FanHouse

Collateral Damage: Players Whose Value Just Changed

Matthew Greber — 2008-09-11T00:48:00 00:00

Filed under: NFL Waiver Wire, Fantasy Football, NFL Injury Report

The story of Week One was, of course, all the players who got injured. That only increased later in the week when the Saints announced that Marques Colston would miss a month with an injured thumb. If you've paid a whit of attention, you know that Matt Cassel is the new QB in New England, while Kerry Collins regains a starting gig in Tennessee.

But there are other players whose value just changed with these injuries as well. They're not replacing the player in question, but the loss of that guy changes their own value - some in good ways, others in bad. Let's take a look.

Tom Brady's knee: And sure, Cassel gets himself a gig. But another first round fantasy pick also loses a decent amount of value in Randy Moss, who will now be trying to catch passes from a guy who has never had a starting job since high school. Wes Welker, ranked at or near the top-10 in WR himself, also loses value - though presumably less because he tends to run shorter routes that should be easier on what amounts to a rookie QB.

Vince Young's knee: Unless you play in the deepest of leagues, you don't own, nor did you really even consider, starting WRs Justin Gage and Justin McCareins. In fact, you may have been unaware that starters share the same first name. In truth, Collins is a better quarterback than the injured Young, so the two Justins both get a bump, albeit a small one in value. At RB, Chris Johnson's value spiked up with his performance in Week One, and there's no reason for that to come down without Young behind center. LenDale White also probably deserves to get a bit more love, since there should continue to be plenty of carries to go around.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Prepare The Eulogy: The Back-to-Back Running Back Strategy Is Dead.

Matthew Greber — 2008-08-21T10:08:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: NFL Position Rankings, Fantasy Football

It's a tried-and-true philosophy, one that has guided more fantasy football drafts than perhaps all other strategies combined: Take running backs with your first two picks.

A solid running back is the secret sauce to fantasy football - it's truly hard to win with problems at that position, while you can go a bit more low rent with the rest of your team. While there have always been teams that will grab an elite QB or WR in those first two rounds, it's the strategy where it's hardest to go wrong. (Unless you grab guys like Anthony Thomas or Reuben Droughns, two guys who went in the top two rounds in drafts of years past to the chagrin of their owners.)

Well, like many of the theories you heard about growing up, it turns out to not be true. At least not for this season.

In fact, it's a fair bet that close to half the teams in most leagues won't take their second running back until the third round - or later.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

From First to Worst: What Is the Worst Draft Pick in Fantasy Football?

Matthew Greber — 2008-08-18T20:43:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: NFL Position Rankings, Fantasy Football

Here at the Fantasy Fanhouse, we do everything we can to help you prepare for your fantasy draft. (And once your league does their draft, there's no better place to host it than fleaflicker.com.)

A little over a month ago, we had ourselves a Fantasy Roundtable about what pick you'd actually prefer in this years draft. Looking over that, I don't think anyone said anything they yet regret (though, undoubtedly, it's just a matter of time).

The general consensus was that ideally one would get either a top-three pick, or work backwards from the 10th pick to capitalize on getting a higher second-round pick.

But what's the flip side of that question?

That is, what's the worst draft pick position?

In my mind, it's a no-brainer that sixth is the worst place to be.

But, you may say, that's crazy talk. With the sixth pick, you can grab either one of the top five running backs (LaDainian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, Brian Westbrook, Joseph Addai and Steven Jackson, possibly but not necessarily in that order) or the top at their positions, Tom Brady or Randy Moss.

The drop off in all of those positions is notable after those top seven guys, so locking down one of them is a clear advantage.

Ah, but what really sets off a draft is the first two slots. And that's where drafting sixth really starts to sting.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Mistakes Were Made: Vince Young

Matthew Greber — 2008-08-01T01:51:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber Have you started prepping for your draft yet? Have you started a free fantasy football league yet? If so, Mistakes Were Made is a series that looks at prior drafts in order to not repeat the sins of the past. Previously, we examined why Shaun Alexander was so misread before last season's draft. Today, it's Tennessee Titans QB Vince Young.

