Also known as Tim Lincecum of the San Francisco Giants. He's the major's first repeat winner since Randy Johnson won the award four straight seasons from 1999-2002.
And they say marijuana isn't a performance-enhancer.
Oh I kid.
Discuss here.
0 recs | 186 comments
Back in the day, watching Giants games,
I’d say, “Hit it out, asshole!” or “Hit in in the water, you self-important ’roid freak”
but these days, watching every fifth Giants game, it’s
“Strike him out, hippie!” or “Get a haircut, ya Cy Young winner!”
Tim Lincecum is my favorite player in the major leagues. Too bad he’s on the wrong team.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 19, 2009
YOU CAN'T DENY SWISHER!!!!111
I love him.
DyeLongJustice - November 19, 2009
I like Swisher too.
He’s probably my 20th favorite player.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 19, 2009
name the other 18.
Leopold Bloom - November 19, 2009
Seriously
Unacceptable for Swish to be so far down that list.
Joey C. - November 19, 2009
I have my reasons...
Swisher was on the White Sox and then the Yankees, my 30th and 29th favorite teams. Swisher also hasn’t become the stud I dreamed of him becoming. That’s not his fault though; I dreamed too big.
Players I like more than him but less than Tim Lincecum are:
Brad Ziegler, Mark Ellis, Kurt Suzuki, Chase Utley, Jack Cust, Pablo Sandoval, Landon Powell, Brett Anderson, Brad Kilby, Kevin Youkilis, Joe Mauer, Albert Pujols, and I have an unfounded but unshakable faith in Trevor Cahill, so I guess that puts Swisher 15th.
Upon further review, Swisher is 15th. 5 yard penalty. Repeat third down.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
Oh yeah, I forgot Zito...
so Swisher is 16th…
unless Brooks Kieschnick is still active. That would bump Swish down one more.
Now I punt.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
Well done.
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
Who's your fave, doc?
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
um, Frank Thomas?
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
I love all the players you like!
You even mention Landon Powell; he’s so awesome.
luvsmrZ - November 21, 2009
22
ak_A - November 19, 2009
33!!!!
DyeLongJustice - November 19, 2009
I like Lincecum, too
My roomie is a Dodger fan who hates his guts. This is a point of contention betwixt us.
Joey C. - November 19, 2009
There should be some players who transcend rivalry hate...
Gaijin_Suketto - November 19, 2009
two-buck chuck
ak_A - November 19, 2009
I miss Trader Joe's...
Leopold Bloom - November 19, 2009
I miss Trader Jack
sirbed - November 19, 2009
His grandkids don't.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
Eh, so what.
mikev - November 19, 2009
Well, there was a 350+ thread about Bailey winning the ROY award...
Pucking Insane - November 19, 2009
Remind me again what team Bailey pitches for
mikev - November 19, 2009
The Reds?
Pucking Insane - November 19, 2009
Ha, that's what the MSM said
bobnothing - November 19, 2009
Im with ya mike...I really dont care!
wacchampions - November 19, 2009
Also, something is seriously wrong with the voting calculation if this is how it went:
Tim Lincecum, SF 11 12 9 100
Chris Carpenter, STL 9 14 7 94
Adam Wainwright, STL 12 5 15 90
Lincecum got less 1st place votes than Wainwright, and less 2nd place votes than Carp, but wins the award. Lulz.
mikev - November 19, 2009
The fact alone that Wainwright got the most first-place votes...
…shows we’re not all the way out of the woods yet when it comes to people voting mainly on wins.
I thought all three were pretty close but when I looked at a number of things Wainwright was a pretty distant third behind Lincecum and Carpenter, either of which would’ve deserved to win it more.
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
The Cardinals got screwed!!!!!
DyeLongJustice - November 19, 2009
See I thought the exact opposite
I thought Wainwright was the choice.
baseballgirl - November 19, 2009
I mean, I was comparing some things like their WHIP, AVG against, K/BB ratio, and so on...
…and in most cases Lincecum and Carpenter came out stronger. Maybe that’s not the best way to look at it but I guess I’m missing something on Wainwright.
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
Grit, mainly. People are way overrating the fact that he has 8 IP more than Lincecum. Saying “he ranked 1st, while Lincecum ranked 2nd in IP” ignores the fact that the difference was miniscule.
speckops - November 19, 2009
Couldn't Lincecum and someone win it jointly?
Nico - November 19, 2009
and the softball throwing ensues.
