A Charlie Brown Christmas

For people who know me well, there are few things that are more obvious to them about me and my personality than my love for the comic strip Peanuts and my kinship with Charlie Brown himself. I realize that this is a fairly geeky thing to admit to, to say the least, but I'm not ashamed of it.

Growing up, there was always something familiar and endearing about the personality of Charlie Brown and the tone of the strip itself that drew me in. I won't say that I learned a lot of life's lessons from Peanuts because one has to actually live life to learn those particular lessons. But, the way those lessons have been expressed in the four panels of a Peanuts comic strip... it's pretty difficult to find someone or something that did it better.

With that said, it's undeniable that Charlie Brown's love for baseball and the way baseball is always around helped me to connect with the comic strip, and it's one of the main reasons that I have gone back to the comic strips over and over again in my life. One of the coolest gifts I've ever received was when my brother found me a copy of Sandlot Peanuts at some used book shop - a 200-page hardcover book featuring nothing but baseball-themed Peanuts comics is pretty great.

It's Christmas-time now and, with the Yankees' signing of Mark Teixeira yesterday, I thought nothing seemed more appropriate going into the holiday than a few words about the sport - what it's like to win, what it's like to lose, and what it's like to be a fan - from Charlie Brown and company.

Enjoy, and Merry Christmas!

(I'm leaving the strips small because I don't want to get anyone angry. That's why I've included transcripts of the comics below each one. Click on the image to make it slightly more readable.)

On Winning
There's actually not a whole lot in the Peanuts oeuvre about winning, as Charlie Brown was rarely lucky enough to be on that side of the field. Still, there are some good bits if you look.

Charlie Brown lies in bed, clearly happy
Charlie Brown: We won our first game of the season... I can't believe it!
He starts tossing and turning
CB: I wonder how the other team feels...
He sits up, with a look of sadness
CB: I don't know... when we lose, I'm miserable... When we win, I feel guilty!

Charlie Brown ecstatically does cartwheels down the road
Charlie Brown: I hit a home run in the ninth inning, and we won! I was the hero!!
Sally (meeting him at the doorstep): YOU?!

Lucy walks up to Charlie Brown on the mound.
Lucy: What's the sense in playing when we know we're going to lose? If there was even a million-to-one chance we might win, it would make some sense...
Charlie Brown: Well, there may not be a million-to-one chance, but I'm sure there's a billion-to-one chance...
Lucy: There is? PLAY BALL!

On Losing
As you can imagine, there's are quite a number of strips dealing with losing. Charlie Brown, after all, was the consummate loser. His eternal optimism in spite of that was what made him so endearing.

Linus is looking through some papers with Charlie Brown looking on
Linus: I've been going over our team records, Charlie Brown... We lost every game this season!
Charlie Brown (after looking for himself): Maybe we're building character

Charlie Brown is on the mound, lamenting another loss, as Lucy strolls up.
Charlie Brown: One hundred and twenty-three to nothing! No one should ever have to lose the first game of the season by a score of 123-0! It just not right... Besides, how could we possibly lose a game 123 to 0?
Lucy: We never got any breaks!

Peppermint Patty, the athlete, is very upset as Linus, Snoopy, and Charlie Brown look on.
Peppermint Patty: THIS IS RIDICULOUS! I've hit five home runs and pitched a no-hit game, and we're behind thirty-seven to five! Whoever heard of thirty-seven unearned runs? This is ridiculous! I thought I could help your team, Chuck. But it's hopeless! I'm going back where I came from!
Charlie Brown: That must be a nice thing to be able to do...

On Being a Fan
Charlie Brown was very famously a fan of Joe Shlabotnik, quite possibly the worst player in baseball history. His devotion was complete, though, despite all that his hero had to endure. If only we could all be so devoted...

Linus, Charlie Brown, and Snoopy are all seated at a table, waiting for Joe Shlabotnik to arrive to the sports banquet they paid to attend.
Linus: Where's Joe Shlatbonik?
Charlie Brown: He'll be here! When Joe Shlabotnik says he's going to do something, he does it! I remember one game last year... He came up to bat in the ninth inning, and said he was going to hit a home run...
Linus: Did he?
Charlie Brown: No, he popped up... But he ran it out!
Linus: I'm glad you have faith in your hero, Charlie Brown
Charlie Brown: He'll be here... He probably stopped to fix a flat tire on some elderly person's car...

Charlie Brown is reading the paper with Schroeder nearby.
Charlie Brown: Oh, no! My favorite player, Joe Shlabotnik, has been sent down to the minors again! He's going to play for Stumptown in the Green Grass League... I hope the fans appreciate what a great player they're getting. I bet he'll lead Stumptown to its first pennant!
Schroeder: With a .004 batting average?

A depressed Charlie Brown sits under a tree.
Charlie Brown: Well, it was another bad baseball year for me..
He walks to the front porch and picks up the paper
CB: Maybe my hero, Joe Shlabotnik, is having a better time... I'll see how he's doing...
Reading the paper
CB: "Joe Shlabotnik struck out last night in the bottom of the ninth as Stumptown of the Green Grass League sank deeper into the cellar."
CB, writing a letter: Dear Joe, Don't be discouraged. Someone understands.