Before the 2007 season started, nobody in the league had been upgraded as much as Titans QB Vince Young. In his rookie season of 2006, Young had ended on a high note. From Week 12 on, he had one terrible game and the rest ranged to very solid to spectacular.

Going into drafts, Young was being seriously touted. Many pundits ranked him solidly as a QB1, especially in twelve team leagues. At least one major publication had him ranked as the #8 quarterback overall. Instead, Young was barely usable as a QB2 most weeks and finished the season barely in the top-20 overall.

Why did people miss so badly? The answer is surprisingly simple: rushing touchdowns.

In 2006, Young scored seven times on the ground, masking his mere 12 TD through the air. Rushing touchdowns are notoriously hard to predict, even for bonafide running backs. To be worthy in anything but a TD-only league, a player has to be at least a semblance of a complete player. Last season, Young not only declined his passing touchdowns from twelve to just 9, he scored just three rushing TD. That's the same amount that the virtual statue Peyton Manning scored.

Part of the blame was the woeful offense of the Titans - it's hard to throw touchdowns to guys who can't get open. But fantasy pundits and owners blew it because they overlooked how fragile his 2006 statistics were. Luck plays a big part in all of sport - it's just important to recognize it when it's there.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Mistakes Were Made: Shaun Alexander

Matthew Greber — 2008-07-08T06:00:00 00:00

by Matthew GreberAs part of the preseason fantasy football preparation, we at the Fantasy Football FanHouse are looking at all angles. One of those, which doesn't always get acknowledged, is what we did WRONG last year, and how we can learn from that this year. There's an old saying about those who fail to learn from history are bound to ... well, do something.

As a preface, since entire articles about what any one of us did with our teams have limited appeal, when we write about mistakes "we" made, it's more of a comment on the consensus opinions from last year, and how they went off track. We're caling this feature Mistakes Were Made.

Take, for example, Shaun Alexander in last years draft. Just two years prior, in 2005, he'd had an MVP season with 1880 rushing yards, 28 - yes, 28 - touchdowns and was seen as one of the safest picks in all of fantasy. But in 2006, he fractured his foot (which is pretty important for a running back) and lived up to the Madden Curse, and posted a mere fraction of the stats his owners had paid for.

Then came last year's draft. What to make of him? Supposedly healed and free of any videogame related hexes, Alexander went in most drafts after other so-called locks like LaDanian Tomlinson, Larry Johnson, Steven Jackson and, occasionally, Joseph Addai. And his season turned out even worse than in 2006, causing the Seahawks to send the former MVP packing. Alexander still has no job as of this post.

So what can we learn? What information did we flat out ignore, or at least trivialize out of our decision making? (And let's just once again acknowledge the Madden Curse, and move on, okay?)

His age. Prior to the 2007 season, Alexander was 31, coming off his first major injury as a professional athlete. That's not a good age on a running back, and when we're talking about a running back's age, it's really the age on his legs. This was a back who had no less than 350 touches a season five years in a row, capped by a whopping 370 carries alone in 2005. That's a serious amount of wear-and-tear, and though Alexander had been solid, a crack in the matrix is all it takes.

His line. Some owners were openly concerned about the loss of left guard Steve Hutchinson who left for Minnesota. But many argued that one offensive lineman does not a blocking scheme make. Well, it definitely didn't help things.

His motivation. Look, I actually hate the whole, "He signed a big contract, he's not motivated any longer," or the flip side of gambling on a player looking for that free agent deal. But after you become the highest paid running back in the history of the NFL, one could argue that the hunger might be satiated just a bit.

So what's the takeaway here, aside from piling on a guy who doesn't have a fulltime job right now? Well, who are the candidates we could - and should - apply this logic to?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Fantasy Roundtable: What Pick Do You Want?

Matthew Greber — 2008-07-01T13:34:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Oakland

The Fantasy FanHouse team will occasionally debate pre-draft topics for your perusement, amusement and...something else that rhymes with those two words. Today's topic: If you could choose where you'd be drafting in a ten team league, which pick would you choose and why?