DyeLongJustice - November 19, 2009
(tries to come up with convoluted joke
about smoking joints behind the backstop at a softball game,
but fails and says f**k it and goes to bed)
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
Do be quiet, Nico.
iglew - November 20, 2009
I know it's not the end-all, be-all of stats but here's how they ranked by ERA+
Carpenter: 183
Lincecum: 176
Wainwright: 157
Since Law tossed Vazquez in there ahead of Carpenter, here’s his: 143.
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
Joel Piñeiro led the league in inducing DPs
He should have won it.
Nico - November 19, 2009
The infamous
Two from the same team cancel each other outOvale Fan - November 19, 2009
Pot-smoking bastard
Wainwright was a better pitcher
cuppingmaster - November 19, 2009
Wainwright certainly was...
…I was sorry he didn’t win.
baseballgirl - November 19, 2009
What makes you think this?
speckops - November 19, 2009
and hotter too!
OakA'sHoney - November 19, 2009
That's a given ;-)
baseballgirl - November 19, 2009
hi
mikev - November 19, 2009
hi
OakA'sHoney - November 19, 2009
how's your offseason going
mikev - November 19, 2009
not nearly as exciting as i'd hoped
how about you?
OakA'sHoney - November 19, 2009
same
mikev - November 19, 2009
If the vote was based on hotness
Randy Johnson never would have won.
ErikFanClubPres - November 19, 2009
If the vote was based on resemblance to a sewer rat,
Randy Johnson never would have lost.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
This always sways my vote.
ZigFan31 - November 19, 2009
now I know why I never win any awards :(
mikev - November 19, 2009
puh-lease
ZigFan31 - November 19, 2009
I thought that was my line?
mikev - November 19, 2009
I thought you liked role-reversal?
ZigFan31 - November 20, 2009
Actually I have a better comment
His new nickname shall be Cy DUI
cuppingmaster - November 19, 2009
That doesn't make sense.
He was not arrested for that, no cop would let that go.
Future Ed - November 19, 2009
DUI... DWI
Don’t know the difference. Not meant to imply drunk driving though.
cuppingmaster - November 19, 2009 via mobile
hi ; )
OakA'sHoney - November 19, 2009
hey there Suzy!
Just flying in for a few words eh? ;-)
cuppingmaster - November 19, 2009 via mobile
yep, how are you?
OakA'sHoney - November 19, 2009
Just working over here
working hard
cuppingmaster - November 19, 2009
I'm pleased about this;
I live in San Francisco, and some of my best friends are Giants fans. Hell, there’s been little enough to get excited about in the Bay Area of late, sporting wise, so hell. I’m going to live vicariously, for a bit.
Plus, I was at his first ever game, which is clearly why he’s so good.
bobnothing - November 19, 2009
I went to his first start in San Jose ;-)
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
I WAS AT HIS BIRTH
Seriously, I was a midwife when I was nine. In Washington.
bobnothing - November 19, 2009
Oh yeah, I was there when he was conceived!
Yes, I am Tim Lincecum’s mother.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 19, 2009
name the other 18 fathers.
Leopold Bloom - November 19, 2009
Tim Lincecum was born in a log cabin
that he built with his own two hands.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
Tim Linecum once rescued me from choking in a crowded movie house.
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
Tim Lincecum makes clowns cry.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
I once saw Tim Linecum kill three clowns, using just his bare hands in one of those clown snuff films.
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
but what did he do with them after that?
Gaijin_Suketto - November 22, 2009
Hm, I'm his father
Well, this is awkward.
Er, sorry I never called. I like you a lot, yknow. I was young, and, yeah. uh.
bobnothing - November 19, 2009
Call me when you get out of prison,
and maybe we’ll hook up for old times’ sake.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
I'm pleased for Lince...
…but I honestly think Wainwright deserved it more. I would have voted for him.
baseballgirl - November 19, 2009
I thought Wainwright looked the weakest of the three when put up against each other
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
Don't get me wrong...Lince is a good choice
ANY of the three would have been…Cards probably split votes
baseballgirl - November 19, 2009
How are you judging Wainwright?
Here are some classic stats to judge pitchers by:
WHIP OAV HR/9 BB/9 K/9
Lincecum 1.05 .206 0.40 2.72 10.42
Carpenter 1.01 .226 0.33 1.78 6.73
Wainwright 1.21 .244 0.60 2.55 8.19
Wainwright’s a step behind across the board. Timmy and Chris were on their own level this year, Wainwright’s a level below.
Here’s a list of NL pitchers who were arguably better than Wainwright this year: Javier Vazquez, Dan Haren, Clayton Kershaw, Josh Johnson, Randy Wolf, Jair Jurrgens
I mean, Ubaldo Jimenez put up almost the same numbers as Wainwright, and he did it at Coors.
