FJM has gone dark for the foreseeable future. Sorry folks. We may post once in a while, but it's pretty much over.
You can still e-mail dak,Ken Tremendous,Junior,Matthew Murbles, or Coach.
Title is a half-assed play on words on a Richard Dawkins book title. Deal with it. Yesterday we saw a dude call Alfonso Soriano selfish because he had six bad games. (Has anyone noticed that noted egomaniac David Ortiz is 3-36? Diva!) Today's selfish oaf: Carlos Lee (HR totals the past five years: 32, 37, 32, 31, 31). I'm sensing a trend about selfish players -- they're freaking awesome.
There're some more gems in here, so let's get started, shall we, Joe Cowley? Williams emulates a Twinning formula Sox GM realizes talent alone doesn't guarantee anything
Talent, as we all know from years of sports journalism dogma, is anathema to winning. Teams win in spite of talent. Talent creates egos, egos create selfishness, selfishness results in too many damn home runs.
Keep your talent. Give me guys who volunteer at soup kitchens. Then I'll have a baseball team.
He spent years watching, studying and even copying it, to the point where it won him a World Series in 2005.
The truth is finally out there: Ken Williams is copying the formula of the 1989 Trumbull, Connecticut World Champion Little League team. Expect a call, Chris Drury.
Now White Sox general manager Ken Williams hopes he has moved a step closer to perfecting the model.
Thanks, Minnesota Twins.
So Ken, you're going to emulate the Twins' uncanny scouting and player development machine and work on bilking Brian Sabean out of Joe Nathan, Francisco Liriano and Boof Bonser for one year of A.J. Pierzynski?
No, of course not. You're going to spout off some nonsense about reducing the amount of talent you want on your team.
''This job is one in which you never stop learning,'' Williams said Monday, hours before the Sox rallied to beat the Twins 7-4 in the home opener. ''Early on, I thought throwing talent at the wall would bring a championship, and, for three or four years, on paper we had the best team in the division.
''There were at least two of those years where Minnesota won the division and then came out and even said, 'That team there [the Sox] has more talent than us.' That really made me rethink some of the things we were doing, the approach we were taking.''
DON'T SAY GRINDER DON'T SAY GRINDER DON'T SAY GRINDER
It also forged the word ''grinder'' into his head.
ARRRRRRRRRRRRGH
White Sox fans: your general manager is officially building a baseball team based on a nebulous buzzword that's a synonym for submarine sandwich. Fear him. Fear him greatly.
He saw players such as A.J. Pierzynski, the Twins' cocky catcher who needled opponents with his antics to no end, all in the pursuit of winning. Torii Hunter, Jacque Jones, Denny Hocking, Doug Mientkiewicz -- the Twins' roster seemed perfectly put together to play the game the right way, frustrating bigger-budget teams along the way.
How about the fact that Hunter regularly hit 25 bombs a year, or that Pierzynski was an above-average hitter at the catcher spot, or that Mientkiewicz was one of the very best defensive first basemen in the game? No? Not important? You're right, it was probably Pierzynski's off-color jokes about what he did to Joe Crede's sisters that won the Twins the division. That's playing the game the right way!
Not only has Williams admitted to copying that model,
WHAT MODEL?
All you've said so far is that they're "grinders" and the roster "seemed perfectly put together" to "play the game the right way." Oh, and that you shouldn't "have the best team on paper." How are these not just read straight off page 1 of General Manager Press Conference Clichés, The Handbook?
but he also has had more money to budget his replica. Add a few tweaks of his own, such as adding players from outside the organization, rather than inside as the cheaply run Twins do, and ... ta-da!
That's another thing. The Chicago White Sox have the fifth-highest payroll in baseball, just behind the Red Sox. They're one Gagne away from equaling Theo's budget. Consider that when you think about what kind of job Kenny Williams is doing. Baseball Prospectus has the South Siders finishing with a sweet 77 wins. Prove them wrong, Kenny. Prove them wrong.
Williams signed Pierzynski, traded away selfish, all-or-nothing hitters such as Carlos Lee and built a stellar starting rotation before the '05 season.
Carlos Lee, EqAs since the trade: .274, .301, .300. The guy they traded Carlos Lee for, EqAs since the trade: .264, .249, .244.
