 to mid-1985)
Team record: 458-543
Closest playoff call: The aforementioned 33-22 record in the first half of the 1981 strike year. Oakland won by four games. The Rangers did have one other winning record (83-79 in 1979) but finished third, five games behind California.

Buddy’s role: He emerged as one of the best third basemen in baseball after his trade from Cleveland. And his emergence happened immediately after the trade – in 1979, right away, Buddy hit .299 with 18 homers and a career high 101 RBIs. He also won the first of six consecutive Gold Gloves, and almost singlehandedly kept the Rangers in the race (well, not singlehandedly, he had help from another guy just acquired from Cleveland, big Jim Kern, who went 13-5 with 29 saves and a 1.57 ERA).

Buddy played at quite a high level for the next six years – he hit .301 and averaged 30 doubles, 14 homers and 162 hits per year, despite missing some games because of injury and the strike. Buddy was a tough strikeout (he finished in the Top 10 in strikeout per at-bat seven times in his career) and as mentioned he was an outstanding third baseman.

Unfortunately, the Rangers were pretty much a mess. He played for four managers in his six-plus year, most of those for – you won’t believe this – Doug Rader. Why won’t you believe this? Go back to that chart, the one that ranks the longest-running players and managers who never reached the postseason. See No. 7. Yep. Doug Rader.

It’s like the Six Degrees of Losing.

Cincinnati (mid-1985 to mid-1988)
Team record: 246-218.
Closest playoff call: Every year Cincinnati was reasonably close. The Reds finished second all three of Buddy’s years in his hometown. Of course, it depends what you mean by close. The first year, 1985, they finished 5.5 games behind the Dodgers. The next year it was 10 games behind Houston. And the last year it was 6 games behind San Francisco.
In none of those years, though, were the Reds ever a serious threat to actually win the division in the last month.

Buddy’s role: In 1985, Buddy came to Cincinnati and really sparked the Reds. He actually didn’t hit a lick, but for whatever reason the Reds played inspired baseball after his arrival, going 46-30 and finishing second. Buddy still had some baseball left in him – in 1985, he hit a career-high 20 homers. But those Reds teams were a mess. You still had ancient leftovers from the Big Red Machine (Dave Concepcion, Tony Perez). You had a few gifted young players trying to get into the game (Eric Davis, Paul O’Neill, Barry Larkin, Jeff Montgomery, etc). And managing between bets, you had Pete Rose.

In 1988, at age 36, Buddy lost it very quickly. He hit .185 in 21 games and was traded to Houston.

Houston/Texas (mid-1988-mid-1989)
Team record: 83-79
Closest playoff call: None.

Buddy’s role: He was just finishing up a career – 2,405 games, no playoff appearances. That placed him fifth all-time as a player – behind Ernie Banks, Nap Lajoie and JUST behind Mickey Vernon and Luke Appling. But with Buddy, the best was yet to come.

Detroit (manager, 1996-1998)
Team record: 184-277.
Closest playoff call: In 1997, they finished 19 games behind Baltimore.

Buddy’s role: The Tigers were already a bad team. But they had not quite hit bottom (though they came close in 1989, going 59-103 with an old team). Buddy took over for the ancient Sparky Anderson, who had lost interest sometime during the Reagan era. So he inherited a bad team, and everybody understood it would take time to get things turned around in Detroit.

Still, that first year was shocking. That 1996 Tigers pitching staff might be the worst in baseball history. They posted a 6.38 ERA. We’re talking the WHOLE TEAM. Greg Gohr went 4-8 with a 7.17 ERA. Brian Williams went 3-10 with a 6.77 ERA. Greg Keagle (I have yet to see his name listed among Detroit icons) went 3-6 with a 7.39 ERA.

And that was the year when Todd Van Poppel was beyond amazing. The Tigers got him from Oakland and he made his first start on August 14. He was terrible. His next time out he was lousy, and the third time he was OK. His fourth time, he pitched a five-hit shutout against the Royals, naturally (though Shane Costa was not hitting cleanup that day). Van Poppel was in complete control – at one point he retired 13 Royals in a row – and he had a three-hitter going into the ninth. He looked like the stud everyone had expected.

He made five starts after that. Get ready. He went 0-3 with a 21.89 ERA. The league hit .429 against him in those five games and slugged .937. He gave up seven homers in 12 innings, the final outing being a fabulous 1/3 of an inning, 4-run performance against Milwaukee where he somehow managed to give up those 4 runs despite allowing one hit (back-to-back-to-back-to-back walks helped).

Anyway, it’s hard to determine Buddy’s role in a fiasco of that magnitude. The next year, the team showed marked improvement – won 79 games – and Buddy actually received some manager of the year votes. The next year the team collapsed again, and Buddy was fired.

Colorado (manager, 2000-early 2002)
Team record: 161-185
Closest playoff call: Buddy’s only winning record as manager came in 2000, 82-80. Rockies finished 15 games back.

Colorado was a weird place to manage. The fan support when Buddy took over was amazing. The ballpark effects were severe which could (should?) help the home team. There were a couple of talented players on the team, including a young Todd Helton and still powerful Larry Walker.

But oh that pitching. Buddy has had an amazing knack for managing awful pitching staffs. In 2000, the Colorado staff had an ERA of 5.26. Then, the Rockies (apparently with Buddy’s prodding) signed some big-money pitching free agents. They signed Mike Hampton and Denny Neagle. They already had Pedro Astacio and a young Shawn Chacon. They were thinking pennant in Denver. Naturally, Hampton and Neagle pitched disastrously, the staff finished dead last in the league in ERA, Walker got hurt, the team lost 89 games, and Buddy started grumbling.

It’s funny, I haven’t known too many people in baseball who take losing harder than Buddy Bell – this is where Alanis sings about it being ironic, don’t you think.

In the end, Buddy warred with upper management, the team got off to a lousy start in 2002, and he got fired. Buddy probably has to take a lot of blame for what happened here, though I don’t think he had a real playoff team anyway.

Kansas City (2005-present)
Team record: 128-209
Closest playoff call: When the Royals beat Curt Schilling* and won Opening Day this year, they were 1-0 and in first place.

Buddy’s role: He has not only hit Shane Costa in the cleanup spot. He has led off Shane Costa in a game too.

* * *

So where does it go from here? Unless something unlikely happens (the Royals really improve, the Royals really collapse), Buddy will finish out the year with the Royals, get fired, and pick up somewhere as a coach maybe. He probably won’t get another managing job, though you never know. He has respect in the game.

But assuming things play out as they will, Buddy Bell will have played managed more than 3,600 games without sniffing the postseason. I’d say, in large part, he’s simply been a victim of circumstance. Casey McGraw Weaver Cox doesn’t win with the teams he’s been given. And Michael Jack Brett Mathews probably doesn’t drag any of those teams to the playoffs. Buddy has, on the whole, been a victim of bad luck.


Then again, I don’t entirely believe in luck. I like the lead-in to the movie “The Color of Money” (disappointing movie, good lead-in).

“Nine-ball is rotation pool. The balls are pocketed in numbered order. The only ball that means anything – that wins it – is the 9. A player make eight trick shots in a row, blow the 9 and lose. On the other hand, a player can get the 9 in on the break, if the balls spread right, and win.

“Which is to say that luck plays a part in nine-ball. But for some players … luck itself … is an art.”

Maybe that goes for bad luck too. And maybe Buddy Bell is an artist.

Icons ...

So, I've been thinking about doing this book about Stan Musial. It wouldn't exactly be a book about Musial ... it would be more about icons. I think if you were visited by your cousin from Trinidad or Brazil or Singapore -- well, name any non-baseball playing country where your cousin lives -- and they asked you to explain the meaning of a baseball icon (definition: "An important and enduring symbol"), you might just tell them the story of Musial. Maybe there are enough cousins out there to buy the book.