GoA's - November 19, 2009
I noticed Keith Law's 1-2-3 were Lincecum, Vasquez and Wainwright
Seemed to hold it against Carpenter that he pitched fewer innings, but that was because Carpenter missed the early part of the season.
So did Mauer but that’s not going to keep him from the AL MVP.
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
Like I said (or maybe thought)
I haven’t looked at the numbers in a while…strange, I remember his WHIP being much lower than that. (Or maybe it was when I looked for my September article)
baseballgirl - November 19, 2009
If you're looking for a WHIP a little lower,
I know several excellent web sites.
Nico - November 19, 2009
Well Nico where are the links?.....tease
sirbed - November 19, 2009
Can I name my new punk band
The Dickwhip Nicos?
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
You know what though?
He won 19 games with a sub-3 ERA, and his numbers in the second half of the season are positively elite.
2.10 era, 1.1 whip, 9-3, and his whip number is so inflated by walks in April.
baseballgirl - November 19, 2009
Look at the votes...
…people who voted for Wainwright 1st didn’t want to put Lince 2nd, so he won with the 2nd place votes, really.
From someone really smart:
baseballgirl - November 19, 2009
Get yours, Spicolli
Joey C. - November 19, 2009
I believe Khalil Greene has the Spicoli market cornered
mikev - November 19, 2009
Is it me
or am I the only one who liked him better after he was found smoking the ganja?
SoCal As Fan - November 19, 2009
I don't know
But sometimes I wonder if I’m the only one who thinks a little less of someone for doing that.
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
You're not. Count me in that group FF
cuppingmaster - November 19, 2009 via mobile
Im with you guys....so no you are definately not the only one who feels this way!
I actually agree with the original post….Socal As Fan is probably one of the only ones who likes him better..or at least I hope this is the case!!
wacchampions - November 19, 2009
Why do you guys think less of him?
I’m pretty certain no one is going to claim it’s enhancing his performance…
I also wouldn’t say I think better of him than before, smoking pot has long since lost it’s luster of a “cool” thing to do.
I don’t actually smoke weed, but I really don’t understand thinking less of him. Is it because he broke a law? Do you think equally less of him for speeding? I know I think less of him for getting caught – but that’s a bit different than your postulations.
So the only thing I can think of is that you have a very conservative viewpoint on marijuana in general – in which case I’d hold Lincecum up as pretty much the perfect counterpoint( hey you can smoke pot and still be someone who works hard and excels at what they do – crazy talk! ).
rrryanc - November 19, 2009
Basically for me it's this
I don’t think smoking weed is cool, nor does it make someone cool.
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
I don't think it's necessarily cool or uncool.
But it does show he’s a somewhat normal 25 year-old.
Leopold Bloom - November 19, 2009
I've never been remotely interested in pot
I don’t think that makes me abnormal. ;-)
Flashfire - November 19, 2009
Yeah, I get pretty bored around people who are stoned
That said, if kids want to do it, all power to their elbows
bobnothing - November 20, 2009
Pot is not for everybody;
having said that, I must now say,
that today I would be a completely worthless sack of shit, either rotting in jail or in a trailer park, if not for the sweet leaf.
I would have ended up in a motorcycle gang, like my dad’s friends, and it just all would have gone to shit from there.
But it didn’t, and here I am.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
AND, you call it sweat leaf,
so, seriously, how cool is that?
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
do you think it makes them uncool?
as in, are you neutral on the subject, or does knowing somebody is a pot smoker automatically give them minus points?
jlanning17 - November 20, 2009
sorry, i just re-read your initial response
so why does it make somebody uncool? is it the act of smoking, or is it the breaking of a law? if it’s the act of smoking, how do you feel about people who drink alcohol?
i’m not trying to be argumentative, i just enjoy conversation/debate about the subject.
personally, i feel it should be legalized. i usually come back to the alcohol comparison. nobody has ever died of pot poisoning. statistics aren’t readily available, but from my experience, drinking under the influence of alcohol is waaaaay more unsafe than driving under the influence of pot. the idea of outlawing a plant that can grow wild on its own seems absurd. smoking pot (in and of itself) is a victimless crime.
the fact that a large percentage of people on this site are CA residents, if not natives, makes this an interesting crowd to have the discussion with.
jlanning17 - November 20, 2009
I don't really care one way or the other if it's legalized or not
For me, I’ve been around the smell of marijuana and it makes me feel like I’m going to throw up. That makes, say, a 311 concert a combination of fun and discomfort.
