<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rock.  Freaking.  Bottom.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/</link>
	<description>Covering the MLB with a focus on the Toronto Blue Jays</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:15:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-33240</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 20:34:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-33240</guid>
		<description>Given this promising entry,I hope and expect to see a future blog from you in haiku.

MW:  There&#039;s all sorts of benefits to hope, but I wouldn&#039;t hold my breath if I were you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Given this promising entry,I hope and expect to see a future blog from you in haiku.</p>
<p>MW:  There&#8217;s all sorts of benefits to hope, but I wouldn&#8217;t hold my breath if I were you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: josh</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32805</link>
		<dc:creator>josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 05:06:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32805</guid>
		<description>know this has been talked about but it really amazes me how little confidence Cito has in Frasor. No matter how well the guy pitches, he just won’t bring him into a game that the jays are ahead by two runs or less. 

What happened to League by the way, Cito doesn’t seem to ever use him anymore. (unless he pitched yesterday, I missed the game did he?)

I’m not panicking yet, I still think we have a very good ball club. What worries me the least is that the starting pitching actually held up reasonably over this road trip. Tallet was great, Halladay was himself, Jannssen threw a quality game. Richmond was fine. Romero wasn’t great but he wasn’t AWFUL.

It’s been the hitting and the bullpen that has pooped the bed and I KNOW we have a great bullpen. (everyone has bad weeks) I also truly believe we have an elite offense and that they will snap out of this slump, I just hope it is sooner than later because I think it will take 90 to get into the playoffs. (I’ve argued with you many times about how many games it takes to get into the playoffs. Last season it took 96 because that’s how many games the Jays would have needed to finish ahead of Boston and win the wild card. Not 90 because that’s how many Boston needed to get in.

MW: Last year it took 90 because that’s how many the wild card team actually needed to win to get the wild card, all else involves separate space-time continuua. You’re right about Frasor, though. I have tried to explain above.

I hate getting into these kinda debated with you because they aren&#039;t really about baseball but I just want to make my case. We are all interested in how many games it will take our beloved Blue Jays to get into the playoffs. Not how many games any other teams will need to win. That being said we are looking at historical numbers to predict how many the JAYS will need this year to get in.

So we see last year that the JAYS would have needed 96. If they had won 90 or 91 they would not have gotten in. That is why I take 96 as the predictor for this season. (I don`t think the number will actually be 96 this year though. Probably in the lower 90`s.)
Now I understand that they could have won a couple more games against Boston and potentially needed less than 96 but that is a small issue and I am still comfortable using my method of predicting how many we will need over yours.

I have discussed this with my friends and half the people (approximately) agree with me while half agree with you. 
It`s a different perpsective I guess.

MW:  A different perspective, indeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>know this has been talked about but it really amazes me how little confidence Cito has in Frasor. No matter how well the guy pitches, he just won’t bring him into a game that the jays are ahead by two runs or less. </p>
<p>What happened to League by the way, Cito doesn’t seem to ever use him anymore. (unless he pitched yesterday, I missed the game did he?)</p>
<p>I’m not panicking yet, I still think we have a very good ball club. What worries me the least is that the starting pitching actually held up reasonably over this road trip. Tallet was great, Halladay was himself, Jannssen threw a quality game. Richmond was fine. Romero wasn’t great but he wasn’t AWFUL.</p>
<p>It’s been the hitting and the bullpen that has pooped the bed and I KNOW we have a great bullpen. (everyone has bad weeks) I also truly believe we have an elite offense and that they will snap out of this slump, I just hope it is sooner than later because I think it will take 90 to get into the playoffs. (I’ve argued with you many times about how many games it takes to get into the playoffs. Last season it took 96 because that’s how many games the Jays would have needed to finish ahead of Boston and win the wild card. Not 90 because that’s how many Boston needed to get in.</p>
<p>MW: Last year it took 90 because that’s how many the wild card team actually needed to win to get the wild card, all else involves separate space-time continuua. You’re right about Frasor, though. I have tried to explain above.</p>
<p>I hate getting into these kinda debated with you because they aren&#8217;t really about baseball but I just want to make my case. We are all interested in how many games it will take our beloved Blue Jays to get into the playoffs. Not how many games any other teams will need to win. That being said we are looking at historical numbers to predict how many the JAYS will need this year to get in.</p>
<p>So we see last year that the JAYS would have needed 96. If they had won 90 or 91 they would not have gotten in. That is why I take 96 as the predictor for this season. (I don`t think the number will actually be 96 this year though. Probably in the lower 90`s.)<br />
Now I understand that they could have won a couple more games against Boston and potentially needed less than 96 but that is a small issue and I am still comfortable using my method of predicting how many we will need over yours.</p>
<p>I have discussed this with my friends and half the people (approximately) agree with me while half agree with you.<br />
It`s a different perpsective I guess.</p>
<p>MW:  A different perspective, indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terry Bradley</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32782</link>
		<dc:creator>Terry Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 00:29:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32782</guid>
		<description>&quot;MW: Hentgen wasn’t one of the guys who immediately popped into my head, unfortunately. He should have. I blame it on it being comment #232.&quot;