And last year Scotty Pods earned that .244 EqA in just 235 at bats because he was so banged-up and shitty the Sox never wanted to play him. Then, of course, at the end of the year, they just straight-up released him. The whole time, he was extremely grindy, though. He starred in that movie Grindhouse. I think he was the lady with the machine gun for a leg.
El Caballo, meanwhile, just keeps putting up 90-30-100 year after year after year. Get that shit off my team.
Credit where credit's due -- it was a wonderful pitching staff the White Sox had in 2005. But let's be honest, a lot of dudes were having career years. Garland, Contreras, even Buehrle -- all of them posted the highest full-season ERA+s of their careers in 2005, and none of them have really been the same since. This is to say nothing of the freakish, otherworldly performances of Messrs. Hermanson, Cotts, and Politte, who, as we love to point out here on FJM, all had ERA+s of 220 or higher. That's 1989 Dennis Eckersley shit. Fun fact: none of these three guys are even on major league rosters this year. The Podsednik-Pierzynski effect? Or (ahem) just a little bit of good fortune?
Bullpens are unpredictable and fickle; it seems like every year the eventual World Series champ gets out-of-nowhere contributions from their 'pen. Just last year, the Red Sox had Okajima and Delcarmen pitching out of their minds. But seriously, to get 185 innings of sub-2.00 ERA ball from the ne plus ultra of journeyman reliever triumvirates -- Hermanson, Cotts, and Politte -- is remarkably remark-worthy. And for the last time, it has nothing to do with grinding or scrapping from hardworking, undersized, fiery white hitters. But the underlying trait Williams searches for is what he calls a ''Chicago toughness.''
Adam Dunn, 2007: .500/.600/2.000 Scott Podsednik, 2007: N/A
Fremulon Ins. has sent me to Rome to negotiate with a division of Generali, so I may be out of commission for a while. But I want to say that it made my heart sing to see my Blackberry light up with reports of Jon Miller saying that a 3-R HR would "kill a rally." God bless all of you, readers, you Knights of Justice, you Lovers of Truth, you Realists!
Proving that he has learned nothing from anything he has ever seen or been told, Ozzie Guillen is installing a couple of real grinders at the top of his line-up.
In a move that paves the way for Tadahito Iguchi to drop down in the batting order, manager Ozzie Guillen said Sunday he plans to bat Darin Erstad second against right-handed starters.
Here are some numbers for you to look at. Each one represents Darin Erstad's OBP, in one of the last six years.
.279 .325 .346 .309 .313 .331
Those are bad numbers!
Here are two other numbers: Tad Iguchi's OBP's for the last two years.
.352 .342
Not wonderful. But better than Erstad's.
What's truly crazy about this, is that Iguchi hits righties well. Last year he was .298/.363/.438, so he got on base more effectively against righties than lefties. Slugged better against 'em, too. And yet, because Darin Erstad is left handed -- which, as we all know, means that regardless of what the factual numbers say, he hits righties better than someone who is right-handed, like Tad Iguchi -- he will hit second.
"[Scott Podsednik] is a better leadoff guy, and [Erstad] handles the bat better than Pods in hit-and-run situations," Guillen said. "We can play games even though Pods is our leadoff guy."
Let's break this down.
"Scott Podsednik is a better leadoff guy"
Than who? Iguchi? No. There are millions of pieces of evidence that prove differently. Than Darin Erstad? Maybe. But Erstad played hockey and punted footballs. So fuck you, stat nerds.
"[Erstad] handles the bat better than Pods in hit-and-run situations."
Oh my God. Ozzie Guillen is planning on winning games by playing hit-and-run with Darin Erstad and Scott Podsednik. Prediction: the White Sox score 150 runs this year.
"We can play games even though Pods is our leadoff guy."
True. One game you might try playing is baseball. One good way to play baseball effectively is to put men who get on base a lot in front of men who hit HR a lot. You have chosen to play a different game: RunIntoOutsBall, which is played by hitting Darin Erstad second in your line-up and hitting and running a lot. Another game you are playing is: OutsBall, (also called "SmartBall") which is played by hitting Scott Podsednik and Darin Erstad 1-2 in your line-up. The goal is to make as many outs as possible at the top of your line-up. The ChiSox are getting 1-8 odds to win the World Series of Outs this year. Even so, I have bet everything I own on them.
Over the previous three seasons with the Angels, Erstad has a higher batting average from the second spot (.277) than the leadoff spot (.259).
