Phil Watch: He Said It Was Inarguable

Sit back and relax. Grab a soda, maybe a sandwich. We're going to be here awhile.

I think it's going to be the longest Phil Watch ever.

It's been a bit tough to keep up with the Proustian prose and Norman Mailerian output of Phil this last week.

Heck, we've had four entirely unoriginal columns from Phil on Alex Rodriguez just in the last ten days alone. Apparently he didn't feel heard the first time, second or third time.

But Crede was signed by the Twins two days ago so, as usual, Phil takes what should have been a perfunctory column about Crede's value, age, back issues, defense and World Series memories, brings it to stupid-ass heights and proudly declares him a game and division changer.

Let's get started.

You can argue that Joe Crede has been the White Sox's best ballplayer since he arrived in Chicago to stay in 2002. The point is inarguable since 2005, when Magglio Ordonez fled to Detroit for reasons of money and health.

Shit! Bustin' out of the gate! Direct, efficient and absolutely wrong. Two for three but that third one's always a stickler. Fucking truth. Always muckin' me shit up.

Let's look:

2005

Crede: 96 OPS+ (100 is league average), 2.1 Value Wins, .252/.303/.454

Konerko: 136 OPS+, 4.0 Value Wins, .283/.375/.534

Dye: 118 OPS+, 2.5 Value Wins, .274/.333/.512

The term 'ballplayer' that Phil uses isn't accidental. He's trying to be all sly and shit by insinuating that Crede's defense made up for any offensive shortcomings in any given year.

In 2005, Crede's UZR/150 was a pedestrian 6.2 for someone considered a borderline great defensive third baseman. In fact, it regressed from the year before in what should have been during his prime age years. Also, Value Wins factors in defense.

Verdict: Not only arguable, but wrong.

2006

A healthy Crede had a fantastic year in 2006. Really. Just a great freakin' year for him. But...

Crede: 107 OPS+, 4.1 Value Wins, 20.0 VORP .283/.323/.506

Thome: 155 OPS+, 4.7 Value Wins, 62.7 VORP .288/.416/.598

Dye: 151 OPS+, 3.2 Value Wins, 64.5 VORP .315/.385/.622

Look at the VsORP. Putting Thome aside for a second, Dye had a ridiculously good offensive year in 2006. If he had been a league average fielder that year, he would have generated 5.6 Value Wins, something that would have put him in the top 5 in the league. Value Wins figures a player's total output in every phase of the game with positional adjustment, fielding and replacement value relative to every other player in the league. It's very effectively trying to build a better beast.

Now, Thome put up 4.7 Value Wins even with the positional adjustment of DH taking 1.4 runs off that total. Thome played a full season in the field with the Phillies in 2004, playing just above league-average (1.8). Take his physical ailments into account and aging, he would have sinked below league average if he would have played first base for the Sox that year. Still...he did play a half-win better than Crede in 2006 and if he had played first, he would have played close to two wins better, with everything factored in.

Verdict: Entirely arguable and I go with Thome.

2007

The first two years of Phil's little 2005-2008-Crede-Is-The-Best-Sox-Ballplayer argument were not only arguable but pretty much wrong.

2007 is as rotten as dumpster juice poured over a nice piece of wagyu.

Crede: 49 OPS+, 0.1 Value Wins, -11.0 VORP .216/.258/.317

I'm not even doing comparables. Those are abysmal by any standard when it comes to standardized standarding standards.

But hey, he had a 23.9 UZR/150...in 46 games.

Verdict: Wrong in the wrongest way that wrong can be possibly wrong.

2008

Crede: 98 OPS+, 1.9 Value Wins, 6.2 VORP .248/.314/.460

Quentin: 148 OPS+, 4.7 Value Wins, 51.3 VORP .288/.394/.571

Thome had 2.2 Value Wins and Dye had 1.8 last year. Now, Crede had a spectacular April and June in 2008. In fact, I would argue that what Crede did in April helped the team that was a question mark get through what was considered a tough part of the schedule at the time.

But c'mon. Quentin was Quentin last year. 51.3 VORP vs. 6.2. The Sox were a .500 at best without him.

Verdict: Wrong, wrong and wrong with a side of wrong.

SO...a cogent argument, though not by me, could be made for 2006 only. And I didn't even do pitchers.

But with the other years...

...With Crede migrating from the defending champion Sox, the Twins become favorites to win their fifth division title in eight seasons under the brilliantly simple Ron Gardenhire. They could move into the status of clear favorites if general manager Bill Smith finishes a second deal he's been working on for weeks — a sign-and-trade deal to acquire free-agent reliever Juan Cruz without losing his second-round pick.

We know that Phil has the new Baseball Prospectus handbook (or a website subscription). He's been belching out statistics from the site anytime he needs something to back up his musings all spring training.

In fact, just yesterday, in one of his 8,000 columns on A-Rod, he told us:

Baseball Prospectus assigns Rodriguez a 46.1 VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) rating. That's higher than either of the heralded newcomers, CC Sabathia (43.6) and Mark Teixeira (38.5).

Do you know what the guys at BP 'assigned' Crede? 1.0 VORP. One. With a ceiling of 2.7.

So according to BP, Crede will contribute one run above a replacement player next year with a ceiling of 2.7 runs over a replacement player output, offensively (VORP doesn't take into account defense). Not league-average. Replacement level. A team populated with replacement-level players would win 25 games on average over a 162-game season.

So...Crede is essentially a replacement player offensively with his defense being the X-factor. He's coming off two back surgeries so you can't, with any degree of certainty, predict that he will be the same defensive player he was before the injury. Heck, you can't even really predict defense for a healthy player with any degree of accuracy.

To wit: Aramis Ramirez, throughout his career, has repeatedly put up fielding run numbers in the negatives. Inexplicably, he had 11 fielding runs in 2007, a number that surpasses every fielding run total Crede has ever produced except 2006 (15.6 FR).

You make sense of that and I'll give ya a little sum'un-sum'un.

The fact is you can only ballpark defense with a good sample size and demonstrated health (bad will most likely be bad and good will probably be good with a decent sample size). But even then, it's a fairly big potential production range.

Phil doesn't cherry-pick, though. Fuck VORP when it gums up the works. Did I mention Crede's projected VORP was 1.0?

Twins officials downplayed Sunday the chance of acquiring Cruz. Perhaps they were still in shock after actually seeing Crede in a Minnesota uniform.

Holy Shit! Joe Crede's in camp! I'm speechless! Where are the disciples? I'm a huge Bartholomew fan!

BTW, here's the comparables for Crede that BP compiled:

I don't know about you, but I shit my pants every time Steve Buechele walks into a room. And Ed Sprague? For-get it.

Before signing Crede, the Twins had done almost nothing this winter. Smith pursued Casey Blake unsuccessfully while adding only Luis Ayala and knuckleballer R.A. Dickey.

So...the signing of...Crede...makes them the...favorites? And Juan Cruz makes them...clear favorites?

But the signing of Crede, along with Nick Punto's move from third base to shortstop, should give the Twins the kind of solid infield that once backed Brad Radke, Johan Santana, Kenny Rogers and a young Kyle Lohse.

Heck yeah! Add Crede's 1.0 VORP to Nick Punto's -3.9 VORP and you've got yourself a stew goin'.