No real need to get into the debate about why pot is illegal but harder, more addictive and dangerous drugs like alcohol and tobacco are legal (and highly regulated). I agree with the criticisms of that logic.
I just don’t like pot, though. Simple as that. I don’t want to be anywhere near someone who’s smoking it, either.
Flashfire - November 20, 2009
the smell and taste of olives and mushrooms makes me nauseous
but i don’t think less of people who enjoy those foods…
i’m confused. being nauseated by the smell of pot smoke is understandable, just like being allergic to peanuts is understandable, but thinking less of people who smoke it (or who enjoy peanut butter) doesn’t seem to logically follow.
jlanning17 - November 20, 2009
I'm not really interested in the logic of it ;-)
But I also don’t see the logic in comparing foods to drugs.
Flashfire - November 20, 2009
Alcohol, caffeine....
Certain types of mushrooms, hell even sugars. They all blend the line between “drugs”( OMG BAD!!! ) and foodstuffs… Seems like a perfectly logical comparison.
For example, I don’t like little kids when they’re hopped up on sugar and caffeine. I certainly don’t think less of them for enjoying a holiday like halloween though :).
rrryanc - November 20, 2009
I notice that many foods have druglike effects.
If I eat a couple of bananas and drink some soymilk, it kinda feels like I drank coffee.
If I eat Carl’s Jr. and drink three cokes, it kinda feels like I shot up some road tar.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
that statement kind of makes the substance in question arbitrary. you’re saying the smell of something makes you feel like you’re going to throw up. you also said you think less of people who enjoy that thing whose smell makes you feel like you’re going to throw up. like i said, the quoted statement pretty much makes the actual substance arbitrary, so i compared to something that makes me nauseous and pointed out that i don’t think any less of people who don’t get that nauseous feeling.
like i said, i find the issue interesting, and i’m interested in the opinions of others, including what leads people to hold these opinions. based on what you have said, i can’t figure you out. first you said you think less of someone for smoking pot, then you said you’ve never been interested in pot, then you said the smell makes you feel like you’re going to throw up. i’m still interested in the logic of thinking less of someone for smoking pot if pot just doesn’t interest you. but maybe i should be interested in the logic of thinking less of someone for smoking pot because the smell of pot makes you feel like you’re going to throw up.
then again,
so i guess the answer is that there is no logic behind it. the unjustified prejudice against those who smoke pot baffles me, which is why i press on. and then you say you aren’t interested in the logic of it? is there any logic behind it? is it comparable to racism and homophobia? a lot of racism and homophobia boils down to fear/dislike of those who are different…
jlanning17 - November 20, 2009
There are few foods whose smell travels
as far or as powerfully as marijuana smoke does.
If you hates olives and someone on the other side of the room is eating olives, it barely affects you. If you are nauseated by the smell of marijuana (and I’m with Flashfire on this) and someone on the other side of the room lights up, he’s pretty much forced me to leave. Now if your complaint were against a food that really does put out a powerful odor, then I’d probably agree with you, but there are only a couple of them that compare.
This is also why, when you seek to have marijuana legalized, you will have the support of people like me only if you have it legalized on private property only. I sure don’t want to be smelling that stuff on the sidewalk. And if it gets to be like cigarette smoking where all the potheads light up as soon as they’re outside of the BART turnstiles and you have to pass through a thick cloud of ganja to get up the escalator, then that’s really going to piss me off.
iglew - November 20, 2009
I'm sort of with you on this one...
There should be non-smoking zones in areas like that, and very busy sidewalks.
It’s not hard to smoke in a designated area, or away from moving crowds.
Then again, I dislike blanket smoking bans in public parks. They seem to be more of an excuse to give park rangers and cops something to ticket for revenue than to actually improve the quality of life. Public parks should have smoking zones, just like they have BBQ zones.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
I would be fine with smoking zones in parks
I would be happy to trade you large chunks of parkland in order to clear up zones I have to walk through, like when there’s a crowd of smokers standing right outside some door where they’re not allowed to smoke inside, but the outside spot is a place I need to get through.
I also never really understood the desire to ban smoking in all restaurants and bars. If some place wants to be a special smoking bar that caters to smokers, what’s wrong with that? I’d rather have them all inside somewhere.
I’m talking about tobacco smoking here, but all the same logic would apply to marijuana. (For that matter, I’d like to apply it to women who pour on the perfume too thick, too. Blech.)
iglew - November 20, 2009
I think the reason for bars/restaurants
At least from what I can remember when the ban was passed for California, was that the second-hand smoke was terrible for the waiters/bartenders.