Bonus: On Statistics
At one point, Linus, the brainy one, became enamored with statistics and went around telling everyone what he discovered. I don't know exactly when these were published, but it was likely before Bill James and his Abstracts...

Linus and Charlie Brown, sitting at their brick wall.
Linus: Do you want to hear some baseball statistics, Charlie Brown? According to my figures, as our pitcher, you had an earned run average this year of eighty runs per game. Statistics don't lie, Charlie Brown.
Charlie Brown: No, but they sure shoot off their mouth a lot!

Charlie Brown, addressing his team as a smug Linus looks on.
Charlie Brown: All right. We've heard the report from our statistician. Both our hitting and our fielding averages were down this year. So you all know what we have to do next season
Team, together: GET A NEW STATISTICIAN!!!

Prospect Preview: 1996

It's pretty hard to believe sometimes, but with the 2009 season upcoming that means that the 1996 season was 13 years ago. Thirteen. To put that into perspective, by the time the 1991 season rolled around - the first season that I remember really well, as it was the year I turned 11 - both Ozzie Smith and Paul Molitor had been in the league for 13 years, Rickey Henderson had been in the league for 12 years and had already broken Lou Brock's record, and Eddie Murray had been playing for 14 years. These were all legitimate, certain stars that had all-but-punched their ticket to Cooperstown by that time.

It's with that perspective, then, that I look back at 1996 and think "Wow, was it really that long ago?" I remember those two home runs that 19-year old Andruw Jones hit in Game 1 of the World Series at Yankee Stadium. None of that seems like it was an Ozzie Smith-career ago, but it was, so we might as well embrace it.

The young talent in the majors in 1996 was pretty impressive. It was the year of Jeter's ROY award, and A-Rod's breakout season. The young talent went throughout the minors as well. Scott Rolen and Nomar were a year away from the majors, and others were getting close too. With all the young talent in the system at the time, it should be interesting to see what the preview guides had to say.

The 1996 Sporting News baseball yearbook had a slightly different format than other preview guides when it comes to the minor league preview. In an effort to streamline the magazine, the minor league comments were shortened to two pages, with the franchises' top players listed with a single-line comment in a table. Despite this, there are plenty of interesting comments to be found and read 13 years later.

Derek Jeter: "Derek Jeter's time has arrived at shortstop. The Yankees' top prospect, who showed a nice flair in a brief call-up last year, has good speed, a fine arm, and a nice hitting technique. The question is whether he will be consistent afield."It also mentions that he "has physical ability and instincts to be a star."

The reports on Jeter were quite accurate, right down to the instincts to be a star, the nice hitting technique, and the questions about his fielding consistency (not that everybody agrees with that last point). Jeter's run-away Rookie of the Year award was also good evidence of just how ready he was for the majors that year.

Bobby Abreu: Listed as Bob Abreu, it is said that he "has speed and gap-power that's so vital in Astrodome."

Abreu made his debut as a September call-up in '96 and struggled some. He didn't become an everyday major leaguer until the 1998 season, but he quickly turned into one of the more underrated players in baseball. Of course, he just as quickly turned into one of those so-underrated-he's-overrated players.

Nomar Garciaparra: "Solid defensively; has shown offensive ability"

It's been a few years since Nomar was near the top of the list of best shortstops in baseball, but he certainly was a big star for those few years. It was mostly with his bat, though, winning those batting titles. It's interesting that, as a minor leaguer one year away from the Bigs, his offense was the afterthought in the comment.

Kerry Wood: "Polished delivery and a fastball that touches 98 mph"

Wood actually didn't break on the MLB scene until 1998, two years later, but it's interesting to see that he was already highly regarded in Single A. So often, you see young power pitchers featured in a team's "hot prospects" list, but it always seems like they won't pan out. This is a nice reminder that some of those pitchers truly are special. Hopefully, though, your organization doesn't have Dusty Baker out there managing, trying his hardest to have a 20-something's arm literally fall off while on the hill.

The Atlanta Braves had quite the system in 1996, even after half a decade of NL dominance and coming off a World Series victory. They were ranked as the second best system in baseball, behind only the Los Angeles Dodgers (whose Todd Hollandsworth won the Dodgers' fifth ROY award in a row in 1996). All of the following players were ranked in the Braves' system in the 1996 TSN Yearbook:

Andruw Jones: "Only 18; has the tools to be plus-player in every aspect"

Jason Schmidt: "Power fastball with hard slider for out pitch"

Jermaine Dye: "Excellent arm, developing power at plate"

While none of those three have gone on to Hall of Fame careers - though Jones could have been until he was replaced by an alien clone - they all have been quality all-stars across multiple seasons. That was a good time for the Braves organization, with the World championship and the stars waiting in the wings. It's a shame they weren't able to turn it into any further championships.

As recent as 1996 seems, we all know that a significant amount of time has elapsed. Many, many players' careers - all-stars and Rookies of the Year even - have come and gone. Still, there are dozens of players still playing today who were only up-and-coming at the time, and it's always fun to see what writers were saying about them before they hit it big.

Top Talent-Producing Universities (Revisited)

Thanks to some great discussion over at Baseball Think Factory, I felt it was important to take at least one more look at my post on Top Talent-Producing Universities. As I said in that post, I was only playing around with the numbers, so I didn't do much beyond a couple of simple calculations. But it's obvious that a simple average doesn't quite do it justice: it penalizes schools like USC who churn out many major leaguers (who tend to drag down the average since they all can't be Mark McGwire or Randy Johnson).

