And everything I would like to be?
I can fly higher than an eagle.
You are the wind beneath my wings:
"Lupica is an insecure, mean-spirited busybody. He’s upset because I put a clown suit on him on that show and in a follow-up column I wrote for ESPN. His little disingenuous overreaction to an opinion I’d stated previously on the show was staged to try to put me in a bad light. I guess no one had ever informed Mike that the E in ESPN stood for Entertainment. The Little Fella probably won’t let the producer (Joe Valerio) have me back on the show again. ... Lupica doesn’t like to be disagreed with, and he’s spoken so abusively to that producer for years that the producer probably doesn’t realize people are allowed to disagree with Lupica. I enjoyed my time on the show. But if the price of admission is stepping to Lupica’s drum, I’m more than happy to go without."
Friday, September 29, 2006
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Baseball writers continue to grapple with the "v" word.
Why is it so important for so many people to ignore baseball statistics as they try to determine the value of a baseball player?
This is a debate about the relative value of Derek Jeter and Jose Reyes and the numbers are right there on the page -- and the debaters still insist on ignoring the numbers:
"The essence of Derek Jeter's greatness has never had anything to do with whether he has better 'tools' than all those more 'talented' players on those other 29 teams."
Derek Jeter has been a five-tool world-class athlete for ten years.
His power doesn't quite qualify? Not enough homeruns? Okay, perhaps. He still has 350 career doubles, 50 career triples, 180 career homeruns, and a .463 career slugging percentage. He's not exactly Frank Robinson in the power department, but he's not exactly Gary Disarcina, either.
The essence of Derek Jeter's greatness as a baseball player is pure baseball-playing talent.
"And it has never had anything to do with almost all the stuff his critics bring up -- not his Zone Rating or his OPS or his VORP or anything else."
In 2006, Jeter is #2 in the entire American League in VORP. Hafner is #1, Jeter is #2.
Jeter's OPS is .897. This is 17th in the league, which is good on its own merits, but it's first among all shortstops in the league (with Tejada nipping at his heels).
Jeter's Zone Rating? His Zone Rating is .809. Yeah, that's pretty bad. Jose Reyes has a Zone Rating of .857.
Don't be afraid of statistics. Statistics can be your friend. You could have used those three statistics that his "critics" supposedly bring up and you could have proven Jeter's what? His value.
"So who cares if Jose Reyes is faster, or scores more runs, or inspires more pickoff throws? If I'm trying to win the World Series, I'll take Jeter over any shortstop in baseball."
If Reyes's 60 stolen bases throw a pitcher off his game and throw the defense into complete mayhem, then Jeter's 30 stolen bases at least throw the defense into entropic dissonance.
"Jose Reyes' impact on a game transcends conventional measures."
Sigh.
Silly me.
I was gauging his value by runs scored, runs batted in, batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percetange, singles, doubles, triples, and homeruns.
"It shows in the way opposing pitchers speed their deliveries, infielders rush their throws, and Paul Lo Duca -- the Mets' No. 2 hitter -- sees lots and lots of fastballs."
Okay, dude. You win.
"It's manifested in his 63 stolen bases" (conventional measure.) "66 extra-base hits" (conventional measure.) "he's batting .406 with runners in scoring position and two outs" (conventional measure.)
You know what? I haven't learned anything new from these clowns.
Let me figure out who's more valuable:
Jeter: .341/.414/.483, 14 hrs, 114 runs, 96 rbis.
Reyes: .301/.353/.491, 19 hrs, 120 runs, 80 rbis.
I say Jeter. The 60-point edge in on-base percentage gives Jeter the nod.
This is a debate about the relative value of Derek Jeter and Jose Reyes and the numbers are right there on the page -- and the debaters still insist on ignoring the numbers:
"The essence of Derek Jeter's greatness has never had anything to do with whether he has better 'tools' than all those more 'talented' players on those other 29 teams."
Derek Jeter has been a five-tool world-class athlete for ten years.
His power doesn't quite qualify? Not enough homeruns? Okay, perhaps. He still has 350 career doubles, 50 career triples, 180 career homeruns, and a .463 career slugging percentage. He's not exactly Frank Robinson in the power department, but he's not exactly Gary Disarcina, either.
The essence of Derek Jeter's greatness as a baseball player is pure baseball-playing talent.
"And it has never had anything to do with almost all the stuff his critics bring up -- not his Zone Rating or his OPS or his VORP or anything else."
In 2006, Jeter is #2 in the entire American League in VORP. Hafner is #1, Jeter is #2.
Jeter's OPS is .897. This is 17th in the league, which is good on its own merits, but it's first among all shortstops in the league (with Tejada nipping at his heels).
Jeter's Zone Rating? His Zone Rating is .809. Yeah, that's pretty bad. Jose Reyes has a Zone Rating of .857.
Don't be afraid of statistics. Statistics can be your friend. You could have used those three statistics that his "critics" supposedly bring up and you could have proven Jeter's what? His value.
"So who cares if Jose Reyes is faster, or scores more runs, or inspires more pickoff throws? If I'm trying to win the World Series, I'll take Jeter over any shortstop in baseball."
If Reyes's 60 stolen bases throw a pitcher off his game and throw the defense into complete mayhem, then Jeter's 30 stolen bases at least throw the defense into entropic dissonance.
"Jose Reyes' impact on a game transcends conventional measures."
Sigh.
Silly me.
I was gauging his value by runs scored, runs batted in, batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percetange, singles, doubles, triples, and homeruns.
"It shows in the way opposing pitchers speed their deliveries, infielders rush their throws, and Paul Lo Duca -- the Mets' No. 2 hitter -- sees lots and lots of fastballs."
Okay, dude. You win.
"It's manifested in his 63 stolen bases" (conventional measure.) "66 extra-base hits" (conventional measure.) "he's batting .406 with runners in scoring position and two outs" (conventional measure.)
You know what? I haven't learned anything new from these clowns.
Let me figure out who's more valuable:
Jeter: .341/.414/.483, 14 hrs, 114 runs, 96 rbis.
Reyes: .301/.353/.491, 19 hrs, 120 runs, 80 rbis.
I say Jeter. The 60-point edge in on-base percentage gives Jeter the nod.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
It warns you about that right on the ticket.
"The odds of such an occurrence seem insurmountable, yet Jay Gibbons pulled off the unimaginable feat: He hit a foul ball that injured his wife.
The scene occurred in the ninth inning of the Baltimore Orioles' game against Minnesota on Saturday. Gibbons fouled a ball straight back over the screen and into the rib cage of his wife, Laura."
It would have been truly unimaginable if she had not been at a baseball game.
Sitting behind home plate.
Watching her husband play baseball.
"It's something you think about every day here. Obviously, it's something I've talked about (to) deaf ears," said Gibbons, Baltimore's designated hitter and player representative. "I've got players coming to me every day saying that one of their family members got hit or almost got hit. I had an usher take one for my wife the other day."
The event with such insurmountable odds, that it almost happened every day.
It's so unimaginable that the players thought about it every day.
The scene occurred in the ninth inning of the Baltimore Orioles' game against Minnesota on Saturday. Gibbons fouled a ball straight back over the screen and into the rib cage of his wife, Laura."
It would have been truly unimaginable if she had not been at a baseball game.
Sitting behind home plate.
Watching her husband play baseball.
"It's something you think about every day here. Obviously, it's something I've talked about (to) deaf ears," said Gibbons, Baltimore's designated hitter and player representative. "I've got players coming to me every day saying that one of their family members got hit or almost got hit. I had an usher take one for my wife the other day."
The event with such insurmountable odds, that it almost happened every day.
It's so unimaginable that the players thought about it every day.
Homeruns are exciting and also effective.
"Ultimately, this is what Bud Selig and Donald Fehr have wrought, a baseball culture so myopic and home run-crazed that even Jose Reyes, who reminds us what the game was like when only the fans in the bleachers were juiced, believes the long ball is king."
