Bruce Jenkins article

So which fans were abusing good ol' Pete Magowan, Bruce? Non-Giant fans? Dodger Fans? Oscillating fans? Who? Oh, sorry. When he says "fans," he means sports media people. He is not referring to Giants fans.

How bout this:

Actually, most of that part is true. Except the power part. Colorado has a ton more sluggers than we have. Bonds should lead us in homers at about 30, tops. Colorado may have 3 or 4 guys go over that (if Helton gets back on the juice.)

Unfortunately, however, this year's team won't be judged on our farm system or "youth" neither of which have anything to do with playing major league baseball in 2007. What matters is scoring runs and preventing runs. The Giants will probably be about average in offense, and have a fairly solid pitching staff.

Our starting staff 1-5 is possibly first in the division, especially if Ortiz comes back. Our long relief should be excellent, and of course our bullpen is highly suspect. If our bullpen comes thru for us, we'll be there at the end.

Our offense should be fairly average. A healthier Bonds should help out a lot. He'll still be geting on base a bunch, which should help out the guys behind him. You can't look at this team and expect that every single guy will have a down year.

You can look at every team in the West and see big holes. Each team is capable of winning the division if things break right.

But that doesn't mean Jenki's pessimism is warranted. He's cynical and moronic, and we really need to stop reading him.

It's because when people here bitch and moan and write inelegant posts about hating such and such a player, they're not getting paid for it and there's no expectation of eloquence; the bar is low. Messrs Jenkins and Ostler are being paid a full time salary to provide insight, so when they pull out gobbledygook bullsh## dreck such as: "There isn't a team in either league more dependent on a fast start," your head damn well may as explode for all the good that sentence did you.

Hey, Bruce! If the Giants win more games than the other teams, then they'll have the better record, right? Yeah, I thought so! In fact, I hear that if a team scores more runs than their opponent, they win the game!

Dammit, now I'm reading this, and it's time to get my Fire Joe Morgan on again...

Get out of the gate quickly -- say, 10 wins in the first 15 games -- and the Giants can re-establish a foundation of trust among their fans. If they fall substantially behind in the NL West, you won't find many people feeling good about the season or, more importantly, the future.

Because, you know, winning 10 games in April will convince people that the future is rosey, even the people who look at the farm system and see a paucity of hitting prospects and a bunch of pitchers who are getting jerked around between the bullpen and the rotation, between the PCL and the Show, and the youth movement that has taken place at the MLB level undermined by a pathological fear of starting young players that ultimately screws them over when they get a short leash at that level. Also, losing 10 of the first 15 games will convince all the people who bought season tickets that they should SELL! SELL! SELL! those behind-the-dugout seats for that series in late July.

So many people say the pressure falls on Barry Zito, given the largest free-agent contract ever signed by a pitcher, but that's not true. Outside of his Cy Young season in 2002 (23-5, 2.75), Zito has never been Roger Clemens, Pedro Martinez or Greg Maddux. He has been a clever, highly competent starter who more than holds up his end. To expect him to win 25 games, stifling the Mets or Cardinals with two-hit shutouts, simply isn't realistic.

Straw man alert! Straw man alert! Everyone who expects Barry Zito to win 20 games and to throw a two hitter this year, raise your hands. Now, someone who didn't raise your hand, but still believes Zito will be a very good pitcher this year, please explain to Mr. Jenkins ONCE MORE why using the stat unfortunately labeled "Wins" is not a particularly good measure of a pitcher.

No, the pressure is entirely on the front office. It's on owner Peter Magowan, who subjected himself to a torrent of fan abuse by signing Barry Bonds (count on this: Even if the Giants had acquired a high-profile outfielder over the winter, they still would have signed Bonds). It's on general manager Brian Sabean, who has built a less-than-thrilling cast around Bonds in recent years. It's on the hopeless romance with a player whose fan appeal amounts to "Come on, big guy -- just one more shot into the bay for old times' sake."

Don't blame Bonds if things go wrong. He's near the end, not always capable of summoning that familiar greatness. Don't blame Matt Cain, still a very young and untested pitcher. Don't blame Rich Aurilia, Dave Roberts or Bengie Molina. Blame the philosophy. Across the bay, the A's have lost so many great players due to budget constraints or injuries, it boggles the mind -- and they always survive. A single injury -- say, Zito, Cain or even Bonds -- could instantly destroy the Giants' season.