Fair enough, you&#039;re a popular guy these days. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;MW: Hentgen wasn’t one of the guys who immediately popped into my head, unfortunately. He should have. I blame it on it being comment #232.&#8221;</p>
<p>Fair enough, you&#8217;re a popular guy these days. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bernard Singh</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32721</link>
		<dc:creator>Bernard Singh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 15:50:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32721</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the FYI on Otis Nixon Mike, much appreciated!!

MW:  No problem, though there wasn&#039;t much &quot;I&quot; there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the FYI on Otis Nixon Mike, much appreciated!!</p>
<p>MW:  No problem, though there wasn&#8217;t much &#8220;I&#8221; there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Norm</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32683</link>
		<dc:creator>Norm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 12:11:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32683</guid>
		<description>Mike, re Post #74 -- Red&#039;s comment was &quot;they only needed one win out of their last six&quot;, and your response was &quot;they only needed one of their last three, but they lost their last seven in a row&quot; 

HUH?? If they only needed one more win, then ANY ONE of the last seven would have worked.  How then does Red&#039;s comment require a correction?

To Post #156 -- you didn&#039;t answer the (perhaps rhetorical) question &quot;when was Carlson&#039;s last good outing&quot; (I paraphrase).  How soon we fans forget!!!  Actually, Jesse had a 5 up 5 down outing just ONE night earlier, in the R. Romero start.

One more point, re Accardo:  &quot;everyone&quot; wants him back, and I would agree, but ONLY IF he has regained his splitter.  And from his numbers (ok, but not great) there is no way to tell one way or the other whether he has.  You can&#039;t tell from the box scores what pitches he is throwing. Since the effectiveness of that particular pitch is so critical, I think we simply have to allow the Jays&#039; brain trust to decide when to bring him up (if at all).

MW:  Only the first and the last three of the seven would have worked, because those wins would also have meant a Detroit loss.  Even then, if they&#039;d beaten Detroit once over that last week, they&#039;d only have forced a one-game playoff for the division.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike, re Post #74 &#8212; Red&#8217;s comment was &#8220;they only needed one win out of their last six&#8221;, and your response was &#8220;they only needed one of their last three, but they lost their last seven in a row&#8221; </p>
<p>HUH?? If they only needed one more win, then ANY ONE of the last seven would have worked.  How then does Red&#8217;s comment require a correction?</p>
<p>To Post #156 &#8212; you didn&#8217;t answer the (perhaps rhetorical) question &#8220;when was Carlson&#8217;s last good outing&#8221; (I paraphrase).  How soon we fans forget!!!  Actually, Jesse had a 5 up 5 down outing just ONE night earlier, in the R. Romero start.</p>
<p>One more point, re Accardo:  &#8220;everyone&#8221; wants him back, and I would agree, but ONLY IF he has regained his splitter.  And from his numbers (ok, but not great) there is no way to tell one way or the other whether he has.  You can&#8217;t tell from the box scores what pitches he is throwing. Since the effectiveness of that particular pitch is so critical, I think we simply have to allow the Jays&#8217; brain trust to decide when to bring him up (if at all).</p>
<p>MW:  Only the first and the last three of the seven would have worked, because those wins would also have meant a Detroit loss.  Even then, if they&#8217;d beaten Detroit once over that last week, they&#8217;d only have forced a one-game playoff for the division.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terry Bradley</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32661</link>
		<dc:creator>Terry Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 04:40:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32661</guid>
		<description>Hey Mike, never miss the shows (game day and weekly), and love the blog. Glad your head is okay!

