Cuckoo for Nick Canepa: Assumptions and false narratives

This morning MLB owners approved the Padres sale from John Moores to the O'Malley/Fowler/Mickelson group. Last evening Nick Canepa wrote a column called, Padres appear headed in right direction. It made me say, "Cuckoo." . . .

For the most part the column wasn't bad. Canepa advocated retaining CEO and President, Tom Garfinkel, with which I wholeheartedly agree (I'll say something about the Garfinkel Situation later). Canepa also said other stuff. I hate to nitpick but I come undone when I read confounding ideas, and all it takes is one. To wit:

Byrnes reminds me a bit of former GM Kevin Towers. After former boss Jeff Moorad fired Towers, I wrote Moorad’s first major decision would be the worst he would make as an owner. I wasn’t wrong. Moores, who still had controlling interest in the team, shouldn’t have allowed it to happen.

Oh yes Nick, I remember. I believe it was October of 2011 when you last referenced this sentiment and I skewered your column for it.

But there wasn't just one confounding idea. There were at least two! Canepa would go on to write his next puzzling tidbit in the subsequent paragraph:

But that’s baseball. Towers is doing fine in Arizona. And, after making the decision to replace KT with Jed Hoyer — another mistake, not because Hoyer was ill-equipped, just a bad fit here — Moorad made it right in naming Byrnes GM after Hoyer bailed to take on the unenviable (but more lucrative) task of trying to put the Cubs back together again.  

Cuckoo. I'm going to try and work this one out. Here it goes . . .

Jed Hoyer was not ill-equipped to take a job as GM of the Padres. This means that he was equipped to take a job as GM of the Padres. Yet another way to say it would be to write that he was qualified, prepared or ready.

So if Jed Hoyer was qualified for the job of general manager then why on earth was he a bad fit in San Diego?

I'm relying on a thesaurus now.

If you are fit then one could say that you are competent. Or, qualified. Or, prepared. Or even, ready.

But if you are a bad fit then you are the opposite of fit, which means you are incapable. At least that's what the thesaurus says: Incapable is the antonym for fit. And since Jed Hoyer was a bad fit in San Diego I am left to assume that Nick Canepa believes that Jed was simultaneously incapable and qualified. 'Tis a conundrum we have here.

The reader is left to assume what Nick Canepa is talking about. Since I am someone who is dialed in to the local baseball scene I am going to make an assumption which may be totally off-base.

I think Canepa is trying to convey that while Jed Hoyer was qualified and ready to become a GM in major league baseball he was not suited for the job in San Diego. Jed came from large market Boston where the pockets were deep and perhaps Canepa feels that he didn't have the proper mindset to operate on a shoestring budget in small market San Diego. Does that sound reasonable?

It doesn't sound reasonable when you consider that Jed Hoyer focused heavily on the draft (a place where small market teams can exploit available talent at relatively modest cost) and also emphasized building a club that could use PETCO Park to its advantage. Using PETCO to its advantage means building a strong rotation and bullpen along with defense and speed which are all relatively inexpensive attributes when juxtaposed with free-agent power hitters. It kind of sounds like Jed Hoyer understood what it meant to build a club in small market San Diego and maybe he was . . . a good fit?

This isn't a defense of Jed Hoyer. He's gone. Whatever.

I wrote this because Nick Canepa makes no sense. When I write things I always re-read them to see if it makes sense. Sometimes my ideas are not coherent. So I go back and fix what I wrote. Sometimes it still doesn't make sense and I say, "Too bad, you're reading this for free!"

I tried to figure out what Nick said. I offered an idea. And then I debunked myself and quite possibly Nick. I'm pretty sure it's what Nick Canepa meant and all I can think is: He sure displays an amazing commitment to a false narrative.

Where art thou, Tim Sullivan?

Cuckoo for Nick Canepa: Subjective payroll analysis

Nick Canepa wrote a column about Phil Mickelson's role in the new Padres ownership group. And if you can imagine, I took umbrage with a small part:

Many San Diegans who voted for the building of Petco Park feel they were victims of a bait-and-switch by Padres ownership, believing Moores and management had not delivered on their promise of a solid, contending franchise. The Padres never said they were going to spend like the Yankees, but player payroll has been among the lowest in baseball for some time and the results haven’t always been pleasant.

In many ways I agree with the first part of this excerpt. Proposition 98 passed after the Padres' World Series appearance against the Yankees and then Moores packed it in until 2004. This (in)action was horribly unfair to Padres fans.

My issue is with Canepa's last sentence. It feels lazy. Canepa writes:

 ...player payroll has been among the lowest in baseball for some time...

When Canepa writes this I feel it's lazy because it is written in a way that says, "I don't really care to do any research."


Payroll has been the lowest for "sometime"? It's such a subjective frame of reference, what does that even mean? And what defines "lowest"? This is also subjective. Are we talking bottom half, third, or quarter of the league in payroll? With 30 teams in MLB, one could say that team number 15 is part of the lowest.

What do Padres fans know right now? We know that payroll has been brutally low since John Moores decided to put a mistress on the books. His subsequent divorce diminished the product on the field from 2009-2012. But the Moores divorce is not the entire story of payroll history in the East Village. PETCO Park existed from 2004-2008 and if my memory serves correctly I don't think that payroll was among the lowest in MLB at that time.

Let's define "lowest" payroll. It's completely subjective but I'm going to say that it is defined by being in the bottom 3rd of the league. So:

Teams 1-10 are the top third -- Well-to-do types.
Teams 11-20 are middle third -- Floating along, accidental like on the wind.
Teams 21-30 are the bottom third -- Living off revenue sharing.

I have yet to research this so I run the risk of making Nick Canepa look like he was correct but I think the exercise is valid regardless.

Let's take a  look at opening day payroll and where the Padres ranked amongst their competitors. (Here is a second source, and probably a more reliable one, which shows nearly identical dollar amounts).

2004 -- 18th place -- Middle Third -- $54, 639, 503
2005 -- 17th place -- Middle Third -- $62, 888, 192
2006 -- 17th place -- Middle Third -- $69, 896, 141
2007 -- 24th place -- Bottom Third -- $58, 110, 567
2008 -- 19th place -- Middle Third -- $73, 677, 616
2009 -- 29th place -- Bottom Third -- $42, 796, 700
2010 -- 29th place -- Bottom Third -- $37, 799, 300
2011 -- 28th place -- Bottom Third -- $45, 869, 140
2012 -- 30th place -- Bottom Third -- $55, 244, 700

So what does this information tell us?

During the PETCO Park era, payroll has fluctuated between the bottom middle third of MLB teams and the absolute bottom of the bottom third.

The first 5 years in PETCO Park (almost first 5 years . . . damn you 2007 for ruining my narrative!) the Padres were in the middle third of payroll. I believe this is where payroll should be*.

*A run of sustained success where attendance is thriving and people in San Diego actually care could allow the Padres to push the upper threshold of the middle third in payroll. Merely an opinion, thinking out loud.

We see that the dramatic shift in payroll occurs in 2009 at the time when John Moores began going through a divorce and sold the team on layaway to the Jeffrey Moorad group.

This all comes down to the use of subjective reasoning to shape narratives. Padres fans have the right to be perturbed at the team and for their thrifty ways in a new ball park but a newspaper's job is to provide adequate information to illuminate its readership.

I think Canepa fails here by using what I've termed "lazy" language. The type of language that says, "I don't care to do any research because it takes too long and god damn it, I have a narrative that I'm sticking too and for cripes sake this whole article is about Phil Mickelson, who is not Mike Schmidt, anyways! Geez! Don't you people have a sense of humor?"