One suggestion, then, is to rank the schools solely by Total Win Shares:

School	# Major Leaguers	Total WS	Notable Alumni
USC	100	4563	Tom Seaver (388 WS), Mark McGwire (343 WS), Randy Johnson (315 WS), Fred Lynn (280 WS)
Arizona St. University	88	4244	Barry Bonds (714 WS), Reggie Jackson (444 WS), Sal Bando (283 WS)
University of Michigan	72	3026	Charlie Gehringer (383 WS), Barry Larkin (346 WS), George Sisler (292 WS)
Saint Mary's College of California	62	2816	Von Hayes (177 WS), Tom Candiotti (158 WS)
UCLA	63	2721	Jackie Robinson (257 WS), Todd Zeile (221 WS), Troy Glaus (158 WS)
University of Texas at Austin	95	2633	Roger Clemens (440 WS), Burt Hooten (164 WS), Greg Swindell (136 WS)
Notre Dame	67	2567	Carl Yastrzemski (488 WS), Cap Anson (381 WS), Cy Williams (235 WS)
California	50	1904	Jeff Kent (335 WS), Jackie Jensen (187 WS)
Mississippi State University	41	1896	Rafael Palmiero (395 WS), Will Clark (331 WS)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign	69	1876	Lou Boudreau (277 WS), Tom Haller (179 WS)

I'm not convinced that this is the best way to look at it, though. It allows for quantity to be ranked over quality, at least in theory. Somehow, we need to account for the schools who have produced the higher level talent while also making sure not to ignore the contributions of the lower level talent they produced.

There were suggestions about taking the top 10% of each school and weighting their contributions differently, or of taking each alumni's total Win Shares and weighting them by their ranking, and so on. While those all would probably re-shape the output into something closer to what we're looking for, I think that they may be needlessly complex (plus, they'd make me work a little harder than I really want to right now).

The method I decided to use incorporates the Average Win Shares shown in the last post and combines it with the number of quality players each school produces. The idea behind this is that schools who produce more high-quality players will be pushed up in the rankings. The formula is this: for schools who have produced 10 or more major leaguers, multiply the average Win Share value by the total number of alumni who accrued 100 or more Win Shares in their career.

This method produces a list of schools that seems a little more likely.

School	# Major Leaguers	Average WS	# Alumni (100+ Career WS)	Weighted Average	Notable Alumni
USC	100	45.6	17	775.7	Tom Seaver (388 WS), Mark McGwire (343 WS), Randy Johnson (315 WS), Fred Lynn (280 WS)
Arizona St. University	88	48.2	12	578.7	Barry Bonds (714 WS), Reggie Jackson (444 WS), Sal Bando (283 WS)
Saint Mary's College of California	62	45.4	11	500.0	Von Hayes (177 WS), Tom Candiotti (158 WS)
UCLA	63	43.2	8	345.5	Jackie Robinson (257 WS), Todd Zeile (221 WS), Troy Glaus (158 WS)
University of Michigan	72	42.0	8	336.2	Charlie Gehringer (383 WS), Barry Larkin (346 WS), George Sisler (292 WS)
California	50	38.1	8	304.6	Jeff Kent (335 WS), Jackie Jensen (187 WS)
Notre Dame	67	38.3	7	268.2	Carl Yastrzemski (488 WS), Cap Anson (381 WS), Cy Williams (235 WS)
San Diego St.	34	51.7	5	258.7	Tony Gwynn (398 WS), Graig Nettles (321 WS), Mark Grace (294 WS)
University of Minnesota	31	51.3	5	256.3	Dave Winfield (415 WS), Paul Molitor (414 WS), Terry Steinbach (173 WS)
University of Tennessee	38	42.6	6	255.6	Todd Helton (258 WS), Phil Garner (195 WS), Rick Honeycutt (130 WS)

A few notes:

• The second method, that tries to account for quantity and quality, gives a pretty similar list to the first list. Now, maybe this means that we came up with a better, more logical method to rank the universities. However, it might also mean that we fudged with the method enough to give us whatever we were looking for originally. I'd like to think it's the former, but we have to recognize that the latter might be possible.
• Schools like Columbia and Cal Poly, which placed highly in the previous post, end up ranking 21st and 23rd, respectively, in this method, which is still higher than I would've expected from my less-than-famous alma mater. (Georgia Tech finishes 12th)
  
• In this ranking, I did my best to account for players who played at more than one school (like Barry Zito who transferred from UCSB to USC). Players are credited to the school they played at last. However, there are about 60 players in the database who are listed as having played at multiple schools in the same years, so there was no way for me to know who they played with last. I left them as is; they didn't affect the top of the rankings.
  

Top Talent-Producing Universities

Well, it's a snow day here in Milwaukee - twelve inches of snow in the overnight and early-morning hours will do that - so I didn't do much this morning except sleep in, watch 30 Rock, and goof off on the computer (there was a new iPod thrown in there too, so that kept me pretty busy). Part of that goofing off is, of course, playing with various baseball statistics.

While doing just that, I decided to look at what colleges have produced the best players. It's easy to look at some lists and see that Arizona St. has produced the likes Barry Bonds and Reggie Jackson, or that USC has produced Tom Seaver, Mark McGwire, and Randy Johnson, but that seems a little too subjective to me. I decided to try something a little more objective to see what we get.

