Saturday, October 31, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
I like to read sports columns. I'm going to agree with some conclusions, disagree with others. I generally like what I read in Sports Illustrated, and I'm okay with the columnists I see on the ESPN and Sporting News web sites.
I continue to be astonished, however, at how poor the writing, rationales, and temperament is for many of the columnists at CBSSports.com. There are exceptions: Pete Prisco knows his subject, stays within his limits, and calls himself out (for example, he admits today he was wrong on Josh McDaniels and the Broncos, as was I). Mike Freeman is hit or miss.
But Gregg Doyel -- with his continued baiting of his readers and "Bleep you, I have a column" attitude, has just worn very thin. And today's Ray Ratto column reaches new heights of poor reasoning, conclusion jumping, and bad writing.
I should start with staying Ratto's column on the problems the Mets had with Tony Bernazard (7/28/09) made a certain amount of sense (although it seemed a bit overwrought for a writer located 3,000 miles away and not privy to the day-to-day team operations). I did note that Ratto added in his 8/30/09 column (in the Chronicle only) he stated: " Fred Wilpon was a billionaire before he met Bernie Madoff; now, according to a new book, he's down $700 million and probably has to sell the New York Mets."
The Wilpons have denied that they were in trouble and the Mets were having money issues, and, as it turns out, they were right: it turned out Madoff made $48 million for the Wilpons. Rather than reversing course, however, Ratto has doubled down: his column today makes the Wilpons -- and, consequently, the Mets, seem bigger rubes than before. (Because they made money?)
Most people are unaware of how their investments work. They don't sit with their investment advisor on a day-to-day basis and review where every cent has gone. They put a certain amount of trust in the advisor. Bernard Madoff clearly betrayed the trust of a lot of investors. There's no doubt about that.
But here's Ratto's argument, verbatim: "When it turned out the Madoff scheme had bitten a huge chunk out of the Wilpon fortune, people cheered. And now that it looks like they actually made money off Berniegate, the likelihood that they'll have to go to court to defend their relationship with one of the great financial criminals of all time will cheer people as well."
Damned if you did (lose money), damned if you didn't.
Also, I haven't seen any word on the Wilpons going to court. Ratto has jumped to this conclusion without any evidence that either there would be legal proceedings against the Wilpons, or that they would fight any charges.
A few more notes:
- "Ranking this Mets team among Mets teams is difficult only because the first three Mets teams were charmingly inept and so many others were just plain inept."
It took me about three readings before I understood (I think) Ratto is referring to the New York Mets of 1962, 1963, and 1964. (Either that or he's referring to the New York Metropolitans of the 1800s -- it's hard to distinguish what he means by "teams.") Yes, the Mets have had some lousy seasons -- watching them play in the late 1970s, 1993, or 2004 was a painful business. But since 1969, they've been roughly a .500 team, with seven playoff appearances, four pennants, and two World Series during that span. A few teams have won more pennants during that span -- the Yankees have 10, the Athletics six, the Dodgers, Cardinals, and Reds five apiece. But this isn't the Detroit Lions we're talking about either.
- "But knowing the Wilpons, they'd probably blow the other $452 million on the lawyers defending their right to keep the $48 million. It's called the Carlos Delgado Postulate, wherein one wildly overpays for something that made initial sense but eventually became a galactic money pit."
First of all, "knowing the Wilpons" is a stretch for a columnist based in San Francisco to say about a New York-based ownership group. Has he ever met them? Second, I state again there's been no mention of legal action. And third, using Carlos Delgado as an example of a bad baseball move is -- well, a terrible example. Yes, Delgado missed most of last year (so did Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes -- no one mentions all three, plus David Wright, played 159 games or more in 2008, the first time in many years a team had four players play so many games) with a hip injury that first came up the year before.
Second, let's look at the records:
Delgado, lifetime: .280/.383/.546
Delgado, ages 34-37 (with the Mets): .267/.351/.488
Yes, it's a drop, but not a shocking one for someone of his age. Using a 162-game average (Delgado played 468 games in his four years with the team, having missed 130 games last year with hip injuries and 50 the other three years), he averaged 36 home runs, 117 RBI, and 94 runs scored for every 162 games played. Most teams would be pretty happy with that kind of output from their first baseman -- and most sportswriters seemed at least a little impressed; Delgado finished 12th in the MVP vote in 2006 and 9th in 2008. Pick out Roberto Alomar or Carlos Baerga, both of whom became old men the moment they entered Shea Stadium, but most Met fans were perfectly satisfied with Delgado's performance.
I have a hard time writing about this, because I think beat sportswriters are far better equipped to critique teams and players than columnists -- or bloggers. Some columnists rarely deign to appear at the ballpark; they just take aim and let the chips fall where they may. If I were paid to write about baseball (I'm not) and critiqued a team or players without allowing for rebuttal, I'd expect a backlash; just as if I'm telling the guy in the next cubicle he doesn't know what he's doing when I'm making a mess of things. Ratto -- and the other CBSSports.com columnists -- should expect the same.
(cross-posted to CBSSports.com)
I continue to be astonished, however, at how poor the writing, rationales, and temperament is for many of the columnists at CBSSports.com. There are exceptions: Pete Prisco knows his subject, stays within his limits, and calls himself out (for example, he admits today he was wrong on Josh McDaniels and the Broncos, as was I). Mike Freeman is hit or miss.
