More cover history: The 2012 SI baseball preview

I was caught off-guard this year. The Opening Series in Japan next week has thrown off my internal Opening Day clock. And so, when my Sports Illustrated was late to my mailbox this week, all I thought I was missing was an NCAA Sweet 16 cover.

But no! When I reached in on Friday, half a face of Albert Pujols was glaring back at me.

As with last year's cover, it's not much of a surprise. The biggest move of the offseason gets the featured spot on the annual baseball preview. This year, there's no inset photo, so it's only the Angels that get the tally in my running review of SI baseball preview covers.

Pujols' appearance -- his second, the other was in 2006 -- represents only the second Angels cover in the history of the SI baseball preview. The other was Joe Rudi in 1977, which does not bode well. Rudi had signed with the Angels that offseason, and the cover bore the headline: "Joe Rudi: The Angels' $2-million man." He went on to hit .264 with 13 home runs and 53 RBIs for a fifth-place club. Somehow, I think things will turn out a little bit better for Pujols and the Angels.

Pujols does make history with this appearance, though. He appeared solo in 2006 and now again this year. Steve Garvey (1975 and '82) is the only other player to have two covers to himself.

For the FULL breakdown of the SI baseball preview cover (and it is comprehensive), look here. Both there and below, you'll find the updated stats.

Team appearances:
Red Sox, 7
Yankees, 6
Phillies, 5
Cardinals, 5
Dodgers, 5
Orioles, 3
Giants, 3
Reds, 3
Angels, 2
Mariners, 2
Indians, 2
Royals, 2
Twins, 2
Mets, 2
Pirates, 2
Tigers, 2
Brewers, 1
D-backs, 1
Rockies, 1
Cubs, 1
Rangers, 1
Padres, 1
A's, 1
Expos, 1
Nationals, 1

That's a total of 62 teams now on the covers (accounting for two or more players sharing the spotlight in some years). Through the 2011 season, 23 of those 61 teams (not including this year's Angels, of course) made the playoffs, with the results as follows:

Won World Series, 6
Lost World Series, 5
Lost ALCS, 2
Lost NLCS, 1
Lost ALDS, 6
Lost NLDS, 3

The Phillies were the featured team on the cover the last two seasons, falling in the NLCS in 2010 and the NLDS in '11. But when it comes to regular-season standings, the editors have hit on top-two teams more than the other positions combined:

1st, 21
2nd, 13
3rd, 15
4th, 6
5th, 2
6th, 2
7th, 2

Here are a few more team-related numbers, all updated to include the 2011 Phillies and 2012 Angels and Pujols, where possible:

Won 100, 7
Lost 100, 2
Player with a new team, 13
Defending champs, 13

As for individual accolades, Roy Halladay's 2010 cover appearance made him the third player whose cover appearance foretold a Cy Young season, but that didn't carry over into 2011. But the Phillies rotation last year did add three All-Star nods to the annals.

Hall of Famers, 16
Retired, 2
MVP, 2
Cy Young, 3
All-Star, 39
Broke record, 2
20-game winner, 3
Led league (wins, strikeouts or ERA), 10

First base remains a strong third in most frequent apperances on the preview cover, with Pujols inching the position closer to outfield's strong hold on second place. (Each player counts once, not as a group, meaning last year's Phillies rotation counted for five starting pitchers):

C, 4
1B, 11
2B, 1
3B, 6
SS, 5
OF, 19
SP, 25
Manager, 2
Owner, 1

Los Angelinos

Brilliant! The Angels announced last week that they will in fact feature their original uniforms as part of their "Flashback Fridays" this season. And, as the release mentions, they will have the halo on the caps.

Flashbacks about to become more common in southern California

The Angels announced on Friday that they'll feature "Flashback Fridays" as part of their 50th anniversary this season. To kick it off, they'll wear reproductions of their 1989-92 uniform (with the 50th anniversary patch added) on April 8, April 22 and May 6.


The press release trumpets it as the "late 1980s" design, and while the lettering and cap design remained pretty much the same from 1972-92, the button-down version only came around in '89, but it's not a big deal. My first reaction was to wonder why they chose that particular jersey, but after reading through the release, which only mentions those three dates out of 13 Friday home games, it seems that the other 10 games will feature different designs. I don't know why they didn't mention that in the initial release, though. I'm also curious as to whether they'll go in reverse chronological order, or just unveil them randomly.

It's possible they're simply starting with the uniform they wore for nearly half of their existence (buttons aside), the one we picture on the likes of Nolan Ryan, Reggie Jackson and Wally Joyner. If it's reverse chronological, then it means they'll be skipping the 1997-2000 design we all remember Mo Vaughn wearing and the mid-'90s Tim Salmon design. As ugly as it was, it would be amusing to see those blue-sleeved faux vests resurrected.

They'll almost certainly include their initial 1961 design, perhaps for the final Flashback Fridays of the season. That one isn't too far off from what they currently wear (since the road jerseys won't come into play), with the awesome exception of the cap and its white halo. That's a replica I wouldn't mind having.

But I'm hoping they bring back the e.e. cummings lowercase design from the early '70s. Unfortunately, in a surprising happenstance in a division with only three other opponents, the Angels won't host the Rangers on a Friday night, which would've given them a perfect opportunity to have Ryan throw out the first pitch.

But would he wear the throwback jersey from his Angels days? Is it taboo for a team owner to wear an opponent's jersey, even if he once played for that team, if it's not the result of a lost bet? Twice in 2009, Ryan donned the Mets' blue and orange, once for a Sports Illustrated photo shoot and again for a reunion at Citi Field of the 1969 championship team. He was the Rangers' president at that time, but not yet a part owner of the team. And the Rangers weren't there for the game at Citi Field. I don't know why I just spent a paragraph on that, since it's not likely to come up. The Angels might have him throw out a first pitch when the Rangers are in town, but it won't be a Flashback Friday, so the jersey issue won't come up. But now it has me wondering if a team owner has ever worn the jersey of another team in a non-wager situation. I doubt it.

(Incidentally, know who else has a 50th anniversary this year? The Texas Rangers, because they were the expansion Senators in 1961. But that's not an anniversary they plan on celebrating, apparently.)

The Mets' 50th anniversary is next season (as is the Astros' -- here's hoping for some Colt .45s throwbacks, a wish on another shooting star, some tequila sunrise action and a return to what I've just decided to call Biggio blue).

Though the Mets don't have too many variations in their uniform design over the years, I hope they'll do something similar. Start with the 1993-94 swoosh design (if only for one night), bring back the racing stripes from '86 for three or four home games, whip up a blue pullover to go with those '80s striped pants, then sport the two-button pullover worn from '78-82, and wrap it up with the simple, basic, no-black-to-be-seen and numberless front of the 1962 originals.

Or, you know, just ditch the black for the entire season. That's an anniversary celebration right there.

Little Old New York

The still image above is from a British tourism film about New York City in 1963. Along with scenes from Idlewild (pre-JFK) Airport, Chinatown and the downtown skyline is a segment on Yankee Stadium. The footage was taken on July 25, 1963, which was the only home game against the Angels that year started by left-hander Al Downing. The announced attendance was 15,716, but it appears the actual figure was a bit less. There's also a segment near the end about the construction of the World's Fair attractions -- including the Unisphere -- for the 1964-65 exposition. (Thanks to Uniwatch for pointing out this video.)

LITTLE OLD NEW YORK

Most valuable losers

When Chase Utley hit his second home run in Game 5 of the World Series, giving him five against the Yankees, the discussion began about who had been named Series MVP from the losing team. Since the award was first given (in 1955 to Johnny Podres), only one player had ever earned the honor but not a championship ring: the Yankees' Bobby Richardson in the 1960 Fall Classic.

Of course, that's the year that Bill Mazeroski ended the Series at Forbes Field with the only Game 7 walk-off homer in history. Mazeroski's numbers in the seven games were decent: .320 batting average, two homers, five RBIs, two doubles, four runs. But Richardson's topped that: .367, one homer, 12 RBIs, two doubles, two triples, eight runs. In fact, Maz's somewhat pedestrian numbers were the best across the board on a Pittsburgh team that lost the Series in pretty much every category other than games won.

The Bombers outhit the Bucs, .338 to .256; outscored them 55-27; outhomered them 10-4; outslugged them 27 extra-base hits to 15; outpitched them 3.54-7.11 in ERA; and outWHIPped them 1.18 to 1.76. The Pirates won their four games by scores of 6-4 (Game 1), 3-2 (Game 4), 5-2 (Game 5), and 10-9 (Game 7). The Yankees' winning scores were 16-3 (Game 2), 10-0 (Game 3) and 12-0 (Game 6).

