Over-rated
September 15, 2007
I wrote earlier this year that I was hoping that the 2007 would be better than my Strat-o-matic '69 season went. If that Strat team was my Star Wars: Episode 1, then hopefully my other teams would be my Star Wars: Episodes 4 and 5. Unfortunately, they turned out to be Episode 2. I don't know what else to say about my 2007 fantasy baseball efforts other than to say my teams were all over-rated both by me and at least a few others. So by association, I am over-rated, too.
My Tout Wars team, which began the season with some nice fanfare on ESPN.com, turned out to have a number of real lemons on it by the names of Carlos Delgado, Rod Barajas, Morgan Ensberg, Wilson Betemit, Kip Wells and Dontrelle Willis. Delgado got a late start in spring and never really got on track. I'm not sure Barajas was ever convinced that he was the guy in Philly and Charlie Manuel did very little to give him a chance to show that he could be that guy. I mean 61 at bats over the first two months of the season is not exactly a large sample to work from. Dontrelle Willis' demeanor on the mound this season had a nervousness about it that had not been evident before. I don't know if it was due to his off-the-field concerns or his sudden realization that his stats had been in decline the past couple of years, but he was not good.
There is no physical reason that Kip Wells shouldn't be a 15-game winner. Having watched some of his starts this year, he's been on the wrong side of some bad luck but he's also made some of it himself with awful pitch selection in key moments of the games. He's proof that there are limits to Dave Duncan's magic. It appears as though he's just one of those guys who overthinks and/or can not reign in his emotions consistently when he's a starter, just like Joaquin Benoit. Both guys have great stuff, but it is increasingly clear that their comfort zone is in the bullpen. Claudio Vargas might be that way too. Unfortunately, I had both Wells and Vargas and along with the "contributions" of Willis, all hope was abandoned failry early on of finishing respectably in the pitching categories, save strikeouts.
I have no explanation what happened to Morgan Ensberg. Ironically, when he first came up I was not enamored with him at all. And then he posted that terrific season a couple years ago and I thought, "well, maybe I was wrong about this guy". So wouldn't you know it the minute I start drinking the koolaid, he bottoms out. Just goes to show you that even people who spend all their time watching and thinking about baseball can be fooled. Wilson Betemit did pretty much what people wanted him to do in LA, which was to be more selective at the plate. His batting average suffered and so Grady Little ran him out of town. Once he moved on to New York and the AL, he torched the pitching for a week and then got sent to the bench in favor of more Andy Phillips. I don't get this one either. Betemit clearly has incredible talent, perhaps even All-Star level. But he appears to take games off when he's a starter. Perhaps that is too harsh an assessment. He plays hard but there are some games in which mentally he's just not thinking at the plate. He'll get fooled for a strikeout in his first at bat and then fall for the same trick in his second and third at bats. The frustration arises because he doesn't do this all the time; he does make in game adjustments from time to time so he does have the potential to put it all together. Still, I would think a manager would try to work through Betemit's immaturity in hopes of developing the star potential rather than simply giving up on him for a known mediocrity. I mean, it's not as though Andy Phillips' bat (.711 OPS) has been a difference maker for the Yankees.
On the plus side, I did roster Brad Hawpe, Ryan Theriot, Hanley Ramirez and Rich Hill. Ubaldo Jimenez has been pretty good too. It's a small victory to uncover next year's up and coming players but at this point small victories are all I have.
My Scoresheet team was even worse. The team was depending on Bartolo Colon, Rich Harden, and Daniel Cabrera on the pitching staff and Rocco Baldelli on offense. Enough said.
My SOMBOE Strat-o-matic team's failures over on Sportingnews.com were entirely my fault. My biggest mistake was being in Russia when the draft and the free agent waiver period occurred. It's tough to make adjustments when you don't have reliable internet and perhaps more relevantly, aren't at all concerned about baseball. Regardless, my initial thinking about my home park was all wrong. RFK is death on batting average and rather than trying to get more of it, I thought it might be a more efficient use of resources to go in the opposite direction and completely abandon it. The correct choice would have been overpaying for average, and/or overpaying for pitching. Since I did neither, I had no home field advantage. Compounding my failures was the fact that my division contained three hitters parks so I basically had the infamous "no field advantage". After many free agent exchanges during the season, I did finally figure out the correct combination but by that time I had spent so much money adjusting the personnel that I was basically one good player short of a team. That said, they did come back from 14 games under .500 with the worst record in the league to finish just 6 games under, third in the division and somewhere near the middle of the pack overall. Another Pyrrhic victory to add in 2007.
I expected my XFL team to suffer a little as it was a very young squad with a few questionable veterans who really needed to come up big in order for me to contend. On the plus side, entering this offseason I will have Grady Sizemore ($10), Joe Mauer ($10), James Loney ($7), Justin Upton ($4), Alexis Casilla ($4), Corey Hart ($11), Troy Tulowitski ($12), Ryan Theroit ($6), Carlos Pena ($15), Jay Bruce ($1) as well as Jake Peavy, Rich Hill and Bobby Jenks at reasonable prices. So I should have a pretty nice war chest to take into the November draft with several of the scarce positions already well-appointed with inexpensive high-ceiling talent. Hopefully in 2008 I won't be so over-rated.
So there you have it. My disastrous 2007 season in baseball. But just like the blackened land after a volcanic eruption destroys everything, eventually a few flowers of optimism poke through bringing the hope that paradise will soon bloom.
OK, so who else besides me is over-rated this year? How about USC, the BCS and ESPN.