Cuckoo for Nick Canepa: A telephone call to discuss how Chase Headley is still not Mike Schmidt

Following Kevin Acee's lead, Nick Canepa used Thursday morning's edition of the U-T to finally throw his two cents into the mix regarding Josh Byrnes' deadline non-moves and extensions.

I called out both columnists last week for not writing anything about the Quentin extension and it kind of pissed Canepa off. What can I say . . . I'm cuckoo.

Nick Canepa's Thursday column was pretty well written. I found myself nodding my head in agreement. And then the whole column unraveled.

As Canepa praised Josh Byrnes and my head nodded, a familiar jewel emerged:

What a professional July for Byrnes. He extended the contracts of left fielder Carlos Quentin and closer Huston Street and refused to give away Headley, who isn’t Mike Schmidt but may be his most reliable position player.

 Wut the wut? Didn't Nick use this same Mike Schmidt reference a couple of weeks ago?

I could not let this comparison stand! I decided to call Nick Canepa and record the call for your enjoyment . . .


[Pleasantries exchanged. Loathing confirmed.]

AJM: Who is Mike Schmidt?

CANEPA: Seriously? He was a third baseman for the Phillies.

AJM: Did he have a mustache?

CANEPA: Yes. What's your point?

AJM: I'm trying to figure something out, be patient. Was he a switch hitter?

CANEPA: That's the problem with young people. Asking if Michael Jack Schmidt was a switch hitter? You're an idiot.

AJM: I meant sexually.

CANEPA: What?

AJM: Never mind. Did he win MVP awards?

CANEPA: Three, Senor Internet writer. Avenging Jack Murphy. What a bunch of crap.

AJM: Be patient. Did he win gold gloves?

CANEPA: He was the best. How old are you?

AJM: My age is not relevant to this discussion.

CANEPA: Your brain is not germane to this discussion.

AJM: German? I'm not German. What does that have to . . .

CANEPA: What is the point of all of this?

AJM: Sorry. If Chase Headley shaved his beard but kept his mustache would he kind of be like Mike Schmidt?

CANEPA: Have you even seen Schmidt's mustache? His mustache was the Johnny Weismuller of mustaches.

AJM: Who?

CANEPA: Its an Olympics reference. That's the problem with people today, they don't appreciate yesterday. You've probably never even seen a Bogart film.

AJM: I forgot what, oh wait. Bogart?

CANEPA: Bogart! Do you even read my columns before you lampoon them?

AJM: Let's move this along, sir. I know you're busy. Has anyone ever really suggested that Chase Headley is Mike Schmidt? I'm pretty sure everyone is aware that he's good, and could have value to many teams, but that he's no Hall of Famer. Certainly no Mike Schmidt.

CANEPA: I'm trying to make a point by using the Schmidt reference ad nauseum.

AJM: Well, I don't get it.

CANEPA: Good god, don't you people have a sense of humor? Would it have worked better if I had written that Chase Headley is no Joe Randa?

AJM: [... smiles...]

AJM: [...squeals like school girl...]

AJM: [... quickly hangs up phone...]

AJM; [... goes and writes in diary...]

*I didn't actually call Nick Canepa. This is merely an imagined phone-call Q&A with Nick Canepa.

Kevin Acee takes it upon himself to write about the Padres after winning a game of Candy Land with Nick Canepa

In the interest of fairness it is my duty to type kind words towards the U-T's Kevin Acee.

It took a week but a U-T columnist finally acknowledged the contract extension of Carlos Quentin. Of course the catalyst for the Quentin mention was the off-the-wall extension of closer Huston Street, but hey, complainers can't quibble. Or can they . . .


Of course they can! But I'm not going to.  I'll just suggest that you go read Kevin Acee's column, Street signing points in right direction,  providing this tasty nugget for you:

Clearly, what’s underway is an attempt to reverse history, to stem the attrition and to no longer be awful.

I enjoyed this line. Pointed and accurate, it's a piece of criticism that the Padres are deserving of, no matter how many positives future generations of ownership perform. The ownership of the hour in San Diego will always be paying for the sins of their Padres*. It is a disappointing reality based on more than 40 years of pain.

*Do you see what I did there? Padres = Fathers? Oh never mind.

And what of the Huston Street extension? When I heard that extension talks were underway with Street, despite his excellent numbers, I thought it was ludicrous! When I heard that the Padres and Street consummated the deal on Sunday I was incredulous!

Then I saw the terms of the deal. Two years at $7M annually for a relatively young guy who currently earns more than that in 2012? I'm not sure what Street's thought process is but I think that this was a good deal for the Padres. This is the deal the Padres would have liked to have given Heath Bell which we now see would have been like wiping our rear ends with $14M and then pissing on it and lighting it on fire. A disgusting proposition.

Huston Street's K/9 has jumped by 3 over the previous two seasons. Will this rate continue? If not what will Street look like as a Padre? And by what will Street look like as a Padre, I don't mean in 2013 and 2014, but in a matter of days?

In closing, I'm glad that Nick Canepa didn't write the linked column from above.

Are we there yet?

Twisting and turning north on Interstate 5, I attempted to quiet my mind.

On a road trip there are no real expectations to have of children other than the frequency in which you will hear the inevitable, "Are we there yet?"

All bets are off on the road. The only given is whether the aforementioned question will be proposed more or less than 19 times.

I had already received the Children's Inquisition twelve times after a mere 45 minutes into what would ultimately prove to be a 6 hour road trip to California's central coast. I could only laugh, the shoe now firmly on the other foot as an adult*.

*This stage of development is often questionable.

Driving through San Juan Capistrano, my mind silent, I thought back to my family's arrival in California.

I looked at Mrs. AJM and said, "Father AJM had initially thought of relocating us to Orange County rather than San Diego."

She submitted a nod and question. "Really?"

Looking ahead at the armada of Sunday afternoon break lights, which become more prevalent as one transitions to Los Angeles, I nodded in affirmation.

"Yeah . . .", my voice trailing off in a reflective pause.

Out of the corner of my eye I could see Mrs. AJM waiting for more, as if to say, "You're the one who brought it up. What's your point?"

I acquiesced.

"Yeah. If my parents would have moved to Orange County I 'd be an Angels fan. And then my life would have been a lot easier."

Mrs. AJM laughed.

From the back of the car I heard a committed, "Are we there yet?"

Lucky number thirteen! There was little doubt that this trip would be recollected for hitting the "over" on the Children's Inquisition very early in the day.

When we arrived in Pismo Beach yesterday I learned that the Padres had extended Huston Street: Two years at $7M a piece. Surprised that Street would take less than he's earning in 2012 for the guarantee of an extra year on his contract I thought back to Carlos Quentin's contract extension of a week ago.

As a Padres fan I silently asked, "Are we there yet?"

The Padres have more issues to address than just a left fielder and a closer. Of course the Padres aren't there yet! Like the AJM family 45 minutes into a six hour drive there's still driving to be done . . .

***
I watched the Red Sox play the Yankees last night with a sick daughter. She said, "Why are people Yankees fans?"

I didn't have the heart to feed her propaganda in such a weakened state. I opted to tell her the truth...

***
XX1090 comes in perfectly all the way up here in the Central Coast. I haven't met any Padres fans yet...

***
I totally just went Nick "Sez Me" Canepa on you. %&*#! I apologize...

***
...

A tree falling in an empty wood (or how U-T columnists cover the Carlos Quentin extension)

The sports columnists for the U-T, Nick Canepa and Kevin Acee, have each been critical of the Padres during the 2012 season, and fairly so. Each writer also stated unique views of Padres LF Carlos Quentin earlier in the season.

Allow me to take you on a timeline tour . . .