Matthew Greber: Alright, so let's start off at the point that was so ably teased by Snyder in the last Roundtable -- if you could choose what draft pick you had, which one would you take?

If folks don't mind, I'm going to suggest that we assume it's a 10-team league which seem to be the most prevalent.

We actually have had this rule in my main league for awhile -- or, we did. Folks with the #1 "pick" could then choose what draft pick they actually got. In practice, it pretty much went that the #1 guy would take the first pick, and so on down the ladder with very little variety. So, we scrapped it. But I'm thinking that if we still had it in place, that wouldn't be the same this year. At least it wouldn't be so for me.

Cause if I have my choice, sure -- I'll take LaDanian Tomlinson with the first pick. But if someone else snags the #1 slot, I'd prefer #10 to anything else. I'll take two of Ryan Grant, Frank Gore, Clinton Portis, Marshawn Lynch there and be just as happy as I would be with LDT and whoever is left at #20 and #21.

Fantasy FanHouse: What say you?

Will Brinson: I want, in order: 1,2,3 and then 10,9,8; essentially I want top three or a bottom pick. I think deciding which of Jackson/Gore/Westbrook is too risky a proposition if I'm being handed the choice of where to start, especially considering it waters down your second round pick.

Hence, I either want top three (LT, Addai, Peterson) or I want to end up in the bottom. The end of the first round is especially attractive this year, because I think QBs and WRs will get taken in the first and second rounds more than normal (certainly Brady, Peyton and Moss will be gone by pick 10 or 12 and I've seen some places where Wes Welker -- WELKAH!!! -- went in the second round).

Because of that, I think that the end of round one affords you the ability to pick up two quality running backs -- Lynch and Grant are two I certainly have my eye on -- and still land a reasonably highly ranked WR at the end of the third round.

MG: I'd love to hear an argument for the middle of the round -- it's generally a nice place to be because you wait the least amount of time between picks. But yeah, unless I'm in a league where I specifically want to draft Peyton, Brady or Moss, I'm with you wanting the bookend picks. Grant and Lynch at the end, especially since it seems that Lynch isn't going to miss anytime despite being behind the wheel for a DUI hit and run, are really nice RBs to snare at the turn.

Welker going that early is awesome. Somehow I think that league is based in Bahstin. Off the top of my head I can name ten WR I'd want before him, but that's probably another roundtable topic.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Is Clayton Kershaw Hurt? Nope, He's Just Not As Good As You Thought.

Matthew Greber — 2008-06-26T18:09:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Los Angeles, Dodgers, NL West, Fantasy Baseball

In todays game against the Chicago White Sox, Dodgers rookie pitcher Clayton Kershaw was pulled after four innings after only giving up two runs.Kershaw only threw 69 pitches, hardly a yeoman-like effort.

So what's the deal? Is Kershaw hurt? Well, not as far as I can see - no reports suggests Kershaw was pulled for anything besides his ineffectiveness. 29 of those 69 pitches were balls, which isn't terrible but doesn't suggest he was locked into the zone.

Kershaw has yet to notch his first major league victory, and if you are a Dodger fan or in a fantasy league, that comes as a bit of a letdown considering the huge amount of hype surrounding the youngster. Sports talk radio, internet chats and office watercooler talk ask one question - is Kershaw a bust?

Hardly.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

The Stash Box: Cardinals Pitchers You Might Be Thinking About

Matthew Greber — 2008-06-13T00:50:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Cardinals, St. Louis, Fantasy MLB, MLB Waiver Wire

Let's face it -- one of the real joys of playing fantasy sports is the satisfaction of feeling smug, even superior, to the other folks in your league. Take, for instance, last season when a given owner tried to add Ryan Braun or Tim Lincecum prior to their call-up, only to find them sitting on your bench. There's no doubt that you felt pretty superior when they undoubtedly posted something like, "I can't believe he's already taken!" (Of course, this assumes a free agent world - otherwise, the same reaction would occur after you bid on that player weeks before anyone else did.)