Mazeroski's five RBIs led the Pirates alongside Bill Virdon, but his five came with just a .241 average on seven hits. For New York, Richardson wasn't a one-man show, and if anyone in the press box kept track of the voting that year, I'd have to think that Mickey Mantle lost by one vote. Mantle hit .400 with three homers, 11 RBIs, a double, eight runs and eight walks. One way or another, the MVP of the 1960 World Series was going to a Yankee.

The Pirates' best candidate for MVP would have to be right-hander Vern Law, who started and won Games 1 and 4 and allowed one run in five innings after starting Game 7. In 18 1/3 innings, he allowed seven earned runs for a 3.44 ERA. The only other mark below 4.00 for Pittsburgh was Harvey Haddix's 2.45 (two earned runs in 7 1/3) that he accumulated by starting and winning Game 5 (6 1/3 innings, both runs) and pitching the ninth to win Game 7. (He came in with runners on first and second and no outs, gave up a single to Mantle that allowed Richardson to score and move Dale Long to third, then blew the save and allowed Long to score the tying run on a groundout to first by Yogi Berra.)

The most dominant pitcher in the Series was Whitey Ford, who won Games 3 and 6 by pitching 18 scoreless innings, allowing just 11 hits and two walks and striking out eight -- certainly MVP-worthy numbers. It makes you wonder why Casey Stengel, whose Yankees won the AL by eight games over the Orioles, pitched Ford for two innings in relief in the season finale on Oct. 2 and didn't use Ford until Game 3 on Oct. 8. Ford's last start had been on Sept. 28, five days before Game 1 of the Series on Oct. 3. For the season, Ford was 12-9 with a 3.08 ERA and an 85-65 K:BB ratio in 192 2/3 innings. Stengel's Game 1 and 2 starters were Art Ditmar (15-9, 3.06, 65-56 in 200 IP) and Bob Turley (9-3, 3.27, 87-87 in 173 1/3 IP). Had Ford started Games 1 and 4 and been available had it gone to seven, it may have been a different story.

In this year's Series, I think any chance Utley had of winning the award hinged on the Phillies forcing Game 7 -- especially if Utley played into a Game 6 victory in even the smallest sense. I think even to consider a player from the losing team, the Series has to go seven games. The most common simple way to evaluate whether a player is the valuable to his team may be to consider the team's fortunes were that player removed from the lineup. Take away Utley's solo homers in the third and sixth innings of Game 1, and it's scoreless into the eighth -- maybe Cliff Lee changes his approach in some situations in a scoreless game as opposed to having a 1-0 and 2-0 lead. And in Game 5, Utley's three-run shot in the first inning kept the crowd at its fever pitch from the start and pretty much gave Lee the freedom to pitch his game. (And, of course, Lee's performance in the Series would've earned him consideration for MVP as well, especially since he almost certainly would've had some role in a Game 7.)

So Utley fits the definition of a player most valuable to his team, but with just a six-game Series, it's hard to seriously consider someone from the losing side. For one thing, the Phillies never found themselves one win away from the title. And though they won Game 1 on the road, once the Yankees took Game 2, it was clear the momentum had shifted and remained on the Yankees' side through Game 4 and their 3-1 Series lead. The Phillies got it back to an extent in Game 5, but only for the first seven innings. After Utley's second home run of the game to lead off that inning and Raul Ibanez's shot three batters later, the Yankees fought back with three runs in the eighth and another in the ninth and had the tying run at the plate in the form of Mark Teixeira before falling, 8-6. In my mind, any shot the Phillies had of forcing Game 7 hinged on their jumping out to a moderately comfortable lead (in Yankee Stadium against these Bombers, that would have to be at least three runs) with Pedro Martinez starting Game 6 for them. It didn't happen -- Hideki Matsui's two-run homer in the second put the Yankees ahead for good, and though the Phillies got one back in the third, Matsui essentially put the game away (and earned his MVP) in the bottom of the third with a two-run single.

Since the MVP was introduced in 1955, a total of 59 players have won the award in the 55 Series that have been played. Those numbers account for three Dodgers -- Ron Cey, Pedro Guerrero and Steve Yeager -- and two Diamondbacks -- Curt Schilling and Randy Johnson -- sharing the award in 1981 and 2001, respectively; they also account for the absence of a Fall Classic in 1994. Out of those 59 players, 23 have been starting pitchers, or 40 percent. Of those 55 Series, 23 have gone seven games, and in seven-game Series, the MVP has been a starting pitcher 14 times, or 58 percent. (Three relief pitchers have won -- Rollie Fingers in 1974, John Wetteland in 1996 and Mariano Rivera in 1999 -- but none of those Series went seven games.) So when the Series goes the distance, giving starting pitchers a chance to have an effect on three games instead of just two, they seem to have a greater chance of winning the MVP award.

Here's the list MVPs from World Series that went seven games:

Year	Player	Pos	Team
1955	Johnny Podres	SP	BRK
1956	Don Larsen	SP	NYY
1957	Lew Burdette	SP	MIL
1958	Bob Turley	SP	NYY
1960	Richardson	2B	NYY
1962	Ralph Terry	SP	NYY
1964	Bob Gibson	SP	STL
1965	Sandy Koufax	SP	LAD
1967	Bob Gibson	SP	STL
1968	Mickey Lolich	SP	DET
1971	Roberto Clemente	OF	PIT
1972	Gene Tenace	C	OAK
1973	Reggie Jackson	OF	OAK
1975	Pete Rose	3B	CIN
1979	Willie Stargell	1B	PIT
1982	Darrell Porter	C	STL
1985	Bret Saberhagen	SP	KC
1986	Ray Knight	3B	NYM
1987	Frank Viola	SP	MIN
1991	Jack Morris	SP	MIN
1997	Livan Hernandez	SP	FLA
2001	Randy Johnson & Curt Schilling	SP	ARI
2002	Troy Glaus	3B	ANA

But I think the other obvious choice for an MVP on a losing team was another slugger, and one who played in the last seven-game Series, in 2002. Glaus won the award for hitting .385 (I'm using batting average because it's likely that most -- if not all -- of the voters in the press looked at that instead of OPS) with three home runs, eight RBIs, three doubles and six runs scored. He doubled in the tying and go-ahead runs in the bottom of the eighth of Game 6, when the Angels were down to their final six outs of the season. He then went 0-for-2 with two walks and two strikeouts in Game 7.

Yet the most valuable player of that Series had to have been Barry Bonds. He hit .471 with four homers, six RBIs, eight runs and two doubles. Six of his eight hits were for extra bases (1.294 slugging percentage) and he was walked 13 times (vs. three strikeouts) for a .700 on-base percentage and a 1.994 OPS. He reached base via hit or walk in every game, and Game 4 was the only one in which he did not get a base hit. He went 0-for-1 with three walks, all intentional, and did not score in the game. The first two free passes worked; the Giants were held scoreless in those innings. But in the fifth, with the Angels leading 3-2 after two runs had scored in the frame, Mike Scioscia ordered John Lackey to walk Bonds with one out and Rich Aurilia on second. Benito Santiago then singled in Aurilia to tie the game. Anaheim got out of the inning, but San Francisco won, 4-3, with an unearned run in the eighth, an inning in which Bonds did not come to bat. (Bonds had batted in the seventh against Francisco Rodriguez and grounded out to first on a 2-2 count.)

That Series was at the height of Bonds' influence on how the game was played, evidenced by all of those walks -- he had an impact simply by forcing the opposing manager to take the bat out of his hands. Clearly, no one was more valuable. Had the Series ended in six games, he would've won the MVP (he went 1-for-3 with a walk, no runs or RBIs, in Game 7), and he probably should have anyway. No pitcher on either team was worthy.

We're overdue for a seven-game Series. There have been seven played since the last one went the distance, easily the longest drought in history. Compare that to 1955-1965, when eight of 11 Fall Classics went the distance. And maybe our next seven-game season finale will come with another MVP debate. Imagine the postgame trophy presentation on Fox if the winner played for the losing side.

Randolph fired in the middle of the night

In a move stunning and disgusting for its timing and method, the Mets fired Willie Randolph after their 9-6 victory over the Angels on Monday night. Pitching coach Rick Peterson and first-base coach/catching instructor Tom Nieto were also axed.

On the one hand, the team wasn't playing up to its potential. But on the other, it isn't a very well-constructed team to begin with, particularly with so much of it relying on declining veterans.