In any case, as I thought about Musial, I tried to come up with the icon for each team in the big leagues. I decided this time not to use any formulas or statistical comparisons ... I just chose a single icon, and I chose from the gut. Because of that, I don't feel at all good about some of the choices. I tried to put myself in Baltimore, for instance, and choose between Cal Ripken and Brooks Robinson. For me, Brooks was a much bigger icon. But I suspect for most Baltimore fans, Ripken would be the guy (and it wouldn't be all that close). Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it's neither one. Maybe the right answer is John Shelby.

Point is: I'd be interested to hear from individual fans on this. And I promise to update wherever appropriate.

I also reserve the right to push The Soul of Baseball once since this is nominally a promotional blog. You know, Father’s Day is just around the corner.

(A few people have emailed me that they’re not too crazy about the name “The Soul of Baseball.” I should tell you up front that I didn’t like it much either. I wanted to call the book “Baseball and Jazz,” because Buck always said that the two best things in the world are “Baseball and Jazz.” That title drew a mixed response from the publishing house – some absolutely despised it while other more level-headed people felt much more negatively about it. We ran through a whole bunch of titles after that, and none of them worked, and they liked “Soul,” and after a while you stop fighting. I’ve grown used to the title by now. And, I still haven’t come up with anything better, although for the paperback version coming out next year I do like “Dave Barry on Baseball” along with “Seabiscuit II” and “As Good as that James Patterson Book! Really!”).

Arizona Diamondbacks
My icon: Nobody.

They haven't been around long enough to have an icon. I would say that Randy Johnson is probably the closest thing. Luis Gonzalez for a while seemed like a strong icon candidate -- he was prominent in the community, he played more than 1,000 games with Arizona, he had the 57 homer year. But I don't think it ever really happened. I’m told my old buddy Thom Brennaman is reaching icon status in Phoenix. I knew him when.

I also knew Hannah Storm when. Here’s a story: She was a weekend sports person in Charlotte when I was a young reporter at the newspaper. I was covering the clay court tennis tournament there (I think it was called the U.S. Clay Court Championships, but I could be wrong), and she called me up. She said, “Hi Joe, it’s Hannah, hey, I’m planning to talk about the tournament on the newscast this evening and I was wondering if you could help me fill in a few gaps.”

I said: “Sure Hannah. What do you need?”

And she said: “OK, first of all, who was playing?”

Atlanta Braves
My icon: Dale Murphy.

Chipper Jones is closing in on icon-status in Atlanta. And of course, you have the great pitchers of the 1990s, especially John Smoltz, who has been with the Braves for 20 years. But to me Smoltz has played so many different roles, he's had the injuries, he was not quite as good as Maddux and he’s very close to Glavine. I don’t think he stands out quite enough.

I think Hank Aaron has certainly built up icon status in Atlanta, and deservedly so, but he played most of his career in Milwaukee.

So I'll go with Dale Murphy. I lived in the semi-South (Charlotte) during the early 1980s, and I just remember what a seminal figure Murphy was then. He played center field, he could run, he hit with power, he was a great guy. That was when the SuperStation and the movie “Just One of the Guys” dominated cable. It was in those days when Atlanta was desperately buying up all the tickets in the "We're a major city too sweepstakes." Murphy was the symbol -- funny that a Mormon from Utah was a symbol of the New South. But I would say Dale Murphy was pretty much everybody's favorite player from Jacksonville to Raleigh.

Baltimore Orioles
My icon: Cal Ripken Jr.

Cal barely edges Brooks Robinson, and I mean just barely. I always sensed that being a hero was hard work for Ripken. With Brooks, it came out more naturally, or at least it appeared that way.

OK, here’s a question: Who was better?

Ripken was clearly a better hitter. His on-base percentage is 18 points higher, he slugged 46 points higher, he hit 100+ more doubles, 150+ more homers, and had an OPS+ of 112 to Robinson's 104. Ripken won two MVPs, Robinson won one. Robinson made 15 All-Star Games, Ripken played in 19.

Robinson did play in a significantly tougher hitting environment, but that doesn't make up the difference (as the OPS+ indicates). The truth is that Robinson was only a good hitter for eight or nine of his 23 seasons. He was only a great hitter from about 1964-68. Ripken was a pretty great hitter from 1982-1991, with occasional bursts after that.

Of course, Brooks Robinson was the greatest defensive third baseman ever. Ripken was no slouch defensively, especially his younger days at shortstop, but Robinson was an artist. I don't think that quite makes up the difference, though -- Ripken was the better overall player, I think. Bill James credits Ripken with 427 Win Shares and Brooks Robinson with 356, and I think that's about right.

Boston Red Sox
My icon: Ted Williams

Big Papi is working his way into full icon status, but it would be tough for anybody on the Red Sox to ever surpass the Splendid Splinter. The real question is: How would you rank the all-time Boston icons? I'll take a shot:

1. Larry Bird
2. John Kennedy
3. Bobby Orr
4. Ted Williams
5. Paul Revere
6. Bill Russell
7. Tom Brady
8. Henry David Throreau
9. Bob Cousy
10. Conan O’Brien or Tom Scholz

Not icons
1. Ben Affleck

Chicago Cubs
My icon: Ernie Banks

One of my all-time favorite teams is the 1966 Chicago Cubs. That team had four Hall of Famers on it (Ernie Banks, Billy Williams, Ferguson Jenkins and Robin Roberts) one near Hall of Famer (Ron Santo), a former batting champ (Harvey Kuenn), a Gold Glove catcher (Randy Hundley), a future six-time All-Star shortstop (Don Kessinger), a future four-time All-Star second baseman (Glenn Beckert), a future 20-game winner (Ken Holtzman), FIVE past 20-game winners not even including Roberts (Ernie Broglio, Dick Ellsworth, Bill Hands, Billy Hoeft and Larry Jackson), a pitcher who won 18 games as a rookie (Chuck Estrada), a batter who once hit .330 with 24 homers in only 294 at-bats (Wes Covington) and three OTHER run of the mill former All-Stars (George Altman, Lee Thomas and Frank Thomas).

Oh yeah, that team was also managed by a Hall of Famer (Leo Durocher).

That Cubs team lost 103 games. One ... hundred ... and ... three ... games. Seriously, could any team better represent the Chicago Cubs? I hope last year on their 40th anniversary they were honored at Wrigley Field.

For a team with a storied history, the Cubs are somewhat low on icons. Many would consider Ryne Sandberg as a potential team icon – I wonder if he would beat Banks in a poll. Sammy Sosa, of course, had his chance. Nobody in Chicago really wants Cap Anson as the team's icon, though he's probably the greatest player in team history.

Chicago White Sox
My icon: Hawk Harrelson(?)

Yikes. He's the first name that came to mind when I thought about the White Sox. That's a terrible choice. HeGone. I suppose there's Luke Appling or Nellie Fox or Luis Aparicio, though I don't see any of them quite filling the role. You could go with Shoeless Joe Jackson, I suppose, but he played about as long in Cleveland as he did in Chicago. How about an all-time Chicago icon list?

1. Al Capone
2. Michael Jordan
3. Dick Butkus
4. Mike Ditka
5. Walter Payton
6. Ernie Banks
7. Mike Royko
8. Harry Caray
9. Gale Sayers
10. John Belushi or Barack Obama

Cincinnati Reds
My icon: Pete Rose

You know who was a huge icon in town when I was writing columns in Cincinnati? Chris Sabo. People just loved Sabo, and the big reason they gave is that Sabo drove a Ford Escort. New York and Los Angeles have always loved bigger-than-life figures – Magic Johnson, Joe Namath, Joe DiMaggio, Crazy Legs Hirsch. Cincinnati, probably more than any city I've ever been in, just wants its superstars to be regular guys.