First of all, this difference in averages is barely anything. Second, they are both terrible. Third, Erstad is terrible. Fourth, hitting him second is a terrible idea. Fifth, Erstad = terrible. Sixth, terrible. Seventherrible. Eterrible. Terriblenth. And tenth, you are a terrible manager, Ozzie Guillen.
And finally, here's this nugget:
Podsednik has batted leadoff since becoming a full-time player with Milwaukee in 2003, and his quick recovery from a Jan. 23 sports hernia operation has fueled Guillen's faith in him from the leadoff spot after a poor 2006 season.
I'll translate this for you: Scott Podsednik has been not good for the last three years. Then he had a gruesome injury and is just now recovering from it. So... he'll be awesome!
Podsednik went 0-for-7 Sunday with a stolen base in a minor-league game against Colorado in Tucson.
Originally a joke in this post just read: "The goal [of OutsBall] is to make as many outs as possible." I have changed it to "...at the top of your line-up." Why? Because of this e-mail from a wonderfully literal- (and like-) minded reader named Tony:
The winner of OutsBall would be the team that has the highest total (1) home games in which the team was not ahead after 8.5 innings + (2) total extra innings played. Based on these two factors, it would seem to me that the team that has the largest difference between average runs scored and average runs allowed (assuming constant variance for simplicity) would be the anticipated winner. The more you get outscored by, the more often you are behind after any number of innings, and the more you get outscored by, the less likely you are to be tied at the end of nine innings. Although there is a good amount of random chance involved in how many extra innings you play, it's intuitive that the more likely you are to be outscored, the less likely you can keep up after nine innings. However, since intuition causes so much trouble in baseball, I will do some research based on the past few seasons
This is getting complicated (notice I change my fundamental conclusion)
The winner of OutsBall would be the team that has the highest total: (1) 3 x Home Losses + (2) Outs used in last inning of Home Wins in Last At-bat + (3) 3 x Total Extra Innings Played - (4) 3 x Extra Inning Home Wins. Based on these factors, it would seem tough to predict the team that ends up with the most outs.
Teams with largely negative run differentials (scores 1 run per game, gives up 5) would lead category (1). However, teams with run differentials close to zero (scores 3 per game, gives up 3), would be most likely to play extra innings or have to bat in the ninth at home. Also, the extra innings categories are affected by a good amount of chance.
Some research will hopefully clear up what teams (large negative run-diff or near-zero run-diff end up at the top of the list.
Did I mention I loved our readers? Here's David on Tony's OutsBall formula. Things is gettin' nerdy, folks!
Tony made 2 mistakes that jump out at me: 1) He forgot to subtract outs not played in rain-shortened games. Since that's completely luck, though, it does make sense to leave it out from his plan for calculating what sort of team is most likely to win OutsBall. 2) His subtraction in part 4 is wrong, it should be deleted. Part 2 correctly addresses the final inning of all home walk-off wins, extra innings or not, so I'll ignore that. In extra innings home wins, he seems to think it makes sense to subtract out the 3 outs that would be expected if that last inning were totally completed. The problem is, he's forgetting about the addition of the bottom of the 9th in those games.
Part 1 accounts for the addition of the bottom of the 9th in extra innings home losses, when combined with part 3. He thought part 3 would overcount the last inning in extra innings home wins, but in fact it does not. In an extra innings loss, the number of innings is 9+extras. For a home win, we only expect 8 innings, so the extra innings count as above expected number of outs and the number of (full) innings in such games is 8+extras.
So the formula for innings should be:
81*9 [minimum away innings] + 81*8 [minimum home innings] + HL [home losses] + E [extra innings, even in home wins] - R [loss of innings due to rain].
Multiply that by 3, add in the last inning outs in walk-off wins (note that this includes all home extra innings wins) to get the total number of outs for the team in the year.
There isn't a lot of bad stat-bashing, or SmartBall references, or anything, but I really like the way this one starts:
This is the new Scott Podsednik.
He's good at baseball now?! Fantastic!
The one who isn't going to rush back from an injury, the one who won't let the anxiety of seeing his teammates playing in Cactus League games overwhelm him.
Oh. What?
He spent the first few weeks of camp on the practice field going through running drills, then straight to the trainer's room for treatment. He started taking flips in the batting cages a little less than three weeks ago. Over the weekend, doctors gave him the green light to take live batting practice, and he did so pain-free.
The Sox then decided to take his return to the next level.