On the other hand, this can go a bit too far sometimes. This year, I drafted Cameron Maybin, sure that I had myself a great combination of young speed and power - and then he got sent down by the Marlins, and it's far from clear when he'll be back in the bigs. I've stashed Colby Rasmus on a team where I have a bench that justifies it, even though it's not clear if he'll play before September.

Of course, this doesn't just apply to fresh young faces -- the savvy fantasy player can also pick up and stash a veteran who is out on the DL for a sizeable part of the year. Many folks have been holding on to Francisco Liriano for just this reason. (I'm of the theory that this is a waste since he'll be able to contribute very little when he does return.) But who else is likely out there on your free agent wire, potentially providing some free benefits to you down the stretch? Well, it turns out the Cardinals have a rash of pitchers with some prior success that should be hurling in the bigs sooner than later. Let's look at them and decide whether they are worth your bench space.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

What Happened to Bill Hall? And Why Should You Care?

Matthew Greber — 2008-05-07T19:38:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Brewers, Milwaukee, MLB Slump or Suck, Fantasy MLB

Milwaukee Brewers third baseman Bill Hall is the kind of player that drives fans - and fantasy owners - crazy. Is he the guy who cranked 35 HR in 2006, or the one who never hit more than 17 HR in any other season? Is he the crusher who swatted four HR by April 9, or the player who has only hit three more since then?

Moving back to third base gave Hall more fantasy value this year - in theory, at least. It turns out that, at least for NL-only leagues, the outfield is possibly shallower than third base. Regardless, owners who cackled with glee at the way Hall burst out of the gates are singing a decidedly different tune right now. Hall is batting just .217 and has not shown much plate discipline, adding only 12 walks the whole season.

So, what's the story here? Is Hall going to be a drag on your batting and/or on-base average, and even if that's the case, is he going to be able to justify it with quality power statistics?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Has Jonathan Sanchez Made a Believer Out of You?

Matthew Greber — 2008-05-01T13:49:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Giants, San Francisco, MLB New Studs, Fantasy MLB, MLB Waiver Wire

Here at the offices of "Stud or Shelton" we examine players who seem to be outperforming expectations to see if they are for real, or instead a flash in the pan like former Tigers hotshot Chris Shelton. As always, we apologize for rubbing salt in the wound of the Shelton family.

If the San Francisco Giants started the season with one strength, it was the starting pitching. Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum represent two of the most promising young starters in all of baseball and - at least before the season started - Barry Zito seemed like a decent #3 pitcher (even if he is the highest paid pitcher in the history of the game.) The rotation was set to be rounded out with Noah Lowry and Kevin Correia, but an injury to Lowry opened up a spot for Jonathan Sanchez.

Sanchez has absolutely taken advantage of this opportunity, though he got off to a rough start against the Brewers, allowing seven ER in just four IP. Owners who have hung tough with him since then have been quite happy, thanks, as Sanchez has only allowed another six earned runs in an additional 29.2 innings. Overall, this season he's 2-1, with 40 K against just 16 walks, with a 3.48 ERA and a respectable 1.28 WHIP. The kid has been dealing, that's for sure. The question is, is he a stud, or a flash in the pan?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Ryan Dempster - Stud or Shelton?

Matthew Greber — 2008-04-22T15:48:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Chicago, Cubs, Fantasy MLB, MLB Waiver Wire

If you have been playing fantasy baseball for any amount of time, you know all about Ryan Dempster, or as we call him in our league, the Dumptruck. Why give this guy such a negative nickname? Well ... it's because he's been less than reliable over his career.

Bouncing between closing and starting, Dempster has only been a draft day darling when he appeared to be able to provide the holiest of holy statistics, saves. (Indeed, he used to be Exhibit A on the "never pay for saves" theorem, because he generally paired his mediocre saves with a bloated WHIP and ERA.)

This season, manager Lou Piniella decided to move Dempster back into the rotation, which seemed largely a decision predicated on the best fit for Kerry Wood, plus the talented youngster Carlos Marmol. It did not seem a decision made because Dempster was an ace in the wings.