But Gregg Doyel -- with his continued baiting of his readers and "Bleep you, I have a column" attitude, has just worn very thin. And today's Ray Ratto column reaches new heights of poor reasoning, conclusion jumping, and bad writing.
I should start with staying Ratto's column on the problems the Mets had with Tony Bernazard (7/28/09) made a certain amount of sense (although it seemed a bit overwrought for a writer located 3,000 miles away and not privy to the day-to-day team operations). I did note that Ratto added in his 8/30/09 column (in the Chronicle only) he stated: " Fred Wilpon was a billionaire before he met Bernie Madoff; now, according to a new book, he's down $700 million and probably has to sell the New York Mets."
The Wilpons have denied that they were in trouble and the Mets were having money issues, and, as it turns out, they were right: it turned out Madoff made $48 million for the Wilpons. Rather than reversing course, however, Ratto has doubled down: his column today makes the Wilpons -- and, consequently, the Mets, seem bigger rubes than before. (Because they made money?)
Most people are unaware of how their investments work. They don't sit with their investment advisor on a day-to-day basis and review where every cent has gone. They put a certain amount of trust in the advisor. Bernard Madoff clearly betrayed the trust of a lot of investors. There's no doubt about that.
But here's Ratto's argument, verbatim: "When it turned out the Madoff scheme had bitten a huge chunk out of the Wilpon fortune, people cheered. And now that it looks like they actually made money off Berniegate, the likelihood that they'll have to go to court to defend their relationship with one of the great financial criminals of all time will cheer people as well."
Damned if you did (lose money), damned if you didn't.
Also, I haven't seen any word on the Wilpons going to court. Ratto has jumped to this conclusion without any evidence that either there would be legal proceedings against the Wilpons, or that they would fight any charges.
A few more notes:
- "Ranking this Mets team among Mets teams is difficult only because the first three Mets teams were charmingly inept and so many others were just plain inept."
It took me about three readings before I understood (I think) Ratto is referring to the New York Mets of 1962, 1963, and 1964. (Either that or he's referring to the New York Metropolitans of the 1800s -- it's hard to distinguish what he means by "teams.") Yes, the Mets have had some lousy seasons -- watching them play in the late 1970s, 1993, or 2004 was a painful business. But since 1969, they've been roughly a .500 team, with seven playoff appearances, four pennants, and two World Series during that span. A few teams have won more pennants during that span -- the Yankees have 10, the Athletics six, the Dodgers, Cardinals, and Reds five apiece. But this isn't the Detroit Lions we're talking about either.
- "But knowing the Wilpons, they'd probably blow the other $452 million on the lawyers defending their right to keep the $48 million. It's called the Carlos Delgado Postulate, wherein one wildly overpays for something that made initial sense but eventually became a galactic money pit."
First of all, "knowing the Wilpons" is a stretch for a columnist based in San Francisco to say about a New York-based ownership group. Has he ever met them? Second, I state again there's been no mention of legal action. And third, using Carlos Delgado as an example of a bad baseball move is -- well, a terrible example. Yes, Delgado missed most of last year (so did Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes -- no one mentions all three, plus David Wright, played 159 games or more in 2008, the first time in many years a team had four players play so many games) with a hip injury that first came up the year before.
Second, let's look at the records:
Delgado, lifetime: .280/.383/.546
Delgado, ages 34-37 (with the Mets): .267/.351/.488
Yes, it's a drop, but not a shocking one for someone of his age. Using a 162-game average (Delgado played 468 games in his four years with the team, having missed 130 games last year with hip injuries and 50 the other three years), he averaged 36 home runs, 117 RBI, and 94 runs scored for every 162 games played. Most teams would be pretty happy with that kind of output from their first baseman -- and most sportswriters seemed at least a little impressed; Delgado finished 12th in the MVP vote in 2006 and 9th in 2008. Pick out Roberto Alomar or Carlos Baerga, both of whom became old men the moment they entered Shea Stadium, but most Met fans were perfectly satisfied with Delgado's performance.
I have a hard time writing about this, because I think beat sportswriters are far better equipped to critique teams and players than columnists -- or bloggers. Some columnists rarely deign to appear at the ballpark; they just take aim and let the chips fall where they may. If I were paid to write about baseball (I'm not) and critiqued a team or players without allowing for rebuttal, I'd expect a backlash; just as if I'm telling the guy in the next cubicle he doesn't know what he's doing when I'm making a mess of things. Ratto -- and the other CBSSports.com columnists -- should expect the same.
(cross-posted to CBSSports.com)
Saturday, October 17, 2009
I like the Angels' uniforms, which I believe they've had since 2002. They're somewhat similar to their uniforms back in the 1960s, except the color change to red -- which to me differentiates them from the Dodgers. I wish the Mets would make use of the color orange more in their uniforms -- only three teams in the major have orange as a featured color (Mets, Giants, Orioles), and none of them use the color particularly well.
Okay, exit Burnett. With Coke, Hughes, and Chamberlain, the Yankees have some great arms coming in for the 7th and 8th innings, plus they're giving a chance for these young arms to start out with 120 innings a year and work their way up, rather than 200 the first year, 225 the second, and then three years of between 20 and 65 while they rehab.
A.J. Burnett has thrown approximately 2,000 pitches this inning. It would be useful if Fox got around to telling us this. I guess Tim McCarver is still figuring out how many feet between the pitching rubber and home plate -- it took him three tries when he noted it a few innings back ("97 feet.. no, 87 feet, no 57 feet").
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Book Review
Book Review: "Faith and Fear in Flushing: An Intense Personal History of the New York Mets," Greg W. Prince
Most boys become big fans of one pro sports team or more. Some become more fervent fans than others. And in the Age o' Internet, one can write about being a fervent fan and get positive feedback from other fervent fans. Writing a book about being a fervent fan, however, presents a larger challenge -- how do I get those who are not a fervent fan of said team to read the book without saying either a) "This guy's totally nuts," or b) "I don't like this team enough to continue reading further."
Now, I'm a Mets fan first and foremost, so I'm probably not the best to review this book; I maintain the same biases Greg Prince does (Mets great, all other teams bad, Yankees really, really bad). So I took it from a different perspective: am I like this guy? And the answer is: pretty much.
- I'm his age (he's about five weeks younger than I am)
- I grew up in the same general area (he grew up on Long Island, I grew up in New Jersey)
- we became fans around the same time (he became a fan in 1969, I waited until 1971, and thus missed the first World Series win)
- we suffered through ups and downs (the 1973 pennant, the Seaver trade and subsequent lousy teams, the mid-'80s renaissance, the '90s drop-off and the Piazza-led revival)
- he met his wife-to-be in 1987 and married her in 1991, so did I (one major difference: Karen could not care less about baseball and likely never will -- unless, of course, my son becomes a fervent baseball fan. Important note: so far, Danny appears to be a Cubs fan, but that's at my urging -- becoming a New York Mets fans in suburban Chicagoland is a surefire start on the road to social leperdom)
- we both shut off the TV volume for the 1986 World Series Game 6, Inning 10 (in my case, it was because my roommate had gone to sleep in our railroad apartment and I was being considerate -- although I was so sick of Vin Scully bringing up the various turning points that left the Mets two runs behind on a once-every-45-seconds basis that I probably would have put my foot through the screen at some point). This proved so successful that I left the volume off for Game 7, listening to the dulcet tones of Bob Murphy and Gary Thorne instead -- and has left me with a lifetime dislike of Vin Scully; I think he became a hero in southern California only because they had no basis for comparison.
My problem with the recent years, however, is I'm no longer a New Yorker. (I was a New Yorker even growing up in New Jersey, and I prefer to put the two years spent in North Carolina out of my mind.) I live in Chicagoland now. While the Mets are still my first team, I certainly listen to and watch more Cubs and White Sox games than Met games. (Note to self: try to get tickets for next year if the Mets visit Milwaukee on a weekend; rooting for opposing team in Wrigley or Comiskey is tantamount to suicide.) So, the playoff collapses in 2007 and 2008 were seen at a distance. (I do not call them "chokes"; I'll go into this more some other time.) Except for the few years Prince was in college in Florida, he's never been able to watch the Mets from a distance. The only derision he's had to deal with is that of Yankee fans (and, even though New Yorkers are notorious frontrunners -- during the 1996 World Series, almost everybody I worked with at St. Martin's Press in the Flatiron Building became a Yankee fan; the woman in the office next to mine and I stuck to our guns and rooted openly for Atlanta -- Met fans still likely outnumber Yankee fans on Long Island, which is right next to Shea Stadium and/or Citi Field). It's harder to root for a team a thousand miles away. (I usually quiet people who deride my continuing to root for the Mets first and foremost instead of a local team by asking them if they'd dump the Cubs/White Sox if they moved to NYC; they wouldn't.)
Most fans, no matter how loyal they are to their team, cannot name all the players on the active roster when the team won the pennant 35 years ago (here, I'll try without looking: Tom Seaver, Jon Matlack, Jerry Koosman, George Stone, Tug McGraw, Buzz Capra, Harry Parker, Ray Sadecki, Jerry Grote, Duffy Dyer, Ron Hodges, John Milner, Felix Millan, Bud Harrelson, Wayne Garrett, Ted Martinez, Cleon Jones, Don Hahn, Rusty Staub, Willie Mays, Dave Marshall -- okay, that's 21 out of 25; missing Jim McAndrew, George Theodore, Jim Beauchamp, and Ken Boswell). Prince can. He can also describe exactly what he was doing while watching Game 6 of the 1986 NLCS (of course, so can I: sitting in the Flatiron Building, listening to the game on weak-signaled WHN -- St. Martin's Press didn't have any televisions at that point -- with my friends and co-workers George, Jack, Janet, Lincoln, and Stuart until they won around 8 PM that night). And where he was in 1977 when the Mets traded Tom Seaver (I was watching Channel 4 news and listening to the radio mournfully). And so on.
Okay, I'm probably as much of a Mets nut as Greg Prince is. And this was fun to read as a result, and I'd recommend it to most Met fans. Don't expect literature, but do imagine you've gotten a letter (albeit a really long letter) from a friend. Would it be fun for a non-Met fan? Probably not, although it might open some eyes. (At least a few Mets fans are going to read it, given I got my copy out of the library here in Naperville, IL.)
*****
National League Championship Series starts tomorrow night. I'll try to live blog the game.
Most boys become big fans of one pro sports team or more. Some become more fervent fans than others. And in the Age o' Internet, one can write about being a fervent fan and get positive feedback from other fervent fans. Writing a book about being a fervent fan, however, presents a larger challenge -- how do I get those who are not a fervent fan of said team to read the book without saying either a) "This guy's totally nuts," or b) "I don't like this team enough to continue reading further."
Now, I'm a Mets fan first and foremost, so I'm probably not the best to review this book; I maintain the same biases Greg Prince does (Mets great, all other teams bad, Yankees really, really bad). So I took it from a different perspective: am I like this guy? And the answer is: pretty much.
- I'm his age (he's about five weeks younger than I am)
- I grew up in the same general area (he grew up on Long Island, I grew up in New Jersey)
- we became fans around the same time (he became a fan in 1969, I waited until 1971, and thus missed the first World Series win)
- we suffered through ups and downs (the 1973 pennant, the Seaver trade and subsequent lousy teams, the mid-'80s renaissance, the '90s drop-off and the Piazza-led revival)
- he met his wife-to-be in 1987 and married her in 1991, so did I (one major difference: Karen could not care less about baseball and likely never will -- unless, of course, my son becomes a fervent baseball fan. Important note: so far, Danny appears to be a Cubs fan, but that's at my urging -- becoming a New York Mets fans in suburban Chicagoland is a surefire start on the road to social leperdom)
- we both shut off the TV volume for the 1986 World Series Game 6, Inning 10 (in my case, it was because my roommate had gone to sleep in our railroad apartment and I was being considerate -- although I was so sick of Vin Scully bringing up the various turning points that left the Mets two runs behind on a once-every-45-seconds basis that I probably would have put my foot through the screen at some point). This proved so successful that I left the volume off for Game 7, listening to the dulcet tones of Bob Murphy and Gary Thorne instead -- and has left me with a lifetime dislike of Vin Scully; I think he became a hero in southern California only because they had no basis for comparison.
My problem with the recent years, however, is I'm no longer a New Yorker. (I was a New Yorker even growing up in New Jersey, and I prefer to put the two years spent in North Carolina out of my mind.) I live in Chicagoland now. While the Mets are still my first team, I certainly listen to and watch more Cubs and White Sox games than Met games. (Note to self: try to get tickets for next year if the Mets visit Milwaukee on a weekend; rooting for opposing team in Wrigley or Comiskey is tantamount to suicide.) So, the playoff collapses in 2007 and 2008 were seen at a distance. (I do not call them "chokes"; I'll go into this more some other time.) Except for the few years Prince was in college in Florida, he's never been able to watch the Mets from a distance. The only derision he's had to deal with is that of Yankee fans (and, even though New Yorkers are notorious frontrunners -- during the 1996 World Series, almost everybody I worked with at St. Martin's Press in the Flatiron Building became a Yankee fan; the woman in the office next to mine and I stuck to our guns and rooted openly for Atlanta -- Met fans still likely outnumber Yankee fans on Long Island, which is right next to Shea Stadium and/or Citi Field). It's harder to root for a team a thousand miles away. (I usually quiet people who deride my continuing to root for the Mets first and foremost instead of a local team by asking them if they'd dump the Cubs/White Sox if they moved to NYC; they wouldn't.)
Most fans, no matter how loyal they are to their team, cannot name all the players on the active roster when the team won the pennant 35 years ago (here, I'll try without looking: Tom Seaver, Jon Matlack, Jerry Koosman, George Stone, Tug McGraw, Buzz Capra, Harry Parker, Ray Sadecki, Jerry Grote, Duffy Dyer, Ron Hodges, John Milner, Felix Millan, Bud Harrelson, Wayne Garrett, Ted Martinez, Cleon Jones, Don Hahn, Rusty Staub, Willie Mays, Dave Marshall -- okay, that's 21 out of 25; missing Jim McAndrew, George Theodore, Jim Beauchamp, and Ken Boswell). Prince can. He can also describe exactly what he was doing while watching Game 6 of the 1986 NLCS (of course, so can I: sitting in the Flatiron Building, listening to the game on weak-signaled WHN -- St. Martin's Press didn't have any televisions at that point -- with my friends and co-workers George, Jack, Janet, Lincoln, and Stuart until they won around 8 PM that night). And where he was in 1977 when the Mets traded Tom Seaver (I was watching Channel 4 news and listening to the radio mournfully). And so on.
Okay, I'm probably as much of a Mets nut as Greg Prince is. And this was fun to read as a result, and I'd recommend it to most Met fans. Don't expect literature, but do imagine you've gotten a letter (albeit a really long letter) from a friend. Would it be fun for a non-Met fan? Probably not, although it might open some eyes. (At least a few Mets fans are going to read it, given I got my copy out of the library here in Naperville, IL.)
*****
National League Championship Series starts tomorrow night. I'll try to live blog the game.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Gary Thorne quoted Mets broadcaster Bob Murphy on ESPN Radio’s coverage of the Philadelphia-Colorado game last night, noting “Baseball is a game of redeeming features.” Try telling that to Troy Tulowitzki.
By most measures, Tulowitzki had an outstanding 2009. Recovering from an injury that took out part of his sophomore year, he hit .297 with an OPS of .929. He hit 32 home runs, drove in 97, and scored 101. And he made just nine errors in the field. With the injuries to the Mets’ Jose Reyes and the subpar years of Philadelphia’s Jimmy Rollins and Milwaukee’s J.J. Hardy, Tulowitzki is running neck-and-neck with the Florida Marlins’ Hanley Ramirez as the best shortstop in the National League.
But in the postseason – and especially yesterday’s Game 4 – Tulowitzki failed, and then couldn’t redeem himself. In the sixth inning of last night’s NLDS game, Tulowitzki was on second base after doubling in Todd Helton to cut the Phillies’ lead to 2-1. He was also running at the crack of the bat, even though there was one out. Unfortunately, Garrett Atkins hit a line drive to third baseman Pedro Feliz, and Tulowitzki was doubled off to end the inning.
Not good, of course. But baseball is a game of redeeming features, and Tulowitzki would have two opportunities to redeem himself. Unfortunately for him, he was unable to do so – flying out in the eighth inning with runners on first and second base, and striking out to end the game in the ninth inning, also with runners at first and second.
It was a tough series for the Rockies. They made mistakes. (So did the umpires, as they later admitted Chase Utley’s “hit” during the Phillies’ ninth inning rally should have been called a foul ball.) Closer Huston Street, who converted 35 of 37 save opportunities during the regular season, was unable to close both Games 3 and 4 in the playoffs. Both Tulowitzki and Street will have months to think about what they could have done. (Street’s defeats were both at the hands of Ryan Howard, who’s beaten a lot of pitchers over the last few years.)
Colorado has a young and improving team. Manager Jim Tracy, after doing a so-so job running the Dodgers and a lousy job with the Pittsburgh Pirates (not that he’s in exclusive company there), took over for Clint Hurdle partway through the season and brought them into the playoffs. They have turned a corner, realizing that just because they play in Denver, they should just stock up on sluggers and ignore the pitching. They have a loyal fan base, a marvelous stadium (I’ve never seen a game there, but I went to the park when we visited Denver in November 2001), and an area that should attract baseball talent. Things are looking up.
Just not this morning.
*****
No baseball for a couple of days. The National League Championship Series will start Thursday night in Los Angeles, with TBS broadcasting the games. The next day, the Yankees and Anaheim Angels Who Claim They’re From Los Angeles start up on Fox (of course). There will apparently only be three days with two games (this Friday, Monday the 19th, and the following Saturday) – that way, the postseason can continue all the way until early November!
*****
Nice job by ESPN Radio announcers Gary Thorne and Chris Singleton on Game 4 of the NLDS (oddly, ESPN Radio apparently had Chris Berman and Rick Sutcliffe on first two Colorado-Philadelphia games – maybe Berman doesn’t like heights or something). Thorne was a radio broadcaster for the New York Mets for a few years in the mid-1980s, but left because there were conflicts between him doing baseball and New Jersey Devils hockey. He now works primarily for ESPN Radio, although he also does Baltimore Oriole cable broadcasts as well. Met fans hated to see him go (although Gary Cohen, his replacement, is among the best broadcasters out there), but he’s achieved a lot of success with ESPN. It was nice to hear him name-check Bob Murphy last night, as Murphy was primarily known only in New York.
Chris Singleton is an interesting story. He was an average player for a few years with the White Sox and Orioles, but then had some ear problems and wound up out of the game at age 32. He was then hired to be the second voice in the Chicago White Sox radio booth, teaming up with Ed Farmer to replace John Rooney (who left the Sox after a salary dispute). To be kind about it, Farmer didn’t mix well with Singleton; putting it more bluntly, Farmer treated Singleton poorly on the air. Singleton is reasonably well informed and comes up with some good observations, but not surprisingly, on the first year or two on the job he was a little raw, and Farmer was no help at all, sometimes interrupting Singleton’s observations or simply ignoring what he’d said rather than striking up a conversation. After two years, Steve Stone (who had done Cubs games for a number of years) became available, so Singleton, reading the handwriting on the wall, moved over to ESPN, where he’s been a pretty good fit.
ESPN’s doing a decent job of developing baseball color analysts – Aaron Boone (who’s still playing), Rick Sutcliffe, and a few others have done well. (Steve Phillips, on the other hand, has taken a long time for me to warm up to. Of course, I may be blaming him for his tenure as Mets general manager.) The problem, with a few exceptions, is there’s nowhere for them to go from there – very few former players have been able to transition to other sports. (Anyone remember Tim McCarver doing Winter Olympic coverage for CBS in 1992? Didn’t think so.) Maybe ESPN can bring back Sports Challenge one more time to give these guys something to do in the off-season.
Photo Credit: Jeff Gross, Getty Images, originally from about.com.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Sunday Thoughts
I didn't catch a minute of the Philadelphia-Colorado game last night. By the time it started (and the Yankees-Minnesota game was over) it was 9:30 Central time, and we were in bed -- my wife, Karen, is not really a baseball fan (that's putting it mildly), so I didn't want to put it on the television. And either WMVP radio (ESPN's radio station in Chicago) signed off of baseball after the previous game or turned down its power, because I couldn't pick up the game on the radio at all. Unfortunately, I missed a good game (not that I would have listened to all of it anyway); more unfortunately, another blown call played an important part in the game (more on that in a bit).
Here's my question: what genius at MLB decided starting the game at 10:07 PM Eastern Time would be a good idea? Especially when an east coast team like Philadelphia is involved; this means that virtually nobody under age 10 saw any of the game. And before anybody says, "But the kids should have the day off, since it's Columbus Day the next day," that assumes people actually have the day off (not everybody does -- I'm writing this from the office), and that parents will let their kids stay up much later for that purpose (I wouldn't; my six-year-old has lights out at 8 PM). If MLB is thinking this is the way to garner new fans, they couldn't be more wrong. (I suppose they're getting slightly smarter; when the League Championship Series first started in 1969, on at least one occasion the AL and NL games started at the same time, leaving NBC to decide which to broadcast.)
So, I propose to MLB the following:
- No more than three games on any weekday (this seems to be the rule anyway).
- No start time later than 8:30 PM Eastern. This may mean some games may overlap, but they did last night anyway, so what difference does it make?
- Game times have to be flexible. I understand the logic for yesterday -- Boston vs. Angels had to start at 1 PM because the New England Patriots were playing the 4 PM game; New Englanders don't want to be paralyzed by the choices and the big, bad NFL will never move a game themselves unless they start getting negative press. And, understandably, the Red Sox were getting sick of being the 10 PM Eastern start when they were in California. So that was locked in. Likewise, the Philadelphia-Colorado game had to be the late game because the Denver Broncos was playing against the Patriots in that same 4 PM game. But did the Yankees-Minnesota have to start at 7 Eastern? It's Sunday night, everybody's at home watching sports anyway, the New York Giants and Minnesota Vikings both played 1 PM games and the Jets play tonight (oh, and if the Twins had won yesterday, you can bet a Yankees-Minnesota Game 4 would have run right up against the New York Jets and Miami Dolphins). The Yankees-Minnesota game should have started at 5:30 Eastern last night, which would have allowed the Philadelphia-Colorado game to start at 8:30, allowing the kids to at least catch the first three innings or so.
If TBS doesn't like this, well, they're hereby invited to bite me. Another network that understands the game a bit better (ahem, ESPN) can take over.
*****
Hated to see the Twins go out that way, but they're probably very happy they made it to the postseason in the first place without Justin Morneau and with Jason Kubel going 0-for-13 with nine strikeouts. Without the two of them, they had virtually no power (Joe Mauer's an outstanding hitter, but he's not a slugger).
The baserunning gaffes in Games 2 and 3 didn't help, although neither could be defined as a gamebreaker. The Game 2 goof came earlier in the game, and showed that Carlos Gomez will never be the five-tool player Minnesota may have hoped (note to Mets fans: with Phil Humber stuck in AAA and the other two pitchers not in the majors, it's looking like the Johan Santana trade will be as much of a win as the Rick Aguilera and Kevin Tapani for a fading Frank Viola was a loss). On the other hand, Nick Punto is a smart baseball player, but he had a major brain cramp last night; he ran through a stop sign by his third base coach (which took me about five replays to see, until it occurred to someone at TBS to get rid of the ALDS logo that was blocking our view).
Next year the Twins will be playing outdoors again (hey, that ought to be fun in early April, huh?). I wonder if they'll still be wearing the Carl Pohlad arm patches -- I'm sure some in the city and with the team genuinely mourned his death, but Pohlad's seeming indifference toward his team (remember he offered up the Twins for contraction?) also carries some weight.
*****
So far we've had several games directly affected by the umpires blowing calls, to the point where folks are calling for instant replay in baseball as it is in football. Some of the calls were debatable (in the Detroit-Minnesota play-in game where a pitch grazed batter Brandon Inge's shirt, the home plate umpire was screened out), some were just plain blown (Phil Cuzzi completely and utterly missed the "foul" ball in Game 2 of the Yankees-Minnesota series even though he had an unobstructed view from 15 feet away; after he rang up a Twins hitter on a very questionable check swing yesterday, Chip Carey noted on TBS he's going to have a hard time reserving a table a restaurant in Minnesota for awhile). I didn't see last night's Philadelphia-Colorado game, so I can't judge that one.
I can see the logic of instant replay (I'm not a purist, I like getting the calls right), but the problem I can see is the slowdowns in the game (a pitcher doesn't want to be standing on the mound for five minutes doing nothing while a replay official stares at eight angles) and that no equivalent giveback to a timeout if "replay challenge" is instituted like it is in football. Suggestions welcome.
*****
Best line of the day: Dave Campbell, on ESPN radio, when a pitcher threw a breaking ball for strike three after a series of fastballs: "When you're looking for a 99-mile-an-hour pitch and you get Mr. Snappy instead…" Mr. Snappy. I'll have to remember that.
Here's my question: what genius at MLB decided starting the game at 10:07 PM Eastern Time would be a good idea? Especially when an east coast team like Philadelphia is involved; this means that virtually nobody under age 10 saw any of the game. And before anybody says, "But the kids should have the day off, since it's Columbus Day the next day," that assumes people actually have the day off (not everybody does -- I'm writing this from the office), and that parents will let their kids stay up much later for that purpose (I wouldn't; my six-year-old has lights out at 8 PM). If MLB is thinking this is the way to garner new fans, they couldn't be more wrong. (I suppose they're getting slightly smarter; when the League Championship Series first started in 1969, on at least one occasion the AL and NL games started at the same time, leaving NBC to decide which to broadcast.)
So, I propose to MLB the following:
- No more than three games on any weekday (this seems to be the rule anyway).
- No start time later than 8:30 PM Eastern. This may mean some games may overlap, but they did last night anyway, so what difference does it make?
- Game times have to be flexible. I understand the logic for yesterday -- Boston vs. Angels had to start at 1 PM because the New England Patriots were playing the 4 PM game; New Englanders don't want to be paralyzed by the choices and the big, bad NFL will never move a game themselves unless they start getting negative press. And, understandably, the Red Sox were getting sick of being the 10 PM Eastern start when they were in California. So that was locked in. Likewise, the Philadelphia-Colorado game had to be the late game because the Denver Broncos was playing against the Patriots in that same 4 PM game. But did the Yankees-Minnesota have to start at 7 Eastern? It's Sunday night, everybody's at home watching sports anyway, the New York Giants and Minnesota Vikings both played 1 PM games and the Jets play tonight (oh, and if the Twins had won yesterday, you can bet a Yankees-Minnesota Game 4 would have run right up against the New York Jets and Miami Dolphins). The Yankees-Minnesota game should have started at 5:30 Eastern last night, which would have allowed the Philadelphia-Colorado game to start at 8:30, allowing the kids to at least catch the first three innings or so.
If TBS doesn't like this, well, they're hereby invited to bite me. Another network that understands the game a bit better (ahem, ESPN) can take over.
*****
Hated to see the Twins go out that way, but they're probably very happy they made it to the postseason in the first place without Justin Morneau and with Jason Kubel going 0-for-13 with nine strikeouts. Without the two of them, they had virtually no power (Joe Mauer's an outstanding hitter, but he's not a slugger).
The baserunning gaffes in Games 2 and 3 didn't help, although neither could be defined as a gamebreaker. The Game 2 goof came earlier in the game, and showed that Carlos Gomez will never be the five-tool player Minnesota may have hoped (note to Mets fans: with Phil Humber stuck in AAA and the other two pitchers not in the majors, it's looking like the Johan Santana trade will be as much of a win as the Rick Aguilera and Kevin Tapani for a fading Frank Viola was a loss). On the other hand, Nick Punto is a smart baseball player, but he had a major brain cramp last night; he ran through a stop sign by his third base coach (which took me about five replays to see, until it occurred to someone at TBS to get rid of the ALDS logo that was blocking our view).
Next year the Twins will be playing outdoors again (hey, that ought to be fun in early April, huh?). I wonder if they'll still be wearing the Carl Pohlad arm patches -- I'm sure some in the city and with the team genuinely mourned his death, but Pohlad's seeming indifference toward his team (remember he offered up the Twins for contraction?) also carries some weight.
*****
So far we've had several games directly affected by the umpires blowing calls, to the point where folks are calling for instant replay in baseball as it is in football. Some of the calls were debatable (in the Detroit-Minnesota play-in game where a pitch grazed batter Brandon Inge's shirt, the home plate umpire was screened out), some were just plain blown (Phil Cuzzi completely and utterly missed the "foul" ball in Game 2 of the Yankees-Minnesota series even though he had an unobstructed view from 15 feet away; after he rang up a Twins hitter on a very questionable check swing yesterday, Chip Carey noted on TBS he's going to have a hard time reserving a table a restaurant in Minnesota for awhile). I didn't see last night's Philadelphia-Colorado game, so I can't judge that one.
I can see the logic of instant replay (I'm not a purist, I like getting the calls right), but the problem I can see is the slowdowns in the game (a pitcher doesn't want to be standing on the mound for five minutes doing nothing while a replay official stares at eight angles) and that no equivalent giveback to a timeout if "replay challenge" is instituted like it is in football. Suggestions welcome.
*****
Best line of the day: Dave Campbell, on ESPN radio, when a pitcher threw a breaking ball for strike three after a series of fastballs: "When you're looking for a 99-mile-an-hour pitch and you get Mr. Snappy instead…" Mr. Snappy. I'll have to remember that.
Credit: The above picture originally appeared in today's New York Daily News and was taken by Barbara Antonelli.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
I have a rule when it comes to sports: family first. So I didn't watch any of the Red Sox-Angels game today, and only listened to bits and pieces of it. And when the Angels made their great comeback today against Billy Wagner and Jonathan Paplebon -- well, I was in an antique store with my son, Danny. (By the way, six-year-olds and antique stores don't mix well, especially when you don't allow him to touch anything. However, that ensures no breakage.)
This was a series I didn't want to see either team lose. I like teams with a plan, with a history of success and humility, and able to treat their players past and present well, and the Angels and Red Sox have done very well using those measuring rods the last decade. The Angels have had a difficult time of it this year with the death of their young pitcher, Nick Adenhart, in a drunk-driving accident (he was not driving; he was plowed into by a drunk driver -- the case hasn't gone to trial yet). I'd certainly root for them to beat the Yankees -- of course, I can't think of a team I wouldn't root for against the Yankees.
*****
Well, here's one, maybe. Now that the Cardinals are out, Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan are being a little coy about their plans for next year. (CBS Sports has more: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/12347467). I understand Duncan's ticked off that his son was traded, but that's the way things go in sports (talk to Felipe Alou about Moises getting dealt away sometime). Phil Rogers of The Chicago Tribune was floating the idea that Dusty Baker is going to get fired and LaRussa and Duncan would be brought in to take their place. I can see Baker getting canned, but I can't see LaRussa (who's now 65) and Duncan (64) moving to Cincinnati at this point, even if their pal Walt Jocketty is now the GM. The franchise doesn't have the backing of the city like St. Louis does (several players have taken smaller contracts for the chance to play in such a supportive environment), and Cincinnati doesn't have the talent in place yet. I don't care for LaRussa (who I find monumentally eogtistical) and Duncan (who has had a reasonable amount of success in finding talent in veterans where there was none, but has never been good at bringing up pitchers through the system without messing up their arms in the process), so that may be clouding my opinion.
This was a series I didn't want to see either team lose. I like teams with a plan, with a history of success and humility, and able to treat their players past and present well, and the Angels and Red Sox have done very well using those measuring rods the last decade. The Angels have had a difficult time of it this year with the death of their young pitcher, Nick Adenhart, in a drunk-driving accident (he was not driving; he was plowed into by a drunk driver -- the case hasn't gone to trial yet). I'd certainly root for them to beat the Yankees -- of course, I can't think of a team I wouldn't root for against the Yankees.
*****
Well, here's one, maybe. Now that the Cardinals are out, Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan are being a little coy about their plans for next year. (CBS Sports has more: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/12347467). I understand Duncan's ticked off that his son was traded, but that's the way things go in sports (talk to Felipe Alou about Moises getting dealt away sometime). Phil Rogers of The Chicago Tribune was floating the idea that Dusty Baker is going to get fired and LaRussa and Duncan would be brought in to take their place. I can see Baker getting canned, but I can't see LaRussa (who's now 65) and Duncan (64) moving to Cincinnati at this point, even if their pal Walt Jocketty is now the GM. The franchise doesn't have the backing of the city like St. Louis does (several players have taken smaller contracts for the chance to play in such a supportive environment), and Cincinnati doesn't have the talent in place yet. I don't care for LaRussa (who I find monumentally eogtistical) and Duncan (who has had a reasonable amount of success in finding talent in veterans where there was none, but has never been good at bringing up pitchers through the system without messing up their arms in the process), so that may be clouding my opinion.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
First Post
Over seven years after starting a blog, I'm starting another. This one is dedicated solely to my favorite sport, baseball. (Note not favorite pastime: that would be either playing with my son or eating Cheez-Its.)
I've been thinking about doing this for quite some time. My original plan was to write about baseball and football, but (1) baseball is quite enough for one blog, (2) I love watching football but can't explain it very well. And after picking up and reading a big of Faith and Fear in Flushing, by a Mets blogger, I realized anyone can write this if they can construct a sentence reasonably well.
I'm a lifelong Mets fan, but I now live in suburban Illinois. Which is fine, because we have three teams to follow: the Cubs and White Sox, of course, and the Milwaukee Brewers are just an hour and a half away. (In fact, the last two MLB games I've gone to were both Brewer games. It's a great stadium.)
After browsing through books by Bill James, Tom Boswell, and Roger Angell, I chose the name The Eleventh Inning because that's a make-or-break time in a baseball game. If you're tied after nine innings, no big deal, everybody can go another inning. By the eleventh, it's a game of attrition. At least one manager is out of bench players (or only has the catcher left); relief pitchers start to go two or three innings instead of one batter, or sometimes a starter will come in. The eleventh inning separates the men from the boys. Or the men from the Men, as the case may be.
Strange time to start, I know, but I'll be writing during the offseason as well.
Thanks for reading.
I've been thinking about doing this for quite some time. My original plan was to write about baseball and football, but (1) baseball is quite enough for one blog, (2) I love watching football but can't explain it very well. And after picking up and reading a big of Faith and Fear in Flushing, by a Mets blogger, I realized anyone can write this if they can construct a sentence reasonably well.
I'm a lifelong Mets fan, but I now live in suburban Illinois. Which is fine, because we have three teams to follow: the Cubs and White Sox, of course, and the Milwaukee Brewers are just an hour and a half away. (In fact, the last two MLB games I've gone to were both Brewer games. It's a great stadium.)
After browsing through books by Bill James, Tom Boswell, and Roger Angell, I chose the name The Eleventh Inning because that's a make-or-break time in a baseball game. If you're tied after nine innings, no big deal, everybody can go another inning. By the eleventh, it's a game of attrition. At least one manager is out of bench players (or only has the catcher left); relief pitchers start to go two or three innings instead of one batter, or sometimes a starter will come in. The eleventh inning separates the men from the boys. Or the men from the Men, as the case may be.
Strange time to start, I know, but I'll be writing during the offseason as well.
Thanks for reading.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)