They told him to forget everything he does in the batter's box. Then they told him to stop trying to steal bases, because his career ~75% success rate means it's barely worth it. Then they told him to gain 40 pounds of muscle so he can hit some doubles. Then they told him to walk more. Then they just said, fuck it, this is taking too long, and traded him to the Astros to get Carlos Lee back, and became a way better team.
''He started on the field a few days ago, and I really like what I see,'' hitting coach Greg Walker said.
This is bad journalism. A key part of context was left out of this sentence accidentally. Here's how it should read:
Walker:"[Podsednik] started on the field a few days ago, and --
Walker hears a solid crack of the bat. He turns away from where Podsednik is shagging flies and sees Jermaine Dye in the batting cage lining ball after ball into the gap.
Walker:...I really like what I see!
Context is everything.
''Until he faces live pitching in a game, it's going to be hard to tell, but we're already in the process. All he has to do now is get up to game speed.''
Cowley cut this quote off early. I listened to the tapes, and the entire quote is:
"All he has to do now is get up to game speed, and then he'll be able to be terrible at the level at which we have come to expect him to be terrible."
Again. Context.
It is well-documented now that he rushed to get back from a strained thigh muscle last spring, and once he started the season in an 0-for-16 slump, his bat easily could have been mistaken for a shovel.
Boy. Shoddy. Again, there is a missing piece here. It should read:
...once he started the season in an 0-for-16 slump -- or, at any other time in his major league career, except for in 2003 with Milwaukee (the only season his OPS+ was over 100, meaning, by that relatively crude but sometimes telling statistical measure, that that was the only season he was better than league average as a hitter) -- his bat easily could have been mistaken for a shovel.
Makes more sense that way, yes?
''First and foremost, my legs feel good. If I have my health and my legs underneath me, I can work from there. It gives me a confidence at the plate that I can always fall back on [my legs].
Without your legs you might not have been able to achieve your awesome career 88 OPS+, or legged out almost but not quite 30 doubles in any year of your career.
I can lay down a bunt, beat out an infield chopper, those sort of things. I can measure everything by the way I feel from my health.
I can ground out softly to the right side. I can pop up to short. I can single into the hole between short and third. Then I have gone 1-for-3 and people will get excited because I am hitting .333! Scotty's back!
"Last year, I rushed to get back. I mean, we're taking the field as the defending champions, and I wanted to be there on Opening Day. And because of that, I kind of dug myself into a hole.''
That hole led to Podsednik pressing, pressing led to questioning, questioning led to a disappointing .261 batting average, and the Sox lost a weapon at the top of the lineup that played a big part in their 2005 World Series title.
Podsednik did have a dreadful year last year. How dreadful? It was even worse than the year he had in 2005, when everyone decided he was awesome. For the record, his "disappointing" .261 in 2006 represented ten fewer hits than he had in his world-beating 2005. Ten. Fewer. Hits. In only 17 more AB.
He had one fewer double in 2006, but 5 more triples (so his legs were fine, I guess) and 3 more home runs. Which means his SLG was actually higher last year than in 2005. He also walked seven more times in 2006. And if you care about RsBI, which I do not, he had 20 more.
All things considered, he probably had a better hitting year in 2005...his OPS+ was 10 points higher, and despite the fact that of his 147 hits, 118 were singles and zero were HR, he did get on base more efficiently. Whatever. They are both abysmal years for a starting outfielder in MLB. And more importantly, this is why you can't use BA to judge anything. .290 vs. 261, in roughly the same number of AB, represents about two bloop singles per month.
''I'm starting to get that confidence back and starting to get over that mental hurdle as far as my health goes,'' Podsednik said. ''I've had no setbacks, no complications. Skill-wise, it's going to be a matter of going out there, getting my work in, making adjustments and go from there."
Hopefully the adjustments will be: suddenly becoming good at hitting.
Rick Sutcliffe on Scott Podsednik in Game One of today's ALDS (very slight paraphrase, I think):
"You know, you just can't underestimate what Scott Podsednik did in that first inning. He did a great job."
Here's what Scott Podsednik did in the first inning:
He got hit by a pitch. He was bunted over to second. He stole third. He came home on a fielder's choice.
Now, what can he take credit for? Getting hit by a pitcher with no control? No. Being moved over to second? No. Stealing third? Okay. Coming home on a fielder's choice? Not really.