JUNE 3rd
Nick Canepa pens a column critical of the Padres with Carlos Quentin at its epicenter. Canepa writes:

And I say, no. Keep him. Re-sign him. Give the suffering fans in this town a hook on which to hang their hat. Be somebody for a change. Man up. It’s time to stop taking organizational laxatives and eat some cheese, rice and crow — you know, something that binds. 

When you tell somebody to "man-up" you're essentially calling them a girl which is sexist and offensive to the delicate sensibilities of the masses. When somebody does "man-up" it should be acknowledged. A form of "manning-up*", if you will.

*I foresee a Peyton Manning column in our future.


JUNE 6th
Kevin Acee pens a column critical of the Padres with Carlos Quentin at its epicenter: Acee writes:

So it is with much reluctance that I submit Carlos Quentin as trade bait.

 Disagreeing with the lead columnist? I like it.

Bottom line, the Padres aren’t good enough (or that close to getting there) to justify keeping Quentin right now. And besides, I just don’t believe Quentin is a guy you build your team around. Not that he needs to rise to that level to justify keeping him, but I’m not even sure the Padres could afford him at $7 or $8 million a year, which he will certainly deserve after this season.  

So you're saying the Padres don't have money? So it might be a story if they could spend that much? Or that if, by some act of God, the Padres spent even more, it would be a three part series!?

Oh, the Padres will be better if they have Quentin.

 Wait. So they should keep him? I sense conflict and passion, the seed and fertilizer of stories!

Now is the time when we fast-forward along our line of time. The Padres are terrible, Huston Street is an All Star even though Acee think Denorfia should represent San Diego, the Chargers season is on the horizon, blah, blah, blah . . .

July 22nd (morning)
Carlos Quentin signs a three year, $27M dollar contract extension with the San Diego Padres. The contract includes a No Trade Clause.

July 22nd (evening)
Nick Canepa does his best Nancy Drew and writes about Chargers Mysteries.

July 23rd
Kevin Acee writes about Penn State and how it got what it deserved. What it deserved? I'm assuming this column includes descriptive epithets about rape and death.

July 24th
Nick Canepa writes about a football referee. A fricking retired NFL referee!
Kevin Acee writes about Chargers rookie free agents and which ones might make the roster.

July 25th
Kevin Acee writes about AJ Smith signing players to contract extensions and doing it NOW! And as a bonus Acee throws in a little story on what the depth chart looks like on the eve of training camp. Depth charts. Yeah, those never change.

July 26th
Nick Canepa writes about the battle for the Chargers' kicking job. Guys who strike balls with their feet! Guys who can't tackle. Guys who are on the field for an aggregate of two minutes each game.

Kevin Acee's U-T archive
Nick Canepa's U-T archive

For two columnists who held such passionate feelings about the future of Carlos Quentin in early June, I find it astounding that neither has written a story about his contract extension. Don't they think it was a terrible decision to sign an injury prone player who's about to turn 30? Don't they think the extension represents a commitment to fans and ultimately a sign of hope that future dollars will be spent on talent in San Diego? A little of both maybe?

The financial commitment to Quentin represents the largest flow of cash* from the Padres since the great Little League uniform distribution of '12, yet nary a story was written?

* Just kidding. I think it was the remodeling effort for the introduction of a Hodads location at PETCO Park.

These statements and questions from me are merely rhetorical outrage. I'm not really surprised. We've heard both Canepa and Acee tell us how many clicks their Chargers stories get. We know that the Manchester & Lynch regime is but a cheerleader for all things Chargers and that they direct which stories will be written.

Maybe our columnists have directives from above to ignore the story and to instead write Chargers fluff as illustrated by our timeline above. What this amateur knows though, is that the Quentin extension is a story, good or bad.

I wonder if our columnists even had a professional desire to follow up their columns from June. Furthermore, I question that if the Quentin extension story was on their radar, would they have even fought to write the piece?

I hope it's the former. And latter.

Cuckoo For Nick Canepa: People Chase Headley is not

In Monday's U-T Nick Canepa went on about how the 2012 Dream Team could beat the original Dream Team while simultaneously acknowledging the following:

• Michael Jordan was in his prime.
• Charles Barkley was phenomenal in 1992.
• People "who know the game" say that the best basketball ever played was during the 1992 Dream Team closed session practices.
• The 2012 edition of the Dream Team will get beat this year if it's not careful.

It was brilliant stuff. Let's move on to where he discusses Chase Headley in his hodge-podge-Sez-Me type column in which he never actually says "Sez Me" but certainly means it . . .


Nick Canepa would have us believe the following:

• Chase Headley will be traded.
• The Padres have depth at third base in the minors.
• Fred McGriff was given away in trade back in 1993.
• The columnist hates inter-division trades.
• Chase Headley is not Mike Schmidt.
• If a trade is executed between the rivals then the Padres should receive Magic Johnson.

Let's just see how Canepa wrote it:

Chase Headley is going to be traded. Let's just hope the Padres, who have some minor-league depth at third base, don't give him away (ala Fred McGriff). I hate inter-division trades. If the Dodgers want Headley, who is not Mike Schmidt, they should have to surrender Magic Johnson ...

I don't get Canepa.

Chase Headley, who is not Brooks Robinson, is a good ball player, a solid ball player.

Most fans would be loathe to watch Chase Headley, who is not Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah's couch professing his love for Katie Holmes, don Dodger blue but Canepa is ignoring a very important point.

If you want value for Chase Headley, who is not Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft, then you have to be willing to deal with every club in each league.

This is not the distant past. There will be no fire-sale, the likes of which fans endured in 1993. The current owners need to keep some value on this club so they're not just going to dump Chase Headley, who is not Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.

Is there depth in the Padres minor league system? Sure. There's James Darnell, who is not Jed Gyorko. And there's Jed Gyorko, who is not Chase Headley (who incidentally is not The Savior or the Anti-Christ).

I just hope that if the Padres do trade Chase Headley, who is not Mercury 7 astronaut Wally Schirra, they get a windfall for him. Alas, I don't know if Chase Headley, who is not Jessica Alba in her prime, is a player who could command some sort of franchise altering wealth of talent to move to San Diego.

But if Chase Headley, who is not George Brett, was Jessica Alba in her prime then we'd be looking at an entirely different reality.

But Chase Headley, who is not Wade Boggs, is Chase Headley. So I guess we'll have to wait until July 31st to find out what becomes of Chase Headley, who is none of the above listed names.

Editor's Note:
No superstar team led by Michael Jordan would lose to the 2012 Dream Team.

Cuckoo for Nick Canepa: Analogy predictions

Enough of the serious fate-of-print-media-in-a-digital-world posts. Alright? Let's get Cuckoo for Nick Canepa . . .


Yesterday Nick Canepa wrote a column about Padres pitching and the scarcity of health within the entire staff. A commentary on the wrath of Tommy John and the hold the miserable ex-Dodger has over our youthful arms, so to speak.

The column was good. It was fair. It was inquisitive. Wait . . . let me read it again. No, it was good. Aside from the allusion to farts in Spring Training it did well to mention the rash of arm injuries but also to ask why such arm injuries are occurring. After all, these sorts of things didn't happen in Nick Canepa's day. Pitchers were tougher. Nick Canepa didn't say that. I DID!

Jump inside of my head and play a game I've developed called:

Guess the Nick Canepa Analogy NOW, You Present Day Sissy!

If you've read the column then just go along with my premise. Now the column is about arm injuries suffered by Padres pitchers and carries a title of Armed and Endangered. With so many arms injured and unavailable I read in anticipation of a specific analogy that Canepa would surely make. Something about guns and sharks, maybe!

What do you think?

To my astonished Sunday morning eyes, Nick Canepa passed up a sure fire Cuban Missile Crisis/ Cold War/ Arms Race reference. With both Yonder Alonso and Yasmani Grandal (Cuban exiles) taking the field each day, the wealth of arms drafted in the June Amateur draft, and the failing arms at the big league level an Arms Race analogy seemed like a given.