I think, though, the most shocking aspect of it is that they did it after an inspiring victory, one in which the hitters came through in the clutch with runners on and tacked on runs in the later innings. With the exception of Pedro Feliciano, the bullpen performed well, with Aaron Heilman getting out of a seventh-inning jam by striking out Vladimir Guerrero and Torii Hunter; Duaner Sanchez pitching the eighth and Billy Wagner saving his second straight after three blowups. Plus, Mike Pelfrey had his fourth straight impressive start.

My concern now is that some players who have begun to put it all together -- Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran have been playing well of late, and then there's Pelfrey -- will regress. That momentum will be gone, that familiarity out the door.

Or maybe they wanted Willie booted. We'll see.

I'm sure I'll have more to say after I've slept on it. I don't want to go too far now on my initial gut reactions, only hours after the announcement.

2008 preview: AL West

I'm not sure how much predicting, per se, I'm going to do with my previews this year. I didn't even do any last year, so I think I'd grown tired of the standard prognostication that everyone does this time of year and over the next six weeks. I will still list the teams in each division in the order I think they'll finish, and in that space between the Red Sox-A's series in Japan and the true opening of the season on March 31, I may take a crack at how the postseason might shake out, but I don't know that I want to put numbers on player performances like I have in the past. There's a lot I'm looking forward to seeing this season, and I think I'll make that the focus of these posts. That's not to say I won't change my mind by the time I'm through with the divisions, but it's how I'll start.

---

LOS ANGELES ANGELS OF ANAHEIM

In general

Don't underestimate the Angels' ability to add another starter (Jon Garland) and the right-handed power bat they needed (Torii Hunter) -- if not the one they wanted (Alex Rodriguez or Miguel Cabrera) -- without having to give up young pitching or their top young hitters in established second baseman Howie Kendrick or shortstop/third base prospect Brandon Wood. Now the question remains is whether or not Wood can win a job and stick with the club -- and produce the 25-30 home runs he's capable of in his first full big-league season. Down the road, he could be a 40-homer guy.

Shortstop Orlando Cabrera is the only significant loss from last year's AL West champions, and his departure brought in Garland. Erick Aybar will man shortstop to start the season and the flexible Chone Figgins will take third, but Wood will be waiting in the wings for one of those spots. The Angels in the outfield will be the best in the game, particularly when Gary Matthews Jr. plays left field, with Hunter in center and Vladimir Guerrero in right. Hunter and Matthews will run down just about everything with loft underneath it, while Guerrero will fire anything that hits the grass into the infield so quickly that the runners will hesitate to take an extra base or be thrown out trying. It's not a bad hitting group, either, though Matthews' 18 homers and 72 RBIs weren't really what owner Artie Moreno paid for when he signed him to a five-year, $50 million deal last winter. Garret Anderson is a liability because of his injury history and advancing age (36 on June 30), but he's penciled in as the cleanup hitter between Guerrero and Hunter. The young right side of the infield -- Casey Kotchman and Kendrick -- will be a joy to watch as they gain experience.

The rotation is stacked with Cy Young contender John Lackey at the front, followed by Garland, Jered Weaver, the only Santana left in the AL (Ervin) and Joe Saunders, who is a fill-in until No. 2 Kelvim Escobar recovers from his shoulder soreness. Lackey and Escobar would actually match up well with Erik Bedard and Felix Hernandez in Seattle, but Anaheim clearly has the better depth through the back end. The bullpen, anchored by Francisco Rodriguez and set up by Scot Shields and Justin Speier, remains one of the best in the league, so to beat these Angels, you're going to have to keep them to four or five runs -- or fewer -- on most nights.

What I look forward to seeing


How good will this outfield be? They all can hit and they all can field, even when Anderson is out in left with Matthews at DH. Hunter has a new home for the first time in his career, which may make a difference, and it will be interesting to see how he responds to the life-altering contract he signed minutes before Thanksgiving. Figgins' six-hit game last year was thrilling to watch, particularly because he won it with that sixth hit, and he's a fun player to focus on each time he's on the field. He's got the speed to swipe 80 bases, which is something you don't see in today's game outside of Shea Stadium. But I'll be most interested in Wood's progress. His arrival would give the Angels a potential homegrown infield of future All-Stars. And I think he's got the kind of power that makes it a risk to leave your seat if he's due to bat in the inning.

SEATTLE MARINERS

In general

Adding Bedard to the rotation in front of Hernandez easily gives them the most impressive young 1-2 punch in the division, but where do they go after that? Jarrod Washburn, Carlos Silva and Miguel Batista? Does that scare anyone? The Mariners have the modern-day equivalent of Spahn and Sain and pray for rain. Except that they have a retractable roof at Safeco Field, so that approach won't help them at home. Beyond the starters, they have a closer in J.J. Putz who won't lose many -- if any -- games with a lead after eight innings, but the question will be getting the lead to him. Slated to set him up are untested second-year man Brendan Morrow and unheard-of Sean Green.

Offensively, Ichiro will rap out 200 hits and cover the ground in center field, but Jose Vidro batting second as the powerless DH and Raul Ibanez in the three-hole? Adrian Beltre can slug 30 homers as the cleanup guy, Kenji Johjima should provide decent protection as the fifth hitter, but then you fall into the abyss of inconsistency and, in two cases, longevity issues with Richie Sexson and Brad Wilkerson. Rounding out the order are middle infielders Jose Lopez and Yuniesky Betancourt.

What I'm looking forward to seeing

Just how good will Bedard and Hernandez be? It'll be a treat for fans in other AL cities when the Mariners come to town with the two both slated to pitch. Can Ichiro keep it up? I love watching him hit and hope his career carries on into his 40s to see just how many base knocks he piles up. Can Putz put up Eckersley numbers? His 1.38 ERA and 0.70 WHIP are on the block, and 82 strikeouts with just 13 walks are in the neighborhood. Does he get even better this year? And does Sexson become this generation's Rob Deer?

TEXAS RANGERS

In general

They didn't really lose anything in bidding adieu to Sammy Sosa, Wilkerson and Akinori Otsuka, but the additions of Josh Hamilton, Kazuo Fukumori, Milton Bradley, Ben Broussard, Jason Jennings and Eddie Guardado don't do much for me beyond Hamilton and Fukumori. Bradley could pay off, but the question remains if he'll be ready by Opening Day after his knee injury last year. And Jennings is coming off that horrendous year in Houston, while Guardado is starting a season for the first time after Tommy John surgery. A former closer, he'll probably start out as a setup man along with Fukumori and one of last year's co-closers at the end of the season, C.J. Wilson and Joaquin Benoit. The other will finish off games.

But how many? A rotation that starts with Kevin Millwood -- an ace by default only -- and pencils in Jennings as its No. 2 ahead of Vicente Padilla, Brandon McCarthy and Kason Gabbard isn't going to inspire many pitching duels.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre lineup we've come to know in recent years is a shell of its former self. Mark Teixeira is gone and Hank Blalock was -- or wasn't -- on the trading block this winter; if he was, it doesn't look like he drew much interest. Setting the table ahead of No. 3 hitter Michael Young will be left to a possible platoon of Frank Catalanotto and Nelson Cruz leading off followed by Ian Kinsler. The duo at the top leaves a lot to be desired (though Cruz is an unknown quantity and could pay off), but Kinsler may be ready to make another step toward being the heir to Alfonso Soriano that the Rangers think he can be. Bradley, Hamilton and Blalock will form the meat of the order, while the bottom third should feature super stud Jarrod Saltalamacchia (got that spelling correct on the first try, without looking), either as the catcher over Gerald Laird or as the first baseman over -- or along with -- Broussard. One-time Phillies prospect Marlon Byrd likely will man right.

What I'm looking forward to seeing

Just how good will Kinsler be? Can he keep improving? He got off to a hot start last year -- .298, nine homers, 22 RBIs in April -- but had just six homers and 26 RBIs after the All-Star break, despite hitting .288 in the second half (as opposed to .241 overall in the first half). Fatigue may have been a factor in his second-half power decline, but his .045 rise in OBP in the second half helped Kinsler post a .807 post-break OPS after just .786 in the first half. Can Salty be as big as his name? Will the Hamilton feel-good story continue? And when will Bradley snap? Watching him in each new city is like watching the Grammys last Sunday to see whether Amy Winehouse could keep it together for her performance, which took place live from a London studio -- meaning she had to sit around until about 4 a.m. with any manner of elixirs to pass the time.

OAKLAND ATHLETICS

In general

I put them last because just who are these guys? Gone are Dan Haren, Nick Swisher, Mike Piazza, Shannon Stewart and Mark Kotsay. In are Emil Brown, Joey Devine and Mike Sweeney? They even lost catching prospect Jeremy Brown, one of the stars of Moneyball (along with Swisher). GM Billy Beane set himself up well for the future, but he's left with nearly nothing -- especially if he deals now-No. 1 Joe Blanton before April.