Third base, like power hitting, had been one of the White Sox's regular edges over Minnesota. The last time Crede was outplayed by a Twins third baseman was 2004, when Corey Koskie hit 25 home runs. But the measure of Crede has always been his glove as much as clutch hitting.

There's no such thing as a clutch hitter, Phil. Seriously, look it up. I'll have an entire post on this soon, right after the BRE TOA 3, brought to you by VUUUUUUCCCCC!

It's entirely random. There is clutch hitting, to be observed after the fact. "Team X was a great clutch-hitting team last year." But you can't say a particular player is a clutch hitter year in and year out. Seriously, pick any random player and check out all the relevant clutch-hitting statistics over the course of his career. They're typically right in line with his overall production and vary wildly year to year.

Crede's averages by year (RISP, 2-out RISP, Late & Close, September)

2005: .286 .232 .289 .371

2006: .343 .351 .237 .179

2007: .298 .292 .296 DNP

2008: .271 .190 .220 .250 (1-4)

He's all over the map. Take 2006 out of the equation, the year Crede was at the absolutely prime production age of 28, and he was pretty average, only better in relation to himself. That doesn't make him a clutch hitter when he's a below average offensive player overall. It's just making up for his crappiness by being less crappy. And that's no way to go through life.

While Crede was limited to 97 games by recurring back problems, he and the other Sox third basemen, Josh Fields and the also-departed Juan Uribe, had a league-high 378 assists last season, 73 more than Minnesota got from Brian Buscher and six other third basemen. Mark Buehrle figures that number would have been higher had Crede been able to go the distance.

Do the Twins get to sign Fields and Uribe as well?

Oh, and Phil's using assists? They also had the second-most total chances, 80 more than league-average (coincidently, the Twins were league-average) and committed the most errors (33) with Crede booting 20 of them in 'limited action' last year.

With agent Scott Boras setting a year-at-a-time contract pace, Crede never had a multiyear deal with the Sox. He would have been in line for a big contract this winter if not for the back injury, which limited him to 144 games over the last two years.

I know! Teams are just throwing money around this year! It's insane. Look at all the money a guy Baseball Prospectus says will have a VORP 22 times greater than Crede got.

C'mon. What would a team give a 31 year-old third baseman with a career .306 OBP and 98 OPS+...even without the back injury...even not taking this economy into account.

What? 4 years/$40 million? Big money?

What the point of all the speculation anyway?

Crede without a bad back is a guy you want on your team at a reasonable price, especially if he learns to walk more as he ages. Absolutely. I don't hate Joe Crede.

But in this realm, on this Earth, in this time, on this temporal plane, Joe Crede has a bad back.

Because of Crede's back, as well as the availability of possible replacements in Fields, Dayan Viciedo and Gordon Beckham, his departure hasn't caused as much angst for Sox fans as it may have. They see almost all players as disposable parts, in part because Ozzie Guillen produced a championship in the first season after the loss of Ordonez and Carlos Lee.

Disposable? Has Phil ever talked to a Sox fan? I got into a debate with one last year because he thought Nick Masset was untouchable. (Cripes, a ton of them bemoaned the loss of Uribe. This same shit happened after the Angels won the series in '02. Everybody was untouchable, even if they sucked stinky chicken ass. But I digress.)

Ordonez, another Boras client, suffered a knee injury in 2004 that allowed him to play only 52 games. It severely damaged his free-agent value the next winter, but Boras put together a creative deal with the Detroit Tigers, who have gotten 73 home runs and 346 RBIs from Ordonez the last three years. He played only 82 games in '05 but has since raised his average to 135 games since leaving Chicago.

I've seen Magglio Ordoñez, watched him play, seen his statistics. Mr. Crede, you are no Magglio Ordoñez.

Boras believes Crede can make an even better comeback, with a second surgery last fall finishing the repair that the one in 2007 started. The artificial turf at the Metrodome won't be ideal, but Boras doesn't expect it to be a major issue.

Well shit, if Boras says so.

And on to Phil. 'Isn't ideal' is what Phil offers today. Just three weeks ago, Phil offered this:

The Twins continue to talk to Joe Crede, but would 81 home games on turf make sense for a guy with back problems? He'd be a better fit in San Francisco or Houston.

What's changed in three weeks? Oh, we here at Phil Watch remember, Phil. Even when you don't.

If Crede stays on the field, he will make the Twins better. They were essentially intact after winning 88 games a year ago, so if they are better they have to be the favorites.

Okay. The Twins are a fine little team. And Crede's a fine little addition with moderate upside. But regressing to the mean may be the mantra in the Twin Cities this year.

They hit .305 with runners in scoring position last year, nearly 20 points higher than the next-best team. Heck, they hit 26 points higher than the two teams - Cubs and Angels - that won the most games in each league last year. Ain't happening again, my peeps.

They hit .276 the year before with largely the same lineup, .296 in 2006 and .271 in 2005.

See! Clutch-hitting is not predictive and largely random.

You. Don't. Bank. On. It.

Phil Watch: Only Cuz It's About The Angels

It's encouraging that Phil got himself a subscription to Baseball Prospectus. It's not encouraging that he's chosen to barely use it.

C'mon. Dig in there, Phil. Dig in there.

Let's get started.

While the White Sox grappled with the knowledge that baseball's leading think tank had pegged them to go from first to worst in the American League Central, the chronically underachieving Los Angeles Angels reacted to an ugly projection of their own. According to Baseball Prospectus, they were poised to finish behind Oakland, failing to win the AL West for only the second time in six years.

Okay. Here's the thing. The reason the Angels won 100 games last year was because they played in the crap hole that is the AL West. They went 26-12 against the Rangers and Mariners last year combined, 10-9 against the A's. It's entirely reasonable to think those records will be repeated, leaving them 15 games over .500 again this year against their division.

The Angels also get the pleasure of playing the NL West in interleague play this year. Last year, they went 6-3 against the NL East. Again, entirely reasonable to think they can repeat that against the NL West. That's now 18 games over .500. If the team goes .500 against the rest of the AL - again, entirely reasonable given the weird off-season - they're 90-72.

I don't doubt the minds at BP - baseball minds greater than mine - but I think they undershot the individual expected performances of the Angels this year, especially w/r/t offense. I think they erred on the side of caution given the fact that so many first-year players and young players coming off injuries are expected to play.

Unlike the Sox, the Angels opted to do some last-minute shopping from the bargain bin, and they're going to be glad they did. General manager Tony Reagins didn't say no when Bobby Abreu fell into his lap and quickly made up the Angels' perceived deficit.

Yes. Reagins only made the move once the PECOTA computer projections told him he needed to.

The BP computer adjusted the Angels from 80 to 84 victories, which is enough to make Mike Scioscia's team again a division favorite, if not by as wide a margin as you would think.

The surprise wasn't that the Angels won't win 100 games again. I was that PECOTA had them under .500. So who's 'you', Phil. You? High 80s in wins was probably expected by every reasonable Angels fan with the Rangers and Mariners once again diligently holding themselves to the position of not fielding a competitive team.

The Angels won 100 games last season and have averaged 94 victories over the last five seasons. But they are at least somewhat vulnerable in the mild, mild West after losing Mark Teixeira, Francisco Rodriguez, Jon Garland and Garret Anderson.