But I was wrong. Nick Canepa surprised me. Congrats, Nick.

Cuckoo for Canepa Analogy:

Call it the Padres Pitching Pandemic. Historic Injury figures aren't readily available, but it's hard to fathom a major league pitching staff that has suffered such a barrage of various arm maladies, some serious enough to require surgery. Instead of the arms of Krupp, this baseball club has been the arms of Venus de Milo.

A freaking Venus de Milo reference! No arms! Ha ha. Didn't even see that coming.

And what of the reference to "the arms of Krupp"?

It could be argued that the Krupp family (German weapons manufacturer) of the Arms of Krupp was the forefather of the Cold War arms race between Russia and the United States. As such, I shall award myself 4 points.

If you saw the Venus de Milo reference coming then you get the maximum allotted points of 7.5*. Congratulations!

*Don't be dim. 7.5 is the number of columns one can read under the U-T's new pay-wall policy.

Thanks for playing today's edition of Cuckoo for Canepa!

A review of the new U-T Sports page

I used to read the Union-Tribune every day. Let me provide a little more context. I used to walk to a corner in the Gaslamp District and purchase one from a vending machine so that I could read the Union-Tribune every day beginning with the Sports page.

Over the years of depositing change* into the newspaper box I felt first hand the rising cost of news as well as the diminished size of our local newspaper. Was there less happening in the world? Much time has passed. Now it's called the U-T.

*I recall the days of .25 cents. Then .35 and .50 cents. Oh, crap. Quoting prices is the death knell of youth!

Yesterday the U-T presented their newly formatted Sports page in what has been described as more of a magazine style. It looks good. A lot of color pictures and a very cool black and white photo from the 1930s at the races in Del Mar. That's the one and only story on page 1. There are previews to other stories including Tight End competition amongst the Chargers, Everth Cabrera's dash for home in the Padres Saturday night win, and the upcoming Olympics in London. The only text written however belongs to the story of Del Mar and the opening of the track on Wednesday.

It's different . . .



I've been down on the U-T Sports page for sometime. Outside of in-season Chargers coverage, admiring a Tim Sullivan column, and laughing at Nick Canepa word jumbles I just don't get my news from there with any regularity. Now, with Tim Sullivan's unfortunate dismissal I have even less reason to return. You could say that I'm skeptical of it all: The paper's content and, its leadership (Doug Manchester and John Lynch).

Contrary to my usual concerns, yesterday's Sunday U-T Sports page was stacked with content. People complained via twitter that the Padres dramatic Saturday evening win in Chavez Ravine didn't deserve to be jammed all the way back on page 11. Sports Editor Jay Posner explained that the decision was a function of advertisements dictating how the inside of the paper is formatted but most importantly, to keep all of Major League baseball together.

In addition to the game recap written by Bill Center, the paper featured a Canepa column (D3*) on pitching injuries, a Chris Jenkins story on Kip Wells' fight to get out of the Mexican League, and a Q & A with Alex Hinshaw. There was a lot to digest. In a good way.

*For those irked that Everth Cabrera and the Padres did not receive mention until page D11, the Canepa column did appear on D3, right as readers open the paper. Maybe Canepa will get buried next time? No. OK. Let's move on.

Is the varied and increased content the product of this simply being the debut of a new format (and a Sunday no less) or is this what readers in San Diego are in for permanently?

The most important thing I read in Sunday's paper was the Q&A with new Executive Sports Editor, Larry Graham. Graham comes from ESPN.com (where he focused on AFC East football) but he also has newspaper experience on his resume.

Graham explains that they're hiring more people to deliver more content including more Chargers coverage (another blog) and increased prep coverage.  It sounds like many ideas will also revolve around the new U-T TV station and the increased staffing will look to deliver more "compelling stories".

Is there a lot more Padres coverage coming? Graham mentions a blog for the Padres which could be good, but it also sounds like the Friars will have to earn their bonus coverage. The largest metropolitan cities have all of the big four sports leagues: NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL. San Diego has but two of these leagues so sports coverage is distributed in the following way: Chargers, Chargers, Chargers, and Padres.

If you told me all of this 10 years ago I would have been ecstatic. More quality, local, sports content is all a sports junkie could ever ask for during a time when newspapers are downsizing. To integrate a more dense sports page with exclusive web content and a new television station is exciting and it is the dynamic type of product for which I'm willing to pay.

But it's not 10 years ago and again I return to that one little word: skeptical. The leadership at the U-T has made it known that they have an agenda and in terms of local sports it all revolves around a new stadium for the Chargers. They've also made it known that they will terminate the employment of their most talented writer (Tim Sullivan) if that writer does not walk mindlessly in lockstep with those in power. I find that to be a scary prospect when looking for unvarnished truth from those who call themselves journalists.

Will Padres coverage stagnate while emphasis on the Chargers' role in San Diego is emphasized by the U-T? Healthy skepticism is a hallmark of a critical mind but so is an openness to something new. I'm curious to see where the U-T goes.

Cuckoo For Nick Canepa: Hoyt Wilhelm and Knuckleballs

After my initial Cuckoo For Nick Canepa post, written yesterday, the UT promptly released news that the company would begin charging customers for their on-line content produced each day. I don't know that the UT is worth a dime of my money so we'll see how this series progresses.

A couple of weeks ago Nick Canepa wrote an article about the horrible television contract with Fox and the complete lack of progress being made with Time Warner Cable to distribute Padres games to a large segment of San Diego. Definitely a topic worthy of coverage by Nick Canepa.

While the column was timely, I did take umbrage (and I was not the only one) with the following analogy by Canepa:

And things are moving along about as swiftly as a Hoyt Wilhelm knuckle ball, but with very little movement.

There is nothing swift about the speed of a knuckleball in its path to homeplate. It be slow, indeed. Nick Canepa is trying to let his readers know that the contract negotiations are moving slow and he uses something a baseball fan can relate to: The slow moving knuckleball. I get it.

Since when, though, is there a scenario where a knuckleball has "very little movement"? 

Knuckleballs move ALL over the place. They move so much that catchers can't even catch them. They move SO much that the otherwise completely useless Doug Mirabelli found gainful employment because he was the only one who could catch a Tim Wakefield knuckler. Do you even comprehend what I just said? Doug "FREAKING" Mirabelli!

Doug Mirabelli was horrible at the game of baseball but he possessed perhaps one of the rarest skill-sets in Major League Baseball: He could catch the knuckleball. Truth be told I'm pretty sure he sucked at it too, only he sucked less than every other catcher holding down a job in the league. So even the best knuckleball catcher in MLB sucked. Why? Because the knuckleball MOVES!

Let's say you don't believe me about the movement of the knuckleball. Would you believe Hall of Famer, Willie Stargell? And I quoth:

”Throwing a knuckleball for a strike is like throwing a butterfly with hiccups across the street into your neighbor’s mailbox.”

Poetic, no? Why would Pops describe the ability to throw a knuckleball for a strike in such a way? Because it moves. It moves a lot. Knuckleballs move. It is, quite simply, what they do.

We've established that a knuckleball has movement, and as such, using it to describe something that is not moving at all (TV contract discussions) demonstrates an exercise in poor judgement by the writer. But what of the reference to Hoyt Wilhelm?

Hoyt Wilhelm was a knuckleballer during the 1950s. And 60s. And early 1970s. He pitched forever and he did it so well he made it into baseball's Hall of Fame. Its what knuckleballers do. They throw FOREVER.