I'll start with the offense this time, where Jersey boy Jack Cust gets the cleanup spot and DH role all to himself, but he could hit 35 home runs but drive in just 75 runs if Travis Buck, Daric Barton and the oft-injured, shell-of-his-former-self Eric Chavez can't get on base. But getting on base is what Beane builds his teams for, so the BBC top of the order should be expected to do just that. But after Cust? Mark Ellis is your five-hole protection, with Emil Brown behind him followed by DL resident Bobby Crosby, Chris Denorfia and Kurt Suzuki. Though I don't agree with the assessment, ESPN.com's A's fantasy preview projects only Ellis, of all people, to be drafted from that lineup, and in the 20th round at that. But there's just one opinion of what the Oakland lineup will produce this year.

The rotation doesn't fare much better in the fantasy projection. Only Blanton stands to be drafted, in the 19th round they say. In between Blanton's starts will be Rich Harden -- once again coming off injury -- Year-After Effect risk Chad Gaudin, converted setup man Justin Duchscherer and soft-tosser Lenny DiNardo. If Blanton goes, Dana Eveland and his 7.55 career ERA is next in line to step into the rotation. Yikes.

What I'm looking forward to seeing

Does Harden stay healthy? I've given up caring whether or not Crosby does. I'd also like to see Chavez bounce back a bit, if only because he's the one Beane chose to keep, letting Johnny Damon, Jason Giambi and Miguel Tejada leave via free agency rather than spend the money. Interesting how he let the hitters leave, but traded the pitchers -- Tim Hudson, Mark Mulder and Haren (with the exception of Barry Zito) -- in order to get something in return. And Cust is a good story -- always a big hitting prospect, he never stuck with his previous clubs (Baltimore, Colorado, Arizona, San Diego) because he was a disaster in the outfield. It was always clear that he'd have to be a DH somewhere, and when he got that chance last year, he provided some exciting moments.

Will the Angels regret three weeks in June?

If the Angels miss out on a playoff spot by one game, they'll have to look at their decision to send Jered Weaver down for three weeks in June.

After defeating Kansas City on June 13, Weaver was optioned to Triple-A Salt Lake city when Bartolo Colon came off the disabled list. Five days later, when Weaver presumably would have pitched, the Angels lost, 7-3, to San Diego. They went on to lose six of their next 10 games after that, and if Weaver had pitched every five games, he would have gotten the start on June 30, when the Angels lost, 6-1, to the Dodgers.

Another way to look at it is to examine the games started by Jered's brother, Jeff, who was the player ultimately traded when the Angels came to their senses and recalled Jered from the minors. Anaheim lost two of the three games started by Jeff Weaver in the three weeks his brother was hopping around the Pacific Coast League.

So whether you look at the games Jered Weaver might have pitched had he gone every fifth game following his June 13 start, or use the three starts made by Jeff in the three weeks Jered was in the minors, the Angels lost two of three in both instances. He won each of his first seven starts and was in position to win his eighth yesterday, but the bullpen blew his lead in the eighth.

Hopefully, it won't cost them in September.

Sox it to me

So my postseason predictions were dead on ... until the end of each league's championship series. So much for the Angels and Cardinals.

I had picked the Cards in six, but we're now at seven straight World Series losses by the National League. (If you want to believe the All-Star Game counts for something, that's nine straight AL victories that don't count in the standings.) The last time an NL team won a game against the AL with postseason implications was the Marlins' Game 6 victory in 2003.

I choose to look at it as the last AL team to lose to the National League in a game of postseason importance was the Yankees. And now, four starting pitchers who have worn pinstripes within the last three seasons are playing for either Houston or Chicago in this year's World Series.

Brilliant.

Anyway, I'd meant to write up a new World Series preview (since my teams weren't in it and therefore my previous "prediction" was obsolete), but after thinking about it a little last Thursday, the next time it occurred to me was Saturday night as I watched Jermaine Dye take Clemens deep and I didn't have a good feeling about it.

I suppose I was pulling a little more for the Astros, for the National League allegiance and the Roger Clemens factor too. I go back and forth on liking Clemens. He's been nice enough to me in the couple of brief encounters we've had. We've never talked or anything, but I've gotten a nod and a kind look.

[A brief sidebar, as Phil Garner just left Mike Lamb in to face Neil Cotts -- again. What is it with managers who get their team to the World Series, then, inexplicably, go against what got them there? I mean, it's not like they throw everything out the window, but why would you leave Lamb in to face a left-hander? At least he got a walk tonight. I remember the same thing happening in 2000 when Bobby Valentine said Al Leiter would be starting Game 1 of the Series against the Yankees, even though Mike Hampton had a full four days rest after the complete-game clincher in the NLCS because the Mets won in five. Valentine's reasoning was that Leiter had followed Hampton all year and he wasn't going to change that now. Well, start Hampton in Game 1 and Leiter in Game 2. My argument for Hampton in Game 1 was that he would come back to pitch Game 5 at Shea Stadium, where he'd hit and give the Mets an advantage over the Yankees.]

So no Series preview, but I don't know if I would've foreseen the White Sox' momentum continuing to this extent. Last year, you just had a feeling that the Red Sox would win those last four games after they'd finally slain the Yankees. This year, I know at least I wondered if there could be two such Cinderella stories in consecutive years. Two teams named for their hosiery doing away with their curses of 80-plus years in successive autumns.

Maybe it can all be attributed to Chicago's recent addition to the overhead compartment. The White Sox have taken to bringing a "Play Like A Champion Today" sign with them on the road. No wonder they're winning. The signs aren't hard to find: They sell posters at the bookstore on campus and the J.C. Penney at the mall. Still, the Sox got theirs from the home office.

On to the postseason

I guess in my dreams, I'm a real baseball writer. Check that -- I am a real baseball writer, in that I write about the sport here; plus I have written about it in a professional outlet regularly before, have done so on occasion since, and figure I probably will again. So as "real" baseball writers do, I feel compelled to reveal my postseason predictions.

I did this last year too, though I never went back to see how my predictions matched up with the actual outcomes. Since we have at least one team in each series returning to the postseason again this year (and six out of eight overall, in fact), I'll address last year's results this year.

With the postseason starting today, I had to get this post up first. By tomorrow, I'll go back and look at my preseason predictions for this season and see how they came out, plus I'll figure out what I think about the individual awards -- MVP, Cy Young, ROY -- for this recently completed season. It's the Cy Young races that have me stumped.

This is the first postseason since 2001 (Mariners, Indians, Yankees, A's, Braves, Astros, Diamondbacks, Cardinals) in which all the games will be played on natural grass. Without going back to figure out which games in Seattle and Houston that year (and in Seattle in 2000) were played with the roofs open, I can't say the last time all postseason games were truly played outdoors. But I can tell you that 1996 was the last time -- and the only time in the wild card era -- that all eight participants had open-air stadiums (Orioles, Indians, Yankees, Rangers, Braves, Dodgers, Cardinals, Padres).

Red Sox vs. White Sox
Do either of these teams feel good heading into the postseason? This is probably the best matchup for both, perhaps not in pitching vs. lineups, but at least as far as momentum and recent play go. Neither team finished the season on an up note. Sure, the Red Sox took two of three from the Yankees and, technically, tied for the AL East division crown, but they had a 3 1/2-game lead midway through September and couldn't close it out. And we all know about Chicago -- 15 games up in the beginning of August, down to as little as a game and a half a week before the season ended. They never relinquished first place, but they had to wait until the final series of the season to pop the champagne rather than putting away the division in mid-September.

Everyone says pitching wins in a short series, so while the BoSox are banged up, the Pale Hose will have Jose Contreras (15-7), Mark Buehrle (16-8) and Jon Garland (18-10) going in the first three games. Plus, Chicago's bullpen is in better shape. Will it be enough to shut down Johnny Damon, Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz when it matters? I think so.

Last year, I had Boston downing Anaheim in four games; instead they swept. This year, I don't know if the idiots have the mojo. Pick: White Sox in five.

Yankees vs. Angels
These two met in the Division Series in 2002 and the Angels, of course, pulled off the upset on their way to their first world championship. With the Yankees' two best pitchers down the stretch -- Randy Johnson and Shawn Chacon -- not starting until Games 3 and 4, I'm not so sure an Angels victory this time would be an upset. Anaheim's got their rotation set up with Bartolo Colon, John Lackey and Jarrod Washburn in that order and has a lineup that feels more cohesive to me through the bottom half.