The 1976 Reds really were amazing. That team only scored 857 runs -- which doesn't sound like much; it would be fewer than last year's Philadelphia Phillies, and exactly the American League average in that wild 2000 season. But in context, it was about a third more runs than the average National League team scored in 1976. Only the 1931 New York Yankees was better.

Here's what I love most about that '76 Reds team -- every regular single player (we're talking 10-deep here) was an above average hitter that season. Every one. They also were one of the best fielding teams in baseball history.

How good was that team? Pete Rose had one of his best seasons in 1976 -- he hit .323, had 215 hits (including 42 doubles), scored 130 runs. In another season, that wins the MVP award. On this team, it barely stands out.

-- Joe Morgan (37 win shares): Had one of the all-time great seasons. He hit .320, walked 114 times, banged 27 homers, scored 113 runs, droves in 111 runs, stole 60 bases and won the Gold Glove.
-- George Foster (25 win shares): Hit .306 with 29 homers and league leading 121 RBIs. He actually finished second in the MVP voting to Morgan (ahead of Rose).
-- Ken Griffey Sr. (25 win shares): Remarkable season; hit .336 (.401 OBP), scored 111 runs, stole 34 bases.
-- Dave Concepcion (23 win shares): Won the Gold Glove, hit .281, scored 74 runs, drove in 69 runs, stole 21 bases.
-- Johnny Bench (19 win shares): Down year for Bench, but still won the Gold Glove, hit 19 homers, and for some reason stole a career high 13 bases.
-- Cesar Geronimo (19 win shares): Hit .300 for the only time in his career, stole a career high 22 bases, finished second in the league with 11 triples, and won a Gold Glove in center field. In case you are counting that means the Reds won Gold Gloves at catcher, shortstop, second base and center field. That's fairly strong defense up the middle.
-- Tony Perez (16 win shares): Down year for Doggie -- the Reds thought he was slowing down and traded him shortly after the season. Still he drove in 91 runs and, also, stole a career high 10 bases. That was one running team. Every single player in the lineup, with the exception of Rose, stole 10 or more bases. And Rose stole 9.
-- Dan Driessen (7 win shares): Sub only hit .247 in 219 at-bats, but he walked a bunch (his OBP was .362), he hit seven homers, he stole 14 bases, he drove in 44 runs, and everyone in Cincinnati believed he would be a future star.

Cleveland Indians
My icon: Bob Feller

I think he's the right choice -- he's the best player in Cleveland Indians history and he has spent his life in Cleveland -- but I never really got the impression that Bob is uniquely beloved in Cleveland. This might be because he's been pretty cantankerous the last few decades ... although we Clevelanders don't really have a big problem with cantankerousness (Cantankour? Cantakerousnessness? Grumpiness?).

I can't really explain it, but I will say that growing up I heard much more about Rocky Colavito (and Lou Boudreau for that matter). And Rocky was in the title of Terry Pluto's terrific book about the Indians. So Rocky Colavito might be the real icon -- but it would be disrespectful to not give Feller his due.

Unless you want to consider Duane Kuiper.

One interesting thing about great Indians teams of the 1990s -- from 1994-1999 the Indians had a .595 winning percentage -- is that no real icon emerged. Carlos Baerga looked to be the most promising choice (he played with energy, hit rockets) but he faded fast. Jim Thome had icon status almost secured and he left. Manny Ramirez, Kenny Lofton and Albert Belle really had no interest in being icons. I suppose the closest thing was Omar Vizquel, but it’s tough to be an icon when you’re the fifth-best guy on a team.

Colorado Rockies
My icon: Nobody.

They haven't been around long enough. Todd Helton I suppose is the closest thing. Or Larry Walker. Anyway, with John Elway around there's no room for any more icons in Denver.

Detroit Tigers
My icon: Al Kaline

I'd be curious to hear from Detroit fans about Ty Cobb and his legacy in the Motor city. Cobb is obviously one of the more iconic figures in baseball history -- it seems wrong to not have him as Detroit's choice. But I get every impression that the right answer is Kaline, because he was a gentleman, because he excelled every year, because he was such a steady force in good years and bad ... I think Detroit fans would choose Kaline as the city icon, probably for all sports. But I could be misreading it.

Florida Marlins
My icon: Wayne Huizenga

No icon here. Luis Castillo has played the most games in Marlins history, by the way, and Dontrelle Willis has won the most games. Dontrelle has a chance, actually.

Houston Astros
My icon: Craig Biggio

I've always thought Jimmy Wynn was an iconic figure, in large part because of that "Toy Cannon" nickname, and also because he was really, really good. In 1968 and 1969 -- right in the heart of the Gibson era -- the TC had a .406 on-base percentage, a .490 slugging percentage, he mashed 59 homers despite playing in the worst-hitters park in the game. He walked 148 times in 1969 -- that team record would last 30 years. For his efforts in those two remarkable years, he was not even chosen to the All-Star Game, probably because his batting average was .269.

In any case, I think Biggio beats out Jeff Bagwell for icon, simply because he's done it a bit longer. I always think of both of them together -- Biggio and Bagwell -- and maybe they're co-icons. Nolan Ryan also qualifies here, but did you know he never won more than 16 games in any season he played with the Astros? I didn't.

Kansas City Royals
My icon: Emil Brown

He has led the team in RBIs each of the last two seasons and ... OK, yeah, it's George Brett. Of course. I've always felt a little bit for Frank White, who was a terrific player and grew up in Kansas City and is beloved, but not quite as much as George. George was a better player than Frank, of course, but it goes beyond that. George represented something to people in Kansas City -- he represented the big time. He always hit in the big moments. He cranked two of the most famous home runs in recent baseball history, both off of Goose Gossage. He played with abandon. And damn, he wanted to beat those Yankees.

OK, a list of all-time Kansas City icons.

1. George Brett
2. Harry Truman
3. Tom Watson
4. Len Dawson
5. Charlie Parker
6. Frank White
7. Tom Pendergast
8. Hallmark
9. Buck O'Neil
10. Arthur Bryant or Rush Limbaugh or Jesse James.

Los Angeles Angels at Anaheim
My icon: Gene Autry

I think that Vlad Guerrero, if he stays with the Angels for a few more years, has a chance to be the guy. But right now, only the old Cowboy stands out. Garret Anderson has played more games than any other Angels' player, and Chuck Finley has the most victories. Again, Nolan Ryan is a possibility.

Los Angeles Dodgers
My icon: Sandy Koufax

In 1963, Sandy Koufax went 25-5 with a 1.88 ERA. He struck out 306 batters. The league hit .189 against him. He won pitching's Triple Crown for the only time in his career.

Let's give you a few amazing feats from that season:

-- Twice that season, Koufax threw more than 160 pitches in a game (he pitched 12 innings against Philadelphia in May and threw 12 more against St. Louis in August).

-- On May 24 against San Francisco and Juan Marichal, he got lit up for five runs in 1/3 of an inning. He gave up singles to Jose Pagan and Willie McCovey to lead off the game, walked Willie Mays, gave up a three-run double to Orlando Cepeda, followed by a home run to Felipe Alou. After a strikeout, he gave up a single to Ed Bailey, threw a wild pitch, and he got yanked.

On August 15 against Milwaukee, it happened again. This time he gave up four runs in 1/3 of an inning. After getting Lee Maye to fly out, he gave up a single to Frank Bolling, another to Hank Aaron, another to Eddie Matthews (damn there were good hitters back then) and a home run to Gene Oliver. He got yanked.

Take away those two outings, and Koufax's ERA drops to 1.62. And the league batting average drops to .182.

-- Koufax started the season 6-1 with a 1.06 ERA with three shutouts.
-- Koufax ended the season 6-0 with a 1.49 ERA with one shutout.