Wilhelm was special though. He won games starting AND closing*. He was kind of like an early Dennis Eckersley except he didn't throw sidearm and his hair wasn't perfectly feathered. He threw a knuckleball. Which moved a lot. If you call yourself a baseball fan, you should know the name and exploits of Hoyt Wilhelm. I have a 1958 Topps baseball card of Hoyt Wilhelm. I KNOW ABOUT HOYT WILHELM.

How about a more contemporary example of a knuckleballer, though? I get that Wilhelm is the hallmark for those who throw the pitch but maybe an R.A. Dickey analogy might resonate with readers.

At the time Canepa's column was written Dickey was coming off a complete game 1-hitter in which he struck out 12 batters. Using Dickey would have made Nick Canepa look like a genius. You know why? Dickey followed that performance-up with another 1-hitter and struck out 13 batters in that one!

R.A. Dickey is also old. He's 11-1. And old. He's 37. But he's 11-1!

R.A. Dickey also just had a biography released earlier this year. He's kind of had an interesting life. R.A. Dickey also climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro during the off-season. If Nick had used Dickey instead of Wilhelm he could have wrote:

 "Things are moving as swiftly as an R.A. Dickey knuckleball dancing at altitude in equatorial Africa, but with little movement."

Canepa could have even mixed in an allusion to Ernest Hemingway had he used Dickey! Ah hell, what do I know**.

*He also didn't do any of that "1 inning" save crap that is so prevalent today. Hoyt Wilhelm worked.
** I know that I wrote this pretty swiftly on account of it being old news and me having to rush Mrs. AJM to the airport. Sorry if it reads like something Nick Canepa mailed-in.

[EDITED 8:43 am in an attempt to give the appearance that I did not completely "mail it in".]

Cuckoo For Nick Canepa

When I was a kid I would sit down at the table for breakfast with the San Diego Union Tribune in front of me and a bowl of Cocoa Puffs. I would read the sports page cover to cover. The Sports section of the UT was thicker during that time of my life, more to read.

With no CNBC in the old days, adults often read the business section of the daily paper to see how the NYSE performed, feverishly charting their personal portfolios. Baseball box scores were my stock index. As a baseball card collector this was my form of investment tracking. I was going to be rich one day courtesy of my little cardboard gods. Rich from cardboard, huh? I'm moving in two weeks and those cards are moving with me. What a burden those boxes have become.

In addition to the box scores, I also read all of the sports columnists. San Diego Union columnist and editor, Jack Murphy, had passed away years before I moved to San Diego but I read all of the columnists who worked in the path he had blazed. This included Nick Canepa who, incidentally, has been around forever. Nick Canepa is a goddamn institution in this town.

As a kid, I didn't really have opinions of Nick Canepa or the other columnists as writers. I just read and continued to eat the Cocoa Puffs, gradually carving deeper and deeper into the box.

By the time my brother would come down for breakfast the box of Cocoa Puffs or Fruity Pebbles, or whatever other cereal graced our cupboard would be nearly gone. And the brother would be pissed. But I was bigger than him so I paid little mind to his plaintiff wails. With the sports section finished, I started my day.

Older now, I use coffee for breakfast.

I drink coffee, sifting through San Diego's poor excuse for a sports section, and I develop my own opinions on those columnists who proffer their opinions. I don't like Nick Canepa's writing. There's a lot about it I don't like. Sometimes Canepa writes an entire column that is so bad it warrants a complete dissection. Fortunately he doesn't always do this because I simply don't have the time in my schedule to be the UT's watchdog.

For the uninitiated, there is always one guarantee with a Nick Canepa column: It will include at least one pop culture reference that nobody below the age of 40 will understand or a reference that could have been updated to reflect some sort of continuous improvement as a writer. 

I appreciate history as much as anybody but there's something to be said for a writer who can stay up to date with both pop and sports culture. Not everything has to be about how, "Things were better in my day!"

Evolve, that's all I ask.

Nick Canepa doesn't believe in evolution. As is the case, I will regularly take Nick Canepa to task for his crappy writing in a series called . . . Cuckoo for Nick Canepa*!

* Points of clarification: I was Cuckoo, or enthusiastic, for Cocoa Puffs. So I ate the whole box. Nick Canepa's writing drives me cuckoo, or insane. Therefore I will write about the insanity. Just so we're clear about the whole Cocoa Puffs analogy.

Nick Canepa is not unlike a 12 year-old

Last evening, Nick Canepa of the UT opined:

Where’s the hook? Why should the people who spend money for tickets want to watch these Padres? And, if a star develops, will he spend more than a few years here before he becomes too expensive, a la Adrian Gonzalez and Bell? The ship carrying a Tony Gwynn sailing forever on the USS San Diego Discount has sailed.

I find Nick Canepa's reasoning intellectually dishonest. He acts like the San Diego Padres are the only team who fail to keep their players as they become free-agents when in reality it's pretty difficult for any team to do it.

Adrian Gonzalez, acquired for nearly nothing in the winter of 2005, entered the same zip code* as Albert Pujols in terms of his production and proceeded to price himself out of the plans of nearly every major league team. So the Padres did what they had to do and moved him for controllable players. But the Padres did what approximately 25 of the other  MLB franchises would be forced to do. Worth mentioning?

*Maybe not zip code. State?

And since I mentioned Pujols let me also remind Nick Canepa that the slugger's former employer failed to keep him in St. Louis for the duration of his career. The Cardinals are a team with a massive following, sell-out crowds, and money in the coffers yet Pujols was only allowed to stay as long as his contract remained team friendly. Now Albert Pujols is an Angel.

Nick Canepa cites the departure of Heath Bell as another example of a player becoming too expensive. But that's not the truth. Heath bell became too expensive to offer a contract for a third year*. The Padres only wanted to be committed for two years. But why such a short commitment, Nick? Let us count the ways -- he's fat, with declining strikeout numbers, and a large crooked number for his age. Isn't it being responsible for the Padres to find another resource to fill a position that is only utilized for 70 innings per year? In Nick Canepa's mind the answer is clearly no or he would have referenced Huston Street and the flexibility of his contract in terms of both years and dollars.

*At which time he would be 37.

I'm not beyond criticizing my favorite baseball team but let's be honest about it. If Nick Canepa had asked when the Padres were going to start locking-up its younger players (see Cameron Maybin) similar to the way the Tampa Bay Rays have done I'd probably be applauding him right here. Maybe mention Jonah Keri's The Extra 2% and how the Rays have found success with such strategies as did the Indians in the 1990s. And then mention that JOSH BYRNES WAS WITH THE INDIANS DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME! YES! THE GUY IN THE PICTURE OF YOUR COLUMN!!!!

Canepa can't do this though. Perhaps the requisite research is above his pay-grade. Instead he gives us the same old arguments about the Padres when the reality is that the vast majority of teams can't keep players once they pass the threshold of super-stardom. These arguments, read by casual Padres fans, are then taken as gospel and repeated ad nauseum. The angry parishioners want answers and Canepa is their prophet. But they're receiving answers from someone who argues like a 12 year old*.

*From time to time I have the opportunity to work with 12 year-olds. These kids are fun but intellectually they aren't quite ready to put forth the effort to support their opinions -- because it requires work. Eventually they grow out of this condition. Well, most do.

As for Nick Canepa's question regarding why should Padres fans show up this season, I guess my answer would sound something like this: Because I love baseball?*

Absent gross malfeasance by the organization, isn't that reason enough?

*I could have also answered Canepa with more detail. More support of my opinions, if you will.

After the 2011 season he Padres added a bunch of pieces to a team in dire need of pieces and I'm curious to see the new formula in action. 

Under the tutelage of Darren Balsley, will Edinson Volquez return to the form that netted Josh Hamilton in a trade back in 2007? 

Will Yonder Alonso show the left-handed swing tauted as perfect for PETCO park? 