Technically, the Angels had a better winning percentage without Teixeira last year (.662 vs. .617).

The team will have a better bullpen without Frankie this year. Book it.

Jon Garland? How will they replace his 4.90 ERA? Or his 5.99 ERA after the break? The horror!

Rivera replaced Anderson before the Abreu signing. $20 bet on who performs better this year. Now, Abreu replaces Anderson. $100,000 bet on who performs better this year.

However, their lineup looks a lot better with the talented Abreu in left field rather than a mix of Terry Evans, Reggie Willits, Juan Rivera and Gary Matthews Jr. It's hard to believe you can get a potential 100 runs-100 RBIs guy for $5 million and incentives, but Abreu simply had slipped between the cracks.

Terry Evans? Listed first? Cripes!

They just signed Rivera to a $13 million deal to play left and DH!

Terry Evans won't even sniff the majors this year on any regular basis. Not a whiff. It's obvious that Phil WENT to Baseball Prospectus. They don't even have Evans getting one at-bat. Terry Evans? It would be like telling a Sox fan that Donny Lucy will see time behind the plate this year and you would say, "Who?" and I would say, "Exactly."

Abreu, who'll turn 35 in March, had a .371 on-base percentage and stole 22 bases to go along with 20 home runs last season. He figures to be on base regularly when Vladimir Guerrero hits, as Scioscia's most likely batting order has Abreu second, Guerrero third and Torii Hunter fourth.

Phil says this because Mike DiGiovanna of the LA Times said it two days ago. At least he kept it in the family.

Now, I know Scioscia has talked about it and it's probably the "plan" entering spring training but it won't be the case by mid-April. Kendrick's a prototypical #2 hitter and will hit there. It's probably motivational crap to get Kendrick to feel a bit marginalized and have him realize that taking a walk and staying healthy is a good thing.

It's Figgins, Kendrick, Abreu, Guerrero, Hunter, Rivera, Napoli, Morales and Aybar. Book it.

"I'll like hitting in front of Vladdy," Abreu said. "My type of game specifically is to be on base and score some runs. I still have my speed."

See. Nothing that says the two-hole specifically. Just 'in front of Vladdy' (God, I hate all the Angels' nicknames. Every one is shortened by half with a 'y' on the end. Thanks, Rex Hudler. Dope.)

The signing of the left-handed-hitting Abreu addressed an imbalance. The Angels hit 11 points higher against left-handers than right-handers last year and were tilting even more in that direction without Anderson and Teixeira.

This one's oddly constructed. Every team in baseball has this type of split for the most part. Anderson is left-handed and typically hit both evenly. Teixeira was an Angel for two freakin' months. There was no dramatic disparity among the LHB v. RH, RHB v. LH, blah, blah, blah.

All hovered in the .260-.270 range. Oh, there is one. The BABIP for LHB v. LH (small size) and LHB in general was above .290 typical, meaning some luck was involved. Therefore, not really relevant.

Just say they needed a middle-of-the-order guy who is left-handed. There. Done. All the other left-handed hitting options before Abreu were switch-hitting slap hitters. See. Easy.

Like Milwaukee's signing of Braden Looper, this was a good move. Those two made a lot more sense than last week's other big free-agent signing — the two-year deal that Adam Dunn took from Washington.

Dunn wanted to play for a contender. The Cubs had been his first choice, but he turned to Houston after the Milton Bradley signing. He would have helped the Astros, but GM Ed Wade couldn't scare up the money to make it happen.

I agree. Houston better be on the verge of bankruptcy because a signing of Dunn and a decent #3 starter would have absolutely put them right in the mix in the Central. For hardly any money, they would have been a contender. It's inexplicable. Wolf and Dunn would have cost the team $15 million this year according to the contracts they signed. Ugh. Just hand the Cubs the division. It's not like the Cardinals are doing anything smart. They signed Kyle freakin' Lohse for four years at $10 million a year!

I wonder if Phil will mention that sort of stupidity regarding Lohse, Phil's pet baby last Spring Training.

One last nugget.

On Milwaukee signing Braden Looper:

Melvin hopes Looper enjoys the home clubhouse at Miller Park more than he did the visiting clubhouse. He has a mark of 0-4 with a 7.01 ERA in 252/3 innings in the retractable-roof stadium.

Where to begin? When Looper pitched in Milwaukee in the past, he faced batters that wore a Brewers uniform unless I'm mistaken and there are secret games being played behind my back.

Now, I guess it's possible that Looper's karma doesn't translate in Wisconsin. Or maybe he doesn't like the restaurant selection in the city or a particular Brewer fan continuously gives him a hard time and it hurts his feelings.

But park stats for pitchers don't translate when he goes to that team because he's not facing players that knocked the shit out of him in the past.

So when Looper takes the mound this year in a Milwaukee uniform, he will never have to face Ryan Braun, Prince Fielder, Rickie Weeks, Corey Hart and J.J. Hardy.

Why those five guys? Because they've hit a combined .441 off Looper.

Just a thought.

Phil Watch: I Don't Know Where To Begin

Anyone ever have a wildly irresponsible friend?

You know, the kind of guy who gets drunk and tries to jump off the roof of the apartment just to see if he can do it without breaking his leg.

And this friend on occasion - say every three years or so - asks to borrow your car to see if he can drive to Midway and back in an hour to, you know, just see if can do it.

And every three years or so you have say, "Hell no!"

He counters with "What's going to happen? You can't predict accidents. You could get into an accident tomorrow!"

And you have to sit him down like he's a five year-old and tell him, "That's the difference, little one. It's my car...and I'm driving. If something happens, it's going to be on me, not because I gave the keys to some dope who's bored and wants to prove how big his dick is."

That's what Phil seems to be missing when ripping into John Danks for passing on the World Baseball Classic today.

Seriously, this is why people don't read newspapers anymore.

Let's get started.

White Sox fans are very proud of John Danks. He declined the chance to play for the U.S. in the World Baseball Classic, saying he wants to make sure he's prepared for the 2009 season.

This is a very popular position for him to take, but it raises a couple of questions:

• Why can't a 23-year-old in great shape make two or three starts in March, working with strict pitch limits and extreme caution, without risking his readiness for the season?

• Why would the U.S. want Danks in the first place?

Let's see. Danks just completed a season where he pitched 40 more innings than he has ever thrown and is coming into a season where the Sox are going to rely on him heavily with the back of the rotation so up in the air.

I know! He should skip the bulk of Spring Training with the Sox and go play in some dippy Bug Selig creation with absolutely no point just because he can. Let's hand the keys to your brand-new car to someone else. Why not?

Phil's first question begs another question. If every player in the "Classic" is going to have to be treated with kid gloves, then why do it? It's not even a real game. It's cutesy bullshit.

Phil's second question begs a "Huh?"

He's a good pitcher and a tough competitor with a great future. Every major-league team would want to have him on its roster. But he has had one strong season in the big leagues. Does that qualify him to represent his country?

Love it! "Represent his country," like it's some Olympian honor where people train their whole lives just for the miniscule chance to compete in something that will most likely define the rest of their lives.

That's what this is NOT!

Who'd a thunk it? Phil has taken a position on the World Baseball Classic that's even more idiotic than anything Rick Telander could offer. It's like Telander on crack, chockablock with dreamy, pie-eyed international wonderfulness.