-- One more: Koufax struck out 10 or more 11 times. This decade, the Kansas City Royals have had THREE pitchers strike out 10 or more in a game. Today's AFLAC Trivia question: Can you name those three pitchers. I'm saying you can't unless you cheat like I did.

I'm separating Los Angeles Dodgers icons from Brooklyn, by the way. I would say Jackie Robinson would be the Brooklyn icon, though you could certainly argue for Gil Hodges. Steve Garvey should have been a contender here, but he isn't. Vin Scully is, however.

Milwaukee Brewers
My icon: Hank Aaron.

I know he only played with the Brewers for a couple of years, but I've got to think those Milwaukee Braves years count.

I would be curious to know whether Milwaukee Brewers fans would choose Robin Yount or Paul Molitor as their icon. They were both considered pretty great guys (I don't think any player in sports history has ever rebuilt an image better than Molitor after his drug issues). Yount played his whole career in Milwaukee while Molitor had a couple of his best years in Toronto. So that's advantage Yount.

Molitor was a better hitter than Yount (higher average, OBP, SLG, more doubles, about 150 more runs scored), but Yount has his advantages too (more triples, homers, RBIs). Molitor played more games at DH than any other position. Yount meanwhile won a Gold Glove at short and was a pretty good center fielder.

Bill James calculates that Yount had 423 career win shares and Molitor had 414.

I'd say too close to call, but it's a blog and that's wimpy. I'd take Yount.

Minnesota Twins
My icon: Kirby Puckett

Things took a nasty and then tragic turn after he retired, but I don't know that any player in baseball history was more beloved in his hometown than Kirby Puckett circa 1995. The Twins have certainly had other iconic figures -- Harmon Killebrew, Tony Oliva, Kent Hrbek, Joe Mauer now -- but I think Puckett wins this going away.

New York Mets
My icon: Tom Seaver

I've had the good fortune (or whatever you want to call it) to have two close friends who were/are enormous New York Mets fans. Both of them idolized Tom Seaver. And both of them had bad experiences when they first met Tom Seaver. I can't recall the specific details, but I definitely remember the general point: Seaver was a jerk to them.

The interesting thing to me is that neither one of my friends allowed that bad experience to color their view of Seaver -- they still loved the guy. In a weird way, I thought, it kind of made them love him MORE, his jerkiness made him somehow into a larger figure. This has to be a New York thing. I cannot imagine how I would react had any of my childhood/college heroes (Duane Kuiper, Buddy Bell, Brian Sipe, Austin Carr, Bernie Kosar. Joe Charboneau, Ozzie Newsome, Mark Price) been jerks to me. I do know that Jack Brohamer once played catch with me in a parking lot, and I have loved the guy ever since.

AFLAC Trivia answer: The question was: Can you name the three Royals pitchers this decade to strike out 10 batters in a game? The correct answer is: “No, I can’t.” But the pitchers are: Blake Stein, Luke Hudson and Odalis Perez.

New York Yankees
My icon: Babe Ruth.

Let's go ahead and try to rank the Top 10 New York Yankees icons in order. It's almost impossible:

1. Babe Ruth
2. Mickey Mantle
3. Joe DiMaggio
4. Lou Gehrig
5. Derek Jeter
6. Reggie Jackson
7. Yogi Berra
8. George Steinbrenner
9. Don Mattingly
10. Whitey Ford

That's probably way off - I should ask Alex Belth to put a list together. In any case, it's an honest effort -- and how about having Lou Gehrig FOURTH? Say what you will about the Yankees (please do), but you could make a reasonable argument that the Top 4 icons in baseball history were all Yankees.

Here, as an added bonus, are the 10 best Frank Sinatra songs.
1. The Way You Look Tonight
2. Summer Wind
3. One For My Baby
4. The Coffee Song (as recorded on “Ring-a-Ding Ding”
5. I Get a Kick Out of You
6. Fly Me to the Moon
7. I Wish I were in Love Again
8. Moonlight in Vermont
9. Luck Be A Lady
10. Theme from New York, New York or My Way or one of those.

Oakland Athletics
My icon: Rickey Henderson

My first thought was Reggie Jackson, but he only played eight seasons in Oakland. I thought about Catfish Hunter then. And for some reason Joe Rudi popped into my head after that. Mark McGwire. Bert Campinaris. Point is, I thought about quite a few different players before I thought about Rickey Henderson. I guess that's because he has played for nine different teams, and he should be in the Hall of Fame by now but he won't stop playing, and he had FOUR different careers with Oakland.

1979-1984: Base stealer extraordinaire. Rickey had a .400 on-base percentage and stole 493 bases. He hit 10 home runs in a season once.

1989-1993: All-around superstar. Henderson's 1990 season is a marvel -- .325 batting average, 28 homers, 65 steals, .439 OBP. He hit with more power, got on base more and stole fewer bases. He was awfully good -- I'd take this Rickey Henderson.

1994-1995: Came back to the team after a brief and troubling few games in Toronto. You could see him slowing down, though he still managed a .409 on-base percentage.

1998: The old man comes home. He coudn't hit much, but he could still get on base (.376 OBP despite only a .236 average) and he stole an astonishing 66 bases at age 39 -- that's the most for any player older than 35.

Stolen bases for players older than 35
1. Rickey Henderson, 1998, age 39: 66 steals
2. Otis Nixon, 1997, age 38: 59 steals
3. Lou Brock, 1976, age 37: 56 steals
4. Lou Brock, 1975, age 36: 56 steals
5. Otis Nixon, 1996, age 37: 54 steals

I'd say he deserves to be the Oakland icon.

Philadelphia Phillies
My icon: Mike Schmidt

I'd like to put Robin Roberts in here because he has been a greatly underappreciated pitcher, and because he once called me out of the blue. I came home and there was a message on the machine, and it said something like: "Hi this is Robin Roberts, I used to pitch in the Major Leagues ..."

I thought: This has to be a prank. But I couldn't see the real prank value of anyone pretending to be Robin Roberts. I looked up his stats and could not believe how good he was in the early 1950s -- he won 20-plus games six straight years. Since the deadball era, only Lefty Grove (seven straight), Warren Spahn, Ferguson Jenkins and Roberts have pulled off that feat. But what blows you away about Roberts is that the guy threw 160 complete games from 1950-55.

To give you an idea how ridiculous that is, last year in the MAJOR LEAGUES there were 155 complete games.

Anyway, he was calling so we could meet at the Negro Leagues Museum and talk baseball. We did, and it remains one of the thrills of my professional life. He's a wonderful guy and a class act and an all-time great Phillies player.

The correct answer is still Mike Schmidt, of course.

Pittsburgh Pirates
My icon: Roberto Clemente

I think for a player to be an icon, you need to have a singular image in your mind. You have to think of Mays going back on Vic Wertz's fly ball, or Mike Schmidt's yanking a home run to left with that compact swing, or George Brett tomahawking that high fastball over the right-field wall or Pete Rose diving head first or Babe Ruth trotting around the bases.

With Clemente, there are so many images. But I think the most powerful is him chasing a ball down the right field line, whirling and whipping a throw across the diamond and nabbing a runner at third base. It's weird to say, but to me if Clemente had been exactly the same player and person he was -- .317 lifetime hitter, exactly 3,000 hits, four batting championships, terrific defender, heroic and traffic death -- but not had that amazing arm, I don't think he would be Pittsburgh's icon.