Will Cameron Maybin continue to show the abilities that have fans clamoring for a long term extension? 

Will Chase Headley and Tim Stuaffer continue to make strides forward?

Will Corey Leubke become a name known outside of San Diego? 

Does Carlos Quentin have a swing that plays in PETCO? Is he the anti-Ludwick?

Has the gutted bullpen been rebuilt because it's looking like there's some promise with Street, Cashner, and Boxberger? 

How many of the players from the number one system in Major League baseball (according to Keith Law), will make it to San Diego this summer? 

And I want to see the Padres beat up on the Dodgers, Giants, and Diamondbacks because Idisdain their existence.


I could come up with a few more intriguing questions/reasons but I'm at my threshold for words. Enjoy Fanfest if you're going tomorrow.

Media Commentary: A Major Award --The 2011 Homage to Suck

As of this writing Lee "Hacksaw" Hamilton of XX1090 holds a modest lead over the Union Tribune's Don Norcross for the worst piece of writing in 2011. Nick Canepa is in dead last* with 12% of the vote.
*Remember, coming in last place is a good thing in this competition. Although it still doesn't say much.

Who did I vote for? If you guessed Nick Canepa then you know AJM like the back of your hand.

This competition was difficult. While over 180 people viewed the post only 50 saw themselves fit to cast a vote. I respect that. If you're not a regular reader I was asking quite a bit of you to go review the work of these writers.* I appreciate you abstaining from the vote if you felt you didn't have the time to read their columns. Your exercise of caution is an admirable trait, a trait we we would do well to donate to our three nominees.

*Hacksaw is not a writer. He wrote something. There is a distinction.

But did I unduly influence you with how I worded the contestants' entries in the poll? Canepa's was the most innocuous. Norcross less so. But if someone wanted to vote without reading then a vote for Hacksaw would have been reasonable based on my unflattering remark about his attempt at writing.* Hacksaw's piece was also fresh on our minds. He was FJM'd the other day and, well he's Hacksaw.

*Lee Hacksaw Hamilton Throws-Up on Paper. And then Pushes Submit.

I went back and reread Nick Canepa's piece. I don't think people are giving Nick the proper credit for writing a truly poor column. It was bad.* So I voted for Nick. Primarily because he's been a newspaper man at the UT since the 60s. Maybe that's the problem. Never the less, I hold him to a higher standard than Hacksaw. Hacksaw isn't a writer. He's a talking head. And a muckraker. But he's no writer. In my eyes this honor belonged to Canepa, the pro.

*When I say "bad" I'm thinking Steven Segal post Hard To Kill. I bought Segal's pony-tail up until this point. I willed myself to believe that a guy with a pony-tail could be that bad-ass. It didn't hurt that he looked 6'5". And that he always did that move where he broke a guy's arm at the elbow. After Hard to Kill I stopped believing. In summation: Nick Canepa's effort was as bad as Steven Segal's pony tail, post-Hard To Kill, but most definitely not pre-Hard To Kill.

The funny thing. I knew Hacksaw would take the title. For one simple reason: he's a polarizing figure. We already knew this but here's further proof. In a span of 24 hours the FJM piece I wrote about Hacksaw became, by a sizable margin, the most read column for the month of December. Why? Because people love to ridicule* the Saw. Ridicule that is often deserved. And this is a problem.

* Do you ever listen to Jim Rome? He constantly mocks Hacksaw's voice and his shtick. Hacksaw has built A Sports Empire on bad PR from Jim Rome. Hacksaw is known across the country for being the punchline to a joke. RANCHO CUCAMONGA! Can you HEAR ME?

People don't necessarily have the time to research. They go to the radio because it's easy. It is a reflex, one that can be done concurrently with the action of commuting to and from work. People depend on the accuracy of information received from a guy who has been given a massive platform and megaphone. This isn't politics, no extra research need be necessary. It's sports and sports should be easy. But you and I know better. We've learned to take nothing at face value, not even our sporting news.

Why would XX1090 knowingly deceive us by putting this guy on the air?

I'm not positive if this analogy works but I would say that XX1090 views its listnership similarly to the way a casino looks at a bet on a football game. Both want to get action on each side. If 1,000,000 betters choose the Chargers this weekend and 1,000,000 take the Raiders the house wins because of the 10% "rake" on each bet. Similarly, a radio station with blindly faithful listeners to Hacksaw coupled with irate listeners who desire to make the phone call* reminding him that he's a big idiot is good for business. Both groups are listening and that equals profit.

*Or text! Text him your thoughts.

So XX1090 doesn't care about us. For a solid dose of reason we get Darren Smith in the afternoon but not after 4 hours of frontal lobe pollution from Lee "Hacksaw" Hamilton. And on top of it, they let him bang his ideas out on a keyboard. Yes, in addition to San Diego.com giving him a forum, XX1090 also posted Hacksaw's malarkey on their website.

This week we've seen Craig Elsten of 619 Sports filling in for a vacationing Darren Smith and in this time we've been privy to a polished and reasoned approach to every topic on the table. As I listen I imagine how perfect a fit Craig would be in Hacksaw's spot, leading into Darren Smith at 2 pm. And then I'm reminded of our betting analogy and I come back to a grim reality. A reality where intelligence is not a commodity willfully doled out to radio audiences.

We are stuck with Lee Hacksaw Hamilton. And I would say that we need NOT be stuck quietly. That we can use our voices to silence Hacksaw's. But in the end, that is all XX1090 really wants. Complaints mean we are listening. And the bills are being paid.

This however, does not mean we cannot call attention to the failings of our media members. You will have to set your own standards for what you are willing to accept from the media but here are mine:

When I witness egregious incoherence, profound lack of logic, or an utter absence of research in a published writing by a professional -- that professional will be called on it.*

* Throws mic down. 

Editor's Note [8:05 AM] 
I would be remiss if I did not point to Dan Hayes, Corey Brock, Craig Elsten and Tom Krasovic for giving us some semblance of sanity with their writing.

The "You Don't Know Jack!" Year In Review: Crappy Writing Needs An Award Too

During the past three months I've written three scathing critiques of articles by locally based journalists. All writers will write an homage to suck here and there but when the piece has egregious factual errors that lead to deception amongst readers then comment must be put on the record. That is what I would like to think that I have done with the articles by Nick Canepa, Don Norcross, and Lee "Hacksaw" Hamilton.

Were these articles the absolute worst written by professional journalists in San Diego during 2011? Likely not. But make no mistake, they were poorly constructed, riddled with errors, and completely "mailed-in" by their respective authors. And so I shall nominate them for worst of the year.

You can click the author's name above to go directly to the article or below you will find the links for the criticisms, which may be the easiest way to refresh your memory:

Nick Canepa Gets the FJMing He Deserves
FJM'd: Don Norcross and his subject, Padres GM Josh Byrnes
FJM'd: Hacksaw refuses to do the math that could be done on his fingers

Or perhaps your memory is pristine and you need not go through such time consuming acts; then now is the time to get yourself to the polls. Decision 2011!

Giving Nick Canepa The FJMing He Deserves

Fire Joe Morgan, the great website that moved onto a better, media-free world in late 2008, was the preeminent place for sports media criticism. Thus, to receive an FJMing, signifies a public demand for blood (or plasma if you would prefer) because a member of the media either mailed it in or failed at their most important task; making sense.

Which brings me to Saturday's column by Nick Canepa of the San Diego Union Tribune. I don't always agree with Nick Canepa. I'm speaking in code: what I mean to say is, I rarely ever agree with the man. But his article yesterday was on another level of "me-no-makey-sense". Let's explore.

Sez Me …

And here we go. Is there anything more tired than "Sez Me"? It's like always talking about Sculpin IPA or misspelling Will Venable's name.