Last year I posited that the Big 10 conference was over-rated, a position that was clearly proven in the postseason, but indisputably confirmed this season with Michigan's collosal failures as well as Wisconsin's narrow escape against UNLV. The big hype so far in college football is the potential showdown between #1 USC and #2 LSU in the championship game: the latest USC dynasty matching up against an upstart LSU squad. At least that is how the BCS and ESPN would have you see it. One very big problem: USC's "dynasty" has largely been an illusion; it is LSU that has had the best program in the country over that span.
USC has played in a mediocre conference and faced underwhelming Big Ten opponents (more often than not, ineptly-coached Michigan) in most of their bowl games. The one time they did face a formidable opponent - the one-dimensional Texas Longhorns (that one dimension being Vince Young) - they lost. All those great pros USC was supposedly producing over the last five years? Mike Williams is largely regarded as one of the biggest busts in NFL draft history, Lendale White is eating himself out of a platoon situation in Tennessee (?!) and glory-boy Matt Leinart has yet to show any real savvy in the NFL despite having two of pro football's best recievers and a 4-time Pro Bowler to give the ball. Only Reggie Bush has shown any real potential. I look at LSU's contributions to the NFL over that same period and I see Joseph Addai (top 5 running back) and Michael Clayton. True, Clayton is to date a one-year wonder wide reciever, but at least he had one good year which is more than you can say for most of the USC's guys.
LSU has played in the toughest conference and their bowl match-ups have come against teams that many people picked to win the national championship (Oklahoma in 2003, Miami in 2005, Notre Dame in 2006). And not only did they win those match-ups, they completely dominated them. The only blemish was a loss to a good Iowa team in 2004 that required the referees to look the other way as LSU defenders were literally tackled from defending against a Hail Mary pass. Oh yeah, and they also had this little natural disaster called Katrina to deal with which not only rearranged their schedule in 2005 so that they didn't have any off-weeks, but the players also had victims of the storm literally living with them the entire season. This year is much more of the same media garbage with USC facing a meek schedule and basking in loud hosannas while LSU faces a schedule so tough that many NFL teams wouldn't finish with a .500 record and still not getting much sympathy or affection.
USC's ranked schedule, or at least the teams that were supposed to be obstacles, are Nebraska, Notre Dame, Cal and UCLA. Cal appears to be a legitimately good team, probably a top 10 finisher. UCLA also appears to be decent although i can see them finishing with three losses pretty easily. Oregon is a darkhorse, but who knows: everyone has looked good against Michigan this year. However, Nebraska just barely escaped with a victory over a winless Wake Forest team and Notre Dame has not only yet to win, but has not yet scored an offensive touchdown. Playing three top 20 teams, one of them highly dubious, is not exactly the stuff of legends.
LSU, who has already crushed formerly #9 Virginia Tech, still has to face a very good South Carolina team led by national title-winning coach Steve Spurrier, reigning National Champion Florida, perenially top 10 Auburn, a very good Alabama team led by national title-winning coach Nick Saban, and Arkansas which features the most talented college running back in college football in the last 20 years, Darrin McFadden. Unlike USC, LSU faces no paper tigers. There is a very good chance that every one of those tough match-ups on LSU's schedule will be a showdown between top 20 teams and a better than average chance that all but South Carolina will be in the top 10 at some point. Even LSU's "easy" games are tough with match-ups against a suprisingly good Kentucky team and a Middle Tennesee State team that nearly beat current #9 Louisville in Louisville. No team in the last 50 years faced five top 10 teams in a single regular season and LSU might not only have to face them but beat them all just to get to the conference championship game. Not the BCS title game. No, that would have to come after defeating the winner of the SEC East, very likely a team they would have already faced (South Carolina or Florida) and quite possibly a team ranked in the top 10. Last year LSU faced four top 10 teams (all on the road) and despite some indefensibly bad officiating at Auburn, went 2-2. This year if they hope to play in the BCS championship they will have to exceed that challenge which is to say if they do go undefeated in the regular season, USC in the Sugar Bowl will be an afterthought.
How good is this LSU team? Virginia Tech had the best defense in the country last year both in terms of points and yards allowed. In 2005, they led the nation in defense in yards allowed and were 3rd in points allowed. In 2004, they were 3rd in points allowed and 4th overall in yards allowed. In fact, you have to go back to 2003 when, ironically enough, LSU had the best defense in the country to find a year when Virginia Tech did not have unquestionably one of the best defenses in the country. Last Saturday, LSU piled up 600 yards of offense and nearly 50 points against that defense, one that has 4 players who are under serious consideration for All-American honors. On offense, Tech did not cross the 50 yard line until the 3rd quarter and that was with one of their drives starting on their own 46-yard line.
And I didn't feel the least bit ashamed that they kept kicking the crap out of Hokies in the 4th quarter. ESPN is the reason. Kirk Herbstreet (Big Ten almunus) stated near the end of the game, even after watching one of the most dominating performances in a match-up of top 10 teams in recent memory, says that he favors USC in the polls despite the fact that he has not seen them play this season. His cohort in the booth, Brent Musberger (another Big Ten Alumnus), actually suggested that USC has a tougher schedule than LSU. Back in the studio, Mark May would not even entertain the thought that LSU, in light of their performance, should be considered #1 for at least one week. I don't get it. Everyone states matter of factly that the SEC is the best conference in the country. Some say it is by far the best, other just acknowledge that is the best with the same conviction they say the sun will shine tomorrow. So if LSU plays in the toughest conference, isn't it logical to conclude they have the tougher schedule? Their non-conference opponents are clearly tougher so if they win against that schedule, isn't it logical to conclude they are the best team? What does this team have to do to finally get some respect?
It took the unique achievement of winning two championships in Tout Wars and another in SOMBOE for me to finally get unanimous respect in the fantasy baseball industry. Of course, now I've become over-rated. Hopefully, LSU will run the tables this year so they can become over-rated too.