In this week’s Metro column, I boldly made the following claim:

[Manny] Ramirez is arguably the best active player to have never received an MVP award. He’s certainly the best active player to be so consistently snubbed; of similar players, he has the fewest top-five finishes without ever finishing in the top two.

But of course, Manny is far from the only great active player to never take home the trophy, and while I was cogitating about this column, I got to talking about these players with my co-conspirators here at UmpBump. We bandied about some other names of active players who have, amazingly enough, never won an MVP: Gary Sheffield and Jim Thome lead the pack, in my mind, and you could make a case for perennially beloved also-rans Derek Jeter and David Ortiz as well.

Sure, there are fantastic younger guys who haven’t won the trophy yet. But when it comes to the David Wrights, Chase Utleys, and Hanley Ramirezes of baseball, one can say, “Hey, he’s still young.” And there are deserving players who are always a long shot to take home the hardware simply by virtue of their position; most pitchers and designated hitters suffer this fate. (I’ve included Ortiz here on my list of snubs because a) yes, I’m a Red Sox fan and this is my list, you jerks and b) he’s finished in the top 5 of the MVP balloting for the past four years running—a neat trick for any player, even more so considering the entrenched bias among many members of the BBWAA against voting for a full-time DH.)

But with the Sheffs and the Mannys and the Thomes, it’s a different story. You can’t necessarily point to a certain year and say, “This is the year he deserved to win,” but you’re still surprised to learn he’s never gotten the trophy.

Of active players, who do you think is the biggest MVP snub? Anyone going to take a stand for Todd Helton? Or Mike Piazza, still technically active? Any secret Carlos Delgado fans out there?

Who gets your vote?

more at twiigs.com…

Announcers usually call Okajima a “deceptive” pitcher, partially because of his oddball delivery—which, as you know if you’ve ever watched any nationally broadcast Red Sox games over the past year, involves a crazy head-dip that just sends Joe Morgan, Joe Buck, Tim McCarver, and Jon Miller into a veritable tizzy.

But there’s another deceptive aspect about him this season—his numbers.

Yesterday, I was watching the game at the gym when bench coach Brad Mills, acting in Terry Francona’s stead, brought Okajima in with the bases loaded and two out. I wondered at this, since Okajima has allowed so many inherited runners to score already this season. In fact, I more than wondered. I lamented. Out loud, right there on the elliptical machine, in front of everyone. And lo and behold, on the second pitch of his outing, Okie gave up a grand slam and, consequently, the lead.

Bizarrely, Boston has continued to use Okajima in these sorts of situations even though he has struggled in them pretty much all year. He comes in, lets everyone else’s runners score, and then promptly gets out of the inning. But of course, due to the wacky rules of earned runs, his 0.93 ERA does not reflect these struggles.

He’s had 14 inherited runners to deal with this season—already half as many as he dealt with in all of last season. Eleven of the 14 have scored. That’s the worst mark in the majors. (Last year, just 4 of the 28 inherited runners scored.) Yet his stats are all pretty much in line with last year’s performance—and in several cases, this year’s numbers actually look better. The one exception? He’s giving up more flyballs:

Disturbingly, that freakishly low BABIP suggests to me that the situation should, by rights, be even worse. [Shudder]

So have hitters finally figured him out? Is the deceptive delivery no longer deceiving anyone? I don’t think you can say that, based on his performance or on his numbers, though that is clearly the worry in the Hub today. The fact is that after Okajima lets those inherited runners score, he promptly goes back to being a badass. Guys don’t have WHIPs of 0.88 when they’ve been figured out. If Okajima’s secret had been discovered, why would his batting average skyrocket from .143 when he’s leading off the inning to .280 when there are runners on? Why would the first batter he faces reach—as has happened in 7 of 18 chances (hat tip to Nick Cafardo)—and the rest go down quietly? If opposing hitters had really figured him out, wouldn’t they be lighting him up across the board? It doesn’t make sense.

I’m not sure what’s wrong with Okajima and his okie dokie, or why the problem only seems to happen with runners on base. But until someone figures it out, I wish the Red Sox would go back to bringing Okajima at the start of the 8th instead of midway through the 7th. It would make this song a lot more fun to sing along to.