Using the database info available at Baseball Databank and the Win Shares info found on the Baseball Graphs Blog (limited through 2007 for now), I calculated how many players have come from each school and then summed up the total Win Shares of each of those players. In order to rank the schools in a meaningful way, I found the average Win Shares of each school's alumni. So, for example, there were 26 MLB players who attended the University of Wisconsin - Madison, and those 26 players accumulated a total of 933 Win Shares throughout their career (with Harvey Kuenn earning the most with 223 WS). That gives UW an average Win Share value of 35.9.

Using that admittedly-basic methodology, I created two lists of the top talent-producing schools, one for all players and one only for players since 1950. However, there are a number of schools who only ever produced one or two players, and when they happen to be quality players, the average gets a little skewed. The ultimate example of this is Texas Wesleyan University, which has produced only two major leaguers: Tris Speaker, who had 630 Win Shares in his career, and Jeff Moronko, a career minor leaguer who played in 7 games in each of 1984 and 1987. This gives Texas Wesleyan an average of 315 Win Shares between its two alumni, but that is clearly a misleading number. The lists, therefore, are limited to schools who have produced 10 or more players.

Average Win Shares of Alumni, by College (All-Time)

School	# Major Leaguers	Avg WS	Notable Alumni
Columbia University	12	102.2*	Lou Gehrig (489 WS), Eddie Collins (574 WS)
Guilford College	10	65.5	Tony Womack (118 WS), Rick Ferrell (206 WS), Tom Zachary (205 WS)
Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo	10	63.3	Ozzie Smith (325 WS), Thornton Lee (165 WS), Mike Krukow (109 WS)
University of Vermont	12	62.3	Larry Gardner (258 WS), Ed Reulbach (206 WS)
University of South Alabama	18	54.7	Luis Gonzalez (316 WS), Juan Pierre (122 WS), Jon Lieber (109 WS)
San Diego State University	34	51.7	Tony Gwynn (398 WS), Graig Nettles (321 WS), Mark Grace (294 WS)
University of Minnesota	31	51.3	Dave Winfield (415 WS), Paul Molitor (414 WS), Terry Steinbach (173 WS)
Ohio University	23	51.0	Mike Schmidt (467 WS), Bob Brenly (93 WS)
Seton Hall University	28	49.6	Craig Biggio (431 WS), Mo Vaughn (200 WS), Johnny Briggs (159 WS)
Arizona State University	88	48.2	Barry Bonds (714 WS), Reggie Jackson (444 WS), Sal Bando (283 WS)

* Updated: The Average Win Shares value for Columbia was originally incorrectly transcribed as 66.6. I apologize for that.

Average Win Shares of Alumni, by College (finishing career since 1950)

School	# Major Leaguers	Avg WS	Notable Alumni
Seton Hall University	20	66.6	Craig Biggio (431 WS), Mo Vaughn (200 WS), Johnny Briggs (159 WS)
Purdue University	10	55.5	Bob Friend (207 WS), Bill Skowron (183 WS)
University of Minnesota	29	54.8	Dave Winfield (415 WS), Paul Molitor (414 WS), Terry Steinbach (173 WS)
University of South Alabama	18	54.7	Luis Gonzalez (316 WS), Juan Pierre (122 WS), Jon Lieber (109 WS)
Ohio University	17	54.2	Mike Schmidt (467 WS), Bob Brenly (93 WS)
San Diego State University	32	52.8	Tony Gwynn (398 WS), Graig Nettles (321 WS), Mark Grace (294 WS)
Mississippi State University	25	52.6	Rafael Palmiero (395 WS), Will Clark (331 WS)
Saint Mary's College of California	16	52.1	Von Hayes (177 WS), Tom Candiotti (158 WS)
Michigan State University	31	50.9	Robin Roberts (339 WS), Steve Garvey (279 WS), Kirk Gibson (218 WS)
University of Southern California	91	49.5	Tom Seaver (388 WS), Mark McGwire (343 WS), Randy Johnson (315 WS), Fred Lynn (280 WS)

A few notes:

• As a Cal Poly alum myself, I'm quite proud to see it place so highly on the list
• There are alumni from 698 different universities in MLB history
  
• The three schools that have the most alumni in MLB history are: USC (100), University of Texas at Austin (95), and Arizona St. (88)
• The three schools with the most alumni in MLB history who accumulated 50 or more Win Shares in their careers are: Arizona St. (24), USC (22), and UCLA (19) & Michigan (19)
• The three schools with the most alumni in MLB history who accumulated 100 or more Win Shares in their careers are: USC (17), Arizona St. (12), and St. Mary's College of California (11)
  
• It's hard to decide what the minimum number of alum should be... is 10 too few? what about 20? Of the 698 different universities that have had alumni in the major leagues, only 53 have 30 or more alumni and only 160 have 10 or more alumni

I'll keep looking at these numbers and post any findings as they come. There's actually a lot fewer top-producing schools than I imagined, but it does at least feel good to have graduated from one of the schools near the top of the list (sure, they barely meet eligibility, but that's beside the point).