Wait, something's not computing... Oh, that's right. Back in December, Jenkins wrote:

[Signing Bonds] ranks among the most cowardly, gutless baseball decisions of the post-war era...

and

What [Bonds] doesn't do is make his team, or his teammates, better. It's one thing to be led by a prime-time Bonds, as the Giants were in their World Series season of 2002. It's another to be dragged into oblivion by a man who has lost any sense of professionalism.

So, which is it? Was signing Bonds the cowardly easy way out, or was it, as Jenkins implies here, a move made in spite of negative fan reaction?

Which is it? Do you blame Bonds for "dragging the team down" with his lack of professionalism, or do you not blame Bonds for anything? I understand he's trying to play rhetorical games, but come on. This is hackery masquerading as acquired wisdom.

Also, does Jenkins actually understand what the A's do? He says not to blame Matt Cain if the Giants aren't any good this year, because he's "young and untested", then immediately praises the A's for winning year after year, even though guys like Matt Cain make up the core of the past few A's teams: guys who are young, but certainly tested by minor league experience and even a little MLB; the A's don't buy into "MLB experience, in and of itself, is valuable" BS.

Take an honest look at the NL West and try to find a category where the Giants have a clear-cut edge. It certainly isn't youth, farm system, speed, starting pitching, run production, defense or the bullpen. There's only one, and you may not have guessed it: Power.

Bonds, believe it or not, is the only man in the division with a full-fledged power reputation. The No. 2 guy would be Jeff Kent, followed by Todd Helton, and then it's pretty much over (Luis Gonzalez? Nomar Garciaparra?). Hell, the Mets alone are superior, with the likes of Carlos Beltran, Moises Alou, Carlos Delgado and the promising David Wright. The Phillies' Ryan Howard might hit more homers than the West's five cleanup hitters combined.

Bruce, I want some of what you're smoking. Let's actually try QUANTIFYING this projected power, shall we? AZ's the only true hitter's park in the division now that COL has the humidor in full effect. From Pitcher's Park to Hitter's Park, the spectrum is: SD/SF/LA/COL/AZ. Keep that in mind. Among players expected to actually get playing time, ZiPS predicts SLG:

SF
Bonds 539
Durham 452
Aurilia 445
Winn 413
Molina 411
Klesko 411

SD
A. Gonzalez 475
Kouzmanoff 452
Cameron 446
Sledge 436
Bard 424
Giles 423

LA
Kemp(!) 478
Wash My Truck 473
Mr. Hamm 469
Ethier 463
(Bunch of guys who should play, but will all be part timers, at best, to start the season)
Furcal 431
L. Gonzalez 412

COL
Holliday 570
Atkins 521
Helton 517
Hawpe 493
Ianetta 465

AZ
Chris Young 525
S. Hairston 522
Quentin 472
Drew 467
Hammock 466
Tracy 465

In other words, Jenkins is talking out of his ass, or still thinks it's 2003 and doesn't realize that Adrian Gonzalez, Garrett Atkins, and Matt Holliday are excellent young power hitters. That's the only explanation I can think of for why he brought Luis Gonzalez into the conversation.

I'll let his assessment of the pitching go, because he doesn't say anything too ridiculous... Quibble about the Randy Wolf statement, but whatever... Chris Young, the Pads pitcher, is good, but his one playoff start is hardly evidence... He has no idea about park effects, as evidenced by his silly statement about Coors Field...

Given that the Giants' offense contains only two legitimate cornerstones -- Roberts' speed and Bonds' power -- a few surprises need to occur. Ray Durham has to stay healthy all season. Pedro Feliz needs to develop more plate discipline. Randy Winn has to show he hasn't crashed back to earth. The Giants certainly aren't terrified as they scan the Western Division lineups, but the opposition has some worthy answers: Rafael Furcal and Juan Pierre at the top of the L.A. lineup. The mercurial Giles brothers, Marcus and Brian, joining Adrian Gonzalez and Khalil Greene in San Diego. The unlimited potential of Arizona's Conor Jackson, Stephen Drew, Chris Young and Carlos Quentin. All that promise in Colorado.