Yes, this sounds like an accurate and well-rounded analysis of baseball history.
Pre-Selig players like Ruth, Gehrig, Foxx, Dimaggio, Mays, Aaron, McCovey, Jackson, Schmidt, Berra, Williams, and Ott were completely ignored by fans and media.
Bud Selig and ESPN were secretly behind Bobby Thomson's shot heard 'round the world, Gehrig's four-hr game, Ruth's three-hr game in the World Series, Mazeroski's World Series walkoff, Maris's 61st, Aaron's 715th ...
I mean, who's Babe Ruth, anyway? Bob Meusel led the 1927 in stolen bases and that's why Meusel still sells so many tee shirts with the number 3 on the back.
"There was a time when players such as Reyes were what the game was all about."
Maybe so, but not in your lifetime, you lying liar. Maybe back in the 1890s when the fielders didn't even wear gloves.
"Apart from batting average, Reyes' numbers are as good or better than Phil Rizzuto's when the Scooter won the AL MVP in 1950 and light-years better than those of Barry Larkin, the last 'traditional' -- read: non-home run-hitting -- shortstop to win the award back in 1995."
Is that meant to be a pro-Reyes argument for 2006 National League MVP?
Because it's not.
Because Ryan Howard's 2006 numbers are much better than Phil Rizzuto's 1950, Barry Larkin's 1995, and also Jose Reyes's 2006.
I give Matthews credit for a new tack, though. The criteria for 2006 MVP is now how they stack up to the 1950 MVP. Freddy Sanchez could be the NL MVP using Matthews's criteria.
Also, I thought Matthews's point was that light-hitting shortstops used to win lots of MVP awards? To prove his point, he goes back to freakin' 1950? That kind of disproves his point.
It's like saying that lots of relief pitchers win MVP awards because Willie Hernandez won one in 1984.
All he's doing is underscoring the decades-long love affair with the homerun.
"But over the last 10 years, baseball has changed every bit as much as Barry Bonds' hat size. Now, the things that Reyes does are considered novelties, quaint relics of a bygone era as dead as dial-up."
How arbitrary is "last 10 years," and how easily disputable?
It's not the last 10 years. It's more like the last 100 years.
I mean, the MVP is not always a slugger. It's sometimes a leadoff batter or a middle infielder or a pitcher. If they can make a compelling argument for that particular season.
But it's purty darn easy to go back to through the decades and prove that Matthews's contention is misleading at best. I mean, Roy Campanella had 25 career stolen bases and 3 MVPs.
"The driving influence behind the MVP voting these days is television. That is where most baseball writers get their information about out-of-town players, and the next time 'SportsCenter' leads off with a guy legging out a drag bunt, stealing second, crossing to third on a groundout and scoring on a sac fly will be the first."
Again, what's with the "these days" nonsense?
How did baseball writers get their information about out-of-town players in the 1970s or the 1940s? A week-old boxscore which didn't list drag bunts? Or a guy in a radio booth reading the plays off a ticker and smacking two pieces of wood together to emulate the sound of a baseball hitting a bat? Exchanging anecdotes over a few beers at the local watering hole?
"That's the kind of things Reyes does. As the engine driving the league's best team, he should be the NL MVP. Yet, he has no chance to win the award because his value to his team and to the league is expressed in ways the highlight reels and boxscores can never capture."
Reyes has no chance to be first in the NL, mainly because of the existence of Ryan Howard and Albert Pujols, but Reyes will probably make a very nice showing in the MVP voting. Top five is my guess.
Oh, and the things Reyes does are absolutely captured in boxscores. Batting average, on-base percentage, walks, singles, doubles, triples, homeruns, runs scored, runs batted in, and steals are all captured in boxscores.
"Disruptive rather than destructive, Reyes not only sets the table, he sets the tone. When Reyes is on base, the runner becomes more important than the batter and the ball becomes a slippery seed in the grip of otherwise sure-handed infielders. And in pitching-dominated playoff baseball, that is likely to win you more games than Albert Pujols, Ryan Howard or Carlos Beltran ever will."
Nonsense.
You know, Carlos Beltran hit eight homeruns in about nine playoff at-bats in 2004. His slugging percentage was approximately 10,000. He could not cause any chaos on the basepaths because he was slowly trotting around them in an orderly manner.
Furthermore, if Wallace Matthews wants to see a man "set a tone," I'll send him a YouTube link of Pujols's two-out, ninth-inning, three-run homerun off Brad Lidge in the NLCS.
Andy Pettitte said "Oh, my God!" That ball is still flying. The crack of the beat is still reverberating.
That's what I call setting a tone and helping a team win a baseball game.
"Reyes' numbers are good but not spectacular - a .300 batting average, 19 homers, 189 hits heading into last night, 80 RBIs and 120 runs scored, more than all but three other National Leaguers, including Beltran, who had one more."
Gosh, it kills me to admit it, but those are spectacular numbers.
"He leads not just the NL, but all of Major League Baseball, in the game's most exciting plays, the triple (17) and the stolen base (60), and though he may never match Beltran for home run totals, a 30-homer season is not beyond his grasp."
Screech ...
Triples and stolen bases are baseball most exciting plays? Huh.
I have always liked the srike-'em-out-throw-'em-out double play.
I have also always liked the homerun.
See, I believe Ryan Howard's 60 homeruns are exciting and also effective. More effective than 60 stolen bases for sure.
Because, when a player hits a homerun, he scores a run 100% of the time. (As a bonus, all the runners on base score, too.)
When a players steals a base, he scores a run less than 100% of the time.
Yes, this sounds like an accurate and well-rounded analysis of baseball history.
Pre-Selig players like Ruth, Gehrig, Foxx, Dimaggio, Mays, Aaron, McCovey, Jackson, Schmidt, Berra, Williams, and Ott were completely ignored by fans and media.
Bud Selig and ESPN were secretly behind Bobby Thomson's shot heard 'round the world, Gehrig's four-hr game, Ruth's three-hr game in the World Series, Mazeroski's World Series walkoff, Maris's 61st, Aaron's 715th ...
I mean, who's Babe Ruth, anyway? Bob Meusel led the 1927 in stolen bases and that's why Meusel still sells so many tee shirts with the number 3 on the back.
"There was a time when players such as Reyes were what the game was all about."
Maybe so, but not in your lifetime, you lying liar. Maybe back in the 1890s when the fielders didn't even wear gloves.
"Apart from batting average, Reyes' numbers are as good or better than Phil Rizzuto's when the Scooter won the AL MVP in 1950 and light-years better than those of Barry Larkin, the last 'traditional' -- read: non-home run-hitting -- shortstop to win the award back in 1995."
Is that meant to be a pro-Reyes argument for 2006 National League MVP?
Because it's not.
Because Ryan Howard's 2006 numbers are much better than Phil Rizzuto's 1950, Barry Larkin's 1995, and also Jose Reyes's 2006.
I give Matthews credit for a new tack, though. The criteria for 2006 MVP is now how they stack up to the 1950 MVP. Freddy Sanchez could be the NL MVP using Matthews's criteria.
Also, I thought Matthews's point was that light-hitting shortstops used to win lots of MVP awards? To prove his point, he goes back to freakin' 1950? That kind of disproves his point.
It's like saying that lots of relief pitchers win MVP awards because Willie Hernandez won one in 1984.
All he's doing is underscoring the decades-long love affair with the homerun.
"But over the last 10 years, baseball has changed every bit as much as Barry Bonds' hat size. Now, the things that Reyes does are considered novelties, quaint relics of a bygone era as dead as dial-up."
How arbitrary is "last 10 years," and how easily disputable?
It's not the last 10 years. It's more like the last 100 years.
I mean, the MVP is not always a slugger. It's sometimes a leadoff batter or a middle infielder or a pitcher. If they can make a compelling argument for that particular season.
But it's purty darn easy to go back to through the decades and prove that Matthews's contention is misleading at best. I mean, Roy Campanella had 25 career stolen bases and 3 MVPs.