Historic Hot Stove: Greg Vaughn

This past weekend marked the anniversary of a major day in Tampa Bay Devil Rays history and, sadly, the world seemed to let it pass without mention. I can't say why that is exactly, but I can guess that most Rays fans are hoping to focus more on their recent stunning success and less on their past failures (David Chalk notwithstanding). And though I can fully understand and appreciate that, I think the "anniversary" of the free agent signing of Greg Vaughn on December 13, 1999, is a great place to start my studies into past free agent signings and how they were received by contemporary experts and writers.

If we remember, and I'm sure few of us do since the 1999 Devil Rays were not quite the '75 Reds, this was only the Rays' second winter. The first season did not go well - they won 63 games when management was hoping for 70 - and this season hardly went better. In 1999, the Devil Rays were 69-93 and had dealt with injury after injury throughout the season. In fact, for the year, 18 Devil Rays players spent a total of 863 days on the disabled list. Wade Boggs, at age 41, inched his way to the 3,000 hit milestone, playing in only 90 games and cracking only 88 hits (he ended the season with 3,010 hits and promptly retired). Wilson Alvarez was the de facto ace, but he threw only 160 innings. DH Jose Canseco played in only 114 games, but he did hit 34 home runs with 95 RBIs and an OPS of .932. Fred McGriff was the club leader in most categories, playing in 144 games with a more than respectable line of .310/.405/.552 with 32 HR and 104 RBIs.

Greg Vaughn entered that off-season at age 34 and at the most productive point in his career. In the previous two seasons for San Diego and Cincinnati, he had hit a total of 95 home runs and knocked in 237 RBIs. He had finished 4th in the MVP voting each year, and seemed like a legitimate slugger worth pursuing. In the December 1999 issue of Baseball Digest Monthly, published before Vaughn had signed with anybody, he was credited with being the clubhouse leader of the Reds who, at 96-67, had finished 19 games better than the year before and only a 163rd-game loss out of the wild card:

"Everybody around the team, including general manager Jim Bowden, manager Jack McKeon and numerous players, gives Vaughn credit for the Reds' new attitude.

'I think he instilled a feeling in this clubhouse that we know we can beat anybody,' thid baseman Aaron Boone said.

'His presence changed the attitude of our club from the very beginning of spring training,' Bowden said.

'Believe me - the way he is is just as important as his numbers,' first baseman Sean Casey said' "

With the legitimate bat Vaughn offered and the strong positive clubhouse presence he seemed to have, I imagine it was a pretty easy decision for GM Chuck LaMar to make. Both were key issues that the Devil Rays needed addressed. Vaughn's history of knee problems and a strained abdominal early in the 1999 season were certainly cause for alarm - not to mention the slugger's 34-year old body - but they had only kept him out of 8 games during the season. The deal of 4-years and $34 million was mostly well-received. Sports Illustrated said:

"Last fall [Owner Vince] Naimoli gave LaMar permission to increase the payroll—it's up $25 million over last year's, to $62 million—and LaMar appears to have spent wisely in signing free-agent outfielders Greg Vaughn and Gerald Williams and starting pitchers Juan Guzman and Steve Trachsel."

The annual Athlon baseball preview magazine for the 2000 season was also impressed:

"By forming what Tigers manager Phil Garner calls 'a whomping offense', GM Chuck LaMar certainly got the attention of apathetic fans. Both newcomers [Castilla and Vaughn] have three 40-homer seasons since '95. Adding them to a lineup that includes mashers Jose Canseco and Fred McGriff 'changes the way I will approach games,' says skipper Larry Rothschild."

But even with the positive reviews, the Sporting News preview magazine was a little more cautious:

"You can look at it in two ways: by adding Vinny Castilla and Greg Vaughn to a lineup that already includes Jose Canseco and Fred McGriff, the Devil Rays have 1) added 78 homers and 220 RBIs in '99 at hitter-friendly Tropicana Field or 2) will be bogged down by a big-bang AL lineup in a division dominated by the very NL-like Yankees."

With hindsight, it's easy to see that TSN's cautious tone was the right one to take. Vaughn quickly aged on the Rays, playing in no more than 136 games in either of his first two seasons. He did manage to hit 54 home runs across those two years, but his batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage were all slipping. In 2002, the third year of his four year contract, Vaughn had clearly become dead weight, playing in only 69 games and batting a sub-Mendoza .163/.286/.315. And though his annual salary of around $8 million dollars did not put him in the upper echelon of salaries for any of his Devil Ray tenure (he was about the 40th highest paid player each of those years), it was obviously a burden on the budget-minded Rays, whose payroll for the 2002 season was around $35 million.

Vaughn was released by the Rays in March of 2003. He signed with the Rockies a few weeks later but was out of baseball by the All-Star Game.

Overall, the free agent signing of Greg Vaughn has to be considered a failure for the Devil Rays. He was not able to maintain his health for any part of his contract, and the big bat that they were paying for never materialized. LaMar should not have focused so much of his limited financial resources on a 34-year-old slugger with a history of knee problems, no matter his recent production. The unrealized hope that they likely had for him taking over the clubhouse in a positive way cannot be put on his shoulders, though. The team they had assembled was old and rickety, with the biggest names being Canseco, Castilla, McGriff, and Alvarez, all of whom were either old or unreliable to begin with. Being put into that situation, it would've taken Kid Griffey and the Say Hey Kid himself to positively affect that clubhouse. Still, it was a big time in Devil Ray history, as it showed the Tampa fans that the organization wasn't going to sit still and do nothing in the face of a mostly apathetic public. It's just too bad that this was the direction they took - not only did it kill their chances of winning in those first few years, but it also seemed to put management off of signing big free agents for a long time.