I know there are some exceptions. You’re allowed to serve alcohol/food at a hookah bar, but I have no idea what the distinction is there.
rrryanc - November 20, 2009
Yeah, but can't people just choose not to
work there?
I could see the complete ban when they first passed it, since employees were already there, and you can’t expect them to all change jobs overnight. But I see no reason why the ban should apply to new establishments. If they have to pay more to get bartenders who will tolerate the smoke, then just let that be part of the business decision. As for existing businesses, give them something like a six-month waiting period after the initial ban, and employees who don’t want to be around when smoke comes back can negotiate or plan to leave accordingly.
iglew - November 20, 2009
i love going to bars and restaurants and not having to breathe smoke
but i don’t like that it’s a law. i’m with you, i don’t think it’s the government’s place to tell private establishments they can’t allow smoking.
i think the reason it is forced is because the gov knows that bar owners will follow the money, and i estimate there would be more patronage at bars that allow smoking than non-smoking bars. so if the choice was left to the owners, everywhere would allow smoking and the people complaining loudly about smoking in bars would still be dissatisfied.
jlanning17 - November 21, 2009
I would allow owner-operator smoking bars
to hire up to three employees who will sign a waiver against suing the bar for getting lung cancer thirty years down the road. That way, there will be more dive bars where one can smoke, but larger establishments will have to be non-smoking.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 22, 2009
Why shouldn't it be a law
that public establishments can’t allow cancerous toxins to be into the air? Isn’t it the case with asbestos and other known cancer-causing agents?
Nico - November 22, 2009
There are a lot of people
who want to breathe those toxins.
I don’t know of anyone who intentionally breathes asbestos.
iglew - November 22, 2009
There are a lot of people who don't
want to wear a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet. Sometimes laws exists to protect idiots from themselves or others.
Nico - November 23, 2009
See, I'd disagree with that.
If someone really doesn’t want to wear a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet for whatever reason, they should be able to. It’s a victimless crime (other than personal injury risk). It shouldn’t be the government’s job to be society’s mom.
danmerqury - November 23, 2009
Even that argument doesn't ultimately work
If we collide and you crack your head open, it will affect me more than if you break an arm, whether legally, emotionally, or both.
But we just share different views of government. I think a corrupt government is bad no matter how you slice it, but in a good government if the people are too stupid to take care of themselves there’s nothing wrong with making them do the simple things that responsible, intelligent people do.
Nico - November 24, 2009
If it really didn't affect anyone else
I’d agree with you. The problem is, we really are a society. To a certain extent we as a society are unwilling to let people hurt themselves. To imagine every man is an island is idealistic. It may be a good ideal or a bad one depending on your view, but in either case it’s not an accurate picture of reality.
That said, I would support an explicit opt-out mechanism for helmet and seat belt use, with certain responsibility disclaimers associated with it. Insurers would be free to treat opters-out how they will.
iglew - November 24, 2009
agree with iglew
it isn’t the bar that’s releasing the toxins, it’s the patrons.
jlanning17 - November 23, 2009
I didn't shoot you!
My gun did.
Nico - November 23, 2009
how am i supposed to interpret this?
are you serious? as in, do you really think that’s a legit comparison, or is this one of those times where somebody makes a ridiculous comment in order to signal that the discussion is over?
jlanning17 - November 24, 2009
More the latter.
It’s not really a discussion that belongs on AN and it’s clear to me that no matter how long we argue we’ll both end up believing what we came in believing.
Nico - November 24, 2009
my intent wasn't really to compare the smell of olives to the smell of pot
what i was trying to say is somebody else likes olives and i don’t, so we have different tastes in food, but i don’t think any less of them. FF was saying he thinks less of people who smoke pot, which i don’t understand because some guy smoking pot doesn’t have a direct effect on FF. somebody smoking pot near FF and forcing FF to smell it is a different issue. i would support FF thinking less of somebody because they smoked next to him and made him smell a smell that he doesn’t like, but i still don’t get why FF thinks less of somebody for doing something that doesn’t effect him.
i don’t enjoy wearing women’s panties, but larry david happens to enjoy wearing women’s panties, and i don’t think any less of him for it.
jlanning17 - November 24, 2009
I really don't think it's a big deal, but
to the small extent that it makes me think a little less of him:
Pretty much, yeah.
Yep.
Whoa, what?? Just because I don’t think you should be driving above the speed limit after smoking a joint, now all of a sudden I’m “very conservative”? Geez, way to turbo-polarize the discussion.
Look, I don’t think pot is a big deal. I have no problem if they legalize it, and I definitely think it’s ridiculous that they’re filling up prisons by giving outrageously long sentences for minor offenders.