And let's look at that steal of third. Considering that the ChiSox' best hitters were coming up, was this a good idea for a guy who was 5 for his last 10 in SB? I don't think so. Especially since a few innings later he tried to steal second and was thrown out by ten feet. It did get him to 3rd with one out, but look at what happened in the rest of the inning:
S Podsednik hit by pitch. T Iguchi sacrificed to catcher, S Podsednik to second. J Dye hit by pitch. S Podsednik stole third. P Konerko grounded into fielder's choice to third, S Podsednik scored, J Dye out at second. C Everett singled to right, P Konerko to second. A Rowand singled to center, P Konerko scored, C Everett to third. A Pierzynski homered to left center, C Everett and A Rowand scored. J Crede fouled out to catcher.
So, after the steal and the FC, it went single, single, homer.
I just don't think there is anything to value that much in this inning from Podsednik. He got on base, which was good, but in a passive way. And he did steal a base, but in an incredibly risky way. Just because it was successful does not make it a good decision. Expecially the way the ChiSox pounded Clement.
I literally can't believe this, but Podsednik just hit a 3-R bomb, his FIRST of the year. For this, you may congratulate and praise him. However, for the record, this fact says a lot more about how awful the Sox' pitching is, than about how good Scott Podsednik is. Trust me.
...has an opinion on the ten best moves of the 2005 off-season. Here's one:
6. Carlos Lee, Milwaukee Brewers for 7. Scott Podsednik, Chicago White Sox: These two are linked together forever now. This trade was one of those great baseball trades. It satisfied obvious needs for both teams and made both teams better. Lee is coming into his own. If he commits himself to getting in better shape, I think there is another level in his production.
Podsednik gave the White Sox their personality and style. He defined them for the first half of the season. What really proves his importance to the Sox is the fact that his leg issues have reduced his impact on the game and has, in turn, changed Chicago's approach as evidenced by their second-half swoon.
I thought we were done with this.
Scott Podsednik and his .699 OPS and his 0 HR did not help the White Sox win very many games. What did help them win games, in the first half, was extraordinary starting pitching and a very good bullpen. Scott Podsednik's injury coincided with a natural regression to the mean for their pitchers.
Carlos Lee has 32 HR this year. He has an .836 OPS and 40 doubles. He even has -- for those of you who care -- 12 SB and has only been caught 4 times. Does anybody really think that the White Sox offense would be worse if Carlos Lee were still on the team? Still?
Jeff Diebold, Chicago Subj: Overrated? How can you say Scott Podsednik is overrated? Saying he isn't doing "his job" because he hasn't hit a home run. Do you watch any White Sox games? Yeah, I didn't think so. If you did, you would know that his "job" isn't to hit home runs, but to get on base and to score runs. He does both of these very well. Looking at yesterday's double-header at Texas, you can see what he does to this team. Scotty P. has been on the DL, and the whitesox have been in an offensive slump. Scott comes back yesterday, and the sox score 6 runs in the first game and 8 in the second game. Overrated? I don't think so. He is a leadoff man. The job of someone hitting leadoff isn't to hit home runs, it is to get on base and to get into scoring position. I would love to hear what you think.
Perry: I also live in Chicago, so I've seen more than my share of White Sox games this year. That changes nothing. In today's game, which is still one, in historical terms, dominated by offense, teams must get power production from the corner positions. As mentioned Podsednik has zero home runs on the season and is on pace for only 28 extra-base knocks this year. What's more, he's slugging only .297 (!) away from hitter-friendly U.S. Cellular. That's just awful power production for a left fielder, and nothing he does can compensate for that fact.
As for Pod's native merits, getting on base and scoring runs, well, he's not particularly adept at those, either. Podsednik's on-base percentage of .345 ranks only 74th in baseball, and his runs scored tally, which is a flawed, team-dependent measure to begin with, ranks ... wait for it ... 74th. Also keep in mind that Podsednik's offensive abilities, such as they are, are made to look better by the tendencies of U.S. Cellular.
Podsednik has his merits. He's an excellent defender in left, and he runs the bases well. However, there are quite literally more than 200 other hitters who have been more productive with the bat this season. Podsednik is the most overrated player in baseball, and it's not a particularly close call.
So, some of our loyal readers have mentioned that we should spend at least a little time discussing writers who are good at what they do. So, here's the FJM Check-Plus of the Week, from FoxSports.com's (!) Dayn Perry:
The following is an exercise in craven subjectivity.