All time Pittsburgh icons:
1. Roberto Clemente
2. Terry Bradshaw
3. Mario Lemieux
4. Bill Cowher
5. Arnold Palmer
6. Willie Stargell
7. Andrew Carnegie
8. Mean Joe Greene
9. Johnny Lujack
10. Michael Keaton or Mr. Rogers

San Diego Padres
My icon: Tony Gwynn

You think this will ever happen again? A guy goes to play baseball and basketball at San Diego State. He is drafted on the SAME DAY by both the San Diego baseball team and the San Diego basketball team. He chooses baseball, and reaches the big leagues in almost exactly a year. He wins a batting title for the Padres in his first full season. He plays 20 seasons, all of them in San Diego. He wins eight batting titles and hits .394 one season when the players decide to go on strike. He also wins five Gold Gloves. He also is an entirely classy guy. When he retires, he becomes the baseball coach at San Diego State.

I wonder who the San Diego icon is.

San Francisco Giants
My icon: Willie Mays

Stretch McCovey is a good option too. And then there's Barry Bonds.

What was Willie Mays' best season? Using runs created, it was 1954, when he hit .345 with 41 homers, 110 RBIs and 119 runs scored.

Using OPS+ it was 1965 when he hit .317 with 52 homers, 112 RBIs, 118 runs scored and a .645 slugging percentage.

Using power/speed numbers it was 1956, when he hit 36 homers and stole 40 bases.

Using Win Shares it was 1965, but 1962 came really close, that year he hit .304 with 49 homers, 141 RBIs and 130 runs scored.

Any my personal favorite year is 1955, when he hit .319 with 51 homers, 127 RBIs, 13 triples, 24 stolen bases and 34 more total bases than anybody else.

He was pretty good.

Seattle Mariners
My icon: Ken Griffey Jr.

For a team that has only been around since 1977, they have several icon possibilities: The young Randy Johnson; the young A-Rod; professional hitter Edgar Martinez; the irrepressible Jay Buhner. But Junior's the guy. It really is stunning to compare Seattle Griffey vs. Cincinnati Griffey:

Seattle Griffey:
Hit .299 with 398 homers and 1152 RBIs. Slugged .569. ... Ten-time All-Star. ... Played 150+ games six times. ... His comps included Frank Robinson, Hank Aaron and Mickey Mantle. ... Lovable. Everyone called him the Kid. ... Won 10 Gold Gloves ... Led the league in homers four times ... Won an MVP award.

Cincinnati Griffey:
Has hit .273 with 176 homers. Slugged .531 ... Two-time All-Star ... Played 150+ games zero times ... His best comp would probably be Dave Justice ... Not so lovable. ... Won zero Gold Gloves. ... Led the league in homers zero times.

If Seattle fans don't want Griffey as their icon, then broadcaster Dave Niehaus isn't a bad substitute.

St. Louis Cardinals
My icon: Stan Musial

Well, he was the whole point of this exercise. I have a lot to say about Musial but I'll save that and for now just give you one of Bill James’ absolute favorite baseball facts. You probably already know that both Griffey and Musial were born in Donora, Pa.

So Ken Griffey Jr. is the second-best, left-hand hitting, left-hand throwing outfielder ever born in Donora, Pa.

On November 21st.

Tampa Bay Devil Rays
My icon: Nobody

Way too soon. Carl Crawford has a chance, but I suspect he won't be with the Devil Rays forever. I'll predict without hesitation that the team icon won't be Elijah Dukes.

Texas Rangers
My icon: Nolan Ryan

He’s not a great choice, but nobody really comes to mind. I guess you could put Rafael Palmeiro here, but I don't think anybody wants that. Pudge? I think he's more of a Detroit Tiger now. David Clyde? Oddibe McDowell? A-Rod in his money-chasing phase? I'll go with Ryan even though he only played five seasons in Texas, and all those as an old man. I think he represented something larger to Rangers fans. Of course, so did Chan Ho Park.

Toronto Blue Jays
My icon: Dave Stieb(?)

I don't feel good about it, but he's the guy who comes to mind. Joe Carter? Tony Fernandez? Vernon Wells? George Bell? While Seattle is loaded down with icon possibilities and has had few baseball successes, Toronto has the two World Series titles and few icon possibilities. Maybe there's someone obvious I'm forgetting.

Washington Nationals
My icon: Jesus Colome

Hey, he leads the team with four wins.

Poker and Kerry Wood

Best I can tell, the single most boring conversation in this world involves one guy telling another guy intimate details about his rotisserie/fantasy football team. The second-most boring conversation involves one person telling another about his/her golf game.

And third, would be me telling you how I just won a poker tournament in Tunica, Mississippi.

Still, I bring it up because, well, I just WON A FREAKING POKER TOURNAMENT. The background to all this is a yadda yadda thing (Question: What were you doing in Tunica to begin with? Answer: I have a good friend and yadda yadda yadda we ended up playing poker in Tunica). It is also worth pointing out that I have absolutely no poker skills whatsoever. None. I had entered two poker tournaments before, I believe, and I was out of both so quickly that the dealer was not sure I fully understood the rules ("No son, you don't say 'Gin' in this game").

So then I was at the Gold Strike Casino in Tunica, and I entered the tournament to do my part to help the casino management buy new felt for their poker tables, and I was flailing around, waiting to get knocked out, going all in at entirely inappropriate times when -- about two hours into the tournament -- I looked down and noticed I had a lot of chips.

There were, best I can tell, a few ringers in the tournament. One guy had a hook instead of a hand. That's usually a bad sign, I would think. Another guy wore all black and a black hat. Another guy would close his eyes before he bet and mutter strange calculations.

Meanwhile, I'm like "Hey, two SEVENS! That seems pretty good to me!" I realize these guys play in lots and lots of tournaments, and I'm sure in the long run they cash in while guys like me eventually lose their wedding rings. But it must drive these guys absolutely bonkers to have some goofball like me win a poker tournament. In fact, I think my victory (600 bucks!) is conclusive proof that poker does not qualify as a sport in any possible way, and they should immediately stop showing it on ESPN Classic (or at least not show it 24 hours a day).

OK, on with the show.

* * *

Buzz Bissinger just did an interesting piece for Play Magazine on Kerry Wood, and the rushing of young pitchers. I don't know Buzz, but I admire his work a lot, see him as a bit of a hero, and I thought this story brought up numerous issues that are pretty fascinating. I agree with some stuff, disagree with other stuff, but the point to me is that it's all worth discussing. Maybe I'm saying all that just because I don't want Buzz to call me a slimebucket.

ANYWAY, the two main topics from the article worth discussing for me are:

1. Are pitchers really being rushed today compared to pitchers in the past?
2. Pitch counts. Good or bad?

Let's start with No 1. I would say that if you asked most people around baseball they would tell you that, yes, pitchers are being rushed compared to years ago. Tony LaRussa, I think, speaks for most folks when he told Buzz, "I'm really not sure how I slept through that second stoplight."

No, wait, I'm sorry, he said, "The economic push is to bring kids up, and it's unfortunate."

I have to say, that is exactly what I would think too. Bissinger in the piece says that "the rule of thumb is that a pitcher should get some 400 innings in the minors before being called up." That makes sense too. He points out that Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Randy Johnson, Curt Schilling all those guys got more than 400 innings in the minor leagues. And look, they've all held up. They've all been really good.

He then writes that Mike Pelfrey did not even get 100 innings in the minor leagues before he was called up, and then he struggled. Mark Prior got barely 50 innings and he's been a shoulder-disaster since then. He mentions Felix Hernandez, who was called up young and pitched some 300 or so minor league innings and has had elbow issues. He also brings up Francisco Liriano and his blown-out arm, though that seems misplaced since Liriano DID get 400-plus minor league innings. He got almost 500 innings, actually.

Anyway, the point is made.