I thought the Washington State Police response was entirely appropriate. They stopped him, gave him a little slap on the hand with a fine, and that’s the end of it.
But whether it’s a good law or not, it’s still the law, and it’s not up to you to decide which ones are OK to break. So yeah, I say he did something wrong. Not a big thing, but still something.
iglew - November 20, 2009
With you
Throwing guys and gals who smoke pot in jail is worthless. If you’re an average person and want to get lit go ahead
BUT I have a problem with people like athletes like Lincecum who are de facto role models for younger people doing marginally bad things that young kids are bound to emulate
cuppingmaster - November 20, 2009 via mobile
I'd have (and do have)
a significantly bigger problem with said athletes doing PEDs, and there are several on that list whom I still admire, so personally it would hypocritical of me to denigrate Linecum for doing something I find scads less offensive in a role model motif.
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
If you're implying that
Lincecum should be treated more harshly by the law because he’s a role model, then I disagree. I like very much that he was treated exactly like any other citizen. I think the ridiculous prison sentences and confiscations are wrong for anyone. I think the small fine and slap on the hand that Lincecum got is just fine, for him or for anyone else.
iglew - November 20, 2009
+1
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
i don't think the act of speeding after smoking is what rrryanc was talking about
he’s equating the illegality of smoking pot to the illegality of speeding.
jlanning17 - November 20, 2009
Ya this.
And I didn’t automatically assume your views were religious, I gave you the option of “just because it’s illegal,” which you surprisingly took.
Suffice it to say that I vehemently disagree with this though:
I think that everyone should understand why a law exists, and choose whether to obey it based on that understanding. But I never did particularly like authority either.
rrryanc - November 20, 2009
I don't entirely disagree with that.
I agree that everyone should understand why a law exists. The reason the law against driving 70 mph on a suburban freeway after having a few tokes of marijuana exists is because the community presumes that such behavior makes you less safe and a danger to others on the road. Now if you want to make the argument that pot really doesn’t diminish your capacity as a driver, that’s a fine argument to make when debating whether to change the law, but the community’s presumption is not prima facie unreasonable. Even if in this one particular case the driver was no danger to anyone, others exhibiting similar behavior could well be, so it’s a reasonable policy for cops to be out looking for them.
Yes, of course, one can and should exercise individual judgment and good sense in recognizing that some laws are more important than others, but if you take that the next step and say any individual has his own personal nullification right and can say “that law doesn’t apply to me because I know better” that is a terrible precedent.
If you’re comfortable with the assumption that you know well enough when it’s OK to drive 70mph in a 60mph zone — and that’s something that even a wussy driver like me will do sometimes — that’s fine. But when you do so, it’s on your responsibility. And if you do get pulled over for speeding, I don’t want to hear you whining about how you were mistreated because you did nothing wrong. No, you chose to take an educated risk, the cop disagreed, and so you wear it. You say “sorry, my bad” and you pay the ticket.
To his credit, Lincecum did wear it, and that’s why I really don’t think less of him out of all this. Certainly it’s far less serious than Mortensen’s little DUI incident earlier this year. What I don’t like is when someone comes in and says he didn’t do anything wrong. He did. He made a mistake, he wore it, and now it’s done.
iglew - November 20, 2009
O I totally agree there
Part of knowing the rules is knowing the consequences for breaking said rules. I never said that I thought Lincecum should have gotten away with breaking the law, simply that I didn’t think less of him because he did. Others said above that they did think less of him, which I find a curious stance.
I guess I do think less of him for getting caught, and you might equate that with actually breaking the law( it’s only illegal if you get caught mentality ). My guess is that most people don’t equate the two though.
rrryanc - November 20, 2009
I think I'm with you here...
Dude should have been more sly and kept his stash under the seat or something.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
I guess I do think slightly less of him for what I perceive as
probably being a little more careless than he ought to have been while driving. From what we know I think he probably was slightly more a danger to others on the road. We have no way of knowing if this was an outlier or one small bit of evidence of a larger trend, but I read that as some small chance of indicating something bad and no chance of indicating something good, so marginally bad on balance.
But like I said before, it’s not very much, and it’s far less a concern than a DUI like Mortensen or Loaiza.
iglew - November 20, 2009
"equating the illegality of smoking pot to the illegality of speeding"
I don’t see how you separate the two here. To me they’re the same issue.
The only reason this is an issue at all is because Lincecum was on the road. If you’re a responsible pothead and you stock up on munchies before you light up and then spend the rest of the night just sitting around at home, then have a good time because it’s none of my business and I don’t care. It becomes an issue when you bring it out to where it affects other people.