We're talking overrated and underrated. Any time these two words are introduced into the discussion, you're taking into account individual perceptions, however skewed and adulterated those might be...
If they were a band, they'd be Coldplay. Yep, it's the top 10 most overrated players for 2005...
All right. I am ready. Tell me how Adam Dunn is overrated, so I can kill myself.
1. Scott Podsednik, LF, White Sox
Oh my God, I am so excited. My heart is beating at like 4x normal rate right now.
To hear many in the media tell it, Podsednik is the catalyst for the best team in the American League. To hear the numbers tell it, Podsednik is a below-average performer by left-fielder standards. He has his merits — good defense, solid on-base skills, speed on the bases — but his failings are more critical. To wit, he can't hit for power. At all. Podsednik's .337 slugging percentage is appalling for a corner outfielder playing half his games in one of the best power parks around. A left fielder with no home runs this late in the season isn't doing his job, no matter how many bases he steals.
It's just...music to my ears. Someone is actually saying it. I might start crying.
3. Hank Blalock, 3B, Rangers
Blalock has loads of ability, but his levels of offensive production are illusory. That's because Ameriquest Field is drastically inflating his numbers.
Consider his career batting line on the road: .241 AVG/.300 OBP/.401 SLG. Now contrast that with his work at home: .316 AVG/.386 OBP/.566 SLG. Until he learns to hit away from Arlington, Blalock won't be the All-Star he's passed off as.
Okay...not the best grammar there at the end, but you convinced me. I didn't think of Blalock as overrated. Now I kind of do.
4. Kevin Millar, 1B, Red Sox
Folksy and likeable? Sure. Idiot, Cowboy Up and all that stuff? Sure. Productive? Nope. This season, Millar is putting up a batting line of .270 AVG/.357 OBP/.367 SLG, which isn't adequate for a defensively challenged first baseman. He's had a couple of very good seasons in his career (both as a Marlin), but he's been unable to produce at all on the road in recent seasons (Fenway is a haven for right-handed batters). Regardless of clubhouse chops, he needs to be benched for road games and cut loose altogether after this season.
Fish in a barrel, but he's right. Although, I don't think there is really anyone who overrates Millar these days. Ditto his #5, Victor Zambrano.
6. C.C. Sabathia, SP, Indians
In some circles, Sabathia is regarded as an ace. He's not. In only one season has Sabathia worked at least 200 innings while maintaining an ERA better than the league average. This season, his ERA has risen to a career-worst 4.75. Sabathia's still only 25, but the time has come to realize his promise.
Fair enough.
7. Zack Greinke, SP, Royals
Fits and starts for a pitcher this young are to be expected, but a 6.28 ERA? Greinke was once hailed as the best pitching prospect in baseball, but it's not likely he'll ever live up to those expectations. Why?
Greinke posts low strikeout rates in tandem with fly-ball tendencies. That's a dangerous mix. No matter how good a pitcher's command might be, if he's allowing a lot of balls in play and a lot of those balls are in the air ... well, that's bad. Press clippings aside, don't expect future greatness from Greinke.
Ignoring the nebulous "command." Talking about K-rates and GB/FB ratio. I might have a crush on Dayn Perry.
8. Ichiro Suzuki, RF, Mariners
Ichiro is a cultural luminary, an important figure in baseball history and a thoroughly likeable and engaging athlete. He also hits for average, runs the bases well and plays an exceptional right field.
However, Ichiro lacks secondary hitting skills. That means he doesn't draw walks and doesn't hit for power.
Because of these deficiencies, he's a player who needs to hit .330 or higher to be effective. Some seasons, he does that, and some seasons he doesn't. When you consider all Ichiro signifies and his global popularity, he's worth the attention he gets. However, through the prism of on-field performance, he's not.
Ichiro is overrated! Ichiro is overrated! Wheeeeeeeeeeeeee!
The last two are Sean Casey and Klesko. Whatever. The point is, Dayn Perry, we salute you.
I hear you, dak. This was just a little palatte cleanser. Overall, I'd like to go 99% bad, 1% good -- so look for the next FJM Check-Plus, a review of a Peter Gammons chat, coming to the site in March 2008.
Sure, Neyer, fine. I picked Gammons because his chats are the exact opposite of Joe's -- succinct, fact-based, and directly in response to the posed question.