Roberts's speed helps on defense, is only marginally important on offense compared to his actual batting abilities, and said advantage could leave him at any time considering his age. Feliz will not learn plate discipline; that ship sailed twenty years ago. Randy Winn hasn't crashed back to earth; his performance has reverted to his career levels, and I suspect it looks worse because he's playing in a park notoriously tough on lefty hitters. Juan Pierre sucks. He doesn't get on base that much, and he's not as good at stealing bases as Roberts. By all rights, he's an 8th place hitter who is inexplicably taking ABs from Matt Kemp. As for the last three teams, I'll only hit the Pads: he names four players on the Padres. That's half the lineup, and he didn't mention Cameron or Bard, who are no slouches at the plate, themselves. The Padres are all projected to be over a 265 EqA, if I remember correctly, which is VERY good.

In the end, I kind of agree with Jenkins's general premise, that winning the NL West will require a ton of good fortune for the Giants.  However, his reasoning isn't really reasoning--it's more meandering shooting the sh## type of discourse--and that drives me crazy. I know being a columnist is a difficult job, but it's hard because finding topics is tough, not because information is hard to come by, or because the root causes of a baseball team's successes and failures are difficult to pinpoint. It's only mental masturbation for Jenkins to keep writing columns from the POV that because he's paid to write about sports, his opinion is more valid and doesn't need to stand up to any sort of thoughtful analysis. My BS detector goes nuts when I read his stuff because he doesn't unveil his process of seeking truth, he proclaims it, fully formed.

youth, farm system, speed, starting pitching, run production, defense or the bullpen. There's only one, and you may not have guessed it: Power.

How the hell does he measure any of that? He doesn't say, and just expects us to believe his word as truth.

Run production? RUN PRODUCTION?!?! What? Isn't that what offense is?

Not a single solitary person. Fucking ever. Recently he was being interviewed on a Sacramento radio station as I was driving through on my way somewhere else (why else to be in Sacramento, right?) and he spent his 7 minutes of squawk time smearing Bonds with no facts, no evidence, not even new allegations; just a basic Bonds rant that could have been written 10 years earlier. A person not knowing Bonds nor Jenkins just tuning in would easily have taken Jenkins for what he was. Over the top angry, jealous, bitter, whatever at somebody who snubbed him. It was personal, and of no noteworthy interest to the public other than for those who have bought into the hate Bonds crusade. (Talk about televangelists being off the wall...sheesh)

The whole Bonds things is about a personal feud for media types who feel they have to drag the public through their little pissy-ant hissy fit.

NOBODY CARES IF BONDS PISSED ALL OVER BRUCE JENKINS SHOES.  We in the public don't care about you pricks in the media. You're only important to each other. For the rest of us, you're less important to us than a clerk at 7-11 or the guy flipping burgers for El Mando down at FAT BOY'S FAT FUCKING FAT BURGERS. Actually the guy flipping burgers for Mando is pretty important, because he enables El Lardo to fatten up like a Suckling Pig at Festivus, get shelled in the process, blowing countless saves, sucking up countless millions, and wasting countless roster spots over the years.

Little media bitches think they're important? Tell you what Brucie and Scottie and Lance and Mark and Lupica and Verducci:  Start reading some Susan Slusser stuff. Listen to Renel Brooks-Moon conduct an interview. Or even Jim Rome. He actually lets an interviewee speak without interruption and actually interviews, rather than debates his guests. Thats what sports media is about. Its actually about sports and how athletes go about pursuing excellence. About techniques, and effort, and goals, and fun, and comraderie and anaylsis and strategy. And the agreements and disagreements arising from that. Thats why we love sports. Save your fucking fruitcake pseudo journalism for the drooling political junkies and idealogues. If you want to report on crime and scandal, reference it to the front section if its really newsworthy. If its not newsworthy in the front, then I don't want to see your insipid little snide shit in the Sports section or listen to it on ESPN either.

We know life is real you stupid fuckers. I get it. Everybody else gets it!  For a lot of us, if we want to immerse ourselves in scandal and fucking misery and the small percentage of human waste that exists around us, we can just look around our workplace, or around town, or even our own circle of acquaintenances. Hell if thats not enough, we can vicariously thrill to any one of the 248 cable stations devoted to Armanda Nicole Smith. Most of us don't need made up shit about stuff that hasn't been proven about a guy in a kids game. Spare us. You write this shit to sell papers, garner viewer/listener ratings,  and grind your personal axes. Nothing more. Useless and eminently forgettable individuals.