Of course, the Yankees have the firepower, but the successful Bombers of recent years have had a solid, set lineup that's not usually this fluid. For tonight's opener, Robinson Cano has been moved up to sixth in the order, Bubba Crosby is in center and Bernie Williams is DHing. And that means Jason Giambi has to play first base. Yikes. I'm sure New York will slug one or two out, but they're going to have to do it against Colon, Lackey or Washburn, because the Angels' bullpen is the best among the four AL postseason teams and might just be the best of the remaining eight contenders.

Something tells me that, after this amazing run through September throughout baseball, we're not going to be treated to yet another Yankees-Red Sox thriller. (Frankly, my own personal allegiances would prefer no matchup than a Yankee-dominated one.)

A year ago, when the Yanks played Minnesota, I expected two strong starts from Johan Santana, which they got, but he only went five innings in Game 4 (allowing one run) after a stellar Game 1 win and Minnesota lost in 11 innings to end its season. "[T]he bullpen will probably blow one, and it could be the clincher," I said, and it was. Santana left with a 3-1 lead but Juan Rincon gave up four in the eighth and Kyle Lohse took the loss in extras. This time around ... we don't get that New York-Boston re-rematch. Pick: Angels in five.

Padres vs. Cardinals
At least the Padres saved face by finishing the season with a winning record. It was in the best interests of the game. The Phillies would have been able to give any of the three teams a better series than the Padres will give St. Louis.

Do I even need to go into further analysis? Even a weaker Cardinals lineup without Scott Rolen and a banged-up, aged Larry Walker will outperform the likes of Ryan Klesko, Dave Roberts and Xavier Nady. They still have Albert Pujols, who may end up having a Carlos Beltran-like postseason. For one series at least, Pujols should allow the St. Louis pitching staff to sort itself out -- i.e., how will Chris Carpenter perform in the spotlight, which Jason Marquis and Matt Morris will show up? Will Mark Mulder prove to be the missing piece? Can the bullpen patch the hole left by Al Reyes' absense?

I gave the Dodgers -- who hadn't won a playoff game since 1988 -- one win last year and picked the winner of the Los Angeles-St. Louis matchup to go on to the World Series. Both happened then, and I think both can happen this time around too -- so long as the winner of this series is St. Louis. With Jake Peavy, San Diego can take one game. Pick: Cardinals in four.

Astros vs. Braves
The only rematch from 2004 in the Division Series. Not too much has changed in Houston, with the exception of Carlos Beltran and Jeff Kent leaving. But in their steads, Willy Taveras has played a solid centerfield and become an adept leadoff hitter while Craig Biggio moved to second base and Jason Lane picked up the offensive slack in the outfield. A lot has been made of the Astros' rebound from 15-30 to win the wild card, but half of those first 45 games were played without Lance Berkman and the rest were played with a still-recovering slugger. The switch hitter was batting just .179 at that point, through which the Astros were 2-20 on the road. They won the final game in Chicago, starting a seven-game stretch in which Houston went 5-2 and Berkman hit .375 with two doubles and a homer. They also won two of three in Milwaukee and went 34-25 on the road the rest of the way.

I'm convinced the Astros we saw during the last two months is a more accurate indication of what this team is than the Astros we saw during the first two. I think their veteran experience will trump Atlanta's youthfulness -- Andruw Jones notwithstanding -- and their bullpen will give them an edge on the mound. The first two pitching matchups -- Tim Hudson vs. Andy Pettitte and John Smoltz vs. Roger Clemens -- are a wash, and should be two stellar defensive battles. (I'm thinking 2-1 and 3-2 games.) But then the Braves have to turn to Jorge Sosa for Game 3 in Houston while the Astros get to throw Roy Oswalt out there. Neither team has revealed a tentative Game 4 starter because you figure the one that's down 2-1 will go back to the Game 1 guy. If the Astros are up 2-1, they may still go with Pettitte to avoid a return to Atlanta for Game 5.

Last fall, I noted that Houston's best weapon might have been its momentum, which was enough to carry it all the way to a Game 7 with St. Louis. (Well, momentum and Beltran.) This year, the only team that can match the Astros' roll is the Angels. Both teams had to battle through September and managed to do so cooly and confidently and win going away. (In Houston's case, it wasn't "going away" in the sense that the team won the wild card by a comfortable four or five games, but it had to fight off the Phillies, who kept winning, and did so.) Last year, I tabbed Houston in three and it took five with each team winning alternate games. I think Andruw and either Hudson or Smoltz will be enough for Atlanta to win one ... but that's it. Pick: Astros in four.

White Sox vs. Angels
I could have picked both LCS to be a rematch of the 2004 contests, but I just don't have a good feeling about the Red Sox and Yankees. I'm not sure where this series will go, but I do wonder if Chicago's near-collapse will be a harbinger of things to come or a wake-up call. The White Sox could have coasted into the playoffs and gone soft; maybe the battle for the AL Central with the upstart Indians will prove to be a spark. I think the advantage in a Chicago-Anaheim series will go to the team that has an easier time in its Division Series victory, but since I pick both of those to go five games, both of which would be played on Sunday, the advantage might be to Chicago, which would get to stay at home awaiting the Angels' flight. But since I'm picking through the postseason from the start, I've got to make a decision now. The edge, at this point, goes to experience.

In the 2004 ALCS, I said the Red Sox needed two wins from either Pedro or Schilling, one from the other, and one from Wakefield. They got one each from Wakefield and Schilling, plus one from Derek Lowe and reliever Curt Leskanic. I also said they needed a win against the Yankees' bullpen and, well, Dave Roberts anyone? Only I had Yankees in seven. This time? Pick: Angels in six.

Astros vs. Cardinals
2004 redux. I like the Astros more this year, but the same goes for the Cardinals. Perhaps I'm putting too much stock in Chris Carpenter's ability to pitch this postseason, but there were signs and predictions of an emergence -- if not a breakout -- last season. An arm injury kept him out of any postseason games and he then went through this year living up to the potential that many seemed to expect to see this season. I think he continues that roll and if St. Louis can get by using him only once vs. San Diego, he'll be in line to make two starts and perhaps an emergency Game 7 appearance against Houston. It'll be another heartbreaking end to the season for the Astros, but if they can't put the Braves away as easily as the Cardinals do the Padres, Houston will again have to take its pitchers as they come in the NLCS. St. Louis won last year with inferior starters to Houston's top three, and even with a rejuvenated Andy Pettitte on the Astros, the Cardinals can counter with their Cy Young candidate.

Last time, I took the Cards in six, but it went the distance. I expect a repeat. Pick: Cardinals in seven.

Angels vs. Cardinals
I'll be rooting for whoever comes out of the NL -- with the exception of the Braves -- but I think this would be a stellar Series. Albert Pujols and Vladimir Guerrero in the same World Series? Could they each win a game with a walk-off? Mike Scioscia vs. Tony LaRussa? Those two chess masters wouldn't need Fox's drawn-out intros and extended commercial breaks to make a baseball game take four hours to play, so if we get a St. Louis-Anaheim Fall Classic, I expect at least one nine-inning game to end after 12:30 p.m. on the East Coast. The Cardinals looked listless in last season's sweep to the idiots of destiny, but LaRussa has had faux-dynasties in the past (see Oakland, 1988-1992). He's made four of the past five postseasons and could get there -- and to the Series -- again in 2006. So let's say he wins this one.

In picking St. Louis in six last year, I noted that since the wild card came along in 1995, only the 1998 Yankees have compiled the best record in baseball through the regular season and went on to win the World Series. I expected last year's Cardinals to become the second. Not so. This year, because of the freefall in Chicago, the Cards' 100-62 record was one better than the White Sox' 99-63. So maybe I haven't learned. Pick: Cardinals in six.

Not a good sign from those Mets

Something didn't sit well with me as we left Shea Stadium on Sunday. That wasn't a good way to end the homestand, not a good way to head out on a season-high 12-game road trip. The Mets went 6-6 on their longest stretch in Queens for the season, losing two of three to the woeful Astros and letting the rubber game against the first-place Angels of The O.C. slip away.

Winding down the ramps, I had the feeling that this was the beginning of the slide that they'll be talking about in September.

Of course, I hope I'm wrong, but Tuesday's lifeless start to the road trip (a 5-0 loss to a weak Oakland club and a starter, Joe Blanton, who was 1-6 with an ERA over 5.00 coming into the game) and last night's additional bullpen failure only strengthened my initial hypothesis. The Mets need Kris Benson to be a stopper this afternoon.

On June 16 last year, the Mets were 30-34, so their current 32-32 record is just two games better. They reached 43-40 on July 7, 2004, and 44-41 two days later, but they went into the All-Star break at 44-43 and emerged from it by losing four of six to fall to 46-47, and it spiraled from there.