Of course, now that the Rays have been to the World Series and boast such jaw-dropping talent, we'll never have to worry about this kind of mess again...

Prospect Preview: 1974

For someone like me, who grew up with the baseball played in the late-'80s and early-'90s (from Gibson's home run to the strike-year and on), looking back through preview guides from the 1970s can seem a little foreign. I know the names and strengths of the players listed, but I don't know them the same way that I know players from the early-'90s.

If, for example, someone told me that a pitcher reminded them of Ben McDonald, then I know something about that player's talent because I remember his hot start for the Orioles. Or if they say that someone looks like Terry Steinbach, then I know something else about that player. But if they say that the pitcher reminds them of Catfish Hunter or that the hitter reminds them of Dave Concepcion, then I can only try to understand what they're saying. I can appreciate that someone might say Troy Tulowitzki looks like Garry Templeton, but I can't know innately if it's a valid comparison.

The minor league prospects sections of these magazines are a little different story, though. When I look through these, the Hall of Fame and other notable names pop-out just as much as any other time frame, and the comments and predictions about these players feel just as understated and odd as anyone else. Fewer names of the Chris Sabo or Chilli Davis variety - quality players who didn't quite reach the annals of immortality - jump out at me, but the All-Star and Hall of Fame names are hard to miss. The names below caught my attention from the 1974 Street and Smith's preview guide.

Frank Tanana: "Southpaw Frank Tanana was great last year in the Texas League. The 20-year-old posted a 16-6 mark, 2.58 ERA, led the loop in strikeouts (197 in 205 innings), while chalking up 15 complete games.""

Tanana's career did not take him to Cooperstown's doorstep, but he was a productive pitcher for 20 years. Pitching for few quality teams, Tanana retired with a 240-236 record and a slightly better-than-average 3.66 ERA. He also had 143 complete games in his career. He did finish high in the Cy Young voting in 1975 and 1976, and he is currently 21st in all-time strikeouts, just behind Mike Mussina and Cy Young and just ahead of David Cone and Tom Glavine. He's in good company there. The most surprising thing is how well the minor league scouting report does of encapsulating his career.

Ken Griffey: "National League fans had a preview of a leading candidate for 1974 rookie ofthe year honors when lefty Ken Griffey was called up from Indianapolis in late August last season, after hitting .327. Griffey responded by hitting .384 for the Reds and should be Sparky Anderson's starting rightfielder this year."

Father of all-time great Ken Griffey, Jr., the senior Griffey was a quality player himself, and a highly touted prospect for what turned out to be the greatest team of all time. Griffey played in 88 games in 1974 and performed adequately. He became a full-time player in 1975 and played very well, earning a starter's spot for what was to become a 19-year career.

Jim Rice: "A year away are infielder Frank Vazquez, a switch hitter who hit .269 after making the jump from Class A to AAA and outfielder Jim Rice. He'll be in Triple A after a spectacular Double A campaign at Bristol (.317, 27 HRs, 93 RBIs). He also mashed AAA pitching the last year [sic] of the season."

Dave Parker: "This time, it'll be another outfielder, 6-5, 225-pounder Dave Parker. Most talented player in the International League in '73, Parker hit .317 with 57 RBIs in 84 games at Charleston and gained All-Stars honors, then batted .288 the last couple of months with the Buccos. Keeping Parker out of the starting lineup could be impossible."

I put Rice and Parker together because, for much of their career, these two were linked. They won matching MVP awards with monster seasons in 1978, and there were three other seasons where they both placed in the top-5 in the MVP voting of their respective leagues at the same time. Though Parker ended up playing in 73 games in the 1974 season, he didn't get to play a full season until the '75 season, the same as Rice. Though today Rice enjoys heated discussions on an annual basis about his Hall-worthiness, Parker seems to be forgotten in the discussion despite a similar case (1 MVP award & 7 all-star appearances, .290/.339/.471 with 339 HRs and 1493 RBIs) to Rice (1 MVP award & 8 all-star appearances, .298/.352/.502 with 382 HRs and 1451 RBIs). I think it's great to see that the two were linked together even during their minor league careers.

Gary Carter: "Also down on the farm is 19-year-old catcher Gary Carter, who hit .253 at Quebec City and led the Expos' Instructional hitters."

Here's where we finally reach our first definite Hall of Fame player from this preview guide. Though Carter didn't fully reach the bigs until 1975, when he finished second in Rookie of the Year voting, the young Carter was still noteworthy. Having been drafted just a year-and-a-half before, in June 1972, he was moving through the minors quickly on the way to his Hall of Fame career.

George Brett: "Third base is the infield hole [for the Royals]. Vet Paul Schaal batted .288 last year and is the incumbent but is 31 years old and will be challenged by George Brett, an impressive 20-year-old who batted .284 at Omaha."

"The Royals, whose minor league clubs had an over-all winning percentage of .552, have some other players who may stick. There's Amer. Assn. All-Star third baseman George Brett (.284), a quick gloveman and only 20 years old."