The cops aren’t patrolling the streets because they’re eager to punish people for immorality (or at least they shouldn’t be). They’re out there to make sure the roads stay reasonably safe. If someone is driving a little too fast, that’s an indicator that he may be a danger. If someone has been smoking pot that’s another indicator that he may be a danger. Ultimately, it comes down to individual cases, but the cops aren’t omniscient so they have to use whatever indicators are available. If there were some practical means of stopping drivers who just got in a big fight with a loved one and are driving like a pissed-off-at-the-world I-don’t-care-who-I-hit maniac, or who are so sleepy they keep almost dozing off at the wheel, I’d be even more eager to have them caught, but you do what you can.
In this case, I’d guess that Tim Lincecum probably was being a little careless, and if the small shock of being stopped by a cop and briefly worrying if it was going to be big trouble has given him enough of a kick that he’ll be a little more careful next time he’s driving from CA to WA on I-5, that’s a good thing.
iglew - November 20, 2009
A minor nitpick
Lincecum wasn’t charged or even really accused, at least in the reports I read, of being under the influence while driving. Seems unlikely that he’d have the weed right next to him without having toked in the car at all, but given how pungent fresh pot can be, it’s not entirely out of the question. At the very least, the arresting officer didn’t find him intoxicated enough to warrant an arrest for DUI – which is significant I think.
So I’d say the two legalities are separate, at least in this case.
As for making the roads safer – get rid of soccer moms driving cars way bigger they can handle and old people of pretty much every variety.
rrryanc - November 20, 2009
I was never totally clear on whether he
was smoking or not. It seems like some people said obviously he was and others said he obviously wasn’t, and whichever I suggested someone was there to tell me I had it wrong.
By the way if fresh pot is as pungent as y’all say, then I disagree with whoever suggested he should have tried to hide it under the seat. If the cops can smell it, the right thing to do is fess up right away (as Lincecum did). If you try to deny it, you’re just asking for trouble, by which I mean you’re being stupid.
iglew - November 20, 2009
Sure, but it's a lot more pungent
When it’s right next to you, than say in your glove box. Or better yet, trunk.
I could see either of two scenarios being fairly likely. One, he was smoking at a buddies house, and upon leaving, grabbed his pipe/weed, hopped in his car and deposited the pipe/weed in a convenient location next to him. Or two, he had the pipe/weed in such a convenient location so that it would be easily accessible to smoke at a stop light or something along the way home.
Either way, the cop apparently didn’t think he was high enough to preclude from driving away, so I think the distinction doesn’t really matter all that much.
rrryanc - November 20, 2009
Stop light.
He was on I-5 headed for Bellevue, about three hours away, so he wasn’t going to smoke at a stoplight. If he was planning to stop in a rest area and smoke, then I would call that something he shouldn’t do.
Less clear where he was coming from, but my impression was he was driving north from California, so he probably hadn’t been smoking at a buddy’s house either.
Agreed about the cop judging he wasn’t impaired.
Also agreed that he should have put it in the trunk. That way the cop probably won’t smell it at all and won’t even ask. If he does smell it, or if he routinely asks, then you fess up and say, yes, there’s some in the trunk.
iglew - November 20, 2009
I haven't smoked weed in about 15 years and I like him more for being a pothead.
Leopold Bloom - November 19, 2009
amen. better pot than 'roids. or DUI's, for that matter.
DyeLongJustice - November 19, 2009
I haven't trimmed weeds in about 15 years and this doesn't effect my feelings about Lincecum at all
sirbed - November 19, 2009
Your yard must look like total shit.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
Tell me this isn't a euphemism
Joey C. - November 21, 2009
Snaggletooth!!!!
WOOT!
ZigFan31 - November 19, 2009
The male alternative to Jewel?
Sorry, Jewel. You’re cute, too.
And, um, new sig? :-P
lynnzgal - November 19, 2009
Exactly!
Sig line fixed!
ZigFan31 - November 20, 2009
is there some sort of cosmic coincidence
That I saw this news at 4:20 PM?
emperor nobody - November 19, 2009
I was just thinking that the worst thing about Lincecum being arrested is
we’ll never be able to talk about him without the same old same old stoner jokes cropping up…you’re a towel!
stormtown - November 19, 2009
National League Cy Young
I would have given the award to Chris Carpenter instead of Tim Lincecum. Carpenter had more wins, fewer losses, a better ERA, a better WHIP and a better strikeout-to-walk ratio.
Rated-R Superstar - November 19, 2009
Lincecum had a significantly better FIP
My view was identical to yours, until I saw that statistic.