What about CC Sabathia? Or Brandon Webb? Or at least a half-dozen others, such as Cole Hamels, Tim Lincecum, Roy Halladay, Derek Lowe, John Lackey and Cliff Lee?

Or Mickey Morandini? Or Lenny Dykstra?

You take any four of those eight guys, you have a serious staff, a real All-Star team, the kind of team that was envisioned when Commissioner Bud Selig and his staffers dreamed up the WBC.

Yes. The kind of ideas that come from dreams. Then you wake up, give it ten minutes and realize that idea was borderline retarded.

But unfortunately, major-league dugouts and front offices are populated by far too many short-sighted, self-interested players and executives.

Yeah. God forbid try to protect your investment. That's just stupid business sense.

Notice that Phil hasn't told us WHY the WBC is remotely a good idea yet?

The second edition of the WBC gets here in March, three years after the inaugural, in which the U.S. went 3-3 and failed to advance to the four-team final round.

That was such a blow to my patriotism. I felt like less of an American that day.

Once again the U.S. has put together a team lacking the bulk of American talent, limiting the possible success of the event before it even begins.

Can this country take another blow to its already diminished status around the world?

Sabathia, Webb and those other six starting pitchers are among the huge group of American stars who didn't submit their names for inclusion on the provisional roster or whose names were pulled back before the roster was released.

Sabathia pitched 40,000 innings last year and just signed a 40 year deal worth 40 bazillion dollars. The Yankees should allow him to run out there on the mother of all short rests for no real reason.

That plan is flawless! This isn't play money, Phil. It's real, like money that can buy stuff.

...The guys who are eager to play, like the Cubs' Derrek Lee and the White Sox's Matt Thornton, deserve credit for getting it.

Derrek Lee and Matt Thornton are better Americans than C.C. Sabathia and Brandon Webb.

Traitors. Somebody call Michelle Bachmann.

The WBC should be a welcome break from the drudgery of spring training. It's surprising that more players don't look at it like this.

My God, Phil. Just have sex for Selig and get it over with.

Phil here alludes to complaints on the part of some players recently that Spring Training is too long, which it probably is.

Congratulations. He just gave reason #10,659 why NOT to extend the preseason with kitschy little 'World Competitions'. To be game-ready (or what is supposed to approximate 'game-ready' for for this crap), position players have to start training two weeks earlier than usual and pitchers would need three. You know...to be stupid-ass "Classic"-ready.

It is supposed to be real games, right? Not time for pitchers to work on specific pitches and hone their location like Spring Training games are, right?

Freakin' great plan.

...Bottom line: Baseball players shouldn't be afraid to play baseball.

Thems fightin' words.

Derrek Lee = Rambo. Webb = Aldrich Ames.

I nominate this column as a top fiver in the Phil anthology, behind recommending the Rays sign Barry Bonds because it would be fun to see him hit in Fenway but ahead of the entire column dedicated to the wonders of Jeremy Affeldt.

Phil was a voluminous little fucker again this Sunday with no mid-week columns.

His second long-form offering discusses the sale of the Cubs to the Ricketts family. It gives nothing in the way of substance outside of recapping the obvious with a few dippy Cub fan '100 year' jokes thrown in.

But here's two nuggets:

If Ricketts wanted, he could find a big role in his organization (president or whatever title you want) for a baseball savant like recently retired general manager Pat Gillick. Or, if he wanted to try something really progressive, Greg Maddux, who figures to get bored playing golf. Those guys would represent the club and help Jim Hendry and his strong front-office staff in setting a vision for the operation.

That way, when Phil achieves immaculate conception and has Greg Maddux's baby, he'll be closer for family time.

President. Greg Maddux. Jus cuz he's all Cubbie and shit.

...(discussing the renovation of Wrigley Field) For this to happen, the Cubs may have to shift a season's worth of games to U.S. Cellular Field and possibly even Milwaukee's Miller Park—and the sooner the better. Why not get the work done in time for the 2014 season, allowing fans to celebrate Wrigley's 100th anniversary in a much-improved park?

The Cubs should rearrange theirs and two other teams' entire schedules because 100 is a round number. It's pretty. Oh, so pretty.

Cub fan to the core. Phil. You are my muse.

Phil Watch: Mishmash Of Mucky Muck

Ever watch a movie and think it was fine enough as the credits rolled? And then you get into the car and realize, "Holy Crap, that movie sucked!"

It comes from being able to step back a bit and see it's suckitude in all it's glory.

We'll call it the Burn After Reading effect.

Phil's column today has it. Boy, does it have it. It's Phil's Whispers. He has his ear to the ground for us, people.

Let's get started.

How committed are the Cubs to Ryan Theriot as their shortstop? There was never even internal discussion about pursuing Michael Young, who the Rangers made available after he balked at moving to third base.

Yes. Ryan Theriot's diminutive wonderfulness is what stopped Hendry from talking about Michael Young. Not the fact that the Cubs are about to be sold and Young has a contract that pays him $16 million each year for the next five years. Yes. Not that. It's Ryan Theriot and all his throwback greatness to the 30s and 40s.

Young and the Rangers appear to have worked out their differences, meaning it's Hank Blalock the Rangers are trying to trade. …Blalock's availability doesn't help the market for Joe Crede, who is among the large group of free agents still unsigned. …

Yes. A team should trade a couple of decent to good minor leaguers for Blalock and pick up his $6.25 million contract for 2009 instead of signing Joe Crede to an incentive-laden one year deal worth $5 million with an option. Yes. That's the way teams should operate. Give up something or somethings for Blalock, a guy who also hasn't played a full season since 2006. Phil = Consistent.

Also unsigned is a large group that was offered arbitration and declined it, including Orlando Cabrera, Ben Sheets, Juan Cruz, Jon Garland, Brandon Lyon and Oliver Perez. Brewers GM Doug Melvin said he considered signing Cruz as his closer but opted for Trevor Hoffman because he didn't want to give up a first-round draft pick. …

Phil. Sweety. Melvin was being nice. If he let it all fly, Melvin would have said that Cruz has been a decent middle reliever over the last two years, has a WHIP that says it's been a bit of a mirage and HAS NEVER CLOSED! Yes. Give up a first round draft pick for that.

Spring training sleeper for the Cubs—center fielder Sam Fuld, who has had a big winter in Venezuela and has leadoff man skills. For the White Sox—third baseman Javier Castillo, a non-roster invitee who hit .288 between Double-A Birmingham and Triple-A Charlotte last season. …

Cripes! That's the 48 bazillionth time he's mentioned Sam freakin' Fuld's "big" winter in the freakin' Venezuelan league. Please tell me how Fuld gets into the lineup to lead off. Please. No answer has been given yet. Cubs outfield: Soriano, Bradley, Fukudome, Johnson, Gathright. And man, if Fuld breaks camp with the Cubs, they're quickly becoming a nugget convention with Theriot, Fontenot and him.

Javier Castillo? A light-hitting third basemen with a career .266 minor league average, doesn't walk and is a little too booty? Fuck Viciedo and Fields. He's is The Answer!

The Brewers are interested in free-agent starter Braden Looper.

Early 2009 nomination for the most irrelevant sentence ever written ever.

And then there's Phil's flagship Sunday column.