But is it? Bissinger quotes Nolan Ryan prominently in the piece. Ryan is one of the marvels of longevity -- the guy could probably get people out now. Ryan did not get 400 innings in the minor leagues (312 innings). In fact, of the 44 pitchers who have won 175 or more games since 1970, about half of them (21) did not get 400 minor league innings. We're talking about such longevity legends as Roger Clemens (167 minor-league innings and counting), Bert Blyleven (167 innings), Don Sutton (265), Mike Mussina (189) and so on.

Meanwhile, a few of the more famous arm-blowouts did get 400-plus innings, including, er, Tommy John (447 innings).

None of this proves or disproves anything other than to say the issue of keeping pitchers healthy might be a bit more complicated than the number of minor-league innings a guy pitches. But to the question at hand, are pitchers being rushed more quickly than in years past: I suspected yes. I ran a few numbers and the answer appears to be, "No."

I looked up, by decade, the number of pitchers who were 21 or younger and had seasons throwing 150-plus innings in the big leagues.

Here's what I came up with:

1960s: 32 different pitchers.
1970s: 26 different pitchers.
1980s: 15 different pitchers.
1990s: 5 different pitchers.
2000s: 8 different pitchers (so far).

Remember, also, there were many fewer teams in the 1960s and 1970s. Even when you look solely at 22-year-old pitchers with 150-plus innings (this would include those rushed college pitchers), there is a huge gap:

1960s: 42 different pitchers.
1970s: 41 different pitchers.
1980s: 27 different pitchers.
1990s: 22 different pitchers.
2000s: 15 different pitchers (so far).

I have to say, these numbers blew me away. I realize age is only one way to judge inexperience -- pitchers 40 and 50 years ago got more minor league innings every season than they do now -- but I think it's pretty clear that general managers are significantly more careful with their young pitching prospects now than they were the 1960s and 1970s.

They might not be CAREFUL ENOUGH -- that's a whole other thing. As Bill James writes me: "I think we are pushing the young pitchers or at least some of the young pitchers along too fast. I think we would be better off if we could stop it. I can't prove it, but that's what I believe based on what I know."

* * *

As for Kerry Wood, I don't think he's so much a cautionary tale (though, of course, he is that) as an anomaly -- there were only five pitchers 21-under in the 1990s to throw 150-plus innings. In case you are curious, they are:

1. Steve Avery, 1991, 210 innings
-- Pitched pretty darned well for two seasons afterward, and the Braves went to two World Series during that stretch. Then had multiple injury/consistency issues.

2. Ismael Valdez, 1995, 197 innings.
-- Double digit victories first four seasons and then struggled with all sorts of problems -- done at 31.

3. Alex Fernandez, 1991, 191 innings
-- Outstanding pitcher until he was 27, done at 30.

4. Javier Vazquez, 1998, 172 innings.
-- No problems so far -- 200-plus innings each of the last five years (198 innings in 2004, but close enough).

5. Kerry Wood, 1998, 167 innings.

So, yes, Wood was clearly rushed, but I don't think there are many others like him. I did get an interesting response about Wood from a baseball executive I know, and I think it's worth putting here without comment:

"To me the problem with Kerry Wood is that his delivery was a wreck. He could get people out; his stuff -- the ball coming out of his hand -- said this guy's a dominant pitcher. But his delivery said that he would break down sooner rather than later.

"You don't face the problem very often, but when you do, it's tough. When a guy's ready to pitch and get people out, it's awfully hard to tell your scouts, your manager, your player development people -- no, his delivery isn't sound, he will break down, we have to wait on him. That to me was the situation with Mark Prior. His stuff was Cy Young quality. But he landed on his heel, and that's a pretty good sign that he will break down. So what are you going to do? Keep him in the minor leagues until he lands on his toe? The guy won 18 games his rookie year. He was one of the best pitchers in baseball. How are you going to wait?"

* * *

That leads us to question No. 2 -- are pitch counts good, bad, neutral, what? I don't have any great insights here, of course, but I think it's worth noting that nobody in baseball seems to like pitch counts. Nobody. Managers hate them. Pitching coaches hate them. Old pitchers hate them, but current pitchers (most I've talked to) hate them about as much. General managers hate them and player development people hate them and college coaches ignore them and high school coaches would have their pitchers throw 5,000 pitches if it meant beating Susan B. Anthony High.

Point is, pitch counts are incredibly unpopular, and yet EVERYBODY IN THE BIG LEAGUES bows down to pitch counts. It's really an amazing phenomenon, if you think about it. Imagine if tomorrow, someone in professional football determined that a running back cannot run the ball more than 10 times a game without becoming ineffective and/or breaking down. And the coaches all disagreed, the GMs disagreed, the players disagreed but IT DID NOT MATTER, teams all over the NFL immediately stopped giving their running backs the ball more than 10 times in any game.

That would be weird, wouldn't it? Isn't this sort of the same thing?

Here's the even stranger part: Nobody's really sure that pitch counts really prevent pitchers from getting hurt.

"It is simply impossible to reach into the data and make any clear connections between pitch limits and injuries," Bill James writes. "I'm not saying that such connections don't exist. I'm simply saying that we can't prove they exist. Or anyway, I can't."

Kerry Wood's contention in the story is that pitch counts have actually harmed his arm in part because he's tended to overthrow to work out of jams so he could stay in the game. I don't know if this is true, but it's not impossible. What puts more strain on a pitchers arm -- 89 pitches thrown as hard and with as much spin as humanly possible, or, say, 147 pitches thrown at 90 percent efficiency?

I don't know the answer to that -- I'm terrible at math -- but I do know that pitch counts have become prominent the last few years, rotations have gone from four to five man, and there does not appear to be an appreciable decrease in injuries or an appreciable increase in pitching quality.

Here's my question: What if some organization broke away? It would need to be an organization that had little to lose -- a losing organization perhaps, a small-market team, an organization that needed an advantage somehow (I wish I could come up with one of those). What would happen if they went to the four-man rotation? The advantages are obvious. It would mean paying one less starter. It would mean not throwing your fifth starter out there, and your fifth starter stinks. It would mean adding one more bat to come off the bench. It would mean more flexibility for your manager.

Then, on top of that, what if that organization simply IGNORED pitch counts -- what if they took out pitchers when they LOOKED tired, like they used to in the old days.

(I'm always leery of saying that people used to do things better in the old days because in the old days parents didn't put their kids in child safety seats. My parents would have had no problem with me riding on the hood of the car. Of course, that may have been a personal thing).

ANYWAY, what would happen if someone reverted back to the 1970s and 1980s? Would pitchers go down with injuries like the opening scene of "Saving Private Ryan?" Would the player's union picket outside their stadium? Would pitchers simply refuse to sign there? Or would MORE sign there? Would it work? Could it work?

I don't know the answer to any of that. I do know, however, that aces and nines beats aces and sixes every time -- and as my man Jack Keats said, that is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

Bo Knows Excitement, Part II

To my surprise, I've received a few billion emails about the Bo Jackson/folk hero column I wrote last week -- it seems the man still resonates 20 years later -- and one of them was from a reader who wanted to make it very clear to me that Bo Jackson was vastly overrated as a baseball player. He made this clear by enclosing a detailed (I mean DETAILED) statistical comparison between Bo Jackson and ... Albert Pujols. I must admit that he was able to prove quite convincingly that Albert Pujols is indeed a better baseball player than Bo Jackson was. He did not, however, give me any particular reason to believe that the earth revolves around the sun.

Yes, I was really, really tempted to send the reader one of the greeting cards I've been meaning to design and get Hallmark to sell in its stores.

Friend,
I'm sorry we missed each other. I hope we can have lunch soon.
Sincerely,
The Point

Then I realized that in his own way, the reader was sort of making a point of his own and one worth thinking about: Are exciting players, by definition, overrated?

In a way, I think that touches on the most fascinating part of the book "Moneyball" -- for me that part that had nothing to do with on-base percentage or not bunting or the relative unimportance of defense or how to avoid high school pitchers in the draft. The part I found fascinating was the discussion of how difficult it is to clearly see and fairly evaluate anything through our biases.