These are games the Mets should be winning. Tom Glavine and Victor Zambrano have pitched well of late, while Blanton and Dan Haren have struggled. Why did the Yankees win 10 in a row in May after falling eight games below .500? Because they played 12 straight against Oakland and Seattle. The Mets should've taken two of three from both of those teams, but now to go 4-2 on this West Coast swing, they'll need to win the last four — one in Oakland and three in Seattle.

July 18 was the last time the Mets were above .500 in 2004; July 21 was the last time they were at the break-even mark. They're going to have to fix some things in order to surpass those marks this season.

* * *
Just twice in the past 50 years have two Ivy League players started for the same team. The second pair is the Rangers' Chris Young (Princeton) and Mark DeRosa (Penn).

Just found that interesting.

What's in a name?

At Notre Dame, there's a women's dorm called Lyons Hall which chose as its sports mascot the mighty lion. The Lyons Lions.

A high school in Los Gatos, California, calls its sports teams the Wildcats. Translating the town's name into English gives you The Cats Wildcats.

Add The Angels Angels to the list.

In some sort of marketing move that's a bit above my head, California's Angels have gone and mushed together the team's original and current monikers, calling themselves the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. Why didn't they just take a cue from Thornton Wilder's Our Town and go with The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, California, United States of America, Western Hemisphere, Earth, the Solar System, the Universe, In the Eye of God?

Clearly, the bang-up marketing job done by the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim (they're a professional hockey team, if you can remember back to when there was professional hockey) has rubbed off on Angels owner Arte Moreno. Yet as of last January, those fightin' Mighty Ducks were ranked 18th among the NHL's 30 teams in merchandise sales, though the team was once named the best-dressed in professional sports. Why, exactly, would the team with the third-highest attendance last year need a name change to increase its reach? Moreno apparently wanted to change the name when he bought the team two years ago, but surely in that time he must've learned what really brings exposure: winning. The Angels signed Vladimir Guerrero and won the division, and only their neighbors to the north, the Dodgers (of Los Angeles) and the Evil Empire to the East, the Yankees, drew more fans. Oh, and all were playoff teams.

What Moreno really missed out on was a true stroke of marketing genius. How could his marketing people not turn on their TVs to Fox -- baseball's own network, no less -- and miss a souvenir sale gold mine right in their midst?

They should've renamed the team The Anaheim Angels of The OC. Think of the possibilities! Seth Cohen bobblehead dolls. Caps with attachments that make the wearer have bushy eyebrows like Peter Gallagher. Fans in eating contests with Marissa Cooper and Summer Roberts. Imagine what I could come up with if I gave it a full 15 minutes of thought!

For the moment, it seems that the name will be the only change. The Angels will still retain the "A" as their main logo, but by now putting "Los Angeles" out in front and "Anaheim" to the back, it moves the team from first in the alphabetical list of franchises to the middle of the pack. How will the AP list them when it comes to putting out the standings come April? "Los Angeles" seems to be the likely choice, but will it now necessitate "L.A. Dodgers" and "L.A. Angels" to differentiate? Or will they just stick with "Anaheim" for convenience? Will they be allowed to?

As more of a baseball purist than an advocate of change, I prefer classic uniforms with original colors (meaning only teams whose colors have always included black can use it for jerseys), team names on the home shirts and city (or state) names on the road ones. The Angels may stick with "Angels" on the road grays, or go with "Los Angeles," but I'd like to see them try to get "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" across the chest. There'd be so much stitching there, the batters would have an unyielding chest protector of sorts getting in the way every time they swung.

The problem is, this change opens the door for so many other teams to go after outrageous geographic marketing takeovers. What stands in the way of the Dallas Cowboys of America, since they already consider themselves America's Team? With the loss of the Hartford Whalers in Connecticut, the Nutmeg State and its siblings to the north -- Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine -- now have to settle for the Boston teams as their own, so we can expect "of New England" to appear behind the names of the Bruins, Red Sox and Celtics (there's no need for the New England Patriots to get redundant).

But there are much bigger regions devoid of professional teams, so that the reach of some teams goes far beyond the hometown area code. The Atlanta Braves of the Southern Atlantic Coast? The Minnesota Twins of the Great Plains? The St. Louis Cardinals of Middle America? The New York Yankees of the Entire Tri-State Area?

Back in September, an AP report talked about New Jersey's attempts to lure a team, starting with the Mets. The Giants and Jets have been in the Garden State for more than two decades, yet the only references to New Jersey come on gameday when 79,000 fans trek to the Meadowlands. Would the Mets drop "New York" for "New Jersey"? Would they trade the interlocking "NY" on the caps for "NJ"? Would they follow their football cousins' lead and stubbornly stick with "New York"? Or would the Angels become a model for the Metropolitans, who could go with the New York Mets of the Hudson?

Does Arte Moreno realize the Pandora's Box he's opened here? I shudder to think of what this will become if the Angels win the World Series this year.

Postseason thoughts, Day 4

Yesterday's games:
Red Sox 8, Angels 6, 10 innings
Yankees 8, Twins 3

Red Sox win series, 3-0
Done and done. Good job. The Sox rolled over the Angels, and it appeared to energize John Kerry, who rolled over George Bush in the debate. Yet I digress. While listening to the Sox game on the radio as I drove home from work, Buck Martinez mentioned, twice, that Bronson Arroyo struck out 11 consecutive Mariners earlier in the season. It's a little inaccurate, which I think Martinez had right one of the times. He had 11 straight outs by strikeout, but there was a walk that made it 11 strikeouts over 12 batters. I figured I would've remembered if someone had broken Tom Seaver's record of striking out 10 consecutive batters. What a dramatic way to go on a three day rest. It's just what the Sox need. They shouldn't have to worry about losing any momentum or rhythm, because if they play the Yankees, as they most likely will, they'll be jazzed. And rested. And have Curt Schilling going in Games 1, 4, and potentially 7. If they need that many.

Yankees lead series 2-1
Ninth inning, Yankees leading 8-1. No outs. Corey Koskie is hit by the pitch. Then Lew Ford is plunked. And yet -- the Twins fans are booing Felix Heredia?? Um, hello: You're down seven runs in the ninth. A loss means you're down 2-1 in a best-of-five series. You need runs to win. You need baserunners to get that win. HBPs are GOOD. FOR. YOU. This is the problem with baseball today. It's not the Twins fans' fault; it's not just them. MLB as an organization has ingrained the thought in casual fans' heads that throwing inside to gain an advantage as a pitcher is not part of the game if you can't do it without hitting a batter. The game has become so soft because umpires are too quick to warn benches and the commissioner's office is wrong to issue directives insisting that they do so. Of course, Bud Selig isn't going to do anything to hurt The Great Bonds and his supplement-fueled, body-armored climb through the record book. On those two hit-by-pitches, the Metrodome should've been rocking like it was when Dan Gladden slid home with the winning run in '91. Johan Santana might be able to bring the series back to New York, but it's going to be a tough task for Minnesota to advance. They missed their golden opportunity in blowing Wednesday's game.

I'm off on vacation until Monday, so I'll be missing some of the weekend's action, as will this blog. So the two of you can discuss amongst yourselves until I return.

Postseason thoughts, Day 2

Yesterday's games:
Astros 9, Braves 3
Yankees 7, Twins 6, 12 innings
Red Sox 8, Angels 3

Astros lead series 1-0
Early in the season, when Roger Clemens was something like 9-0, I didn't want to think he was still that dominant. I figured a lot of it had to do with changing leagues and facing lineups who had never seen him and his impressive splitter. As the Astros faded, he didn't get the same press, and I look up his numbers in September, and he's 18-4. OK, that's good. He may have struggled yesterday, but he got out of those jams. He may be a bit of an ass, but he's from Texas. A lot of people are. At least he's a little more likable, and more subdued, than Barry Bonds. I can enjoy watching Clemens set milestones. But the Braves are in trouble. They've never drawn well, so they gave fans who purchased tickets to yesterday's game free tickets to today's game, just to fill seats. Yeah, great fans they have in Atlanta. But Carlos Beltran showed why he'll be the most coveted free agent this winter. Since the all-star break, when the Astros were just 44-44 and struggling, he hit only .257, with 17 home runs and 41 RBI. But he improved his strikeout-to-walk ratio ever so slightly (51 Ks to 45 walks pre-break, 50-47 afterwards) and upped his on-base percentage 5 points to .370. The biggest difference, however, was his aggressiveness on the bases: 27 post-break steals to 15 before the midsummer classic. And all three of his caught stealings came in the first half. But it's Clemens I keep coming back to, and if Roy Oswalt mimics Rocket's output, hometown boy Brandon Backe will have a chance for another big -- and historic -- win in Game 3 in Houston.