Did he just do that?!?

Yes, he did!!!!!

It’s been a morning of giggles this morning here at UmpBump HQ as we try to digest Manny Ramirez’s ridiculous, hilarious, awesome double play from yesterday’s game. The best part may actually be when Manny’s teammates gather ’round to watch the replay in the dugout, and Manny then performs a live reenactment of the now-famous high-five.

As Nick likes to say, Manny plays the game like a giddy five-year old. (Or sometimes an angry five-year old, such as a few innings after yesterday’s catch when he angrily tossed his helmet at the first base umpire, dreadlocks flying in rage.) And clearly, Manny’s defense is potent stuff, because the baseball blogosphere is delightfully tipsy from contact with it this morning. Soxaholix reminds us that even when the team is on a four-game skid, “the glass is half Manny.” Gowanus Rotisserie breaks the play down into “the five stages of being awesome” (hat tip to The Joy of Sox for the link, who in turn called it the “ultimate Manny moment”). Sox and Dawgs has your top ten Manny moments and Babes Love Baseball calls it “Manny being Manny being Awesome.” Manny has often talked of his dream of winning what he sometimes calls the “Silver Glove.” He’s not shy about claiming he’s the best LF Boston has ever had, a claim Surviving Grady suggests he might want to consider retracting considering that Jim Rice is still a very, very large man.

But the most apt turn-of-phrase may be found in this article by Josh Alper for the FanHouse, presciently written earlier this week:

If the Gold Glove was an award for sheer entertainment value, Manny would have a dozen of them by now. Alas, the awards are supposed to be for fielding excellence. I know, I know, Rafael Palmeiro and Derek Jeter have won them but two wrongs do not make a winning argument for Manny.

They should come up with some kind of award for that throw he cut off in the outfield, though. After 100 years it’s tough to do something in baseball that no one has ever seen, or even conceived, before.

“Something in baseball that no one has ever seen, or even conceived, before.” Yes, this is the only proper way to describe the contributions Manuel Aristides Ramirez makes to these Red Sox of Boston. Manny, may the Monster rise up to meet you, the wind be always at your back, may the sun shine warm upon your face, may soft rains fall when you want an off-day, and until you are ready to retire, may Theo always pick up your option.

Given how clueless he comes across as on just about everything else, President Bush gives surprisingly cogent and knowledgeable answers whenever he is asked a baseball question.

Witness his answer in an interview with Politico.com/Yahoo (his first ever “interview with the internet”), when asked which position player and which starting pitcher he would pick first if he were starting a team, everyone was a free agent, and he had an unlimited budget.

I’ll give you three guesses for each player, and I bet you’d be wrong on all six tries.

The President’s answers? Chase Utley and Roy Halladay.

What mades these answers so surprising/unsettling/super creepy for me is that those are exactly the two answers I would have given, and that those are almost certainly not the kind of super big name answers the vast majority of baseball fans or mainstream analysts would give.

Especially Roy Halladay. I mean, he pitches in Canada. Do you think Joe Morgan even knows who Roy Halladay is?

But Utley too. Sure, Utley is a rising star, and he’s coming on strong in a big way this year, but I don’t think we can really say he is a household name yet, at least outside of Philly. Fantasy geeks might pick Utley, but I can guarantee you 99 percent of the mainstream media would pick someone else, and 98 percent of those picks would be Pujols, A-Rod, or Jeter.

But perhaps even more unsettling than Bush giving such intelligent answers is the fact that he actually backs up his answers with not-nonsensical reasons. Seeing Bush support claims with actual logic and reasoning was quite a shock to my system, and I’m not sure if I’ve recovered yet.

Let’s look at the transcript (a video is also available on Yahoo Sports):

Q: Mr. President, I know you’re going to hate this, but I’m hoping that we may twist your arm and talk about baseball for just a moment. (Laughter.) Mr. President, you’re a Major League Baseball team owner again. Everyone is a free agent. You have a Yankees-like wallet. Who is your first position player? Who’s your pitcher?