Moneyball focused more on players we underrated (Chad Bradford the prime example in Moneyball) because they don't look like players, or because they don't throw hard enough, or because they can't run or are too small or whatever.

So is the opposite true? Do we overrate certain players because we just like watching them play?

I say yes. Take Barry Sanders. Please. I realize this is a football example, but I think the point is the same and anyway I've already gotten into near fist-fights about Barry Sanders, so I might as well bring him up again. Barry Sanders was probably the most exciting football player I've ever seen (Bo was up there too, Randy Moss as a rookie, Dante Hall for a little while, Earl Campbell, Gayle Sayers, Deion, that Boise State quarterback ...). Every game, Sanders would show you a move you had never seen before, and pretty often he was going to make a run that would leave you breathless. He was absolutely amazing. People often compare sports to the freelancing of jazz -- I think Barry Sanders was the closest thing I've seen.

He was, in my opinion, also pretty vastly overrated.

When I say overrated, I don't mean he stunk. Far from it. I just mean that many people -- most people? -- rank Barry Sanders as one of the top two or three running backs in NFL history and they put him high on the "Player you would start a team with" list. For me, Barry Sanders is nowhere near the top of either of those lists.

Why not? He really couldn't block. He really couldn't catch. He was not a guy you could rely on to get the big yard on third-and-one. The guy had more negative plays than any great back ever -- he would just dance around and dance around looking to break something. It was fun to watch, unless you were his coach.

How frustrating was he? For several years, his coach Wayne Fontes would TAKE HIM OUT near the goal line. Could you imagine this happening for any truly great back?

"THAT'S BECAUSE WAYNE FONTES WAS AN IDIOT!" the emails always begin. Maybe so. Maybe not. But idiot or not, Wayne Fontes LOVED Barry Sanders. I’ve heard several times that he was the only one in the Lions' organization who wanted to draft Barry. He had an offense designed especially for Barry. And yet he felt certain that the best way for his team to win was to yank Sanders out near the goal line. That says something, no?

His playoff numbers say something too:
1991 vs. Dallas: 12 carries, 69 yards, 1 touchdown.
1991 vs. Washington: 11 carries, 44 yards, 0 touchdowns.
1993 vs. Green Bay: 27 carries, 169 yards, 0 touchdowns.
1994 vs. Green Bay: 13 carries, -1 yard, 0 touchdowns.
1995 vs. Philadelphia: 10 carries, 40 yards, 0 touchdowns.
1997 vs. Tampa: 18 carries, 65 yards, 0 touchdowns.

"THAT'S BECAUSE THE LIONS SUCKED!" the emails always begin. Maybe so. But they did make the playoffs five times in Barry's career -- in large part because of Barry, certainly -- and he was pretty much a non-factor in just about every one of those playoff games. The bottom line for me is the guy was exciting and thrilling, but honestly, I think you would have had a hard time winning a Super Bowl with him.

Every time I write this I get violent emails from Barry fans who talk about how he would have gained 12 billion yards had he run behind, say, the Cowboys offensive line (I usually throw in how I think Emmitt Smith was a better back) and how I'm obviously a Communist who despises his mother and so on ... people get very emotional about Barry Sanders. Then, I think this expresses the point: Exciting players touch off emotions. Emotions prevent people from seeing or thinking clearly. Ergo (I love the word "ergo"): Exciting players are overrated.

If you want a baseball example, let's go back to my favorite: Bruce Sutter and Dan Quisenberry. They pitched the same number of innings. They had similar ERAs and were similarly effective. You can spend countless hours trying to determine which one was better (believe me, I know) and never come to any real conclusion. Bruce Sutter was more exciting though. He struck people out. He popularized a pitch. He's in the Hall of Fame. And Quiz, who was not exciting, did not even get enough Hall of Fame votes to stay on the ballot.

OK, we move on. By the way, I also think Albert Pujols really is a better ballplayer than Bo. Really. Willie Mays was better too.

* * *

We now list off our Top 10 most exciting players in baseball today. I want to confirm many readers' views that it really is stupid to rate exciting players by using some sort of statistical formula. I think I wanted to see if I could invent a formula that would, more or less, give me a top 25 that mirrored my own opinions. I came somewhat close, even if I don't know exactly how I did it.

One other thing: Several people wrote in asking why I don't include inside-the-park homers in the formula. It's a good question, and I have a terrible answer: I have absolutely no idea where to find a list of inside the park homers. I'm sure it's out there and easy to find, but I could not find it. If someone wants to point me to the list, I'll happily do a whole blog entry on inside-the-parkers ... I'm fascinated by them. In the meantime, though, here we go with the Top 10:

10. Rafael Furcal
Excitement score: 126

One of the most amazing baseball experiences of my life was going to the Dominican Republic with Tony Pena. A couple of years later it would turn out that Tony wasn't necessarily the most hearty of characters -- he quit in the middle of the year after some unsuccessful stunts and a lot of losing and a messy situation that involved a divorce (not his own).

Still, I think the world of Tony because I saw where he came from -- literally, we walked through his old house -- and I saw the way people in the Dominican idolized him, and I saw how much he gave back.

In any case, we were driving around one day and we ended up in the little town somewhere -- I think it may have been close to where Juan Marichal grew up. We got out of the car, and there were young kids playing baseball on some sort of dirt field. They were using a pipe for a bat. Really. A pipe. They had some sort of beat up round thing that may have been a ball or a rock or something in between. And they had like three gloves, which they shared. It was so archetypal, so representative of everything I had ever heard about Dominican baseball, I would have been tempted to believe some movie producer had set it up before we arrived.

We watched the game for a while (the shortstop, naturally, was dazzling) and we got back in the car. A few minutes later, we came upon another town, and another dirt field, and exactly the same scene.

And I understood in a deeper way how Rafael Furcal, Luis Castillo, Cesar Cedeno, Tony Fernandez, Alfredo Griffin, Vlad Guererro, Alfonso Soriano, Miguel Tejada and so many other exciting players had come from the Dominican Republic. It isn't just desperation to get out and make money and all that. It has something, I think, to do with imagination.

9. Ryan Howard
Excitement score: 126

Well, I just got back from St. Louis -- had a terrific book signing. Even the time at a U.S. Cellular store wasn't too bad; lots of people came in. So, in honor of the fine city that I have sometimes, in my wicked past, mocked ... here's a rapidly thrown-together all-time St. Louis team:

All-time team of players born in St. Louis:

Catcher: Yogi Berra.
First base: Charlie Grimm.
Second base: Ron Hunt (just for the hit-by pitches)
Shortstop: Lonny Frey (more of a second baseman, but he could play short)
Third base: Bobby Byrne
OF: Pete Reiser
OF: Roy Sievers (beats out Bernard Gilkey)
OF: Elston Howard (moved the outfield by Yogi again)
DH: Ryan Howard
Bat off the bench: Nate Colbert
Fourth outfielder: Jack Tobin
Special mention: Don Mueller (struck out seven times one year in 453 at-bats ... but only walked 15 times).
Should have played someplace other than catcher: Muddy Ruel.
Restaurateur and ballplayer: Mike Shannon.
Played too long ago but had one heck of a name: George Edward Martin Van Haltren.
Manager: Dick Williams.

8. Scott Rolen
Excitement score: 127

So I was watching my "This Week in Baseball" videotape -- seriously, what are we supposed to do with videos now? Do they even make VCRs anymore? Anyway, I decided my five favorite kinds of defensive plays (in order) are:

1. Third baseman making a diving backhand stop, hopping to feet, and ripping off a bazooka throw to first base.
2. Outfielder running to the wall and legitimately stealing a home run.
3. Shortstop diving for ball hit up the middle, bouncing to feet, throwing out runner.
4. Third baseman charging on bunt, bare-handing, whipping throw underhanded.
5. Shortstop or second baseman running back on looper and making dramatic over the shoulder catch.