Twins-Yankees series tied 1-1
As much as the Yankees and their fans would have talked calmly and acted cooly if they had gone down 0-2 -- "We've just got to take it one game at a time"; "We've been here before"; etc. -- this team would have been in trouble going to Minnesota in such a hole. Sure, it was a big win for the Twins too, which is why Ron Gardenhire had his closer out there to finish off the game in his third inning of work. It's just that I don't get why he was out there in the 10th to begin with. Gardenhire said he left Nathan in for his third inning after the Twins had taken a 6-5 lead on Torii Hunter's home run off Tanyon Sturtze because he "didn't like our options" left in the bullpen. When you're on the road, you know you're going to have to protect a lead with the home team getting one last at-bat, so why was Nathan in there in a tie game to begin with? When the Yankees rallied, he had to bring someone in after Nathan, so why couldn't J.C. Romero have started the 10th? If he got into trouble, then Gardenhire could've brought Nathan in to get out of a jam. The Yankees were lucky to come away with this one. Mariano Rivera faltered again, and Sturtze, who was one of the relievers the team was talking up as having finished the season strong, would have been the losing pitcher. Now the question is: How will Kevin Brown pitch? He's obviously not Joe Torre's first choice, or the decision would have been announced earlier than yesterday. This may seem like an obvious expectation, but my feeling is Brown will either get shelled and not make it through the third, or he'll be brilliant and scatter four hits over seven.

Red Sox lead series 2-0
It's over. Boston isn't the Oakland A's, the Red Sox are not going to blow a 2-0 lead. There's a very slim chance this series will even get back to California. It might not make it to Saturday. Pedro sure sounds like a different pitcher now, far from the "the Yankees are my daddy" comments two weeks ago. "I was the No. 1 today, and that's all that matters," said Martinez, 0-4 with a 7.72 ERA to finish the season. "I don't care what the experts have to say, they were talking trash. Every time they give me the ball, I'm special." The Red Sox may have celebrated their postseason-clinching victory in Tampa Bay (while the Yankees like to talk about how they don't make a big deal out of postseason appearances because that's expected and their goal is to win the World Series), but Boston is playing like a calm, confident, focused team determined to be one of the last two playing this season. Bronson Arroyo might not scare many as the opposing pitcher in an elimination game, but are Angels fans really confident with Kelvim Escobar as their savior? In Boston, which might be the biggest home-field advantage this side of the Metrodome? I'm not so sure about that one.

Postseason thoughts, Day 1

Yesterday's games:
Cardinals 8, Dodgers 3
Red Sox 9, Angels 3
Twins 2, Yankees 0

Cardinals lead series 1-0
Hooray for Larry Walker. Good for him. Sixteen years in the majors, six in Montreal, nine-plus in Colorado, one playoff appearance with the Rockies in 1995. He he .214 with just three hits, one homer and three RBI. In his first game back, he slams two home runs. I listened to the game a little on the radio, called by the Mets' own Gary Cohen and Arizona outfielder Luis Gonzalez (it seemed like every inning there was a former Diamondback on the field -- Steve Finley, Elmer Dessens, Tony Womack), while I was on the road. And leading up to the game, it seemed everyone had the same feeling I did: is there one pitcher on either staff (Eric Gagne aside) who scares you? Not really. Walker's performance got me thinking about the Expos that got away, mostly because Montreal has had a great farm system and player development run the last 15-20 years, but the team can never keep its own talent because of financial constraints. Walker may have been the biggest: one of Canada's own, he didn't want to leave, but Montreal couldn't keep him. We've also got Vladmir Guerrero and Bartolo Colon (not brought up and developed by the Expos, but unable to stay because of financial reasons) in Anaheim (along with Andres Galarraga, who's not on the postseason roster, and backup outfielder Curtis Pride), Orlando Cabrera and Pedro Martinez in Boston and Javier Vazquez in New York. So with former Expos on four of the eight playoff teams, we've got a shot at seeing one of them soaking in champagne in three weeks.

Red Sox lead series 1-0
I'm not going to get ahead of myself here (because it's only a 4-1 Astros lead in the third), but could you imagine a World Series Game 1 in Boston with Curt Schilling facing Roger Clemens? Fox executives would be all tingly inside. The Red Sox seemed determined yesterday, and depending on which Pedro we see tonight, this one could end a lot faster and end up more wide-open than anyone expected.

Twins lead series 1-0
I think even the biggest Yankee fans expected this one. Johan Santana is pitching like God, but with a better slider. I'm not sure, but I think I saw Rudy Giulliani on ESPN this morning -- taking a break from his tireless campaigning for President Bush -- trying to convince everyone that, despite appearances, the Yankees actually won this debat- er, this game. But all this means is that the Twins didn't let last week's sweep in the Big Apple affect them. They may need to watch out: In 2001, Tony Womack's father passed away, and Fox loved that storyline. It helped that he had some big hits in that World Series for Arizona. I can't tell you how many times I heard someone at the network explain last night how Jacques Jones took the redeye back from California, where his father died over the weekend, and will return there after tonight's game for the funeral tomorrow before meeting the team back in Minnesota for Game 3. Jones homered last night.

It's the top of the fourth in Atlanta right now, and the Braves have left seven men on in three innings. Clemens has gotten into two bases-loaded jams and wiggled out of both, allowing the one run in the first. If they can't get those guys in, they're done.

Season review and postseason picks

I was a few days late on my preseason predictions, so I'm going to make a point of getting my postseason prognostications posted promptly. And with alliteration.

But first, let's look at how things fared compared to how I thought it might go. It's not pretty.

NL East predictions
Phillies
Marlins
Braves
Mets
Expos

NL East reality
Braves
Phillies
Marlins
Mets
Expos

More so than last year, this was the Phillies division to lose, and they did. And so did Larry Bowa, who's now looking for a job. What I got right: 1. "It just means that [the Marlins have] got a good chance of having their first winning season in which they don't win the World Series." 2. "... while I'd like nothing more than to see J.D. Drew continue his mediocre career, something tells me that there's going to be a little bit of that inexplicable Braves magic that keeps him healthy for 145 games this year." He played exactly 145 games. 3. "Seventy wins this season [for the Mets] would be a small improvement and probably not enough to bring Art Howe back." They won 71.

NL Central predictions
Cubs
Astros (wild card)
Cardinals
Reds
Pirates
Brewers


NL Central reality
Cardinals
Astros (wild card)
Cubs
Reds
Pirates
Brewers

The Cubs' injuries were just too much -- 20 starts each from Mark Prior and Kerry Wood, Sammy Sosa out a month and his streak of 40 home runs and 100 RBIs is snapped. Despite all that, they were in the driver's seat with a couple of weeks to go, and they couldn't win. I'm annoyed that my Mets had to play spoiler to the Cubs, taking two out of three at Shea on the next-to-last weekend of the season, but the Cubs then went and dropped three of four to the Reds and couldn't beat the team they would've faced in the division series, the Braves, when their backs were to the wall. They gave up after losing those two 12-inning games to the Reds. The difference between the Astros and Cubs, both of whom had solid starting pitching and a dangerous, if aging, lineup? Houston lost Andy Pettitte and Wade Miller for longer stretches than Chicago lost Prior and Wood, and they didn't fold. What I got right: 1. "... [if] they don't lose Sammy Sosa for a month ..." 2. "In this division, second place should still mean new life in the postseason." 3. The Astros did win the wild card, though that wasn't decided until the last day of the season. 4. I don't know exactly when it happened, but at some point you could draw a line in the standings after the No. 3 team in this division, and those three on either side of the line would stay on that side of the line. 5. Reds fourth, Pirates fifth, Brewers sixth. 6. The Reds did have a 100-HR outfield, but they needed four players to do it: Adam Dunn (46), Ken Griffey Jr. (20), Austin Kearns (9) and Wily Mo Pena (26) = 101. 7. "Once it's clear that Kris Benson is back from his injuries, he'll be traded for prospects."