THE PRESIDENT: That’s a great question. I like Utley from the Philadelphia Phillies. He’s a middle infielder, which is always — you know, they say you have to have strength up the middle — there’s nothing better than having a good person up the middle that can hit. And Roy Halladay from the Toronto Blue Jays is a great pitcher. He’s a steady guy, he burns up innings. And I’m sure I’m leaving some other good ones out, but those –

Q: We thought you were going to go A-Rod, Josh Beckett.

THE PRESIDENT: Josh Beckett is good, yes, he’s real good, too. I mean, look, that’s a tough question to answer on the fly like this, Michael.

Here we can clearly see that the president follows the game quite closely. He has some idea that Utley’s marginal value compared to other middle infielders makes him perhaps the most valuable player in the game right now, and that Roy Halladay has been a tremendously reliable starter whose true greatness has been obscured by pitching in Toronto.

We also see that the interviewer has know idea who either player is, the way he is taken aback, and doesn’t really know what to say other than to suggest the two most obvious names known to any person living in the East Coast Bias Zone (in fact, the actual transcript from Politico.com misspells Utley’s name as “Ottley”).

At first I was tempted to assume that Bush must have had the questions in advance and was pre-coached on the answers, as he so often is for actual political issues. But then I realized that no populistic, politically-minded answers-coach would ever tell the President to pick Utley and Halladay.

Whatever else you want to say about our President, you have to give him his due: the man really does know baseball. Now if only he knew anything about anything else.

Today the Arizona Daily Star has a lovely little feature on Bill Hohn, who has umpired major-league baseball games for 18 seasons and is now rehabbing in Tucson after injuries stalled his career.

From the Daily Star:

In the last two years, he has had three surgeries to repair herniated disks in his lower back and the sciatic nerve in his left hip. Hohn, a 52-year-old native of Butler, Pa., missed most of 2007.

During his comeback, he has spent the last seven days on a rehabilitation stint at Tucson Sidewinders games. He is expected to return to the major leagues Friday in Atlanta.

Hohn’s is a feel good story. But his is a look bad face. Behold:

I don’t know what is going on here. It’s more than a mustache, but less than a Fu Manchu. And apparently this is nothing new:

I suppose he has good reason grow the ’stache. After all, umps need to look tough. If I was an ump, I’d want to look like as much of a hard ass as possible. But somebody needs to tell Hohn that the the secret to a successful Fu Manchu is uniformity. The hairs above the lip and along the sides of the mouth need to be the same length. This party on top (lip) and business on the sides look is not good.

Pay attention, Bill. This is how it’s done:

Ahhh. Now that’s some truly fortunate facial hair.

I have a question.

What’s with all the unassisted triple plays these days?

When I was a kid, literally for YEARS we all knew that there were only 8 unassisted triple plays in more 150 years of baseball history, and that that number was unlikely to change much any time soon, because they were so rare. But since the last time the Dodgers won a World Series (with which I mark the end of my innocent childhood) the total number of unassisted triple plays has nearly doubled from 8 to 14.

Of course, this may just be a fluke, as the play is still extremely rare.

From 1876, which is as far back as we have reliable records, until 1909, there were no unassisted triple plays. Zero.

After Neil Ball turned the first one ever in 1909, there was another 11 years of silence. But then suddenly in the 1920s, like flappers, the jitterbug, and government corruption, the triple play’s popularity skyrocketed, and it seemed like everyone was doing it. Indeed, in just 7 years from the end of 1920, when Bill Wambsganss turned his famous unassisted triple in game 5 of the World Series, until 1927, major league ball players turned SIX unassisted triple plays.

They then proceeded to show just how amazing this actually was by turning only a single unassisted triple play in the next SIXTY-FIVE years.

We finally did get two in the 1990s - Mickey Morandini in 1992 to break a 34-year lull, and John Valentin just two years later in 1994.

But now we enter the 2000s, and the unassisted triple play is suddenly all the rage again. In this decade alone there have already been four of them turned, including Asdrubal Cabrerra’s last night.

Of course, in all likelihood, this is probably a fluke, but still, I can’t help but wonder if there might be structural differences in the game today which account for the uptick.

Is it because guys take more walks and thus “clog up the basepaths”, making it more likely? Is it because line drive percentages are higher? Is it because back in the day there were more Ichiro-like slap hitters, who would deliberately go for a ground ball or a fly ball in those situations, rather than just letting rip with a line drive toward second base? Is it just that there are so many more expansion teams now, so that there are just so many more innings played and thus so many more chances to hit into one?

