The Hound Of Ulster

My obsession with the judicial branch of the US Government continues - as does the battle over who will fill those positions. Hugh Hewitt REPORTS on what exactly we are seeing, and what we should expect to see in the future.

The second most important court in the country is thus two additional conservative jurists short because of GOP fecklessness and infighting.

And some people wonder why there is anger in the Republican base and among its legal elites with the GOP’s senate majority.

…

Sen. Chuck Schumer announced last week that there will be no more Supreme Court justices in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts or Justice Samuel Alito. “Judges are the most important,” he announced. “One more justice would have made it a 5-4 conservative, hard-right majority for a long time. That won’t happen.”

The categorization of four justices on the Supreme Court as “hard-right” is reckless and absurd, an obvious extension of Schumer’s radical and relentless assault on the right of Americans to hold traditional originalist views of the Constitution and its intended operation.

Schumer is a master propagandist, and he never lets up in his effort to define terms in ways favorable to his radical legal agenda of delegitimizing the historical mainstream of American legal theory.

It is also apparent from Schumer’s flat declaration that he has already resolved to block any Supreme Court nominee whom Bush sends forward.

…

“The Gang of 14″ forfeited not just the reputations of many fine men and women, it abandoned principle and the Constitution for political expedient.

Frist and McCain will see their presidential ambitions ruined in no small part because of the latter’s authorship of the deal and the former’s failure to stop it.

Expect the new leader of the Senate GOP to understand this, and the other would-be presidential candidates from among the Republicans — especially Sen. Sam Brownback if he runs, and Gov. Mitt Romney — to remind the GOP primary electorate over and over again how great was the defeat masked with the title “Gang of 14.”

I haven’t quite gotten myself up to Bench Memo’s level of optimism yet, for a couple of reasons. First, I have no confidence in the GOP’s willingness to take a tough stance on these. And second, the Dems are way better at getting what they want without paying the political consequences. That was true when they were in the minority, and I think it will still hold true - to at least some degree.

I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

THIS does very little to persuade me away from the idea that the nomination and approval of judges is of nearly absolute importance.

The NSA denied the request for documents, saying the records would jeopardize national security. The advocacy group argued that the law can’t be used to protect the government from disclosing details about illegal programs.

U.S. Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle disagreed, saying that even if the program is ultimately determined to be illegal, it doesn’t change the fact that the materials are classified and are not covered by the Freedom of Information Act.

Andrew, over at True Blue LA, is not at all PLEASED - as indicated by his slightly family-unfriendly title. Here is the crux of his argument:

Juan Pierre is the anti-sabermetric poster boy. Sure he has a high average and steals a lot, but the batting average is completely empty, Pierre has a career isolated patience of .047 and an isolated power of .074. Keep in mind he spent part of his career in Coors Field. And those steals? Pretty much worthless since he gets caught 26.3% of the time.

This means Juan Pierre’s value is entirely dependent on his batting average. If he hits .325, he’s an acceptable, possibly even above average center fielder. If he doesn’t, look out. And, since batting average happens to have large fluctuations from year, look for Pierre to have a couple really bad years, as opposed to the standard bad year he would put up, through no fault of his own.

Of course, since Pierre doesn’t walk, and his speed means he must be a lead off hitter, Pierre is the very definition of an out machine (he’s ranked 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 1st in outs over the last four years) Almost every G.M. has accepted the fact that outs are valuable, and shouldn’t be thrown away. Ned failed to get that memo, apparently. J.D. Drew left the Dodgers with a large on base percentage hole and 11 million dollars to fill the gap that he left. Ned Colletti has decided to take that money, and fill the hole with the biggest out maker in baseball.

Jon Weisman was BARELY more enthusiastic.

As a baserunner, he has a history of piling up stolen bases but at the cost of 20 caught stealings or so per year. Overall, he adds more value on the bases than he subtracts, but not nearly as much as his stolen bases alone might suggest.

And boy, does he need that value. He has never slugged more than .375 in a season. But he must consistently make that up in on-base percentage, right? Nope. His career mark is .350, which is barely adequate for someone who depends on that skill. Basically, in a year that his batting average is clicking, he will get on base at a decent rate. But the same could presumably be said of a career backup like Repko, who OBPed .345 in only his second major league season, injury-plagued at that.

…

Pierre is above-average in the narrow sense. And his annual salary may be in line with an above-average player in this 2006-2007 offseason. And perhaps this is the kind of security blanket Colletti needs to avoid giving away a valuable prospect and getting too little in return.

But it shouldn’t come to this. It shouldn’t require this. Pierre is not sufficiently above-average to make much of a positive difference in 2007, and with each passing year, the chances diminish exponentially. The best the Dodgers can hope for is that by 2011, if the Dodgers haven’t unloaded Pierre, baseball has become such a lucrative business that a contract with an average annual value of $9 million is fit for a spare part.