I still would’ve given it to Carpenter for the reasons you cited.
richwol1 - November 19, 2009
Yep.
So much so, that Fangraphs has Lincecum’s FIP-derived WAR to be a full 2.5 wins above Carpenter or Wainwright.
danmerqury - November 19, 2009
mmm FIP-derived WAR
sirbed - November 19, 2009
F that!
It’s all about the strickouts!
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
I was surprised that Lincecum won over Carpenter
I’m just starting to read this thread so I’m sure someone else has said this but does it seem likely that perhaps Carpenter and Wainwright split the vote and this gave Lincecum the award?
It’s hard to get too upset though as Lincecum is a great pitcher and I really think we should pull the trigger on that Chavez for Lincecum trade whenever Brian Sabean is ready.
sirbed - November 19, 2009
Apropos of nothing,
“Evil Ways” by Santana is an excellent song.
Leopold Bloom - November 19, 2009
Oakland band.
Very apropos.
lynnzgal - November 19, 2009
Really?!
My non-sequitur was appropriate?
His pots are cold. Poor fella.
Leopold Bloom - November 19, 2009
Don't worry Bloom
I don’t think you’re ever appropriate.
sirbed - November 19, 2009
Its part of his charm.
lynnzgal - November 19, 2009
Much as I hate to credit that city across the bay . . .
. . . . Santana was definitely NOT an Oakland band. Though they played throughout the Bay Area, they were a decidedly San Francisco band. I remember them at the Fillmore and other SF venues and their identity was grounded in SF until the epic set at Woodstock.
camperdog - November 19, 2009
You're right.
I guess it was his Raiderette foot wear that threw me.
lynnzgal - November 19, 2009
Bay Area Music
Oakland rap is better than San Francisco rap.
Rated-R Superstar - November 19, 2009
Saran wrap is even better
sirbed - November 19, 2009
Luniz
Rated-R Superstar - November 19, 2009
The guy wearing 12 isn't for DHB I hope
better if it’s for Stabler or Gannon.
I really liked Luniz’s work better before they went electric at the Newport Folk Festival in 65’.
sirbed - November 19, 2009
Gannon
That album came out in 2002.
Rated-R Superstar - November 19, 2009
Who in the F*&k?
DyeLongJustice - November 19, 2009
Rich Gannon
He won the MVP that year.
Rated-R Superstar - November 20, 2009
I don't think he was talking about Rich Gannon, RRS.
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
Sure he was.
The question was why the guy was wearing a #12 jersey. RRS deduced from the date of the album that it must have been for Rich Gannon.
What Gannon are you talking about?
iglew - November 21, 2009
I'm fairly certain he's not familiar with the album.
I also am not familiar with “Luniz,” and I actually know a handful of East Bay rappers…
Leopold Bloom - November 21, 2009
You also know a Sacramento rapper, too.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 22, 2009
Has nothing to do with being familiar with the album.
I don’t know shit about rap. But there’s a picture of a guy with a Raiders shirt showing #12. You wonder which #12 it is, so you look up Luniz on Wikipedia where you see that the “Silver & Black” album was released in 2002. That year is when Rich Gannon was wearing #12 for the team and he was a star. It doesn’t take any musical expertise to deduce that the shirt is for Gannon.
RRS is being perfectly logical and you’re making no sense.
iglew - November 22, 2009
You got to change
Baby.
Joey C. - November 20, 2009
his pots are cold, Joey.
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
As you know
I don’t watch National League baseball for the same reason I don’t follow the WNBA. However, if ever a player could break the glass ceiling and run with the big boys, by God it’s Tim Lincecum.
ErikFanClubPres - November 19, 2009
I really think you're being unfair to the WNBA
sirbed - November 19, 2009
I don't watch the NL for the same reason I DO watch women's tennis...
I’ll let you figure that one out.
DyeLongJustice - November 19, 2009
the yelp every time someone makes contact with a ball?
bobnothing - November 20, 2009
I love that a dude who looks like that
has won the cy young 2 yrs in a row
my_cat_max - November 19, 2009
I hope he wins it next year too,
but only if he grows a fu manchu and goatee like Frank Zappa.
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
Oooo, can he get the crazy eyes, too?
Leopold Bloom - November 20, 2009
Sure, another eighth or two'll do it...
that and a vaporizer…
Gaijin_Suketto - November 20, 2009
Geek alert
So it’s 1:30 am and I’m looking at Lincecum’s name, and I’m thinking: If you had two of them, would the plural be Linceca?
iglew - November 20, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Athletics Nation to post a comment.