"The driving influence behind the MVP voting these days is television. That is where most baseball writers get their information about out-of-town players, and the next time 'SportsCenter' leads off with a guy legging out a drag bunt, stealing second, crossing to third on a groundout and scoring on a sac fly will be the first."
Again, what's with the "these days" nonsense?
How did baseball writers get their information about out-of-town players in the 1970s or the 1940s? A week-old boxscore which didn't list drag bunts? Or a guy in a radio booth reading the plays off a ticker and smacking two pieces of wood together to emulate the sound of a baseball hitting a bat? Exchanging anecdotes over a few beers at the local watering hole?
"That's the kind of things Reyes does. As the engine driving the league's best team, he should be the NL MVP. Yet, he has no chance to win the award because his value to his team and to the league is expressed in ways the highlight reels and boxscores can never capture."
Reyes has no chance to be first in the NL, mainly because of the existence of Ryan Howard and Albert Pujols, but Reyes will probably make a very nice showing in the MVP voting. Top five is my guess.
Oh, and the things Reyes does are absolutely captured in boxscores. Batting average, on-base percentage, walks, singles, doubles, triples, homeruns, runs scored, runs batted in, and steals are all captured in boxscores.
"Disruptive rather than destructive, Reyes not only sets the table, he sets the tone. When Reyes is on base, the runner becomes more important than the batter and the ball becomes a slippery seed in the grip of otherwise sure-handed infielders. And in pitching-dominated playoff baseball, that is likely to win you more games than Albert Pujols, Ryan Howard or Carlos Beltran ever will."
Nonsense.
You know, Carlos Beltran hit eight homeruns in about nine playoff at-bats in 2004. His slugging percentage was approximately 10,000. He could not cause any chaos on the basepaths because he was slowly trotting around them in an orderly manner.
Furthermore, if Wallace Matthews wants to see a man "set a tone," I'll send him a YouTube link of Pujols's two-out, ninth-inning, three-run homerun off Brad Lidge in the NLCS.
Andy Pettitte said "Oh, my God!" That ball is still flying. The crack of the beat is still reverberating.
That's what I call setting a tone and helping a team win a baseball game.
"Reyes' numbers are good but not spectacular - a .300 batting average, 19 homers, 189 hits heading into last night, 80 RBIs and 120 runs scored, more than all but three other National Leaguers, including Beltran, who had one more."
Gosh, it kills me to admit it, but those are spectacular numbers.
"He leads not just the NL, but all of Major League Baseball, in the game's most exciting plays, the triple (17) and the stolen base (60), and though he may never match Beltran for home run totals, a 30-homer season is not beyond his grasp."
Screech ...
Triples and stolen bases are baseball most exciting plays? Huh.
I have always liked the srike-'em-out-throw-'em-out double play.
I have also always liked the homerun.
See, I believe Ryan Howard's 60 homeruns are exciting and also effective. More effective than 60 stolen bases for sure.
Because, when a player hits a homerun, he scores a run 100% of the time. (As a bonus, all the runners on base score, too.)
When a players steals a base, he scores a run less than 100% of the time.
Baseball Basics.
My coworker is going to a baseball game tonight. She asked me for the basics. This is what I sent to her.
If anybody knows Wallace Matthews's email address, maybe I'll also send it to him:
1) Each pitch is a ball or a strike.
2) Four balls is a walk.
3) Three strikes is an out.
4) A foul is a strike, but not if there are already two strikes. Then, it's a do-over.
5) A "hit" is reaching a base safely. An "out" is not reaching the base safely. Usually, an out is a strike out, a fly ball that is caught, or a ground ball that is fielded and thrown the first base before the batter reaches first base.
6) Three outs in an inning.
7) The bases clear after the inning is over. If you were on second base when the inning ended, you don't start at second base when the next inning starts.
8) Nine innings in a game.
9) When the runner touches home plate, it's a "run," not a "point."
Those are the basics.
Don't worry about the infield fly rule or why a runner on first base automatically runs when there are two outs and a 3-2 count. As long as you don't call a "run" a "point," you'll sound smart.
If anybody knows Wallace Matthews's email address, maybe I'll also send it to him:
1) Each pitch is a ball or a strike.
2) Four balls is a walk.
3) Three strikes is an out.
4) A foul is a strike, but not if there are already two strikes. Then, it's a do-over.
5) A "hit" is reaching a base safely. An "out" is not reaching the base safely. Usually, an out is a strike out, a fly ball that is caught, or a ground ball that is fielded and thrown the first base before the batter reaches first base.
6) Three outs in an inning.
7) The bases clear after the inning is over. If you were on second base when the inning ended, you don't start at second base when the next inning starts.
8) Nine innings in a game.
9) When the runner touches home plate, it's a "run," not a "point."
Those are the basics.
Don't worry about the infield fly rule or why a runner on first base automatically runs when there are two outs and a 3-2 count. As long as you don't call a "run" a "point," you'll sound smart.
Monday, September 25, 2006
Who's the Best, Most Outstanding, Coolest, Most Awesome, Most Valuable Player?
"First, the disclaimer: I am not an MVP voter, so what you read here is not official, merely an opinion."
I can sleep easier tonight.
"In my definition, the MVP award is not meant to go to the best, or most outstanding, player, but rather to that player most responsible for the success of his team. ... Remember, it's Most VALUABLE Player."
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Very common sentiment, though I disagree fundamentally with the criteria. Because I believe Pepe's logic collapses upon itself.
Emil Brown was more valuable for the success of his team -- however limited that team's success was -- than Jeter has been for the success of his team. Percentage-wise, anyway.
Playoff teams are typically good because they have lots of good players. Where would the Yankees be without Jeter? In the playoffs, probably.
Where would the Indians be without Travis Hafner? Mabye last place. Doesn't matter to Phil Pepe, but it probably matters to the fans in Cleveland and Kansas City.
But what is really baffling to me is this: While the term "valuable" may be vague, I don't think the terms "best" or "most outstanding" or any less vague.
Is Pepe claiming Jeter is the MOST VALUABLE player, but Jeter is not the BEST player or the MOST OUTSTANDING player? I think all of those terms are pretty much synonyms and now you're grading a player based on the effectiveness of his teammates. Miguel Cabrera doesn't pitch, you know what I'm sayin'?
There seems to be a fairly common idea that a separate "player of the year" award or "best player" award would solve this problem.
The stat junkies could satisfy their craving by giving a "player of the year" award to David Ortiz, while the baseball poets can still reward fielding, baserunning, leadership, and all the other qualities that sluggers presumably lack, by giving an MVP to a different player from a winning team.
Can you imagine?
If "most valuable" is vague and ambiguous, how about "player of the year"? What could be more vague than "player of the year"?
My personal "player of the year" is Coco Crisp because his name is funny.
I can sleep easier tonight.
"In my definition, the MVP award is not meant to go to the best, or most outstanding, player, but rather to that player most responsible for the success of his team. ... Remember, it's Most VALUABLE Player."
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Very common sentiment, though I disagree fundamentally with the criteria. Because I believe Pepe's logic collapses upon itself.
Emil Brown was more valuable for the success of his team -- however limited that team's success was -- than Jeter has been for the success of his team. Percentage-wise, anyway.
Playoff teams are typically good because they have lots of good players. Where would the Yankees be without Jeter? In the playoffs, probably.
Where would the Indians be without Travis Hafner? Mabye last place. Doesn't matter to Phil Pepe, but it probably matters to the fans in Cleveland and Kansas City.
But what is really baffling to me is this: While the term "valuable" may be vague, I don't think the terms "best" or "most outstanding" or any less vague.
Is Pepe claiming Jeter is the MOST VALUABLE player, but Jeter is not the BEST player or the MOST OUTSTANDING player? I think all of those terms are pretty much synonyms and now you're grading a player based on the effectiveness of his teammates. Miguel Cabrera doesn't pitch, you know what I'm sayin'?
There seems to be a fairly common idea that a separate "player of the year" award or "best player" award would solve this problem.