Nice bounce back by the Jays tonight, great to see some two out hitting with RISP.

&quot;MW: That’s a pretty strong starting five. I might sneak a Cone or a Clancy in there over Clemens just because he’s Clemens.&quot; (post 232)

Clancy? Really? Before Hentgen? (&#039;96 &quot;I&#039;ve got late hard break on all of my pitches&quot; Hentgen, not &#039;04 &quot;I&#039;m throwing beach balls&quot; Hentgen)

Someone called in tonight and asked why teams are better at home, and I thought that your response was exactly right, especially with regards to teams building their teams around their parks. If a team is torn between signing one of two players, the smart ones will take the park into account. Or in the Yankees case, build the park to suit your players (Ruth&#039;s short porch in right). There is a long list of left handed power hitting Yankees that took full advantage. 

There was originally a paragraph here where I took a shot at Ryan, but I erased it because as much as I&#039;ve been one of his biggest critics in the past (I even sank so low as to refer to him as &quot;BJ Koch&quot; recently), I&#039;ve come to realize that I feel bad for the guy. I can&#039;t think of anything more difficult for a pro athlete than to struggle like he has this year and then to lose the closer spot (for the time being, at least). I have to give him credit for embracing his new role with a positive attitude in what must be a difficult time for him. I don&#039;t know if he has a future with this team, but I wish him the best of luck.

MW:  Hentgen wasn&#039;t one of the guys who immediately popped into my head, unfortunately.  He should have.  I blame it on it being comment #232.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Mike, never miss the shows (game day and weekly), and love the blog. Glad your head is okay!</p>
<p>Nice bounce back by the Jays tonight, great to see some two out hitting with RISP.</p>
<p>&#8220;MW: That’s a pretty strong starting five. I might sneak a Cone or a Clancy in there over Clemens just because he’s Clemens.&#8221; (post 232)</p>
<p>Clancy? Really? Before Hentgen? (&#8217;96 &#8220;I&#8217;ve got late hard break on all of my pitches&#8221; Hentgen, not &#8217;04 &#8220;I&#8217;m throwing beach balls&#8221; Hentgen)</p>
<p>Someone called in tonight and asked why teams are better at home, and I thought that your response was exactly right, especially with regards to teams building their teams around their parks. If a team is torn between signing one of two players, the smart ones will take the park into account. Or in the Yankees case, build the park to suit your players (Ruth&#8217;s short porch in right). There is a long list of left handed power hitting Yankees that took full advantage. </p>
<p>There was originally a paragraph here where I took a shot at Ryan, but I erased it because as much as I&#8217;ve been one of his biggest critics in the past (I even sank so low as to refer to him as &#8220;BJ Koch&#8221; recently), I&#8217;ve come to realize that I feel bad for the guy. I can&#8217;t think of anything more difficult for a pro athlete than to struggle like he has this year and then to lose the closer spot (for the time being, at least). I have to give him credit for embracing his new role with a positive attitude in what must be a difficult time for him. I don&#8217;t know if he has a future with this team, but I wish him the best of luck.</p>
<p>MW:  Hentgen wasn&#8217;t one of the guys who immediately popped into my head, unfortunately.  He should have.  I blame it on it being comment #232.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bernard Singh</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32659</link>
		<dc:creator>Bernard Singh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 04:12:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32659</guid>
		<description>Mike,

Do you know what happened to Otis Nixon tonight? I thought he was supposed to be here for Flashback Fridays.