...Both Reinsdorf and McCourt keep a close eye on the bottom line. While Reinsdorf took the White Sox's payroll into the nine-digit stratosphere in the honeymoon seasons after the 2005 championship, he and general manager Ken Williams now appear ahead of the curve in watching out for the economic downturn facing baseball and other professional sports.

Nine-digit stratosphere? It was $103 million, good for 4th in baseball...after a World freakin' Championship. Now...I'm thinking that Phil believes that kind of spending is bad given the word choice and the fact that he wrote 4,000 columns in 2008 about the White Sox irresponsible spending. Let's see who this plays out.

And they're not 'ahead of the curve'. Has Phil been watching this offseason? Not one team will enter 2009 with a payroll higher than 2008. Not one. Not even the Yankees.

The White Sox opened 2008 with a payroll of $121.2 million and added to it by trading for Ken Griffey Jr. at the trading deadline. The signing of Bartolo Colon gave them 14 players signed at $83.525 million. Factoring in the arbitration-eligible Bobby Jenks and 10 entry-level players, they will be in the range of $92-94 million when the season opens—and they are still open to trading Jermaine Dye, which could lower that figure.

So that's pretty good...right?

The movement to get younger—creating opportunity for players like Josh Fields, Dayan Viciedo, Chris Getz, Brian Anderson, Jerry Owens and Brent Lillibridge—is allowing the White Sox to cut almost $30 million off the payroll, seemingly without being passed by anyone in the American League Central.

So...really good...right?

The Dodgers' cost-cutting is even worse, as Manny Ramirez can testify. The reality with a situation almost as strange as Ramirez himself is that it now appears the Dodgers never really wanted to re-sign Ramirez. Many around baseball believe general manager Ned Colletti made Ramirez a two-year offer only to save face, with the expectation that somebody would outbid him. But that hasn't happened.

Worse? Probably poor word choice. But...worse?

And so...now we have the Dodgers NOT signing Manny. They're NOT signing him in Phil's world for the reasons given.

If the Dodgers really wanted to keep Ramirez, they would have done it by now. But whispers have gone around for years about McCourt not having the usual financial muscle of Dodgers' owners, and that is being borne out this winter.

So again...there's NOT signing Manny...in Phil's world...for the 12,000 reasons given.

...The Dodgers opened the 2008 season with a payroll of $118.6 million, and added Ramirez, Casey Blake and Greg Maddux in midseason deals. But they since have released Andruw Jones, lost six free agents to other teams (most notably Derek Lowe and Brad Penny) and allowed eight others, including Ramirez, to linger unsigned.

So...they're...cutting...payrolllllll. And no Manny...?

They have only about $52 million committed to nine players, with two of the three biggest contracts belonging to players who haven't helped ( Juan Pierre and Jason Schmidt). They have four arbitration-eligible players, including catcher Russell Martin and closer Jonathan Broxton, and are expected eventually to re-sign Ramirez.

JEBUS H. CHRIST!!!! YOU JUST SAID THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SIGN MANNY!!!!!!!!

While the Sox count on production from inexpensive contributors like Carlos Quentin, Alexei Ramirez, John Danks and Gavin Floyd, the Dodgers have a deeper, more touted core of young players. Matt Kemp, Andre Ethier, James Loney and Martin figure to hit together near the middle of the order for years to come.

De-Bat-Able. Matt Kemp looks like a monkey humping a football when he plays the outfield. Loney hasn't developed anything resembling consistent power yet (except against the Cubs in the playoffs, of course. Tee-hee.) and Ethier? Meh. We'll see. They were a .500 team last year in a shit-ass division before trading for Manny.

Chad Billingsley, Clayton Kershaw, James McDonald and Cory Wade similarly anchor the pitching staff (although Billingsley may not be ready to open 2009 because of a November broken leg, when he slipped on ice).

Anchor?

Billingsley = Good. Yes.

Kershaw = Should be decent. Great hook. Had some control issues.

McDonald = Six major league innings. Six.

Wade = Never started a major league game. Never.

And where the hell is Kuroda?

Gee whiz, Phil. Two guys have no major league starting experience, one is coming off an injury and the other is primed to go through growing pains. How is that 'anchoring' anything?

But can you cut your payroll 30 percent and defend a division title? The Dodgers, like the White Sox, hope the answer is yes.

Well...it kind of depending on what that 30 percent is, doesn't it? Just a thought.

Phil Watch: Let's Dispel A Myth

Why not an end-of-the-year Phil? Why Not?

In a way, Phil is a rock in these changing economic times. A strong ship in the storm.

Nobody holds to such a stubborn ethos more than Phil in the Chicago Media since fuckstick left town.

For evidence, check out Phil's Hardball entry where he continues in his efforts to find a move that Kenny Williams might regret. That one involves the Aaron Cunningham for Danny Richar deal.

See, in Phil World, the White Sox would still field a competitive team with Aaron Cunningham in right if Jermaine Dye were traded. Because in Phil World, a win counts more when a team does it with prospects. It was like 1 1/2 wins when the Marlins won a game last year, completely destroying the rest of baseball with a 125-37 record.

That's the Phil ethos.

Speaking of the Phil ethos, another part of it is paying the top free agents gobs of money only makes you a dirty, dirty team. And your wins only count as half a win, meaning the Yankees with the top payroll in baseball last year only went 45-117. See. More Phil-math.

Using this logic, Phil wrote the perfunctory 'You can't buy a World Series' article Sunday.

Let's get started.

Trying to buy way into World Series not best method

Impatience rarely is rewarded in baseball.

Neither is badness. Seems like the same result to me. Both types are not playing in the playoffs with the fire and passion, but tell me more, Dr. Science.

It happens, sure. The World Series the infant franchises in Florida (1997) and Arizona (2001) won come to mind. But there have been a lot more spectacular failures than successes from teams that spend heavily to get themselves to the top.

Well...there's spending stupidly and above your means and then there's just spending. Let's see if a distinction is made.

Think of the White Sox in the Albert Belle-Frank Thomas years...

I know. Those 49 hrs, 152 rsbi, 48 doubles, .328 average, .400 OBP, 200 hits and 113 runs completely drug down the Sox lineup in 1998, one of only two years he played for them. Fucker. Who dare he? Base clogger.

The Dodgers with guys like Kevin Brown and Darren Dreifort...

Brown was 58-32 with a culmulative ERA below 3 in his time with the Dodgers. Asshole. How dare the Dodgers not foresee his injuries as well? They should have been able to predict that.

And wait a minute! Driefort was the Dodgers' first round fucking pick! They stupidly rewarded one of their own. How is that buying anything?

The Mets in the era of Pedro Martinez, Carlos Beltran and Carlos Delgado...

Yeah. Signing the best player in baseball at the time in Carlos Beltran was soooo stupid. He didn't prove his worth enough when he hit a gazillion homeruns in the '04 playoffs. How is that different from the Red Sox 'buying' Manny for $20 million a year? Results? If we could predict results, why play the games?

And Pedro has been paid an average of $12.9 million over the last four years by the Mets. $15 million in the previous four years by the Red Sox. For a big market team, how is $12.9 million for an aging pitcher who was very recently one of the best pitchers in baseball blowing any budget?