You will notice two third-base plays in my Top 5 -- and the "Third baseman diving to his left, scrambling to his feet, throwing out runner" is pretty high on my list too. The truth is, I love watching a third baseman play defense. That probably explains why I tilted the system to get Rolen in here.

7. Carlos Beltran
Excitement score: 129

I've written here before that Carlos is, by far, the most exciting player I've ever covered day-in, day-out. I heard writers talk about what a thrill it was to cover DiMaggio or Mays or Williams (well maybe not Williams) or Musial. Every day, they might do something to thrill you. That's how it was, for a little while, with Carlos.

There was a rain-makeup game against Arizona that comes to mind -- it was Sept. 4, 2003, and he did everything that day. He bunted for a single. He stole three bases. He ran down a fly ball. He went first to third on a sharp single -- Beltran is a beautiful runner, long stride, hardly seems to be exerting himself. He hit a long sac fly against Randy Johnson. He was a show. But the best part happened in the ninth inning -- the Royals were down 1 run -- and he faced Matt Mantei, who was still throwing about 284 mph back then.

I remember Beltran battled him and battled him, fouling off pitches (at least this is how I remember it) and working his way for a walk. He stole second. He stole third. And he scored on a very, very short fly ball -- one short enough that the second baseman could have caught it. The right fielder did catch it, and he threw, and in memory it wasn't even close. Carlos had just taken over the game -- acted like he was an older brother playing with kids. He would do that sometimes (even in the playoffs, as you might recall) and it was amazing to watch.

Incidentally (or perhaps not incidentally) the Royals lost that game in extra innings. This is my life.

6. Albert Pujols
Excitement score: 130

Let's say Albert Pujols plays until he's 40. Let's say he stays healthy. Let's say that until he's 35, he just about the same player he was the last six years. And let's say after that, he loses a little bit each year until he's 40. I realize that's a lot of "let's says" and this isn't realistic, and, hell, I probably figured it wrong anyway. But I want to put the stats I came up with anyway.

Pujols projected numbers if he played to 40.

Average: .329
Hits: 3,708
Doubles: 832 (most ever)
Triples: 38
Home runs: 800 (most ever)
Runs: 2,393 (most ever)
RBIs: 2,426 (most ever)

You know what? He definitely is a better baseball player than Bo Jackson was.

5. Grady Sizemore
Excitement score: 131

I had always heard that Sizemore was the throw-in player in the Bartolo Colon deal. I'd heard that the Indians really wanted Brandon Phillips, who was the mega-prospect, and they wanted Cliff Lee, the lefty who could throw hard. And Sizemore was more of a project -- he had hit .268 in Low A the year before and even though he walked a lot and stole some bases, he showed no power and he struck out a ton. In fact, I've heard many people say that Indians GM Mark Shapiro's best move was, in fact, lucky.

"Don't kid yourself," one baseball executive told me. "I think a lot of people understood that Sizemore was the prize in that deal. He could run like hell, he played a huge center field, he played baseball with passion and everybody knew the power would come. I'm not sure we knew it would come this fast -- but I'll tell you this: When that trade was made, I got calls from a whole bunch of people around the game saying, 'Damn, how did Mark get Sizemore?'"

Whatever the motivation, Sizemore absolutely took off the day the Indians acquired him. He had been hitting .258 with zero homers in high-A when the trade was made. The rest of the year, he hit .343 in Kinston, and the next year he hit for power, showed off some speed in Akron and became one of the top prospects in baseball. Now, he's the guy many would choose to start their team.

4. Jose Reyes
Excitement score: 133

I wish I could have gotten him higher. I wish I could have made him No. 1. To me, Reyes is the most exciting player in the game. But the system is the system, and this is where Reyes ended up. In any case, the Mets have two of the 10 most exciting players in all of baseball and a bunch of guys who are like 58 years old. It's like you have Jose Reyes, Carlos Beltran and the cast of Cocoon.

I have slogans:

Beltran and Reyes and afternoon buffet-yus
Beltran and Reyes and wash away gray-yus
Beltran and Reyes and lots of toupee-yus
Reyes and Beltran and is The Price is Right on?

3. Jimmy Rollins
Excitement score: 134

Buck O'Neil loved Jimmy Rollins. He used to say that Rollins was the one player who really reminded him of how they played ball in the Negro Leagues ... lots of speed, some power, lots of energy and so on.

The last two-plus years, Rollins has stolen 86 bases and been caught only 11 times. That's 88.7 percent success rate -- which is historically good.

Top five career stolen base percentages since 1951 and a few current players (minimum 150 steals):
1. Carlos Beltran, 87.3%
2. Tim Raines, 84.7%
3. Eric Davis, 84.1%
4. Willie Wilson, 83.3%
5. Barry Larkin, 83.1%
10. Carl Crawford, 82.1%
12. Jose Reyes, 81.3%
20. Ichiro Suzuki, 80.5%
21. Jimmy Rollins, 80.4%
22. Alex Rodriguez, 80.1%

2. Carl Crawford
Excitement score: 135

How many players in baseball history have hit .300, banged 20 homers and stolen 60 bases? Go ahead and take a guess. I guessed before I looked it up -- I guessed nine players. I thought it might be a couple more than that, actually, but my Price is Right childhood has always inspired me to guess low. You don't want to go over. Bet a dollar!

Anyway, I was way off. The correct answer. Two.

1. Joe Morgan, 1976: .320, 27 homers, 60 stolen bases.
2. Rickey Henderson (twice).
1985: .314, 24 homers, 80 stolen bases.
1990: .325, 28 homers, 65 stolen bases.

So, I think it would be fair to say that as an athlete, Carl Crawford is in rare, rare company. He has not pulled off the .300/20/60 trick just yet, but he's come awfully close already -- last year, at age 24, he hit .305 with 18 homers and 58 stolen bases.

People don't think or talk much about Carl Crawford, which tells you a lot about the Tampa Bay Devil Rays. It was the same situation with Carlos Beltran in Kansas City. He will get his big stage somewhere and everyone will realize just how exciting and amazing a player he is. And poor Tampa fans will be left with the grim reward of knowing they were on him first, sort of like those people who followed Springsteen around New Jersey in the early 1970s or those early REM fans in Athens, Ga.

1. Ichiro Suzuki
Excitement score: 139

Well, he is exciting. He is one of the few guys in baseball who inspire me to count batters until his next time up, although that might be because I simply don't want to watch Richie Sexson hit anymore. The Royals have already played the Mariners two series this season, and in the first I thought Ichiro looked pretty brutal in center field. He didn't actually commit an error, but I thought he took lousy routes, I think he let one ball drop that he might have caught, and even on plays he made he looked kind of shaky.

Second series though, he was absolutely terrific in center field. I mean Gold Glove terrific. He made one of the best catches I've seen this year. He ran down several throws. He prevented a couple of runners from going first to third. ... Plus, how can you not like watching that crazy batting style.

I will also tell you since this is a Buck O'Neil-inspired blog that Ichiro had great respect for Buck and the Negro Leagues. I mean GREAT respect -- he has never wanted publicity for it, but he has always very quietly (and generously) supported the Negro Leagues Museum and he sometimes asked Buck for advice. I think he's a pretty amazing guy. I will say thism though: I see the 10 million reporters follow him around and I wonder, "Do you think at any point Japanese newspaper readers pick up their paper and say (in Japanese): "Oh man, ANOTHER story on Ichiro. I get it. He went 1 for 4. Terrific. Can you leave me alone with the Ichiro deal already?"