The stat junkies could satisfy their craving by giving a "player of the year" award to David Ortiz, while the baseball poets can still reward fielding, baserunning, leadership, and all the other qualities that sluggers presumably lack, by giving an MVP to a different player from a winning team.
Can you imagine?
If "most valuable" is vague and ambiguous, how about "player of the year"? What could be more vague than "player of the year"?
My personal "player of the year" is Coco Crisp because his name is funny.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Every team thinks they're a team of destiny.
From the nj.com Yankees weblog on September 23, 2006:
"It is as fun to be a Yankee fan right now as we can remember since, oh, late October of 2000. We certainly aren't the only ones feeling the swagger of this Yankees team. Yankee Nation is alive and as frenzied as we can ever remember. We are waiting, no, clamoring for October to begin, where we will really see what this team can do."
From the nj.com Yankees weblog on October 1, 2005:
"This is one time when we just know that all the hyperbole, superlatives and cliches wouldn't describe the sheer madness of this 2005 season.
But the rational half of us screams that one thing is for certain: there is no reason this team can't win the World Series this year. Sure, they're not as good as some people thought they would be. But they're certainly not as bad as some people thought they were back in April. And best of all, after all the talk about the 2005 Yankees not being a team--that they were just a bunch of individual players playing together--they've proven that the opposite is the truth. And that's why this season has been more fun than usual. These 2005 Yankees are gritty. They are tough. And they are resilient. They are the opposite of their professionalist counterparts of seasons past.
And that's exactly why they can win the World Series."
It's really not a big deal. Every team that makes the playoffs has a chance to win it and no team has any guarantees. Every fan base ought to be excited every year their team makes the playoffs.
I am just not sure why the 2006 Yankees supposedly have newfound swagger or why the 2006 season was supposedly more fun than the others.
I don't see all that much swagger right now. I saw Mike Mussina lose a game at Tampa Bay as the Yankees lost the ALCS home field advantage to the Tigers.
How's about a little less swagger and a little more covering first base on groundballs to the right side?
"It is as fun to be a Yankee fan right now as we can remember since, oh, late October of 2000. We certainly aren't the only ones feeling the swagger of this Yankees team. Yankee Nation is alive and as frenzied as we can ever remember. We are waiting, no, clamoring for October to begin, where we will really see what this team can do."
From the nj.com Yankees weblog on October 1, 2005:
"This is one time when we just know that all the hyperbole, superlatives and cliches wouldn't describe the sheer madness of this 2005 season.
But the rational half of us screams that one thing is for certain: there is no reason this team can't win the World Series this year. Sure, they're not as good as some people thought they would be. But they're certainly not as bad as some people thought they were back in April. And best of all, after all the talk about the 2005 Yankees not being a team--that they were just a bunch of individual players playing together--they've proven that the opposite is the truth. And that's why this season has been more fun than usual. These 2005 Yankees are gritty. They are tough. And they are resilient. They are the opposite of their professionalist counterparts of seasons past.
And that's exactly why they can win the World Series."
It's really not a big deal. Every team that makes the playoffs has a chance to win it and no team has any guarantees. Every fan base ought to be excited every year their team makes the playoffs.
I am just not sure why the 2006 Yankees supposedly have newfound swagger or why the 2006 season was supposedly more fun than the others.
I don't see all that much swagger right now. I saw Mike Mussina lose a game at Tampa Bay as the Yankees lost the ALCS home field advantage to the Tigers.
How's about a little less swagger and a little more covering first base on groundballs to the right side?
The Yankees are in one league and the Mets are in the other.
Three Lupica posts in one day!
I think Lupica is proactively making excuses for the Mets just in case the Yankees defeat the Mets in the World Series:
"The Yankees will enter the 2006 postseason with a payroll, according to the current numbers from Major League Baseball, of $213 million.
Whatever, dude. It's pretty transparent that your perspective is skewed. The Mets are the underdogs and you're Polly Purebred.
But it's downright pathetic to claim the moral high ground, to feign outrage that the Yankees outspend everyone in the American League. A Mets supporter who complains about payroll is a hypocrite.
Last week, the Mets clinched the division while playing the Florida Marlins, and Lupica smiled.
The Mets celebrated so much that night, they went through twenty cases of champagne.
Beltran, Pedro, Delgaod all make about the same as the entire Marlins payroll.
Each case of champagne that the Mets poured over their free-agent mercenary heads cost more than the entire Marlins' bullpen.
Hypocrites like Mike Lupica did not see the irony. Hypocrites like Mike Lupica were not appalled. Hypocrites like Mike Lupica don't hate payroll inequities, they just hate the Yankees.
I think Lupica is proactively making excuses for the Mets just in case the Yankees defeat the Mets in the World Series:
"The Yankees will enter the 2006 postseason with a payroll, according to the current numbers from Major League Baseball, of $213 million.
The combined payroll of the other three likely playoff teams - A's, Tigers, Twins - in the American League is $222 million.
If the Yankees play the Twins in the first round, the disparity in payroll will be approximately $150 million, which means the Yankees will have the greatest single economic advantage in the history of any postseason, in any sport.
This isn't about how the Yankees spend their money.
They spend it well.
They break no rules.
They pay a high price for success in revenue sharing, and luxury taxes, even if this new stadium of theirs will be a way around some of that.
It doesn't change the fact that only in baseball can one team outspend everybody like this.
While playing by the rules, they are also playing by a different set of rules.
You know what the difference is between their payroll and somebody like the Mets'?
An entire playoff team.
The difference between the Yankees and the Mets is the A's.
Or the Twins.
That's the bottom line here, on the amazing bottom line of the Yankees."
Meanwhile, Mike Lupica thinks Omar Minaya does no wrong and Oliver Perez is going to win 20 games.Whatever, dude. It's pretty transparent that your perspective is skewed. The Mets are the underdogs and you're Polly Purebred.
But it's downright pathetic to claim the moral high ground, to feign outrage that the Yankees outspend everyone in the American League. A Mets supporter who complains about payroll is a hypocrite.
Last week, the Mets clinched the division while playing the Florida Marlins, and Lupica smiled.
The Mets celebrated so much that night, they went through twenty cases of champagne.
Beltran, Pedro, Delgaod all make about the same as the entire Marlins payroll.
Each case of champagne that the Mets poured over their free-agent mercenary heads cost more than the entire Marlins' bullpen.
Hypocrites like Mike Lupica did not see the irony. Hypocrites like Mike Lupica were not appalled. Hypocrites like Mike Lupica don't hate payroll inequities, they just hate the Yankees.
What Fans Do.
Mike Lupica's biography reads as follows:
"He began his newspaper career with the New York Post in 1975, at the age of 23, covering the Knicks. In 1977, he became the youngest columnist ever at a New York paper when he joined the Daily News."
I can only deduce that it took Lupica thirty years to realize that fans are biased towards the players on their local team:
"If David Ortiz were a Yankee, Yankee fans would have been writing their Congressmen the last two years to get him the MVP award."
Yes, that's how it works. Of course, the major exception being Alex Rodriguez in 2005.
But, generally, the local fans and writers and coaches and teammates and batboys and hot dog vendors and smiley local morning news anchors all pull for the player from the local team.
I mean, Billy Wagner has pitched 70 whole innings and practically leads the league in blown saves (probably, in a lazy, unverified sort of way), but the Mets are pushing his supposed candidacy for the Cy Young Award.
That's how it works.
Go to an ESPN Sports Nation poll and ask if Khalil Greene is the NL MVP. He will receive 0.01% of the national vote, but 90% of the San Diego vote.
So, yeah. Lupica is stating the obvious.
Yankee fans root for Jeter in 2006, (we'll ignore 2005), and they rooted for Soriano in 2002 and Mattingly in 1986.
Red Sox fans, such as New York Daily News columnist Mike Lupica, root for David Ortiz.
"He began his newspaper career with the New York Post in 1975, at the age of 23, covering the Knicks. In 1977, he became the youngest columnist ever at a New York paper when he joined the Daily News."
I can only deduce that it took Lupica thirty years to realize that fans are biased towards the players on their local team:
"If David Ortiz were a Yankee, Yankee fans would have been writing their Congressmen the last two years to get him the MVP award."
Yes, that's how it works. Of course, the major exception being Alex Rodriguez in 2005.
But, generally, the local fans and writers and coaches and teammates and batboys and hot dog vendors and smiley local morning news anchors all pull for the player from the local team.
I mean, Billy Wagner has pitched 70 whole innings and practically leads the league in blown saves (probably, in a lazy, unverified sort of way), but the Mets are pushing his supposed candidacy for the Cy Young Award.
That's how it works.
Go to an ESPN Sports Nation poll and ask if Khalil Greene is the NL MVP. He will receive 0.01% of the national vote, but 90% of the San Diego vote.
So, yeah. Lupica is stating the obvious.
Yankee fans root for Jeter in 2006, (we'll ignore 2005), and they rooted for Soriano in 2002 and Mattingly in 1986.
Red Sox fans, such as New York Daily News columnist Mike Lupica, root for David Ortiz.
Well, bully for the Phillies.
I know that Nick Swisher might score 100 runs and drive in 100 runs this season, but the gas prices in the northeast United States have fallen sharply over the past few weeks.
I know that Barry Bonds leads the NL in walks, but Pluto is no longer considered a planet.
Mike Lupica presents another baseball non sequitur:
"I know that we're already doing sketches for Bobby Abreu's plaque in Monument Park, but it's not like the Phillies exactly fell apart when he left town, right?"
Right.
Are you making a point, Monsieur Lupica?
Are you suggesting that Bob Abreu isn't a good baseball player because the Phillies are playing well in his absence? Are you arguing with a non-existent opponent that Bob Abreu is so good that no team is supposed to able to win without him? That he's supposed to be irreplaceable?
Are you so unwilling to praise any Yankee player or Yankee GM that you have to stoop to indirectly assailing them because the Phillies have played well in August and September?
Since joining the Yankees, Abreu is hitting .330/.428/.486, 30 runs, 34 rbis in 50 games. Nice.
In August, the Phillies' record was 18-11. In September, the Phillies' record ahs been 14-6. All this without Bob Abreu? How is this possible?
Maybe it has something to do with Ryan Howard, among others. In August, Howard hit .348/.464/.750, 14 hrs, 25 runs, 41 rbis. In September, Howard has hit .418/.588/.910, 9 hrs, 19 runs, 15 rbis.
Ryan Howard's surge to NL MVP is not a poor reflection on Bob Abreu or Brian Cashman.
I know that Barry Bonds leads the NL in walks, but Pluto is no longer considered a planet.
Mike Lupica presents another baseball non sequitur:
"I know that we're already doing sketches for Bobby Abreu's plaque in Monument Park, but it's not like the Phillies exactly fell apart when he left town, right?"
Right.
Are you making a point, Monsieur Lupica?
Are you suggesting that Bob Abreu isn't a good baseball player because the Phillies are playing well in his absence? Are you arguing with a non-existent opponent that Bob Abreu is so good that no team is supposed to able to win without him? That he's supposed to be irreplaceable?
Are you so unwilling to praise any Yankee player or Yankee GM that you have to stoop to indirectly assailing them because the Phillies have played well in August and September?
Since joining the Yankees, Abreu is hitting .330/.428/.486, 30 runs, 34 rbis in 50 games. Nice.
In August, the Phillies' record was 18-11. In September, the Phillies' record ahs been 14-6. All this without Bob Abreu? How is this possible?
Maybe it has something to do with Ryan Howard, among others. In August, Howard hit .348/.464/.750, 14 hrs, 25 runs, 41 rbis. In September, Howard has hit .418/.588/.910, 9 hrs, 19 runs, 15 rbis.
Ryan Howard's surge to NL MVP is not a poor reflection on Bob Abreu or Brian Cashman.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Captain Keyboard Courageous.
"The money quote, from Jason Giambi, is right there on the cover of Sports Illustrated, like a fastball under Alex Rodriguez's chin.
'Alex doesn't know who he is,' Giambi says of A-Rod, the SI cover boy. 'We're going to find out who he is in the next couple of months.'
Here's something we need to find out first:
Who is Jason Giambi to be saying something like that about Rodriguez?"
Who is Mike Lupica to talk smack about Jason Giambi?
Who is Mike Lupica to make fun of Johnny Damon's hair?
Who is Mike Lupica to tell Serena Williams that she ought to pay more attention to tennis?
Who is Mike Lupica to think he's Alex Rodriguez's psychologist?
Who is Mike Lupica to tell Alex Rodriguez that he shouldn't sunbathe in Central Park?:
"Now A-Rod needs to stop talking, too. He needs to stop telling us how smart he is and how good-looking he is. If he really thinks that one of the reasons people don't love him is because he's 'biracial,' as he suggests to SI's Tom Verducci, then it is worth wondering if maybe he got sunstroke that day in Central Park when he became the photo-op heard round the world. ... He also seems to be as insecure as any great athlete you will come across in any sport. He desperately needs to be loved and has put himself in a situation here where he stands right next to a guy - Jeter - who will always be loved 100 times more at Yankee Stadium. That's on Rodriguez. ... Rodriguez needs to stop analyzing himself or begging to be analyzed by sports writers."
I'll answer Lupica's question: Who is Jason Giambi to be saying something about Alex Rodriguez?
At least Giambi is ARod's teammate.
At least Jason Giambi has worn pinstripes.
Who the heck is Mike Lupica?
Jason Giambi is more of a True Yankee than Mike Lupica will ever be. For that matter, Wil Nieves is more of a True Yankee than Mike Lupica will ever be.
'Alex doesn't know who he is,' Giambi says of A-Rod, the SI cover boy. 'We're going to find out who he is in the next couple of months.'
Here's something we need to find out first:
Who is Jason Giambi to be saying something like that about Rodriguez?"
Who is Mike Lupica to talk smack about Jason Giambi?
Who is Mike Lupica to make fun of Johnny Damon's hair?
Who is Mike Lupica to tell Serena Williams that she ought to pay more attention to tennis?
Who is Mike Lupica to think he's Alex Rodriguez's psychologist?
Who is Mike Lupica to tell Alex Rodriguez that he shouldn't sunbathe in Central Park?:
"Now A-Rod needs to stop talking, too. He needs to stop telling us how smart he is and how good-looking he is. If he really thinks that one of the reasons people don't love him is because he's 'biracial,' as he suggests to SI's Tom Verducci, then it is worth wondering if maybe he got sunstroke that day in Central Park when he became the photo-op heard round the world. ... He also seems to be as insecure as any great athlete you will come across in any sport. He desperately needs to be loved and has put himself in a situation here where he stands right next to a guy - Jeter - who will always be loved 100 times more at Yankee Stadium. That's on Rodriguez. ... Rodriguez needs to stop analyzing himself or begging to be analyzed by sports writers."
I'll answer Lupica's question: Who is Jason Giambi to be saying something about Alex Rodriguez?
At least Giambi is ARod's teammate.
At least Jason Giambi has worn pinstripes.
Who the heck is Mike Lupica?
Jason Giambi is more of a True Yankee than Mike Lupica will ever be. For that matter, Wil Nieves is more of a True Yankee than Mike Lupica will ever be.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Rappers are flashy with their benjamins. Bling Bling. Word.
"By their nature, the New York Yankees are an intimidating team. They flash their money like rappers, play in a stadium that oozes history and trot out five players who make more this year than the entire Florida Marlins roster."
Nothing more intimidating than a stadium oozing history.
"So it was odd, then, to see the 2005 Yankees walking around with an unnerving lack of swagger, looking more like kids on the first day of school than bullies on the playground. Their body language said as much about the Yankees as their play did, and they made a quick exit from the playoffs, going without a World Series for the fifth consecutive season."
Do you think Jeff Passan is completely making this up?
The 2005 Yankees stormed back from a rough start to win the AL East from the Red Sox. They won the AL East in a showdown at Fenway in a playoff atmosphere in the last weekend of the season.
Nobody ever knows who's going to win in the playoffs, but I think the Yankees had plenty of swagger as they headed into the first round of the 2005 playoffs. "The team that gets hot in October" and all that jazz.
Unit was fantastic in the second half. Unit was not Kevin Brown. ARod was so "comfortable" in his second season as a Yankee, that he had 48 homeruns, 130 runs batted in, and an MVP award on the way. Mariano had an ERA of 1.38. Even the Giambino had bounced back.
Jeter, Rivera, ARod, Sheffield, Matsui, Giambi, Posada, Mussina, Unit, Wang, Gordon.
Were they really walking around with an unnerving lack of swagger as they headed into the ALDS vs. the Angels?
Or is Passan just making it up because they lost?
Oh, and for accuracy's sake, the Yankees have not gone without a World Series for five consecutive seasons.
I scanned my memory banks and used the Interweb for verification.
Sure enough, Jeff Passan seems to have forgotten about the years "2001" and "2003."
Yeah, yeah. I know what he meant. The Yankees have gone five consecutive years without a World Series title.
Write what you mean, you hayseed.
Nothing more intimidating than a stadium oozing history.
"So it was odd, then, to see the 2005 Yankees walking around with an unnerving lack of swagger, looking more like kids on the first day of school than bullies on the playground. Their body language said as much about the Yankees as their play did, and they made a quick exit from the playoffs, going without a World Series for the fifth consecutive season."
Do you think Jeff Passan is completely making this up?
The 2005 Yankees stormed back from a rough start to win the AL East from the Red Sox. They won the AL East in a showdown at Fenway in a playoff atmosphere in the last weekend of the season.
Nobody ever knows who's going to win in the playoffs, but I think the Yankees had plenty of swagger as they headed into the first round of the 2005 playoffs. "The team that gets hot in October" and all that jazz.
Unit was fantastic in the second half. Unit was not Kevin Brown. ARod was so "comfortable" in his second season as a Yankee, that he had 48 homeruns, 130 runs batted in, and an MVP award on the way. Mariano had an ERA of 1.38. Even the Giambino had bounced back.
Jeter, Rivera, ARod, Sheffield, Matsui, Giambi, Posada, Mussina, Unit, Wang, Gordon.
Were they really walking around with an unnerving lack of swagger as they headed into the ALDS vs. the Angels?
Or is Passan just making it up because they lost?
Oh, and for accuracy's sake, the Yankees have not gone without a World Series for five consecutive seasons.
I scanned my memory banks and used the Interweb for verification.
Sure enough, Jeff Passan seems to have forgotten about the years "2001" and "2003."
Yeah, yeah. I know what he meant. The Yankees have gone five consecutive years without a World Series title.
Write what you mean, you hayseed.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
The Reason to Boo Big Papi.
Derek Jeter is David Ortiz's Waterloo.
But who can really blame David Ortiz?
He had no idea what he was up against. He has no idea what happens when you take on The Power of Derek Jeter:
"Nobody has ever thought of Ortiz as a bad guy."
I have!
Every time that big, stupid son of a gun has batted against the Yankees, I have thought of him as a bad guy.
"But he also said what he said, and he was dead wrong. If he feels that badly about it, he should have said so last night."
Stop hitting walkoff homeruns against the Yankees, you stupid son of a gun.
"Now Yankee fans can let him have it with a clear conscience."
Now?
Phew.
Thanks, John Harper, for giving me the go-ahead.
It's funny, because, for about three years now, I've had my eye out for David Ortiz whenever I drive. If I happen to see him crossing the street, I might get a sudden attack of amnesia whereby I get the gas pedal mixed up with the brake pedal.
"Yes, Officer, I thought I heard a noise and I thought I might have hit something. That's why I backed up and hit him again. So I could be sure."
But who can really blame David Ortiz?
He had no idea what he was up against. He has no idea what happens when you take on The Power of Derek Jeter:
"Nobody has ever thought of Ortiz as a bad guy."
I have!
Every time that big, stupid son of a gun has batted against the Yankees, I have thought of him as a bad guy.
"But he also said what he said, and he was dead wrong. If he feels that badly about it, he should have said so last night."
Stop hitting walkoff homeruns against the Yankees, you stupid son of a gun.
"Now Yankee fans can let him have it with a clear conscience."
Now?
Phew.
Thanks, John Harper, for giving me the go-ahead.
It's funny, because, for about three years now, I've had my eye out for David Ortiz whenever I drive. If I happen to see him crossing the street, I might get a sudden attack of amnesia whereby I get the gas pedal mixed up with the brake pedal.
"Yes, Officer, I thought I heard a noise and I thought I might have hit something. That's why I backed up and hit him again. So I could be sure."
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
What About Bob?
I know it's coming.
It's gaining momentum.
It even kinda sorta makes sense.
The Yankees were in a tight pennant race with Boston. The Yankees added Bob Abreu. The Yankees quickly pulled away. Abreu has been a huge part of the Yankees' success in August and September.
But there's a problem with voting for Abreu for AL MVP.
It's the American League MVP. You can not be MVP of the American League if you only played 60 games in the American League.
Maybe next year, Bob.
It's gaining momentum.
It even kinda sorta makes sense.
The Yankees were in a tight pennant race with Boston. The Yankees added Bob Abreu. The Yankees quickly pulled away. Abreu has been a huge part of the Yankees' success in August and September.
But there's a problem with voting for Abreu for AL MVP.
It's the American League MVP. You can not be MVP of the American League if you only played 60 games in the American League.
Maybe next year, Bob.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Big Papi Backlash Continues.
Eh, the anti-Ortiz article is predictable enough.
But you've got a look a little more closely to find these bizarre observations by a man who apparently thinks he's coherent enough to determine who's the MVP of major league baseball:
"Alex Rodriguez of the Yankees collected the hardware instead, despite the certain knowledge among Yankees fans that, despite a statistically terrific year, he wasn’t even the MVP of his own team."
What's the emoticon for stammering, shock, surprise?
:-0
One of my frat buddies had a barbecue over Memorial Day Weekend in Connecticut. One of our mutual friends lives in Montreal. We'll call him "George" for the sake of this story.
"George" was unable to attend the barbecue because he chose instead to drive to Toronto to see one of the last performances of the Lord of the Rings musical
Sometimes, no embellishment is needed:
"I also know that when the Red Sox lost Jason Varitek, their catcher and captain, they collapsed despite Ortiz’s continuing presence in the lineup. To me, that makes Varitek, not Ortiz, Boston’s MVP."
...
But you've got a look a little more closely to find these bizarre observations by a man who apparently thinks he's coherent enough to determine who's the MVP of major league baseball:
"Alex Rodriguez of the Yankees collected the hardware instead, despite the certain knowledge among Yankees fans that, despite a statistically terrific year, he wasn’t even the MVP of his own team."
What's the emoticon for stammering, shock, surprise?
:-0
One of my frat buddies had a barbecue over Memorial Day Weekend in Connecticut. One of our mutual friends lives in Montreal. We'll call him "George" for the sake of this story.
"George" was unable to attend the barbecue because he chose instead to drive to Toronto to see one of the last performances of the Lord of the Rings musical
Sometimes, no embellishment is needed:
"I also know that when the Red Sox lost Jason Varitek, their catcher and captain, they collapsed despite Ortiz’s continuing presence in the lineup. To me, that makes Varitek, not Ortiz, Boston’s MVP."
...
Big Papi Backlash Begins.
In all seriousness, if you don't want the questions answered, then stop asking them.
Shut the whole sports reporting enterprise down and let the numbers speak for themselves:
"I love David Ortiz. I love the fact that he's a self-made megastar in Boston, a town tough enough to make New York seem warm and fuzzy. I love that he's the one remaining Red Sox icon who loves the hubbub of The Hub. I love that he returned from a heart ailment and picked right up where he left off, hitting home runs.
I love that he'll speak his mind, too."
I feel a "but" coming on.
"Except this one time, when he should keep his thoughts to himself."
A "but" or an "except."
"On Sunday, he went too far when he campaigned for MVP. I don't particularly like it when guys campaign for the Hall of Fame, but in the case of Cooperstown, at least they're not campaigning against anyone, just for themselves.
When you campaign for MVP, you're putting yourself ahead of other worthy candidates."
You've gone too far now, Big Papi. You've gone too far! You said you deserved the American League MVP award!
"I love David Ortiz."
"I don't like players who blah blah blah blah blah blah."
A lot of sportswriters really think the story is about themselves.
"If anything, Ortiz's words are going to put Jeter in an even more positive light, as the candidate who lacks any interest in glorifying himself (and by the way, the scoring call that so upset Ramirez and Ortiz was an error on Jeter that didn't cause him to complain). Jeter's response to New York writers was predictable. 'I'm not thinking about winning an MVP,' Jeter said. 'I'm thinking about winning the division. Our focus here isn't on individual awards.' Perfect."
I knew Ortiz would suffer a backlash and I find it amusing that, just three weeks ago, Ortiz was cherished for his forthrightness and fun attitude. (A five-game sweep will change a lot of perceptions, won't it?)
I also agree that it's simply the wrong thing to say. Boston could still make the playoffs and win the World Series if they have a good couple of weeks. No reason to indirectly criticize your teammates or to even worry about the AL MVP award.
But I still disapprove of Heyman's disapproval.
If guys like Heyman really want the players to "put up [their] numbers and pipe down," then let's base the MVP voting on the damned numbers.
Not how much you "love" the player or his postgame interview style.
Shut the whole sports reporting enterprise down and let the numbers speak for themselves:
"I love David Ortiz. I love the fact that he's a self-made megastar in Boston, a town tough enough to make New York seem warm and fuzzy. I love that he's the one remaining Red Sox icon who loves the hubbub of The Hub. I love that he returned from a heart ailment and picked right up where he left off, hitting home runs.
I love that he'll speak his mind, too."
I feel a "but" coming on.
"Except this one time, when he should keep his thoughts to himself."
A "but" or an "except."
"On Sunday, he went too far when he campaigned for MVP. I don't particularly like it when guys campaign for the Hall of Fame, but in the case of Cooperstown, at least they're not campaigning against anyone, just for themselves.
When you campaign for MVP, you're putting yourself ahead of other worthy candidates."
You've gone too far now, Big Papi. You've gone too far! You said you deserved the American League MVP award!
"I love David Ortiz."
"I don't like players who blah blah blah blah blah blah."
A lot of sportswriters really think the story is about themselves.
"If anything, Ortiz's words are going to put Jeter in an even more positive light, as the candidate who lacks any interest in glorifying himself (and by the way, the scoring call that so upset Ramirez and Ortiz was an error on Jeter that didn't cause him to complain). Jeter's response to New York writers was predictable. 'I'm not thinking about winning an MVP,' Jeter said. 'I'm thinking about winning the division. Our focus here isn't on individual awards.' Perfect."
I knew Ortiz would suffer a backlash and I find it amusing that, just three weeks ago, Ortiz was cherished for his forthrightness and fun attitude. (A five-game sweep will change a lot of perceptions, won't it?)
I also agree that it's simply the wrong thing to say. Boston could still make the playoffs and win the World Series if they have a good couple of weeks. No reason to indirectly criticize your teammates or to even worry about the AL MVP award.
But I still disapprove of Heyman's disapproval.
If guys like Heyman really want the players to "put up [their] numbers and pipe down," then let's base the MVP voting on the damned numbers.
Not how much you "love" the player or his postgame interview style.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Get Used to Second Place.
Big Papi drops the gap-toothed teddy bear act and ruins any hope he had for the MVP:
"I'll tell you one thing," Ortiz said. "If I get 50 home runs and 10 more RBI [which would give him 137], that's going to be a round number that no one else in the American League will have."
137 might be a prime number, but it's definitely not a round number.
No great mathemetician, Ortiz also proves to be no great logician:
"All depends on who makes the playoffs," he said. "Dye is having an unbelievable season, an incredible year. Konerko, too."
"Morneau, he's having a great season, but in Minnesota, there's no publicity. I bet you nobody knows who he is."
Okay, if you say so.
But if it all depends on who makes the playoffs, you're probably out of the running.
"Don't get me wrong -- [Jeter's] a great player, having a great season, but he's got a lot of guys in that lineup," Ortiz continued. "Top to bottom, you've got a guy who can hurt you. Come hit in this lineup, see how good you can be."
I agree. Ortiz has a point. But I also think Ortiz hurt his chances by missing a couple of weeks, even if it's through no fault of his own. Same goes for Pujols, Beltran, Hafner, etc.
Not the biggest problem with Ortiz's candidacy, though.
He just blew the whole thing by asking for it, by admitting he wants it, by acting like he cares about it. Your team is ten games out. You're supposed to say you're not interested in individual awards.
If you go to the reporters and beg for the MVP? You'll never get it. The reporters place humility above all other characteristics.
Three weeks ago, you were everybody's favorite player. You were Superman. You were the Clutchest Player of All Time.
Now we don't like you anymore.
"I'll tell you one thing," Ortiz said. "If I get 50 home runs and 10 more RBI [which would give him 137], that's going to be a round number that no one else in the American League will have."
137 might be a prime number, but it's definitely not a round number.
No great mathemetician, Ortiz also proves to be no great logician:
"All depends on who makes the playoffs," he said. "Dye is having an unbelievable season, an incredible year. Konerko, too."
"Morneau, he's having a great season, but in Minnesota, there's no publicity. I bet you nobody knows who he is."
Okay, if you say so.
But if it all depends on who makes the playoffs, you're probably out of the running.
"Don't get me wrong -- [Jeter's] a great player, having a great season, but he's got a lot of guys in that lineup," Ortiz continued. "Top to bottom, you've got a guy who can hurt you. Come hit in this lineup, see how good you can be."
I agree. Ortiz has a point. But I also think Ortiz hurt his chances by missing a couple of weeks, even if it's through no fault of his own. Same goes for Pujols, Beltran, Hafner, etc.
Not the biggest problem with Ortiz's candidacy, though.
He just blew the whole thing by asking for it, by admitting he wants it, by acting like he cares about it. Your team is ten games out. You're supposed to say you're not interested in individual awards.
If you go to the reporters and beg for the MVP? You'll never get it. The reporters place humility above all other characteristics.
Three weeks ago, you were everybody's favorite player. You were Superman. You were the Clutchest Player of All Time.
Now we don't like you anymore.
Friday, September 08, 2006
Why Derek Jeter Is The MVP.
"If this year's race was a political election, Boston's David Ortiz (47 homers, 121 RBI) and the White Sox's Jermaine Dye (40-109) would be the mainstream party candidates while Jeter - who enters this weekend's series in Baltimore with just 12 homers and 85 RBI - would be running as an independent."
Travis Hafner (42 homers, 117 RBI) would be ... I don't know ... the Forgotten Third-Party Candidate.
"Jeter, with a .344 average, is in a race for the batting title with Minnesota's Joe Mauer but otherwise isn't much of a factor on the AL leaderboards. His value is more intangible, it seems, and to win he'll need voters to look beyond the raw data."
Why does Sam Borden assume that Joe Mauer doesn't bring intangible values to the Minnesota Twins? David Ortiz doesn't bring leadership values to the Red Sox? Jermaine Dye hasn't stirred up his teammates before each and every game with a clubhouse speech?
"The success of the Yankees could end up being a factor in the race, too. And Ortiz's candidacy figures to be hurt by the Sox's rapid collapse over the past few weeks."
I think Ortiz's candidacy was hurt more by his trip to the hospital. During that time, Ortiz was 0-for-0 with 0 hrs and 0 runs batted in.