Brett is viewed by many as the greatest third-baseman of all time (though that view is probably stronger in the Kansas/Missouri area than in the rest of the country), and is one of three members of the prestigious 1999 Hall of Fame class (along with Nolan Ryan and Robin Yount). He finished third in the Rookie of the Year voting this year, and went on to win an MVP award in 1980 and be selected to 13 All-Star teams, among other more memorable events.

Thirty-five years ago, when the above comments were written, it was impossible to know who would live up to their promise, and who would never pan out. The comments on George Brett were just as valid as the comments on Rick Sawyer. And I love the uncertainty and promise of it because it means that any magazine I pick up today or in the future could have the next Gary Carter or George Brett featured in it, hidden under my nose. And it'll be my pleasure to read the magazines and watch the games and try to figure it all out.

Through the Years: Rickey Henderson

A couple of weeks back, the Baseball Writer's released the official ballot for the 2009 Hall of Fame class. The ballots are never a surprise, because we know that once a player retires he'll be placed on the ballot five years later. Still, the unveiling of the ballot is news because it marks "Hall of Fame Season", when the baseball blogosphere (and some long-time writers) goes crazy for a few weeks debating the merits of their favorite candidates (or anti-candidates). This is a fun time, as it gives us baseball junkies something substantial to talk about.

So I've decided to join in the fun in my own way. Last week, I wrote about the newly-retired Greg Maddux in a piece I called "Through the Years." I went back through my collection of preview guides and reviewed how Maddux was looked on by contemporary writers from year-to-year as he entered his prime. With such a great and unique talent, I felt it would be interesting to see how his talent developed in front of everyone's eyes and to find out how long it took the writers of the day to notice it for what it was. I've decided to do the same type of piece for some of the current Hall of Fame nominees. I'm starting this week with the only no-doubt candidate on the ballot, the always entertaining and superbly qualified Rickey Henderson.

Drafted in the 4th round of the 1976 draft at the age of 17, Rickey was obviously an attractive player to his hometown Oakland Athletics. Making his debut on a double-header Sunday in 1979 against Texas in Oakland, Rickey got a double and single in his first two at-bats and never looked back over his 25-year career. Despite this solid start, Rickey did not garner a mention in either the 1979 Sports Illustrated baseball preview issue or anywhere in the 1979 run of Baseball Digest. This is more a product of the magazines' short word limit and of the A's ineptitude at the time, though.

Heading into Rickey's first full season in 1980, neither Baseball Digest nor Sports Illustrated had room enough to mention him. The closest recognition Rickey got in that year's SI was a reference to Oakland's "speed in the outfield" even though they devoted an article to the future "Stars of the '80s" (in which they predicted stunning success for Keith Hernandez, Carney Lansford, Bob Horner, Rick Sutcliffe, and Paul Molitor).

But 1980 was a doozy, and it would be a long time before any preview guide would feel able to leave out Rickey again. In his first full season, Rickey was named to the All-Star team and finished 10th in the MVP voting that year. Batting .303 with a .420 on-base percentage, he stole 100 bases (setting an AL record), scored 111 runs and helped the A's improve their record by 29 games over the year before. The Sporting News was rightfully impressed in their preview guide the next year, and couldn't wait to see how someone so young could improve:

"At age 21, Henderson became the first American League player ever to steal 100 bases. He was the only player on the A's to hit .300 (.303) and he did it in his first full season. As the season progressed, Henderson's defense in left progressed, and he showed some critics that his throwing arm is anything but weak."

The strike-shortened year of 1981 led to an even better year with the bat for Rickey, where he increased his batting average and slugging percentage on his way to a second-place finish in the MVP voting. In 1982's Street and Smith's preview guide, the writers did their best to show both sides of Rickey's talent:

"The Oakland outfield is nothing short of superb... Not only do Rickey Henderson, Dwayne Murphy, and Tony Armas take hits and runs away from the opposition, they provide most of the team's offensive punch. Henderson barely missed winning the MVP award after a season in which he stole 56 bases and batted .319."

But the talent on display in 1982 was that which Rickey will forever be remembered for: the stolen base. And 1982 was the year of the stolen base, when Rickey set the record for steals in a season at 130 (from 261 times on base). The next year's preview guides definitely noticed this, though they also noticed his drop in batting average as he marched toward the record. From the 1983 Sporting News:

"Last year, for the first time in his career, he failed to hit .300 (.267), perhaps because he was too busy stealing bases. His 130 steals broke Lou Brock's major league record of 118, and now that the record is safely tucked away, Henderson intends to reconcentrate his efforts on hitting."

And from 1983's Street and Smith's:

"So what is left for him? His on-base percentage was the league's third best last year. His 116 walks ranked first, and his runs scored (119) fourth. The season before he led the league in hits even while playing in Oakland, a notoriously bad park for hitters. All that really remains is to establish himself as a power hitter, which he intends to do this season. He has stated the intention to hit 25 home runs this year, something leadoff hitters not named Brian Downing just don't do."

Rickey didn't increase his power all that much in 1983, but he did put together another all-around great year, stealing 108 bases and scoring 105 runs while batting .282/.414/.421 and an OPS+ of 139. It was a much better all-around performance than the record breaking year before, but it wasn't as celebrated. He put up similar numbers in 1984, though he was able to increase his power, hitting .293/.399/.458 with 16 HRs and an OPS+ of 145.