And yet ... he's burst out of the gates. He's 3-0 with a 3.00 ERA and a teensy 1.04 WHIP. In a league where a lot of actual aces are doing far less than this, is Dempster the kind of guy who you can count on for the whole season?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Nate McLouth - Stud or Shelton?

Matthew Greber — 2008-04-22T13:33:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Pirates, Pittsburgh, Fantasy MLB, MLB Waiver Wire

Stud or Shelton? is a look at some players outperforming expectations. It's a way of assessing whether the player in question can be expected to continue his hot pace, or whether he'll turn into Chris Shelton. (For those with short memories, Shelton was the Detroit Tigers player who hit 9 HR in the first 13 games of the season, making everyone salivate and proclaim him the next Babe Ruth. By July, he was back in Triple-A and is now back in the farm system ... of the Texas Rangers.)

Everyone is such a negative Nelly these days, wondering why supposed studs like David Ortiz, Prince Fielder and Andruw Jones are doing so poorly. And honestly speaking, we take care of a lot of that in our Slump or Suck section.

So, let's take a look at someone having a good start to the season instead.

For instance, Pirates outfielder Nate McLouth. Here's a guy who didn't win the starting centerfield job until the end of Spring Training, and probably wasn't drafted in many mixed fantasy leagues despite being pimped by more than a few fantasy pundits.

So far those folks (a group that did not include myself) are feeling pretty sharp: McLouth is a top-10 fantasy player overall, batting a crisp .382 (with a .453 OBP), knocking in 16 RBI in his first 19 games, and scoring the same amount of runs. This follows his 2007 season, where in just 329 at bats, he hit 13 HR and stole 22 bases.

So, is it a sign of things to come? Certainly, I haven't found anyone who thinks McLouth is going to stay a top-10 player all season. But will he be good enough all year long to warrant a starting spot in your outfield?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Dan Uggla: Slump or Suck?

Matthew Greber — 2008-04-17T02:00:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: MLB Slump or Suck, Fantasy MLB

I read on a chat recently (I wish I could take credit for it myself) someone talking about their fantasy team name: "The Good, The Bad and D. Uggla."

First off, great name. And secondly, it's pretty appropriate. Dan Uggla's owners have seen very little of the good, a great deal of the bad and no shortage of the ugly this year.

It's only Uggla's third season, but you thought you knew what you were getting when you drafted him -unspectacular average but a seeming lock for 30 HR from second base, a hard hole to fill.

But so far in April, Uggla has been hoping to hit above the Mendoza line (which should really be renamed the Bob Uecker line, since he had an exact career .200 average) and shown little power along the way. With runners in scoring position (and remember, he has Hanley Ramirez batting ahead of him), he has exactly one hit. Which provided half of the six RBI he has thus far.

It's only 13 games or so, but should you be worried about Danny Boy?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Quick Hits: Dave Roberts hits the DL, Giants Fans Rejoice?

Matthew Greber — 2008-04-11T12:53:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Giants, NL West, Fantasy Baseball, MLB Injuries, San Francisco

San Francisco Giants outfielder Dave Roberts landed on the DL this week, with a torn meniscus and "additional debris" behind his kneecap. I'm no doctor, but that doesn't sound good.

And indeed, Roberts could miss at least a few months with this injury. So, why would Giants fans be happy about this?

It's not any hostility towards Roberts, one of the few talented veterans left on the team, and by all accounts a really good guy. Though he's 35, he still has wheels, swiping 31 bags last year to go with his solid defense.

But there you have it -- he's 35.

Despite the fact that the Giants have won three straight games, no rational San Francisco fan thinks this is anything but a lost season. And well run teams do one thing in those kind of years -- find young talent to help them rebuild. So it was particularly galling for these fans to watch the season begin with youngsters like Fred Lewis, Rajai Davis and Eugenio Velez struggling to find regular playing time.
That all changes with Roberts taken out of the mix -- Lewis and Davis have gotten starts in the last three games (all wins for the Giants) and while they haven't played at an All-Star level, that's really not the point. At the end of the year, manager Bruce Bochy and GM Brian Sabean need to know what they have on their hands to help plan for 2009.

