Three pennant-winning managers on today's Birthday Team. And I'm not saying they're the same guy, I'm just saying I've never seen Tommy Glaviano and Tom Glavine in the same place at the same time.

C: Parke Wilson
1B: Dick Hoblitzell
3B: Toby Harrah
SS: Snuffy Stirnweiss
LF: Mike Hargrove
CF: Tommy Glaviano
RF: Tommy Griffith

SP: Steve Rogers
SP/2B: Kid Gleason
SP: Doc Newton
SP: Francisco Liriano
SP: Wayne Garland
RP: Ed Vande Berg

Manager: Frank Selee

Had never heard of Bright's disease. Had to look it up. Learn something new every day.

As noted at THT, today is the 10th anniversary of Anaheim's big Game Six comeback.

Two players who had key roles in that game never appeared in another major league contest. Can you guess who they are? (To find the answer, click on the link - they're mentioned a little before the "day-versaries" segment, in the paragraph that begins "Oh, and that turned out").

Ross Youngs dies of Bright's Disease as well, that's the only other time I'd heard of it.

Can you guess who they are?

Robb Nen?

Regarding one of your birthday SPs, Steve Rogers, I was curious about his truncated career and in looking up info about that, came upon this curious anecdote in Wikipedia:

"According to the book No More Mister Nice Guy by former Expos manager Dick Williams, who was Rogers' manager from 1977 to part of 1981, Williams was not a fan of Rogers. Williams accused Rogers of being unwilling to step up when his team needed him in big games once the Expos became contenders. According to Williams, Rogers was at his best when the Expos were bad because he had no pressure. Williams called Rogers "a fraud", claiming that he had "king of the mountain syndrome".

However, Rogers defeated the Philadelphia Phillies and their ace Steve Carlton twice in the 1981 National League Division Series. He held the Phillies to one run in Game One and hurled a six-hit 3–0 shutout, helping himself with two RBI in the deciding Game Five, to send Montreal to the National League Championship Series. In Game Three of that Series, Rogers pitched a seven-hit 4–1 complete game against the Dodgers, but lost Game Five in relief when he allowed a pennant-winning home run to Rick Monday. The decision of manager Jim Fanning to use Rogers in that game, on only two-days rest, is still debated by Montreal fans."

It's behind the paywall, but Bill James just wrote a helluva article about the 2003 Red Sox bullpen experience that got tagged as a "closer by committee experiment."

Quick pull quotes:

I have never advocated a Closer by Committee—not in any book, not in any memo, not in any speech, not in private communication, not inside the Red Sox organization, not outside of it, not anywhere.

I think that what happened was, we were asked repeatedly who the Closer was, and, since we didn’t know, when somebody in the press suggested that we might have a Closer by Committee, somebody in our system said, "Yes." Whether it was Grady Little who said "Yes" or Theo or somebody else. . ..I don’t know. But I think that’s what happened.

Were we really intending to use a Closer by Committee? Well. . .no; it’s not a yes or no question, but "no" is more accurate than "yes". You have to understand how a front office works: different people have different evaluations of the talent. I think most of us were hoping that Chad Fox would be healthy... You don’t want to say that, however, because you’ve got several other relievers who would also really like to be the Closer and earn the Big Bucks.

Using a Closer By Committee is certainly not a way to maximize the leverage index of your best reliever. It is much more likely that it will reduce the leverage index of your best reliever—thus, it’s an argument against the Closer By Committee.

As my friend Sam Reich used to say, "If you can pitch in the sixth inning you can pitch in the ninth inning." But here’s what I really did not understand ten years ago, starting with the broader subject of the sprinter vs. the middle distance runner. You can run a lot faster in a short sprint than you can run if you are running two or three miles. For the exact same reasons, most pitchers are more effective when they’re throwing 20 pitches in an outing than when they’re trying to throw 130 pitches.... Closers are sort of "super-sprinters" who come into the game when the finish line is so close that you can smell it. There are advantages that go with being a reliever, as opposed to a starter, and there are advantages that go with being a Closer, as opposed to a piss-ant reliever... the Closer is in a unique position because, more than anyone else, he knows when he will be coming into the game... the Closer has a more regular schedule than any other reliever... Other relievers are given these benefits as the opportunity allows the manager to bestow them, but Closers have priority on them. This makes Closers different.

Because they are different, some of them are super-effective...

If I had understood this ten years ago, when people were talking about the Red Sox using a Closer by Committee, I would have been running around yelling "Wait a minute! Hold on, here!" I didn’t do that. I take responsibility for that. If I knew then what I know now, I would have been an active opponent of the Closer by Committee concept.

This also reflects on the validity of the ideas that I did express years ago, about maximizing the leverage of the Closer. You can’t maximize the leverage of the Closer without taking away the advantages that the Closer has in terms of sprinting to the finish line. Some of what I wrote was invalid because of that.

Can you guess who they are?

Nen and Shawon Dunston

Bingo - Nen & Dunston.

And I'm not saying they're the same guy, I'm just saying I've never seen Tommy Glaviano and Tom Glavine in the same place at the same time.

Glaviano's the one who made errors on the the last three plays of the game to allow the Dodgers to overcome an 8-0, eighth-inning deficit.

Most days I see the birthday team here and then I see one of the same names under Anniversaries on THT, and I think something like "Wow, Steve Rogers! I hadn't thought of that guy in a long time, and this is the second time I've seen his name today. What are the odds?" Later that morning I piece together that it wasn't a coincidence.

Mariano Rivera thinking retirement

*Puts gun to temple*

*Puts gun to temple*

That was pretty much my reaction as well.

But here’s what I really did not understand ten years ago, starting with the broader subject of the sprinter vs. the middle distance runner. You can run a lot faster in a short sprint than you can run if you are running two or three miles. For the exact same reasons, most pitchers are more effective when they’re throwing 20 pitches in an outing than when they’re trying to throw 130 pitches.... Closers are sort of "super-sprinters" who come into the game when the finish line is so close that you can smell it.

It seems like 1-inning setup men and LOOGY's know when their personal finish line is coming, so I don't see the closer/non-closer distinction.

It seems like 1-inning setup men and LOOGY's know when their personal finish line is coming, so I don't see the closer/non-closer distinction.

The former don't always know when the gun is going to go off; the closer knows both ends of the race.

-- MWE

*Puts gun to temple*

That was pretty much my reaction as well.

Yeah, but you're always looking for a reason to put a gun to Larry's head.

The former don't always know when the gun is going to go off; the closer knows both ends of the race.

-- MWE

I get that, but once the race starts they are both "super-sprinters."

Also, the set-up man knows that the race is going to start soon after he is instructed to warm up in the bullpen.

So what happened to Cupid Childs's wife and child?