NL West predictions (ugh)
Diamondbacks
Padres
Giants
Dodgers
Rockies

NL West reality
Dodgers
Giants
Padres
Rockies
Diamondbacks

I don't know why I put so much faith in Randy Johnson, Luis Gonzalez and Richie Sexson. This team was nearly as bad as the 2003 Tigers, and Detroit didn't have anyone close to the caliber of a Big Unit, a Gonzo, a Sexson or a Steve Finley. Of course, come September, Johnson was the only one still coming to Bank One Ballpark every day. This one was a car wreck. What I got right: 1. The Padres were in contention. 2. "I really think any of these five could finish anywhere in the division, with the exception of the Rockies in first and the Giants in last." At least I hedged my bets with the possibility of the Diamondbacks crumbling. 3. I'm really stretching here: "But perhaps more than any other team in contention, the Diamondbacks need to avoid DL time by its [d'oh! should be "their"] stars. They can't afford to go two weeks without a start from the Big Unit, or lose Luis Gonzalez and his injured elbow to season-ending surgery. If either of those happen, they're done, making this a very risky pick."

AL East predictions
Red Sox
Yankees (wild card)
Orioles
Blue Jays
Devil Rays

AL East reality
Yankees
Red Sox (wild card)
Orioles
Devil Rays
Blue Jays

Yes, I picked with my heart and not my head. Certainly, the Red Sox had the talent to take the division, and they pushed the Yankees until the final week of the season. Had they not fallen 10 back in August, it might've happened. Coulda, woulda, shoulda. I guess, like with the Braves in the NL East, I really can't believe anything else will happen until it does. What I got right: 1. For the first time since Tampa Bay came along, the order of the division was different, only it was the Devil Rays in fourth and the Blue Jays last, instead of a change at the top. 2. The wild card went to the second-place team in the AL East. 3. "The Yankees will probably win the division with the Red Sox taking the wild card." How's that for taking the easy way out? 4. "I also suspect you'll see Jason Giambi and Bernie Williams on the DL at some point." OK, that one too was like predicting the Pope would pray today. 5. "Hideki Matsui will improve upon last year's numbers and Enrique Wilson will not play second base all season." 6. "Kevin Brown will likely break down again." 7. The Orioles finished third!

AL Central predictions
Royals
Twins
White Sox
Indians
Tigers

AL Central reality
Twins
White Sox
Indians
Tigers
Royals

So much for the Garth Brooks Theory. Having the country singer in spring training did not help the 2004 Royals the way it did the 1998 NL Champion Padres or 2000 NL Champion Mets. Maybe because they're in the AL. At some point this season, it actually looked like Brooks had a chance to be called up by Kansas City. I should've read into my own comments when I noticed (as I just did now) that I didn't say anything specific about players actually on this team and instead talked about the guy who wrote "Friends In Low Places." Is the AL Central basement low enough? What I got right: 1. "While four out of the five teams in the NL West have a shot at the division title [not so much that part], it's a race among three here. By September, it will be down to two." It was a race among three, when the Indians made their August run. By September, it was down to the Twins and White Sox. 2. "88 games may be enough to win baseball's weakest division." It would have been -- the first-place Twins won 93, the second-place White Sox 83. 3. "[The Tigers] may have a chance to fight Cleveland for fourth place." OK, so they took fourth place by 14 games. But I said they could have a chance. 4. If you move the Royals from first to last, I had the order of the other four teams correct.

AL West predictions
Angels
Athletics
Mariners
Rangers

AL West reality
Angels
Athletics
Rangers
Mariners

I did it! I pegged the first two teams in the division! I got one right! Whew. OK, that's enough to bring me back next year. Just don't read what I wrote about Texas. What else I got right: 1. "It's going to be a great race, that's clear." 2. "... many question whether Arthur Rhodes can truly be a closer." Welcome, Octavio Dotel. 3. "Seattle's biggest detriment is its age."

Now, quickly, on to the postseason.

Twins vs. Yankees
If Minnesota hadn't been swept in New York last week, I'd give them a shot. But after that result, I think they may be doubting themselves. Johan Santana very well may win two games in this series, but the bullpen will probably blow one, and it could be the clincher. Let me say this (and I'll try not to play it safe in every series I pick here): If the Twins beat the Yankees, I wouldn't be surprised to see Bud Selig handing a very large trophy to a champagne-drenched Ron Gardenhire. Pick: Yankees in five.

Red Sox vs. Angels
The last time the Angels won the AL West was 1986. They faced the Red Sox in the ALCS. I don't think that matters, I just wanted to point it out. OK, this is hard. I was about to write that I really, truly believe that either of these teams could win the AL pennant. Which means I would've been picking any of these four teams. Look, as good as the Angels are, they're going to have to face Curt Schilling and Pedro Martinez in three of a potential five games. They may have been able to win the division without Jose Guillen, but can they win a best-of-five series? I don't know. Besides, everyone wants to see a Red Sox-Yankees ALCS go seven games again. Which means it probably won't happen. I'm going with it though. [A caller to WFAN today made a very good point: The Red Sox had better win in three or four, because if it goes to a fifth game, that would be on Sunday, and Curt Schilling would pitch, meaning he won't be available until Game 3 of the ALCS against the Yankees on Friday.] Pick: Red Sox in four.

Dodgers vs. Cardinals
Good pitching beats good hitting, huh? Both have good pitching, but not much more than that. Do the names (and stats) of guys like Jeff Weaver, Odalis Perez, Jose Lima, Matt Morris and Jason Marquis seem like the top pitchers on division winners? Not so much, in this day and age. I'll probably be rooting for the winner of this series to to go The Series. Pick: Cardinals in four.

Astros vs. Braves
What a run by Houston. The best thing going for them may be that they're the hottest team heading into the postseason, and the last two champions -- the 2002 Angels and 2003 Marlins -- carried the same title on their October runs. Roger Clemens and Roy Oswalt may in fact be the best 1-2 pitching punch in the playoffs (No? Who then?). Had he not missed the season finale with a stomach ailment, Clemens would've won 19 to go with Oswalt's 20. But that missed start means he gets to start Game 1 in Atlanta, followed by Oswalt. Why is all the Cy Young talk among Clemens, Jason Schmidt, Randy Johnson and Carl Pavano? It could be Oswalt's. As for this series, I think it could be the first series win for Houston. And I'm going all in on the prediction: Pick: Astros in three.

Red Sox vs. Yankees
No, I'm not going to do it. As I said in my AL East review earlier, I just can't imagine it until it happens. I'll be rooting for it, but I'm going to wuss out and go the other way with my pick. But I'll put it this way. What the Red Sox need to do to win: Like the 2001 World Champion Diamondbacks, they may need four wins from their two aces, Schilling and Martinez. But can Pedro do it against the team he called his daddy? Maybe 1-1. Tim Wakefield could pick up the other one. Essentially, the Sox need two wins from either Schilling or Pedro, and at least one against the Yankees bullpen. What the Yankees need to do to win: Not blow leads in the late innings. If the bullpen is perfect, the Yankees move on. I'm keeping it that simple. I figure that each team will win a barnburner and a close one -- 11-9 and 3-2 type games -- which puts us at 2-2. Throw a blowout to each team and we're at 3-3. Game seven, Yankee Stadium. Pick: Yankees in seven.

Astros vs. Cardinals
An all-wild-card World Series would mean Roger Clemens goes back to Boston. Another Yankees vs. wild card World Series means Clemens returns to the Bronx. I don't know ... Clemens took off to start the season and never really slowed down. To think he will now may be falling for the same thing all over again. But I'll bite. I just love St. Louis' lineup and defense. Look, no one stands out on their pitching staff, but they've got capable starters and a reliable closer. Remind you of anyone? The 2002 Angels, perhaps? Granted, Anaheim didn't lead the majors with 105 wins, but they got it done in the postseason. Pick: Cardinals in six.

Cardinals vs. Yankees
No matter what the World Series matchup, there's a good chance there will be a lot of talk about history. Yankees vs. Cardinals, Dodgers or, for the third time in eight years, Braves. Yankees or Red Sox vs. Clemens. Cardinals vs. TWins. Twins vs. Braves. But a St. Louis-New York Series would pit the two cities with the most titles against one another (Yankees, as everyone knows, have 26; Cardinals have nine. The A's do as well, but they don't get to play this postseason, and they've done it in two cities). So Yankee fans may think otherwise, but I just don't see them as the favorite heading into this postseason. They're not the perceived lock that they've been in past seasons. Yet only once since the start of the wild card era in 1995 has the team with the best record in the regular season won the Series -- the 1998 Yankees. But this time, their pitching is the weakest it's been on this run. Their best pitcher is Mariano Rivera, and he's been worn out this year, pitching the most innings since 2001 (75 2/3 this year to that season's 80 2/3), and we all know how that ended. Sure, it was only five more innings than last year, but he's 34 now. Eh, that probably doesn't mean anything. Still, that Yankees lineup that everyone thought was the best in baseball? No better than second-best. St. Louis slugs it out.

Pick: Cardinals in six