In the meantime, all three of these guys -- Davis, Lewis and especially Velez (who can play both outfield and infield slots) are not only helpful to the Giants, but to fantasy owners as well. They're all fast (Velez might be one of the fastest kids in the league) and stolen bases are a hot commodity.

So, in a season that Giants fans most likely will want to forget, there are a few positives -- though Dave Roberts might not agree.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Juan Pierre: Slump or Suck?

Matthew Greber — 2008-04-10T02:22:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Fantasy Baseball, MLB Slump or Suck

Before I get into specific player analysis, a brief explanation of what Slump or Suck is supposed to be. (First off, it's a cute name, isn't it? Everybody doesn't just love Raymond, they love alliteration. ) But to clear up any confusion, the purpose of the column is to look at players who are under performing their historical performance and/or the expectations most folks had for them this season. If I think he's going to right the ship, then he's just in a Slump. If, however, I think that what you see is what you're gonna get ... well, then the player Sucks.

Get it? Got it? Good.

Today's post looks at Dodgers outfielder Juan Pierre. Why do folks like Juan? (Hint: It's not just because his batting helmet always looks giant on his head, making him look like a toddler.)

Well, dig these numbers:

46-47-65-45-57-58-64

Yep, those are his stolen base numbers from the last seven seasons. That averages out to about 55 bags a season, which is indeed pretty darn good. We all know that Pierre has almost no power (and with 12 career homeruns, it's would be fair to remove the word 'almost' from that phrase), but the bags, runs scored (historically, a safe bet to exceed 90 R/season) and a career .301 batting average make him worth the power gap.

Don't they?

Hm.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Richie Sexson: Slump or Suck?

Matthew Greber — 2008-04-03T15:52:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Fantasy Baseball, MLB Slump or Suck

When you are a 6'8", 240 lb first baseman, people expect you to rake. A LOT. And for awhile, Richie Sexson did just that. He's hit over 30 HR five times, twice reaching 45 jacks in a single season. Just two years ago, he posted the following line:

.264 avg, .338 OBP, 34 HR, 107 RBI, 75 R and 1 SB.

Sure, it's not going to win you any fantasy MVP awards. Among other things, the On Base Percentage suggests a lack of plate discipline (yep, 154 strikeouts - and that's not a season high for him) and he's obviously not racing around the bases.

But 34 jacks is 34 jacks. If you are even remotely interested in Sexson, it's for power. Home runs are like a little pot of gold in fantasy baseball - they provide a hit, a run, an RBI and of course the tater itself. This is why Sexson is potentially so appealing.

BUT ... there's always a but, isn't there?

After all, through Wednesday's games, Sexson is hitting a robust .091 (1/11) and ... well, that's all you really need to know about that. He's being dropped in a bunch of leagues as a result.

This in part is because this isn't a new development. Last year, Sexson missed a bunch of games due to a balky hamstring, and this season he's already suffering from a sore shoulder. That ain't good for fielding or hitting.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Barry Zito: Slump or Suck?

Matthew Greber — 2008-04-02T02:08:00 00:00

by Matthew Greber

Filed under: Fantasy Baseball, MLB Slump or Suck

Let's be clear on one thing from the outset -- in early April, there's no such thing as a slump. The season just isn't long enough. And if you are just basing your opinions on how a player has done so far this season -- well, relax. It's just a game or two old. (In most cases, you definitely should not care a whit about Spring Training stats.)

But with others? Perhaps a slump has been going on since last year. Perhaps the player in question isn't in a slump so much as ... he sucks.

Perhaps the player in question is named Barry Zito. Now, I'm predisposed to like Zito -- he plays for my Giants, he seems generally like a nice, laid-back guy who "gets it," for what that's worth, and I'm always a sucker for someone with a big curveball.

But I'm here to say this: Barry Zito sucks.

Sure, you can take his Opening Day start apart in a million ways --- he didn't sniff 85 mph on the radar gun, he gave up three in the first, and generally looked like anything but an ace. Were that the only sin of Zito, all could and would be forgiven. But the reality is...he hasn't been right since joining the Giants before the 2007 season.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments