Twins win, right?! Right? Oh, Letters to the Editor don't count towards the final score of the actual game. I'm sorry. Yes, indeed, the Twins lost.
Twins 3, Royals 7
LP: Hendriks (0-2) WP: Hoe-shaver (11-11)
Save? no. I'm not counting the Greg Holland effort as a save even if the box score on MLB.com says he earned one. No way. Not going to count. I'm not even going to look at the King of the Savers leader board because I'm enraged that the official scored actually believed the Twins could possibly rally to threaten the Royals lead in the ninth. Puh-lease. How dare the powers that be issue a sacred save in such a decidedly un-save like situation. boo.
Okay, yeah, now that I'm over my save-rage induced fit I'll commence with the recapage. Liam Hendriks started his second ball game today and lost. He went five innings giving up eight hits, five earned runs while striking out only 2 batters. The good news? He walked zero, zilch, nada batters today. Bert must be pleased with his performance, that is, of course, unless he left the ball up in the zone. Truth be told, I don't know if there were many balls left up in the zone, I was busy finishing a print that's due on Friday, but I'll assume that because the Royals didn't hit any home runs off of him that Hendriks didn't leave any balls up. Waldrop pitched two thirds of an inning and gave up two runs. The rest of the bullpen gave up 3 hits and no runs, Hoey included. Wierd, right? The Twins offense offered up eight hits and three runs. Mauer went oh-fer with three walks. I'd ask for my money back, but I live out of state. The "defense" offered up three errors, and Plouffe (!) records of them. Some puss threw the ball away on some play that I didn't see to give the Twins another error on the field today. Frankly, I don't know how to read what happened in during the bottom half of the fourth inning, and being that the Twins couldn't scrape together enough hits / runs to win this garbage I don't care to decipher what actually happened.
Culture Club: Kansas City is chalk full of fine art. No joak. There is so much happening in KC that I don't know where to start, but the Nelson-Atkins is definitely worth the price of admission. They have world class exhibitions (most of which are FREE (hint, hint, DG...), a fantastic facility, and a beautiful sculpture grounds. Through the 15th of November they have an exhibition of night sky and cosmos photography, and coming in October they'll be showing Romare Beardon's prints. I highly recommend a stop by the Nelson-Atkins Museum if you're going to be in KC to see the Twins lose.
Speaking of saves, on my way to ND this morning, I was listening to Mike & Mike talk about Mariano Rivera and there were people asserting that he was the best pitcher (not reliever) of his generation. Let's see him go out and throw 215 innings a year and see how he does.
Wait, what? The best pitcher of his generation? Have they heard of the big unit? Padro? Liam Hendriks?
I'm certainly willing to cede the title of greatest reliever of his generation to the guy. He's been all that.
You'll get no argument from me. But this conversation went way beyond that. They were talking that no one, in any sport, has been more dominant than him, which is a pretty weird argument to make about a guy that pitches about 70 innings a year. More dominant than Jordan? Yep, that's what they were saying. More dominant than Gretzky? Well, maybe, that one was close, because Greenie has heard some dudes from Boston say that Bobby Orr was the greatest hockey player of all-time, so maybe Gretzky didn't measure up, either. More dominant than Tiger? Hemming and hawing on that one.
Please. The guy is a specialist. He has one role and one role only on the baseball field. Pitch the ninth inning in a game where your team is already in the lead (actually, he's probably used in the eighth inning more than other "closers", especially in the post season). He's been more than terrific in that role, no doubt about it (the BEST), but to compare that to the all-around excellence of Michael Jordan and suggest that Jordan doesn't measure up? Good. Lord.
They were putting Rivera on the "Mt. Rushmore" of Yankees, with Ruth, Gehrig, and DiMaggio. Better than Mickey Mantle! Or Yogi Berra!
Just for some perspective: Rivera WARP: 29.9, Mantle WARP: 117.1, Berra WARP: 58.9, Jeter WARP: 65.1
One more thing: when you hear all the breathlessness about Jeter having the most hits as a Yankee and playing the most games as a Yankee remember this: Mantle delivered almost twice the value of Jeter in fewer games played. Jeter is a sure fire first ballot HOFer and I'm pretty surprised at how well he's hit this year again, but he's not close to the inner circle guys.
In 20 years, they'll have a new "best Yankee ever", and the rose-colored glasses surrounding Jeter's career will be removed. He'll be known as a top-10 shortstop, and a legit first-ballot HoFer.
But I agree, if I have to read one more "Derek Jeter is actually underrated, you guys!" article, I'll probably freak out.
"most dominant" is different from most valuable. It's like "most feared."
/Jim Rice apologist
I think Rivera, as a specialist, should be compared to Ray Guy. Or Morten Andersen. Or Gary Anderson. Gary's facemask was dominant.
Ray Guy should have been in the Pro Football HOF 20 years ago. That he is not in that HOF is just another example of the tragevesty that is the Pro Football HOF.
A punter's contributions have huge "leverage" in football, perhaps even bigger than that of a kicker (and Jan Stenerud is the only pure PK in the HOF). Ray Guy was the best of his era and then some (in 1994, EIGHT years after his retirement, he was selected as the punter on the league's 75th Anniversary team). College football even has a "Ray Guy Award" for the nation's best collegiate punter.
Yea, the historian of the PFHOF. And yet the voters for the HOF can't seem to figure it out. (He has been a "finalist" seven times and a "semi-finalist" five other times; Bert's got nothing on him)
(the other is Billy "White Shoes" Johnson)
Argue all you want about the propriety of Bruce Sutter being in the HOF, or whether Mariano deserves to be a first-ballot guy. Ray Guy was a HOFer through and through.
All given. But, would you say that Mike Jordan didn't live up to his dominance? That Guy was the best football player of his generation?
It sounds like Guy would do well to send a certain sportswriter a pound of coffee from Starbucks and a six pack of Blue Moon.
Oh, I'm with you that talking about Mariano as the best pitcher of his generation is just ridiculous. And I don't really know what "most dominant" is supposed to mean, other than "best" -- a concept that means even less in the NFL than it does in MLB.
If he did that, he'd get crapped on for making that sportswriter make his own coffee and not including any citrus fruits.
Ray Guy is an excellent comparison. No punter is close to being as good (although current Raider punter has a better career average) but no one will ever consider him close to being the best footballer ever.
I'm not saying that LaTroy Hawkins could've been the best closer of all time if he got to enjoy the type of strike zone that Mo gets (Rivera is extremely, extremely good at the limited role he plays, and as you mentioned, his playoff saves have been pretty huge), but tell me there's a pitcher in baseball that doesn't watch video of that and say "I could be a hall of famer if I got that pitch called a strike every time".
Incidentally, Joe Pos has a new post that addresses Rivera and how the changing role of the closer is reflected in his stats:
http://joeposnanski.blogspot.com/2011/09/meaning-of-600-saves.html
I highly recommend a stop by the Nelson-Atkins Museum if you're going to be in KC to see the Twins lose.
That's rich, Tex. 🙂
Nelson-Atkins is (and has been) on the list! I've been trying to convince the powers that be to up the culture quotient, I just need to find the right exhibition, I think.