Come to think of it, if we consider the eras in which the most triple plays happened, those two eras roughly correspond to the most offense-oriented eras in baseball history - the “lively ball” era of the 1920s, and the current era I like to call the “juiced ball” era. So maybe that is your answer right there.

In any case, it’s a ridiculously amazing play - still rarer than a perfect game.

You gotta feel for the guy.

Today, it was announced that the San Diego Padres released center fielder Jim Edmonds. The team had stumbled out of the gate in 2008 to a thus-far-disappointing 12-23 record and felt that they needed to make a change.

Prior to the season, we had speculated that Edmonds would be a “boom-or-bust” addition to the Pads, and clearly, the organization already labeled him the latter. Edmonds was batting an abysmal .178/.265/.233 line prior to today. Admittedly, I am yet to see a San Diego game this year, but the article (linked above) mentions how it wasn’t just poor offense that did him in:

While Edmonds once made spectacular catches while with the Cardinals and Angels, he clearly lost a step or two and simply couldn’t catch up to fly balls.

Again, not having seen Edmonds play, it’s difficult for me to comment much on this, except to say that I’m sure his decline on defense is made far more visible by the very spacious outfield at Petco Park.

For those of you now wondering if your team should sign Jim, there are things to note:

PRO: Edmonds has a .227 BABiP this year, which is well below his career norm (more in the .300 area). So there’s room for improvement.
CON: His BABiP has been decreasing annually since 2004, so it might not be much of a fluke.
PRO: His line-drive rate is as good, if not better than, his prime, so when he makes contact, it’s been solid a good portion of the time.
CON: He’s also making contact on fewer occasions. His strikeout rate is at 23.3%, which is higher than his career norm. And he always was very strike-out prone to begin with. Combine this with a BABiP trending down, and it’s a big warning sign.
PRO: But he’s back to seeing 4.2 pitchers per plate appearance! The old, more patient Jim is back!
CON: Despite this, he’s still not walking as often as he used to. Besides, when you’re batting .178, it doesn’t matter much anyway. You’re still an offensive liability.
PRO: But the glove! THE GLOVE! In a smaller outfield, he can still be a good defensive player, right?
CON: Probably not. At least not in center field. Even last year, playing in Busch Stadium which has much less space in center towards the corners, it was becoming clear that those Gold Gloves were a thing of the past.

So is this it for Jim? Knowing what I mentioned above, would you still take a chance on him?

Earlier this week I introduced you to Hoppy Papi, my new homebrew named after Boston’s favorite slugger. I showed off some of my beer label designs and encouraged you to send in your designs.

Loyal reader Wes went a step farther. He sent in a design for a Hoppy Papi pint glass. Behold:

Note that Papi is actually hopping in the photo.

This video is from Tuesday night’s Cardinals-Rockies game, which the Redbirds won 6-5.

Chipper Jones is on fire.

From the good people at the Canadian Press:

Jones hit .410 in April - an average for the month topped by only one player in the last 10 years: Barry Bonds hit .472 in April, 2004. Vladimir Guerrero also hit .410 in the opening month in 2000.

As if to make the point his stellar April was no fluke, Jones has pushed his major league-leading average to .425 for the Braves, who were off Monday and open a home series against San Diego on Tuesday.

Actually, after tonight’s two-for-four outing, Jones is hitting .429.

Bearing in mind that it’s early – very, very early – in the season, let’s take a moment to talk about Chipper Jones and his pursuit of history.

But first, a little background.

Since Ted Williams hit .406 in 1941, nobody has hit .400. Five guys have had 500+ plate appearances and hit over .375. Stan Musial hit .376 in 611 at bats in 1948. Ted Williams hit .388 in 420 at bats in 1957. Rod Carew hit .388 in 616 at bats in 1977. George Brett hit .390 in 449 at bats in 1980. And Larry Walker hit .379 in 438 at bats in 1999.

Last September, Vegas Watch (one of my favorite blogs) did a post listing the ten guys most likely to hit .400. Miguel Cabrera topped the list, followed by Albert Pujols, Vlad Geurerro and Matt Holliday.