This fifth straight all-star caliber performance paved the way for free agency that off-season, and led Rickey into George Steinbrenner's open bill-fold. Signing for a then-large sum of $8.5 million over 5 years, Rickey moved over to Yankee Stadium's spacious centerfield and brought some major expectations with him:

"Henderson (.293, 16 HR, 58 RBI at Oakland) will switch from left field, which he played adeptly for five years with the A's, to center. He was down to 66 stolen bases last season but has gone over 100 three times, including a major-league record 130 in 1982. He'll lead off... The Yankees stole but 62 bases last season. Henderson should have that many by August. Just think of the RBI situations he'll create for Don Mattingly, Winfield,and Don Baylor."

The season proved to be a success for Rickey and the Yankees. Rickey's excellent season - .314/.419/.516 with 80 SBs, 146 Rs, 24 HRs, 157 OPS+ - helped the Yankees win 97 games that year and helped Don Mattingly win the 1985 MVP:

"Mattingly credits the presence of Henderson and Winfield as major factos in his success. 'When you have Henderson hitting in front of you and Winfield behind you,' Mattingly said, 'it means someone's always on base and pitchers can't pitch around you. I put up some great numbers last year but I couldn't have done it without them.'"

The 1986 Sporting News preview guide continues:

"Henderson, whose ankle injury at the beginning of the 1985 season was a major factor in the team's slow start and the early-season firing of Manager Yogi Berra, came on strong to make his first Yankee season after six years with Oakland a rousing success."

Rickey's second season in New York was less spectacular than the first, but he did increase his power that year (28 HRs, .469 SLG) and play in his fifth straight All-Star game. He also stole another 87 bases, setting the Yankees club record for the second year in a row. His 1987 season did not go to plan, though, as he found himself sidelined for 67 games with a nagging hamstring injury. The New York City media naturally came down on Rickey in this disappointing season, but he seemed to have the right attitude about it over the off-season. From the 1988 Athlon baseball preview:

"'What I do naturally,' says Henderson, 'is get on base, intimidate pitchers and get hitters pitches to hit.' Henderson will be watched closely this summer after a season in which his desire was increasingly questioned the longer he remained sidelined."

With his full health back in 1988, Rickey proved himself to his doubters, hitting .305/.394/.399 with 118 runs and 93 stolen bases. His performance didn't carry over into 1989 though, the final year of his deal with the Yankees. Starting off the season poorly, Rickey was traded back to the A's in mid-June and missed the All-Star game for the first time since 1981. His performance picked up in the second-half of the season as the A's marched on to the World Series.

The Series victory - and a 4-year, $12 million offer - must have pleased Rickey, as he stayed with the A's after the season. It was the second of three consecutive series appearances for the A's, who were filled with stars such as Mark McGwire, Jose Canseco, Dave Henderson, Dennis Eckersley, Dave Stewart and Bob Welch. The quality of the team wasn't lost on Rickey. In the 1990 Street and Smith's, it says:

"Left fielder Rickey Henderson, a free agent who signed back on, thinks the A's will continue to repeat in the AL West. 'I think we fit right in with the great teams,' he said. 'I watched those A's teams in the '70s and we fit in with them. That team won three World Series in a row. I feel this club can do that.'"

But Rickey's value was still there, as the magazine called the new A's outfield "the best in baseball." He did everything in his power to prove it that year, hitting .325/.439/.577 with 28 home runs, 119 Rs, 65 SBs, and a 188 OPS+. It was Rickey's best season in the majors, and he was rewarded with his first and only MVP award.

By the end of the 1990 season, Rickey was "already recognized as the greatest leadoff hitter of all time" and was sitting only two steals shy of Lou Brock's record of 938 career stolen bases. He would go on to break the record on May 1, 1991, and then steal 468 more bases over the remaining 12 years of his career.

From 1992 and on, Rickey played on 10 different teams, always looking for one more year of work. Even as his bat and speed left him, he was still a valuable player, posting on-base percentages routinely .100-.150 points better than his batting average. In 1996, he had 112 hits but 125 walks; in 2001, he had 86 hits and 81 walks. As Joe Posnanski points out, Rickey retired with the most walks in Major League history (2,190, since surpassed by Barry Bonds), and still holds the record for most un-intentional walks (2,129).

Rickey was a very special talent in the game of baseball, and it showed through very early in his career. He seemed to set challenges for himself often - steal 100 bases, break Brock's record, become a power hitter - and he was always able to rise up and surpass them. Even when he heard whispers of worry and doubt or when he signed large contracts acknowledging his production, Rickey did nothing but prove that he was the star he claimed to be. Contemporary writers, as shown in this collection of preview guides, were able to recognize this quickly, praising Rickey for his many talents year after year.

It seems obvious that Rickey will get the call to the Hall in January. The only real question remains to be, will he get in unanimously?

Site Updates

Just a couple of quick notes about the blog here...

• I've added a list of categories on the side so that posts can be found by their topic/category.
  
• I've also added an area for "Useful Pages". These are pages that I think might be useful or informative to people, and this makes it much easier to find them. For example, the list of preview guides that are available for viewing online will be updated as I discover them. It should make for a good one-stop shop for these links.

And here's an important truth that needs to be pondered...