Delgado was traded to the Mets for Mike Jacobs, Yusmeiro Petit and Grant Psomas. Who'd that work out?

And unless I'm a moron (entirely possible), how did these three have any effect on the Mets' bullpen sucking balls the last two years?

The Tigers of the last two years, when they added Gary Sheffield, Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis to the mix that had won a pennant in 2006.

Speaking of sucking balls, did Gary Sheffield put on a Jeremy Bonderman, Nate Robertson and Justin Verlander mask and take the mound without me hearing about it? All three are homegrown talent who collectively threw up on themselves every time they threw a pitch. Oh, I forgot. Phil-math means they were actually league-average on the Phil Homegrown Prospect Adjustment Scale.

Even the Cubs, who are yet to get a playoff victory from the purchase of Alfonso Soriano, Ted Lilly, Jason Marquis, Kosuke Fukudome and Mark DeRosa.

Even? Even! Isn't this Exhibit A? And check out the details of those contracts. They're a backloaded mess. All that money and not even one win in the playoffs. Isn't that the entire premise of the column?

And BTW, wasn't the Johan Santana trade the bestest of bestest moves for the Mets last year in Phil's mind? The Mets gave up four legitimate prospects AND paid him $23 million a year for the next 45 years. If that's not buyin' somethin', I don't know what is. How does Sabathia compare to Santana? And how does that fit into this equation?

The teams that have sustained success in the last two decades were built around players who blossomed into stars during the process: the Braves of the 1990s; the Yankees when they won four World Series in five years...there's little comparison to the franchise that won with guys like Bernie Williams, Paul O'Neill, Scott Brosius and a young Andy Pettitte.

WWWWWHHHHOOOOAAAAA!!!!

This is where we stop. He just rambles on from here about how Alex Rodriguez and Mark Teixeira have never led their shitty teams to the promised land, making them crappy leaders.

You know, typical vague garbage entirely dismissive of the players around them.

We stop here to dispel a myth perpetuated by the likes of Phil and Phil-like dopes.

In some fantasy world I have not visited yet, the Yankees won four World Series in five years with a roster completely populated with Yankee prospects. It's a pretty world with sprites, fairies and unicorns where every baseball player plays with the grit, fire and passion of a David Eckstein or Reed Johnson.

But getting back to the real world, Bernie Williams, Derek Jeter, Andy Pettitte and Mariano Rivera were indeed on the Yankee playoff teams that won four in five. Those are facts.

But...the first championship in '96 had...

Tino Martinez? Bought. Signed as a free agent after being traded to the Yankees.

Wade Boggs? Bought. Signed as a free agent.

Paul O'Neill? Bought. Signed as a free agent.

Four of the five pitchers in the rotation: Jimmy Key, David Cone, Dwight Gooden and Kenny Rogers? Bought. All signed as free agents.

John Wetteland? Traded from the Expos because they couldn't afford him and Yankees could.

Darryl Strawberry, Cecil Fielder, Ruben Sierra, Tim Raines, Bob Wickman, Joe Girardi? All guys who were established stars on the downside of their careers, contributed significantly and were signed or traded for because the Yankees did and nobody else could at that level.

Totally forgot about Fielder.

It doesn't get better. 1998 saw Chuck Knoblauch, Chad Curtis, Scott Brosius, David Wells, Hideki Irabu, Orando Hernandez and Mike Stanton added to the previously bought-or-trade-for list of guys.

1999? 2000? Add Roger Clemens to the previous lists.

I don't know what world exists where Jeter, Posada, Pettitte and Rivera could have won 4 in 5 with league-average talent around them, but I want to visit that world.

Because in that world, the Angels have won eight straight World Series.

Phil Watch: He Had Me At Range Factor

Phil bought a book!

Last week, Phil called the 2009 Bill James Handbook recommended reading.

I had to change my underwear as I had crapped my pants in disbelief.

And then he used a cursory glance at the book to say Chone Figgins may be the most overrated player in baseball because he doesn't hit home runs and was only a +7 baserunner in his accompanying article.

Just forget the fact that he fractured two fingers in the second game of the year and followed that up by pulling his hamstring and was out a month. Oh, and then he followed that up with bruising his right elbow in September. All that and he hit ahead of the #2 position in the order that hit a collective .258 behind him, 5th worst in baseball on a team that won the most games in 2008.

Check out what Bill James projects Figgins to do in 2009. Every team would take a player like that. Just look shit up! There. It's out of my system.

So there was no Phil Watch last week because it just would have been a bunch of curse words and name calling. I'm trying to be a better person.

This week's offering makes for a little more cerebral experience.

Let's get started.

White Sox's Jermaine Dye might be moving on

But whether they involve him being on the team is still a question

Anybody understand what the heck that means? Read that again and please tell me because I don't get it. Outside of possibly NORAD, proofreaders are probably most valuable in this world at newspapers, wouldn't you think?

Paging Jermaine Dye, paging Jermaine Dye … Mr. Dye, please cancel your spring-training reservations with the White Sox and hold for your impending reassignment.

Phil wrote the opening in that netherworld between sleep and awake, the only place where shit like that seems funny.

Oh, fuck it. Let's just get to the goods.

...If you were going to have Carlos Quentin on one outfield corner and Dye on the other, as the White Sox did in 2008, why even consider Viciedo in the outfield?

I will speak slow. Just because Alexei Ramirez happened to play right away doesn't mean Viciedo will. Alexei is 26. Viciedo is 19! And apparently out of shape. Just because Kenny may be open (Kenny quotes I omitted) to trying him in the outfield doesn't even touch the realm of meaning he is going to take over right field on Opening Day 2009. And therefore meaning Dye is going to be traded. See, there are more years after next year. It's called long-term for a reason.

Kenny didn't broach the subject. Somebody asked him about the possibility. Possibility, by definition, means it's possible. And not necessarily right now.

Common sense thinking. It works. I promise.

Years ago, when Williams was the Sox's farm director, he and his coaches turned Carlos Lee from a third baseman into a left fielder in little more than a week's time. The guess here is that's the long-term plan for Viciedo, assuming Josh Fields and Wilson Betemit can hold down third.

Paging Phil Rogers...paging Phil Rogers. Your column is about to get stupid. Paging Phil Rogers...

Quentin should be a fielding upgrade in right field over the 34-year-old Dye, whose 2008 range factor of 1.86 ranked 27th among 30 primary right fielders. So this is the right time to trade Dye.

Phil. Go to the glossary of your new book. It's in the back. Range factor is NOT a spectacular judge of an outfield's ability to field his position at or better than the rest of the league.

ZONE RATING IS! It's a stat that evaluates how a player fields his typical defensive zone compared to the rest of the league. It's all comparabley and stuff, therefore more importanter.

Range factor's formula is (put outs + assists/innings played). Now look that over. In short, if your team's pitching staff is loaded with a bunch of flyball pitchers or tends to pitch more away to right-handed batters or a flurry of other factors, your range factor will be skewed by the number of fly balls you caught. It's not adjusted for anything. It just asks if the player caught the balls hit to him.

And Phil has heard of zone rating. We know this here at Phil Watch. He used it to say Miguel Cabrera was a bad third basemen by third basemen-y standards. What the hoo-hoo?

And if he's in that section of the book and wants to use range factor, turn a couple of pages to the leftfielders! Quentin had a 1.83 range factor, .04 points below Dye. And while he's on the left field page, check out Carlos Lee's zone rating. It's .755, dead last in baseball. Lee's play in left field doesn't buttress anything here.

And an aside here. If range factor is important in Phil's world, where's the column discussing Ryan Theriot's dead-last rating for shortstops? Had to get that in. I'm small.

Dye's slow and not very rangey, but in 272 chances in 2008, he had one error. Quentin, by contrast, had seven errors in 240 chances. Both had five assists. Upgrade?

He has averaged 34 home runs and 95 RBIs in his four years with the Sox. That gives him value to many teams: the Dodgers (assuming they don't re-sign Manny Ramirez), Mets, Braves, Angels (if they lose Mark Teixeira), Rays and Reds, to name six teams that are not believed to be on his no-trade list.

Christo fading. Columnists = Analysts. Reporters = Reportage.

Team-by-team:

Dodgers: They'd have to move/would be asked for Kemp or Ethier, something they wouldn't do for a bevy of players with bigger upside than Dye. With Lowe and Penny gone, they're not letting go of any pitching. Oh, and they already have two players with wildly expensive and not very producey-type contracts in Pierre and Jones in the outfield. How does Dye fit?

Mets: Intriguing, part une. The rumors are out there. But the Sox wouldn't do it without getting a centerfielder in return and the Mets are backtracking on the possibility of trading Fernando Martinez. And Jenks would be involved in that one. See, other teams have needs, too.

Braves: Well, they just traded Vazquez to the Braves and got what they wanted from their farm system in return. I suppose it's possible. Not very probable. It would be the definition of a salary dump.

Angels: No. Dye can't play left and that's what they need.

Rays: Intriguing, part deux. Surplus of bullpen arms and the Sox need it.

Reds: Intriguing, part trois. The names are already out there. Bailey for Dye straight up? Maybe not with Bailey's regression last year.

See. Mets, Rays and Reds. I could have saved Phil some time by not typing in stupid.

Williams might not fill his biggest remaining need—a center fielder/leadoff hitter—with a Dye trade, but should get a lot of interesting offers the next two weeks. By moving Dye, who is due $11.5 million in 2009 with an option for '10, he would be gaining flexibility to sign a free agent or two who slips between the cracks, as he did with A.J. Pierzynski and Orlando Hernandez after trading Lee and letting Magglio Ordonez walk after 2004.

He already has that flexibility. His own paper has mentioned the updated payroll numbers after the Vazquez trade about a gazillion times.

This off-season Williams is doing to his lineup what he did to his rotation two years ago—sacrificing expensive, known quantities to collect multiple options with potential staying power. I didn't like it when he traded Freddy Garcia and Brandon McCarthy (and almost Jon Garland), but the development of Gavin Floyd and John Danks made that gamble work.

Phil owns up to his own dippiness. Kind of. Progress.

But that 'almost' on Garland is a bit of a misnomer. He didn't like it. For evidence, he compared the potential effect of losing Jon Garland to the Cubs letting Matt Clement go. Oh, and there was a 'Ghost of Garland' image in the nut graph. Fun.

The latest renovation of the roster is more appealing, even if many executives believe Williams is overrating Flowers, whom they regard as a serious liability behind the plate. Williams did well recouping the kind of talent he sent to Arizona to acquire Vazquez three years ago (center fielder Chris Young was the headliner).

Vazquez was traded for Chris Young, Luis Vizcaino and Orlando Hernandez.

Vizcaino had a perfectly fine, if unspectacular little run pitching in middle relief for three different teams in the three years since. He's now 34 and coming off a 5.28 ERA campaign for Colorado in 2008.

Hernandez is out of baseball and didn't pitch last year because he's 97 years old.

Young...well...since the trade, he had a great rookie year. Since that year, Arizona has decided he is a terrible lead0ff hitter because, you know, he doesn't get on base. .306 OBP in the majors will do that. And that little thing like striking out once in every 3.97 at bats will do it as well. If he was the leadoff hitter for the White Sox, White Sox fans would not want him as a leadoff hitter. He's worse than Soriano in the leadoff spot. By a lot, actually.

Zone rating = average. Range factor = below-average.

Young wasn't just the headliner...he was the only real player in the deal. And even with all that Vazquez was, the Sox got the better of that one, all things considered.

Now! onto Flowers. Many executives don't think Flowers is overrated. Many executives know that Flowers caught full-time for the first time last year. He was a shortstop in high school and switched between catcher and first base in college. They think he's a project defensively, not overrated.

The guy walked 98 freaking times in 413 at-bats last year for a .427 OBP. And he's not and all-or-nothing hitter. 32 doubles in 413 at-bats. Sure, Class A. But he should be on schedule to get to the White Sox right about the time Pierzynski and Konerko's contracts expire. It's a ridiculously good play and the right guy for the situation.

Flowers, Gilmore and Santos Rodriguez are all high-ceiling guys. Brent Lillibridge could be next year's Quentin: a talented player acquired when his value was low after a bad year. It makes you wonder how much Williams will be offered for Dye.

And there you go. Phil spends a bazillion columns lamenting the loss of Fautino de los Santos and barely even mentions that Santos Rodriguez, a guy comparable not only in name but in ceiling, was just acquired. And Rodriguez has the added advantage of not just having Tommy John surgery.

That's our Phil (cue wacky sitcom music)!

Phil Watch: Ah, C'mon! (Times 8,397)

"Mommy. What's a pythagorean win-loss percentage?"

"Well Robby, it's when a baseball idiot pokes his dipstick into a baseball hoo-hoo and, nine months later, a little baseball moron of an idea pops out."

"What?"

"You heard me, you little..."

Let's play a little catch-up. Phil's been a busy little bee over the last week, if being busy means being a dope. Which it does.

So let's just pick the juiciest nuggets over the last week and do that thing where the BRE tries to get all clever and shit and say things that are more funny/accurate/incisive/breathtakingly inappropriate than what Phil writes.

It's what we do.

Let's start with today's offering (in reverse order):

Modern math: According to the Pythagorean standings, the Angels' Mike Scioscia and Houston's Cecil Cooper were the best managers in the majors this season. They had ratings of +12 and +9 respectively.

Wow. Wow! WOW!! I don't know if I've ever seen something so wrong in an inherently wrong way than this. Well, that's not true. Palin DID say her First Amendment rights were violated by the media yesterday.

Pythagorean standings are NOT manager ratings. Repeat. Not. No. They are a pretty simple mathematical equation that takes runs scored and runs against and plugs them into a formula to determine their win-loss record based solely on that.

In other words, it's merely cute and nobody uses it. Sometimes the disparity is pretty shocking and it's interesting to see such a disparity. It can help an argument in an ancillary of an ancillary sense by demonstrating that a team probably was unbelievably lucky with RISP, they had a great bullpen or their rotation was loaded with Zeuses, Apollos and Joes the Plumber.

Arizona last year was a good example. 18 games over in actual wins and four games under in Pythagorean wins.

But let's take the Angels this year. They were well on their way to being the Arizona of this year w/r/t Pythagorean win-loss. On June 9, they were 39-26 and in first place, four games up on Oakland. Their run differential was...ZERO! Oakland's was +46.

