The San Francisco Chronicle’s Bruce Jenkins freely admits that it’s bar talk, not news, but it’s bar talk season so let’s hear him, um, talk:
Off-the-wall thoughts bouncing around the 3-Dot Lounge: What if Buster Posey is an infielder, in essence, and not a catcher? And what if he’s
hitting .438 with 15 homers in Fresno around the first of June? . . . As catchers go, Posey is slightly built. It seems almost criminal to
shorten his career – or at the very least, torment his legs – by
keeping him behind the plate exclusively. He’s a born hitter, and he
was an infielder until making the switch to catcher at Florida State.
He could play an acceptable shortstop at any level, he’d be absolutely
fine at third base, and a no-brainer at first.
I like “what-if” scenarios, and as I sit here right now I like to think what life would be like if Buster Posey was, say, a catcher-turned second baseman like Craig Biggio. But I’m not sure Biggio was ever considered as good a defensive catcher as Posey is purported to be.* I haven’t had a chance to see him catch, but according to Keith Law’s prospect rating last year, Posey “is a plus defensive catcher with a plus arm” and those don’t show up on your doorstep every day, especially with a good batting eye and mid-range or better power.
In an ideal world, Posey is given a chance to start behind the dish — a chance even Biggio got, by the way. Of course, the current San Francisco Giants’ decision makers don’t live in an ideal world. They live in a land where Bengie Molina is given the starting catching job until his having full time employment puts his Social Security benefits at risk.
*Biggio’s conversion has been officially chronicled by history as “the Astros wanted to save his legs.” I don’t know if that’s really true or not, as I can’t find a reference to Biggio’s time behind the plate that doesn’t treat the conversion like some super hero origin myth. Maybe he just wasn’t that good back there? Anyone who watched him more closely as a catcher back in the day care to weigh in?
There were a series of interesting comments to the Yadier Molina story this morning. The first commenter, a Cardinals fan, said he’s never really cared for Molina. Other Cardinals fans took issue with that, wondering how on Earth a Cardinals fan could not like Yadi.
While I’ll grant that Molina is a particularly popular member of the Cardinals, while I personally like his game and his overall persona, and while I can’t recall ever meeting a Cards fan who didn’t like him, why is it inconceivable that someone may not?
Whether you “like” a player is an inherently subjective thing. You can like players who aren’t good at baseball. You can dislike ones who are. You can like a player’s game who, as a person, seems like a not great guy. You can dislike a player’s game or his personality for any reason as well. It’s no different than liking a type of music or food or a type of clothing. Baseball players, to the fans anyway, are something of an aesthetic package. They can please us or not. We can choose to separate the art from the artist, as it were, and ignore off-the-field stuff or give extra credit for the off-the-field stuff. Dowhatchalike.
No matter what the basis is, “liking” a player on your favorite team is up to one person: you. And, as I’ve written elsewhere recently, someone not liking something you like does not give you license to be a jackass about it.
For a couple of years people worried if A-Rod would sully the Yankees Superior Brand. Given how they’re playing these days I wonder if A-Rod should be more worried about the Yankees sullying his brand.
He resurrected his baseball career last year. He’s cultivated a successful corporate identity. He’s in a relationship with a leading Silicon Valley figure. It’s all aces. And now it’s total class, as his home is featured in the latest issue of Architectural Digest:
Erected over the course of a year, the 11,000-square-foot retreat is a showstopper, with sleek forms and striking overhangs that riff on midcentury modernism, in particular the iconic villas found at Trousdale Estates in Beverly Hills. Unlike Rodriguez’s previous Florida home, the Coral Gables house is laid out on just one story so the interiors would connect directly to the grounds. Says Choeff, “Alex wanted to accentuate the indoor-outdoor feel.”
There are a lot of photos there.
I don’t think I have much in common with Alex Rodriguez on any conceivable level, but I do like his taste in architecture and design. I’m all about the midcentury modernism. Just wish I had the paycheck to be more about it like my man A-Rod here.
The best part of this sequence is not that Molina successfully evaded an inside pitch or that, in doing so, he hit the dirt and did some pushups. It’s not even the part where, after that, het got back up and knocked a single to left field.
No, the best part is the applause from the crowd. Very respectful fan base in St. Louis. They’d even applaud an opposing player who showed such a great work ethic. Or so I’m told.
Justin Verlander and Kate Upton have been a couple for a long time. And dudes like me have been writing about them for a long time because, well, Justin Verlander and Kate Upton.
They’ve fallen a bit off the radar in recent years thanks to Verlander taking a step back from Cy Young contender status and Upton’s profile likewise receding a bit, but if anything that probably helped things out given how hard it probably is to live a life with paparazzi hovering every time you want to out and get a burger or something.
In any event, those two crazy kids have made it work. Made it work so well that Verlander gave Upton a big fat rock that she showed off at last night’s Met Ball, which is a fundraising gala for the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Check it out:
When you’re on a $180 million contract you can afford stuff like that, I guess.
Anyway, it looks like Upton enjoyed the fancy, star-studded gala in New York. I’m sure Verlander had a good time on the Tigers’ off-day in Cleveland. There’s a lot to do in Cleveland if you know where to look.