I don’t want people to think this signing is the end of the world. It doesn’t aggressively hurt the team. If Kemp comes out blasting the ball in AAA, he will find a spot in a major-league starting lineup. But it is a depressing, disturbing allotment of resources. Ever since he was hired, I have made a concerted effort to be open-minded about Colletti, but one can only be so forgiving. There simply has to be a better way to spend $45 million than on Juan Pierre.

But for some strange reason, I was not particularly upset - in fact, I even like the move in a smallish way. But I don’t like disagreeing with Weisman. So I set out on a journey through Pierre’s stats - and his potential Dodger uses - to determine if my optimism was part of my outlook on life, or if it had some concrete defenses.

I came up with a couple things, I think. The fact that his value is heavily reliant on batting average is just that: a fact. There is absolutely no way to get around that.  Same is true for his pedestrian stolen base percentage, his massive “out numbers,” his mostly competent defense, and his noodle arm.  (That’s an insult to noodles everywhere, actually.)

Add all those things together, and it really doesn’t look like something you’d want around for 5 years, right?  And especially not at $9M-per.  No wonder Andrew was ticked off.

But I do think there are a couple of things that need to be said. 

First off, Coors did not impact his power. Even in the bandbox, Pierre has minimal power. So I don’t think it’s really right to assume the same inflation in his numbers as we would of someone like Preston Wilson or Jeremy Burnitz. He had 39 extra-base hits his first full season, 26 his second, and then 36, 37, 34, and 48 in subsequent years.  Only the first two of those seasons were in Colorado.  So let’s dismiss that criticism.  He has almost no power, true - but his numbers are not inflated by their pre-humidor field.

Second, he plays a lot. Seems like a small thing, I know. But on this post-Drew, intra-Nomah roster, it’s not. Kent is likely to miss some time, and Nomar is absolutely certain to miss some significant chunk at one time or another.  Even if one were the make the convincing case that a partial season from Drew is better than a full season from Pierre, there is no denying the debilitating impact the loss of a starter can have on a team.  And that’s something that won’t show up in any one particular player’s numbers.  But it can really gut a team emotionally.

And lastly, he’s not leading off. I think a lot of these criticisms are connected to the fact that Pierre’s numbers clearly indicate that he is not a prototypical leadoff guy - unless you’re one of those really old-school folks that thinks all a leadoff guy needs is to be fast. His OBP is not high enough for a leadoff guy, and he doesn’t walk enough to significantly increase his on-base value. (Hence his heavy reliance on average.)

Put a guy like that at the top, and the damage he does will be only slightly less than the good he does.  But what about these facts?

He was the toughest batter in the National League to strike out and second in the league in steals and triples (13). He also played in 162 games for the fourth consecutive season, which makes him an upgrade from the 39-year-old Lofton.

Now, think of those skill sets behind Furcal.  He’s an excellent bunter, doesn’t strike out, and puts the ball in play.  I like that better.  So, I find myself in the strange position of liking the Pierre signing more since the Dodgers already have a leadoff guy than if we were looking for one.  Unlike Weisman (and definitely unlike Andrew) I think this actually makes things slightly better in the post-Drew era.  It doesn’t “aggressively hurt” us, for sure.  But I think we can get even more positive than that.

And then there’s always this:

Pierre is known as a hard worker and positive clubhouse influence.

I’m not a big believer in “clubhouse chemistry winning championships.”  But Eck makes me pay for that assumption every single time. Pierre has been repeatedly compared to The Stein because of his desire, his constant hard work, and his attitude.

That can’t be all bad, right? 

Not much blogging today. Not because there wasn’t much to blog about, but because life got in my way. Hate it when that happens.

For those that are still aware of the importance of Iraq, Fumento has a Must-Read PIECE. (Red State has an INTERESTING, similar post.)

THIS is a great article.

The way she understood it was that these young black men do not see growing up as having any advantages to it. One is either current or old-fashioned and outdated. The only success they think they can believe in is had by either athletes or rappers. Young black men. So they hold on to adolescence and adolescent ways as long as they can.

The writer also said, “I am sure many knew of Ed Bradley but they did not identify with him. He was too sophisticated. They identify with the overgrown boy, who is everywhere and who is getting over. He’s got a lot of cash, plenty of girls, lots of jewelry, an expensive car. To them, that’s the world. Or it’s the world they want to be a part of.”

So what can be done to make adulthood seem attractive to these young black men?

Good question.

And a broader one than he’s asking, really. THIS sort of thing has a similar cause, I think.

Lastly, Pierre might be a DODGER. That’s not Soriano money, but it’s not loose change, either. (And I wonder if Werth will be BACK.)

What is the prognosis for Jayson Werth’s recovery and availability to play the outfield for the Dodgers in ‘07?
– Donald G., Temple City, Calif.

We’ll let an e-mail from Werth answer that: “I’m doing awesome. I’m pain-free and training hard. I’m ready to resume my career. I have started swinging on the beginning level, but so far my recovery is doing great and I’m excited about being a Dodger.”

Werth is recovering from his second wrist operation and, although the Dodgers are not counting on his return, the departure of J.D. Drew could provide an opening if Werth can regain his 2004 form.

That would help a lot.