MW:  Something did happen that kept him from attending, but they didn&#039;t tell us what it was.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike,</p>
<p>Do you know what happened to Otis Nixon tonight? I thought he was supposed to be here for Flashback Fridays.</p>
<p>MW:  Something did happen that kept him from attending, but they didn&#8217;t tell us what it was.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wyatt Bailey</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32658</link>
		<dc:creator>Wyatt Bailey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 03:57:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32658</guid>
		<description>“MW: Minnesota’s home/road splits are most assuredly an anomaly, caused by small sample size. And it’s a lot easier to get what you want when you ask nicely.”

Ok. Sorry Tsar Mike and un-rememebered-named producer. Please, I beg of thee, do not put me against a break.

MW: See, that’s not the way to do it.&quot;

Come on Mike, loosen up a little. You know I&#039;m just joking with you. I really do like your producer, he was very kind, and I like your manner towards me on the radio even though you probably despise me. I also know you hate that I make a bunch of messages in a row. And for that, I really do apologize, I just get caught up sometimes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“MW: Minnesota’s home/road splits are most assuredly an anomaly, caused by small sample size. And it’s a lot easier to get what you want when you ask nicely.”</p>
<p>Ok. Sorry Tsar Mike and un-rememebered-named producer. Please, I beg of thee, do not put me against a break.</p>
<p>MW: See, that’s not the way to do it.&#8221;</p>
<p>Come on Mike, loosen up a little. You know I&#8217;m just joking with you. I really do like your producer, he was very kind, and I like your manner towards me on the radio even though you probably despise me. I also know you hate that I make a bunch of messages in a row. And for that, I really do apologize, I just get caught up sometimes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FLIPPER</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32657</link>
		<dc:creator>FLIPPER</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 03:53:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32657</guid>
		<description>Hi MIKE 227 responces ,Ya responded to everybody and yet the Leaf blog is at the top..  What do they do with that blog.. Talk about how the Leafs are doing on the course..  Anyway Mike. I was wondering what your take is on Scott Richmond going to the bull-pen..  Obviously he would be a shoe in for long relief but I think he deserves better..  Do you think they are going to plug him back in the starting roll?  You might have already adressed this question with 227 responces  but I would like to know your take on it ..   Great job Mike..

MW:  Richmond is only in the bullpen because he&#039;s the 5th starter and they don&#039;t need him to start until next Saturday.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi MIKE 227 responces ,Ya responded to everybody and yet the Leaf blog is at the top..  What do they do with that blog.. Talk about how the Leafs are doing on the course..  Anyway Mike. I was wondering what your take is on Scott Richmond going to the bull-pen..  Obviously he would be a shoe in for long relief but I think he deserves better..  Do you think they are going to plug him back in the starting roll?  You might have already adressed this question with 227 responces  but I would like to know your take on it ..   Great job Mike..</p>
<p>MW:  Richmond is only in the bullpen because he&#8217;s the 5th starter and they don&#8217;t need him to start until next Saturday.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg W</title>
		<link>http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32655</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 03:46:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/05/27/rock-freaking-bottom/#comment-32655</guid>
		<description>First question is... what&#039;s your record # of comments actually posted on one blog?

Second, because I&#039;m happy we won, but it doesn&#039;t really mean any more that any one of the nine prior losses, a totally irrelevant question...

Who would you pick as your all time Jay starting rotation, based on their performance in the Blue Jay uniform?

My five are, in no particular order, Stieb, Key, Halladay, Clemens, Guzman.

Thanks for all your time and hard work Mike!

MW:  That&#039;s a pretty strong starting five.  I might sneak a Cone or a Clancy in there over Clemens just because he&#039;s Clemens.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First question is&#8230; what&#8217;s your record # of comments actually posted on one blog?</p>
<p>Second, because I&#8217;m happy we won, but it doesn&#8217;t really mean any more that any one of the nine prior losses, a totally irrelevant question&#8230;</p>
<p>Who would you pick as your all time Jay starting rotation, based on their performance in the Blue Jay uniform?</p>
<p>My five are, in no particular order, Stieb, Key, Halladay, Clemens, Guzman.</p>
<p>Thanks for all your time and hard work Mike!</p>
<p>MW:  That&#8217;s a pretty strong starting five.  I might sneak a Cone or a Clancy in there over Clemens just because he&#8217;s Clemens.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