In was in early October, 2009, that Padres boss Jeff Moorad fired General Manager Kevin Towers, and I wrote he’d just made the first major blunder of his captaincy.

Totally stupid blunder. Kevin Towers had only been here for 15 years. So dumb. It was like divorcing your wife after being married for 30 years and forfeiting nearly everything you own. Wait... someone did do that... we refer to him in these parts as, "The Guy Who Hired Kevin Towers In 1995". We're creative with our names around here.

For what money I have, Towers is the best GM in baseball, as he once again proved when he turned around woeful Arizona in a Phoenix minute (slower than New York’s, but fast enough).

Best GM in baseball based on having little money? I don't know what kind of money Nick Canepa has in his bank account but based on this being a Padres article I'm guessing it's nothing. I'm confused. Are there not better GMs than the guy who acquired Randy Meyers in 1998? And are we really assigning all of the credit in Arizona to Kevin Towers? People also wanted to give Towers the credit when Jed Hoyer was doing his part here in 2010. That Kevin Towers is clearly a God.

Moorad’s second blunder, obviously, was hiring Jed Hoyer as Towers’ replacement.

It would have been better to leave the position of GM vacant. Or bring back Joe McIlvaine.

Not that there was anything terribly wrong with Jed. Except that, coming here from snooty Boston, he obviously preferred big bowls of chowder to fish tacos. 

 Is this a small fish in a big bowl of chowder analogy? Or are we starting to equate snobbery with those who revel in soup?

So after two seasons he’s taken the first plane out of town to join fellow Red Sox brat packer Theo Epstein, who’s been given run of the dilapidated — but wealthy — Cubs.

Finally! A pop-culture reference! I loved Breakfast Club. And it was filmed in Chicago. Nick Canepa is owning us right now. OWNING. US.

Despite looking like a kid about to buy a prom night corsage, Hoyer seemed to know what he was doing. 

Wait. He looked like he knew what he was doing yet the hire was a blunder? Canepa is running circles around us. RUNNING. CIRCLES. AROUND. US. (My prom sucked. Canepa is mind-f*cking me right now.)

Like his predecessor, Hoyer was hamstrung by the Padres’ tight wallet. Unlike Towers, he chose not to stick around to see if he could handle the challenge and finish the work.

Towers stuck around for a reason. He wasn't fired sooner. You see, when a market is small, there is little chance of success unless the farm system is loaded. Towers failed to load the farm. Yet he kept his job. It's mysterious.

At least Epstein saw things through in Boston. Hoyer didn’t come close here.

Actually, in Theo Epstein's second year at the helm in Boston a World Series was claimed. And then Epstein quit after year three. Why? Because he wanted a contract extension. Just like Jed Hoyer.

Towers may not have drafted well — something I never will fully comprehend — but he had the great ability to fleece people in trades (the David Freese–for-Jim Edmonds deal was not one of them, but nobody’s perfect), and he got the club into the playoffs and World Series on a handmaiden’s budget.

CANEPA. IS. CORRECT. Towers was terrible in the draft! It's why the Padres haven't had a more sustained run of success.

But I must take umbrage with the crazy talk about getting the Padres to the World Series on a handmaiden's budget. Firstly because, I have no idea about the earning power of a handmaiden. Secondly, because the internet exists. The internet tells me that the Padres had the 9th highest payroll in 1998 and the disparity between 1st and 9th was a paltry $19 million.

And speaking of fleece(ing) I have two things to say: it's a comfortable product and also what Jed Hoyer did to the Florida Marlins. Hello Cameron Maybin. Goodbye fungible relief pitchers. (YES! I finally used the word fungible in a sentence.)

And no GM — maybe no GM ever — was better with pitchers, baseball’s plasma.

Some people write of "blood and guts" and others deal in "intestinal fortitude". Nick Canepa and I both broker in plasma. I sold my plasma in college and it allowed me to party like a rock star on Thursday nights.

Hoyer was in the process of rebuilding the club’s farm system, a good thing, when the glitter of Michigan Avenue beckoned. 

I have submitted "...rebuilding the club's farm system, a good thing...." as the understatement of the Mother f*ckING year.

At least he had that going for him, but even Jed readily admitted he screwed up this past off-season, sweeping a 90-win team of clubhouse leadership and miscalculating on veteran free agents who couldn’t cut it anymore.

I'm not a Hoyer apologist. But it's hard to calculate correctly on veteran free agents when the calculator you've been given is void of so many decimal places. You know this, Nick. So why mention it?

Young Hoyer also either bowed to upper management or public (I hope not) pressure to bring slugging minor league first baseman Anthony Rizzo

That Rizzo kid, for lack of a better word, RAPED the Pacific Coast League while an inept Brad Hawpe manned first base in PETCO Park. Why wouldn't he have been promoted?

Enter Josh Byrnes, former GM of the Diamondbacks when Moorad ran that club.

Our transformation is complete. We are now the San Diego Diamondbacks.

Byrnes was canned in Arizona, but he did some good things there. Many of the players Towers won with this year were brought in with Byrnes on the bridge. 

 I thought Towers gets all the credit because he's the Pitcher Whisperer. And there's also the matter of plasma.

What Towers did there was create a winning pitching staff and bullpen, his forte.

Uhhh.... Nick... I guess I'll give you the bullpen (only because, like you, I don't want to do the research) but the Diamondbacks only had four legitimate starters this year, three of which were acquired by Josh Byrnes (Hudson, Kennedy, Collmenter) and the other by Jerry Dipoto (Saunders). Good point though.

Byrnes, at 41, has a pedigree, having studied under good baseball people along the way. Hopefully, he’ll be more than a San Diego comet. Hopefully, he’ll buy, not rent.

Josh Byrnes has good pedigree. He's like a dog. And I'll be honest-- people who by houses are comfortable. I don't want a guy who's comfortable. Kevin Towers was comfortable. 15 years comfortable.

If Moorad wants to build a winner here, he has to keep GMs around long enough to learn their names. He can’t afford Blunder No. 3. …

 Jed's name only has three letters and I've heard Jeff Moorad say it on the Darren Smith Show numerous times. "Josh" on the other hand is a hella tricky name to master.

Losing assistant GM Jason McLeod, who’s headed for Chicago with Hoyer, may be the bigger loss …

Finally Nick Canepa makes crystal clear sense of this mess. I wish the clarity would have occurred before word number 553 of the column (I counted).

Epstein already has put the kibosh on Hoyer’s first planned move, signing Brad Hawpe …

Haha. Brad Hawpe jokes will never get old.

I can't wait to do this again.

Delusions de Dean Spanos

A quote from Chargers owner Dean Spanos in Nick Canepa's Monday UT column:

“I like A.J., even though he’s a bit goofy,” Spanos says. “I trust him. He’ll tell you he’s made mistakes. Who hasn’t? But he takes chances. Sometimes you lose the bet, but if you’re going to win a world championship, you’ve got to take chances. I learned that from my father in our business. A.J.’s committed 100 percent to this organization.

 Now that there have been close to a billion comments on Canepa's Monday morning column it may be too little too late to be taking the piss out of Dean Spanos and the above quote.

"Too little, too late" does not compute....I've never let being late to the party abbreviate my thoughts so here it goes...

God Help Us...and them.

Really? Really, Dean? You learned from your father, that in order to win championships, you have to take chances? Really, Dean? Are you even aware as to why this entire city has the worse case of blue balls in all of sports? It's because San Diego HAS NO CHAMPIONSHIPS!!! For f*ck's sake!
(click "Read More" to continue)

Reading that Canepa article only confirms that the Spanos family is completely out to lunch and has little clue about running a franchise. Is that being overstated? The Chargers have had a nice run since 2004 but that nice little run has occurred absent a Lombardi Trophy. Perhaps it's hyperbole to say Dean Spanos has zero clue how to run the franchise but Canepa's column is proof positive that if the Chargers win a championship it will likely be in spite of current ownership.