Chipper Jones didn’t crack the top ten.

I emailed Vegas Watch’s editor to ask why. Here’s what he had to say:

The only reason he wasn’t on the list was his age. It was the guys who had the best chance of hitting .400 over their career, so that had a large effect. Also, he hit .375 in September; when I did the post, I had his three year average at .318.

That’s fair enough, I guess. A little agist, maybe. But reasonable.

Earlier today, I sent out an email to the Umpbump staff asking for their feelings about Chipper’s pursuit of .400. Here’s what Paul emailed back:

hitting .400 is now a near impossibility. chipper’s always been a high babip guy, but come on. his pitchers per plate appearance is down this year, so it’s not that he’s being more selective either. his line drive rate is a little higher than usual, but not high enough to think that the babip even has a chance of staying so high. with that said, it’s worth noting that he’s striking out a lot less than usual - and he never was a strikeout guy to begin with - which, if this continues, could very well result in a career high for batting average for him (although topping last year is really, really, really hard to do).

i think i’ve said this before, but baseball isn’t the same anymore. teams have far too much statistics on hitters’ tendencies, defensive positioning has gotten too advanced, and pitchers have become far too good for a guy to be able to hit .400 any more.

Of course, Paul is right. Hitting .400 in 2008 is a lot harder than hitting .400 in 1941. And Paul isn’t the only one who thinks so. Here’s what George Brett had to say about today’s more specialized bullpens, and the impact that has on hitters:

“Taking nothing away from Ted Williams or any of the players that have hit .400 in the past, like Rogers Hornsby, but back then, starters would pitch nine innings practically every game,” Brett said. “Teams had four starters along with guys in the bullpen, but the reason they were in the bullpen was because they weren’t good enough to be starters.”

So with all that said, what do you think, blogosphere? Will Chipper hit .400?

Personally, I think he’s going to do it.

I think Chipper is going to hit .400 because he has health, he has motivation and, frankly, he’s just that good.

Let’s start with health. For a while there Chipper was developing a reputation as another J.D. Drew, a guy who couldn’t stay on the field, who found new ways to hurt himself weekly. But last year Jones played in 134 games, his most since 2004. Moreover, he seems to have totally overcome the foot injuries that plagued him prior to 2007.

As for motivation, consider this: Last month I wrote a post asking which Braves belong in the Hall of Fame. 184 people voted and Chipper got 72 percent of the vote. This is pretty consistent with the public perception that Jones is a borderline Hall of Fame candidate. Now ask yourself this: would hitting .400 change that perception? Absolutely. Hitting .400 would stamp Chipper’s HOF ticket. And you better believe he knows it.

Finally, Chipper is good enough to hit .400. So far this season the switch hitter is hitting .440 against righties and .400 against lefties.

Here’s what AJC beat writer Dave O’Brien had to say about Hoss in an April 18 blog post:

In his past 200 games, since June 24, 2006, Chipper has hit .358 (273-for-763) with 61 doubles, 6 triples, 52 homers, 167 RBI, 113 walks, 104 strikeouts, a .437 OBP and a .658 slugging percentage.

And in 102 road games during that period he’s hit .376 (153-for-407) with 36 doubles, 5 triples, 29 homers, 86 RBI, a .445 OBP and a .703 slugging percentage. That’s a 1.148 OPS in his past 102 road games. Astounding.

Hoss is astounding. And the truly scary thing is, at the age of 36, he seems to be getting better.

That’s why I think Chipper’s going to be the first player since Ted Williams to bat .400. Because I don’t think his hot start is an anomaly. I think he has elevated his game. This isn’t a streak. This is a state of being.

That aforementioned Vegas Watch post started like this:

There is no such thing as a .400 hitter. Well, at least there never has been. People have hit .400, of course, but that’s always been something of a fluke. This is evident in the fact that Ty Cobb has the highest career BA ever, at “just” .366.

Like Cobb, Chipper isn’t a career .400 hitter.

But I think this season, Larry “Chipper” “Don’t call me ‘Hoss’” Jones will get there. And it won’t be a fluke.

Right now, he’s just that good.