What does that mean? Well, if it was relatively late and the Angels were down, say, four runs, it usually meant Scioscia would go with the Chris Bootchecks, Jason Bulgers and Darren O'Days of the world. Who are they? Exactly. The Angels ended the season at +68 and the A's ended at -44.

So anyway. You take the Pythagorean win-loss, compare it to actual win-loss and come up with a number called 'Luck'. So if the P-WL is say 12 games lower than actual win-loss, then it's determined by this simplistic formula that 12 games were won that the numbers say they probably shouldn't have.

In other-other-other words, IT'S NOT A MANAGER'S RATING!!!!!

Managers cannot see the future, which saying 12 games a year determines a manager's proficiency does! This is where certain statistical models get into trouble. Because dopes can wildly misuse them.

It was debunked ten years ago, completely modified and has been tossed to the ash bin of silly baseball logic.

I can only think Phil is using this for some stupid reason.

The worst were the Toronto combination of John Gibbons and Cito Gaston and Atlanta's Bobby Cox, at -7.

Cripes. Poor Cito Gaston. Phil couldn't even give the guys his properly proper props.

When Gibbons was fired on June 20, the Jays were 35-40 with a +9 run differential.

They finished 86-76 and had a +104 run differential.

That's a 51-36 actual record and a 55-32 Pythagorean W-L for Gaston.

So a +4 luck factor for the team under Gaston and a -11 luck factor for the team under Gibbons.

That doesn't mean that the Jays were better because of the presence of Super Gaston. It had more to do with something resembling a healthy rotation and a bullpen that found its legs as the season went on. Oh, also, Vernon Wells and Alex Rios figured out that getting base hits and not striking out makes you a better baseball player. I don't think it took Cito to tell them that.

The rankings show managers decided only one playoff race—the AL Central. Minnesota's Ron Gardenhire was a -1 compared to Ozzie Guillen's zero, and without the difference the Twins would have avoided a one-game playoff.

BREAKING NEWS: Ron Gardenhire singlehandedly 88 games this year. There were no Minnesota Twins players involved. In fact, every game this year was a mirage created by Bud Selig to fool everyone into thinking that baseball is real.

Really? Is Phil thinking through this shit while he's typing it? Pythagorean W-L means nothing! Just a cute tool, people! And it's not Modern Math. It's math used 15 years before baseball stats were seriously evaluated.

Lou Piniella was a -1 after getting a -2 rating in 2007, his first year with the Cubs. Dusty Baker, the manager Piniella replaced, was a +2 in his first year in Cincinnati.

There you go! Based on an archaic, overly simplistic formula that nobody uses, Dusty Baker was a better manager than Lou Pinella.

It took all season for Phil to find something to justify his Dusty man-love, but he wins. They can go make Phusty babies now.

And then we move on to the impetus of this article: Charlie Manuel is the bestest manager in the bestest way in the bestest history of history.

Why? Well, because the Indians have been bad since he left.

Manuel, who had been Mike Hargrove's hitting coach during Cleveland's heyday a decade ago, replaced Hargrove as manager before 2000. His first two teams won 90 games and 91 games, winning the American League Central in 2001.

But Shapiro sacked him after a 39-47 start in '02. The firing came less than nine months after Shapiro had been promoted to replace John Hart as general manager. He tabbed Joel Skinner, an organization guy, as an interim manager to finish out the season but then turned to the 35-year-old Eric Wedge for 2003.

We're getting to it...

You can't blame Manuel for being just a little amused looking at what has happened to the Indians since they sacked him.

Four of Wedge's six seasons have been losing ones; Manuel, on the other hand, never has had a losing record for a full season. The Pythagorean rankings, which essentially measure a team's victory total with the number suggested by its run production and prevention, have Wedge at -19 for his six-year career; Manuel is at zero for the six full seasons he has managed in Cleveland and Philadelphia.

This should just about cover it:

Cleveland Indians Payroll Since 2000:

2008: $ 78,970,066
2007: $ 61,673,267
2006: $ 56,031,500
2005: $ 41,502,500
2004: $ 34,319,300
2003: $ 48,584,834
2002: $ 78,909,499
2001: $ 93,360,000 (Manuel)
2000: $ 76,500,000 (Manuel)

Any correlation? Me thinks so!

But no. It's because Charlie Manuel is the smartest manager to ever don a fat baseball uniform.

Did Phil watch Manuel's press conferences?

He sounded like this guy:

"I wasn't working on trying to prove nothing," Charlie Manuel said.

More to come.

Phil Watch: Ah, C'mon! (Con't)

I would be remiss if I didn't at least mention this here at Phil Watch, as Phil got his ass handed to him on sports radio all last week over it.

Why?

Well...see for yourself.

The Cubs are on the list of teams for which Jake Peavy will waive his no-trade clause. This doesn't look like a fit, but don't be surprised if Jim Hendry tries to put together a package that would include a swap of first basemen, Derrek Lee and Adrian Gonzalez, who is supposedly untouchable.

Jake Peavy - by himself - being traded to the Cubs 'doesn't look like a fit', but...

The Padres, a team desperately trying to get younger and shed payroll, would trade away a 26 year-old first basemen considered by most to be one of the best in the game for a 'package' headlined by a 33 year-old first basemen in serious offensive decline and is owed $26 million over the next two years and has a no-trade clause.

Oh yeah. And Gonzalez's contract obligation over the next three years:

09:$3M, 10:$4.75M, 11:$5.5M club option (no buyout)

Now...if you're a team trying to rebuild...THERE IS NOBODY YOU WOULD REBUILD AROUND MORE!!!

And Peavy going to be included AS WELL?????!!!!!!

Phil's 'package' would have to include Soto and/or Marmol for Towers to even pick up the phone. Or a farm system dump the likes of which haven't been seen since the Johan Santana trade. Mention the realistic details, Phil. And then check your inbox.

Have I been expecting too much from the Chicago Tribune all this time? Is this my fault somehow?

Phil Rogers. Capturing the essence of a Score caller for three-plus decades.

But

I must give Phil credit where it's deserved. Well...this is mostly due to the fact that Rick Morrissey wrote something so breathtakingly stupid, making Phil's response was positively sane in comparison.

It's the typical shit. The World Series experiences a rain delay and sportswriters compulsively feel the need to prove their mettle by writing reactionary pieces promoting the wholesale destruction of the current model.

It's what they do. It makes them feel important, if only briefly.

Here's Morrissey:

1. Start the season on April 15 and end it on September 15, resulting in a 130 game season.

2. Better yet, start May 1 and end it August 30. The season is way too long.

3. The Steroids Era ruined stats anyway so fuck it.

4. Move the World Series to a neutral, warm-weather site.

5. Like Game 5 this year, one hour and 18 minute games are awesome.

Should BRE start a Rick Watch? WOW!

Phil's response:

1. Keep the season at 162 games.

2. Cut Spring Training by one week.

3. Start the season 10 days earlier.

4. Have teams play three scheduled doubleheaders.

5. Add a 26th player to the roster.

6. World Series played between October 13-21 every year. First round increased to seven games.

I could get behind that.

And if 10,000 people can run 26.2 miles in the New York Marathon on November 2, a few baseball players can play their little game in late October.

See. I think they alternate between who is going to be the raging moron each week over at the Trib.

Phil just volunteers a lot.