I feel an impending sense of doom as a Chargers fan. My brain tells me they are moving to Los Angeles, a locale which would prevent me from ever rooting for them. My heart tells me that even if the Chargers stay, the Spanos family will continue to fall short in bringing home the hardware. Furthermore, my own personal experience with meeting Dean Spanos tells me that we are doomed on all fronts.

Yes... I have a Dean Spanos story. Allow me to be your proxy in delivering a message of doom. This message however is for another post on another day (or maybe another hour).

Until then...

Next Week on the UT Charger Roundtable: Kevin Acee meets the Bloggers....and then Nick Canepa has an aneurysm

I was just watching the weekly Chargers Roundtable that Acee, Canepa, and Posner do for the Union Tribune and there was mention that Kevin Acee would have special guests next week: local Charger bloggers.

Acee's guests will be members of Bolts From The Blue and Glorify the Past. After watching the entire Charger Roundtable: what condescending pricks!

The only thing that ever really matters is perception and what I saw was a boss who told his beat writer he needed to do this to keep up with the competition (see: 619Sports.net)...... who incidentally, had already beat them to the punch on the concept. Oh.....and I also saw a crotchety relic of a columnist named Nick Canepa, nudge Acee and scoff at the notion of meeting with "non-journalists". A gathering with the steerage class of sports writers? Lord no! What a couple of ass-hats.

Or have I overreacted?

Go ahead and hover over the video. The mighty paper of record couldn't even spell [sic] Chargeres correctly. Also, if I'm not mistaken it was a Charger blog (GTP?) who suggested to Kevin Acee that he needed to make his UT videos available for embedding on other sites. Glad the paper lent credence to something a lowly blog suggested.

Editor's Note:
I don't think that I've missspelled anyting. Of coarse teh same standerds dont apply at this site,

The Heath Bell Effect

Below you'll find the Heath Bell Effect. What's that you say? It's what happens when he pitches and then opens his mouth: Padres win, people start talking.

After Bell saved game #1 in Citi Field's history he proceeded to bash ESPN's Baseball Tonight for never featuring the Padres and never even mentioning SD in the build-up to the Mets' opening night. Fair enough....we know that on the West Coast we play second fiddle. So I shall propose two things to you, San Diego Sports fan:

1. Check out the time-line below.....it is the chronology of The Heath Bell Effect.
2. After reading the chronology (and listening if you have the time) follow Heath Bell's lead and make a little noise....I have a suggestion.
   

April 14th: Heath Bell dogged ESPN in an interview with Scott & BR on Tuesday morning:
[XX1090-Audio]

April 16th: HB then went on Baseball Tonight and spoke with Karl Ravech:

Click:[ESPN Video Link]

April 17th: The following afternoon Baseball Tonight's Tim Kurkjian spoke with Darren Smith:

[XX1090-Audio]

April 17th: Miami radio personality Sid Rosenberg (a native New Yorker and Met Fan) and Scott & BR regular hooked up to talk about a few things...the last of which was a brief commentary on the Padres where he bashed them mercilessly!
[XX1090-Audio]

April 19th: Bell's remarks ring true about almighty ESPN
[Union Tribune-Nick Canepa]

That folks, is the Heath Bell Effect:

1. Heath Saves Games:
2. Heath Drops Mad Quotes:
3. People Start Talking About Heath....And The Padres.
   

This folks, is my proposal:

1. Let's E-mail Scott & BR's regular Radio Active guest: Sidney Arthur Rosenberg
   

Listening to that guy Rosenberg reminded me of Bleacher Bum Jordan (if you added a brain). Brash, loud, opinionated and completely New York-East Coast-Centric. He came off as an extension of the ESPN bias that Heath Bell justly attacked earlier in the week....so let us join Heath Bell in appealing to Common Sense......here's Sid Rosenberg's email address:

sidsback2001@yahoo.com

Dear Sid:
We ruined your opening night and took the series from you....we know, we know...we listened to your interview with Scott & BR---"The Mets didn't take the series seriously"---"The Padres are an awful baseball team"---"We only have two players, and some guy named Headly who gets lucky every once in a while"---"And when the season's over the Padres will be where they belong...in last place".

Well let's look at last year: The (last place) Padres took 5 of 7 from the Mets and the Phillies won the East by 3 games....do the math and chew on that Mighty New York Fan. Your overpriced team will likely cave again and we'll just keep on battling....see you on August 8th!

For those of you who are the regular rebel-rousing-Thomas Paine-types but lack the time required of a full-time insurrectionist: feel free to copy & paste the above gibberish. Or get creative as you keep in mind that the national information outlets think San Diego and its fans are a joke....so you don't have to be nice.

How many e-mails can we inundate ol' Sidney Arthur Rosenberg with?

Editor's Note: It appears that there is another component to The Heath Bell Effect......when someone else tries to close a game......it's kind of ugly. Well, you can't win 'em all. A great week had by both the Padres and....Dodgers.

Anatomy of a Pissing Contest

What a shit storm. Below is a comprehensive list of links to stories regarding Chargers' General Manager AJ Smith and his public spat with LaDainian Tomlinson. The Country should not know that AJ Smith is San Diego's GM! I never knew that the GM of the Patriots was named Scott Pioli...didn't know it until his name made the news as a possible replacement in KC and he was ultimately hired. Pioli is the guy who built a dynasty in NE but nobody knew him....which is the way it should be.

Note to AJ Smith: General Managers should be seen and not heard.

There is a lot of info below. I would recommend listening to the XX1090 audio files. Jim Trotter is the former Charger UT Beat Writer and currently writes for Sports Illustrated. Kevin Acee is the current Charger UT Beat Writer. They are frequent visitors to Darren Smith's afternoon show on XX1090 and provide some good background. I think the most interesting aspect of this story is the XX1090 interview by Acee on January 22nd. He had the opportunity to give the context in which AJ gave his quote but he did not. He in no way disavowed the idea that AJ was "mocking" LT......but as the shit hit the fan.....he went ahead and published an article on 1/25 where he said there was "NO WAY" that AJ was mocking LT. So which is it I wondered....

The resulting storm that fans rained down on SD caused Owner Dean Spanos to REQUIRE AJ to apologize to LT. What does this mean? Who knows....

January 14, SI.Com, "Chargers handling L.T. like a journeyman, not a Hall of Famer", Jim Trotter.

January 17, Union Tribune, "Chargers ponder LT's fate", by Kevin Acee

January 21, Union Tribune, "Draft day homework is already well underway", by Kevin Acee.

January 22, Union Tribune, "Window of opportunity always open if you have a top QB" by Nick Canepa.

January 22, XX1090, Darren Smith interview with Kevin Acee.

January 22, XX1090, Darren Smith interview with Jim Trotter.

January 23, Yahoo Sports, "Time for Spanos to 'flex' on Smith", by Michael Silver.

January 23, The "WHTNEP" San Diego Sports Fan Collective, "AJ Smith: Front Runner for Douche of the year."

January 24, Union Tribune, "LT can resolve predicament by making a cut-in his pay", by Tim Sullivan.

January 25, Union Tribune, "Abrupt? Egotistical? Smith can be both. Bud did he mock LT? No." by Kevin Acee.

January 25, Union Tribune, "Tomlinson-Smith saga must stop now, Merriman says", by Kevin Acee

January 26, XX1090, Darren Smith interview with Kevin Acee.

January 26, Chargers.com, "AJ reaches out to LT".

January 26, Union Tribune, "Smith calls Tomlinson in effort to clear the Air", by Kevin Acee.