" 'That has to count,' Posada said. 'Playing in meaningful games for the last month makes a difference. There is more pressure. Without that, how valuable is someone, really?' "
Am I the only person who finds it odd that nobody can think of a candidate from the team with the best record in the league? Magglio Ordonez just doesn't have enough intangibles?
Also, while I believe that Posada was stumping for Jeter, the point about playing in meaningful September games actually helps the cases for Mauer, Morneau, and Dye more than it helps the case for Jeter.
"Still, stats aren't the basis for Jeter's candidacy anyway. Fifty-six years ago when Phil Rizzuto won the MVP - the last Yankee shortstop to do so - he beat out a deep field (including Yogi Berra) that in many cases had better numbers."
Can we all please get something straight once and for all?
A gold glove shortstop (he might earn it this year legitimately) who bats .340 with speed and power, walks a lot, scores 120 runs and drives in 100 is making a very strong stat-based argument for MVP.
That's why he's the MVP, if he's the MVP.
It's not because of the way he stands on the top step of the dugout.
Travis Hafner (42 homers, 117 RBI) would be ... I don't know ... the Forgotten Third-Party Candidate.
"Jeter, with a .344 average, is in a race for the batting title with Minnesota's Joe Mauer but otherwise isn't much of a factor on the AL leaderboards. His value is more intangible, it seems, and to win he'll need voters to look beyond the raw data."
Why does Sam Borden assume that Joe Mauer doesn't bring intangible values to the Minnesota Twins? David Ortiz doesn't bring leadership values to the Red Sox? Jermaine Dye hasn't stirred up his teammates before each and every game with a clubhouse speech?
"The success of the Yankees could end up being a factor in the race, too. And Ortiz's candidacy figures to be hurt by the Sox's rapid collapse over the past few weeks."
I think Ortiz's candidacy was hurt more by his trip to the hospital. During that time, Ortiz was 0-for-0 with 0 hrs and 0 runs batted in.
" 'That has to count,' Posada said. 'Playing in meaningful games for the last month makes a difference. There is more pressure. Without that, how valuable is someone, really?' "
Am I the only person who finds it odd that nobody can think of a candidate from the team with the best record in the league? Magglio Ordonez just doesn't have enough intangibles?
Also, while I believe that Posada was stumping for Jeter, the point about playing in meaningful September games actually helps the cases for Mauer, Morneau, and Dye more than it helps the case for Jeter.
"Still, stats aren't the basis for Jeter's candidacy anyway. Fifty-six years ago when Phil Rizzuto won the MVP - the last Yankee shortstop to do so - he beat out a deep field (including Yogi Berra) that in many cases had better numbers."
Can we all please get something straight once and for all?
A gold glove shortstop (he might earn it this year legitimately) who bats .340 with speed and power, walks a lot, scores 120 runs and drives in 100 is making a very strong stat-based argument for MVP.
That's why he's the MVP, if he's the MVP.
It's not because of the way he stands on the top step of the dugout.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Frank Deford, Thinkin' Feller.
"Baseball has always been heavy laden with statistics, to the point where, well deservedly, it is mocked and satirized."
By whom is it mocked and satirized?
"That's the most ground balls to the second baseman hit by a left-handed batter in a night game in the last 36 years. Har de har har."
Oh, it is mocked and satirized by you.
That was a good one: "The most ground balls to the second baseman hit by a left-handed hitter in a night game in the last 36 years."
Har de har har, indeed.
"But for all that, statistics are very much of both the substance and the charm of baseball."
Phew.
"No sport can be so easily quantified."
Any sport can be easily quantified.
"And somewhat like that, this dreaded statistic, the pitch count, which professes to save pitchers' arms, may be, in the process, damaging the whole greater game."
Less pitches undoubtedly save pitchers' arms. It's simply a matter of degree. It's physically impossible that throwing a pitch is less damaging to a pitcher's arm than not throwing a pitch.
Now, do you think the pitcher needs to build endurance? Perhaps.
But for every chest-thumping Bob Feller, there are hundreds of Mark Fidryches and Kerry Woods littering the baseball graveyards.
For every freakish Steve Carlton who seemingly proves that 300 innings will build up your endurance, there are dozens of Don Gulletts who quickly throw out their arms.
I also have a hunch that, as the game has progressed through the decades, the overall talent level has vastly increased. Also, the salaries have vastly increased. As a result, the pressure and intensity of each pitch has increased in a similar fashion.
I have a hunch that Iron Joe was not continually firing 90 mph splitters during his 400-inning seasons. He simply didn't have to.
Point being, I doubt very much that the pitchers who played 100 years ago had stronger shoulders. I think they pretty much lobbed the ball over the plate.
"But even worse is the law of unintended consequence. Once the pitch count mattered so much, opposing teams began to concentrate on making the pitcher pitch more pitches."
Smart. Because bullpen pitchers are usually worse than starting pitchers.
Actually, this difference in ability was even more stark in, say, the '50s and the '60s. Maybe the batters should have taken more pitches and tried to tire out the starter.
"Suddenly, actually hitting pitches is subsidiary to simply staying at the plate as long as possible."
Does Frank Deford even watch baseball games?
Hitting pitches is hardly subsidiary to simply staying at the plate as long as possible. I'm guessing that Vlad Guerrero will get more MVP votes than Kevin Youkilis. I'm guessing most observers realize that Robinson Cano is having a better offensive year than Mark Loretta.
Ideally, a batter works the count, walks a lot, strikes out a little, and combines a high batting average with speed, power, and an ability to hit situationally. Good luck finding that player.
"Baseball is beginning to remind me of basketball before there was a 24-second clock, when the idea was to freeze the ball."
Foul balls are your problem with Nine Man Stand Around?
"Next time you watch a baseball game, take note of how many foul balls there are. Really. This is one statistic somebody should start paying attention to."
Ummm, okay. I agree that there are a lot of foul balls in baseball games. It's not exactly like watching a basketball team freeze the ball, but there are certainly a lot of foul balls.
"It's easier to foul off pitches now, because the new parks don't have much extra territory where foul pops can be caught and because hitters are stronger, with whippier bats, so they can get around on pitches at the last instant and bang it foul."
It's easier to foul off pitches now? Compared to when?
I actually wish foul balls was a statistic that was tracked more carefully. It would probably prove that Frank Defords "whippier bat" theory is nonsense.
Deford's genius solution to baseball's non-existent problem?:
"Play ball! Pitch the ball! Swing at the ball! Hit the ball!"
Just don't hit it foul.
If you hit the ball foul, you're ruining the game of baseball.
By whom is it mocked and satirized?
"That's the most ground balls to the second baseman hit by a left-handed batter in a night game in the last 36 years. Har de har har."
Oh, it is mocked and satirized by you.
That was a good one: "The most ground balls to the second baseman hit by a left-handed hitter in a night game in the last 36 years."
Har de har har, indeed.
"But for all that, statistics are very much of both the substance and the charm of baseball."
Phew.
"No sport can be so easily quantified."
Any sport can be easily quantified.
"And somewhat like that, this dreaded statistic, the pitch count, which professes to save pitchers' arms, may be, in the process, damaging the whole greater game."
Less pitches undoubtedly save pitchers' arms. It's simply a matter of degree. It's physically impossible that throwing a pitch is less damaging to a pitcher's arm than not throwing a pitch.
Now, do you think the pitcher needs to build endurance? Perhaps.
But for every chest-thumping Bob Feller, there are hundreds of Mark Fidryches and Kerry Woods littering the baseball graveyards.
For every freakish Steve Carlton who seemingly proves that 300 innings will build up your endurance, there are dozens of Don Gulletts who quickly throw out their arms.
I also have a hunch that, as the game has progressed through the decades, the overall talent level has vastly increased. Also, the salaries have vastly increased. As a result, the pressure and intensity of each pitch has increased in a similar fashion.
I have a hunch that Iron Joe was not continually firing 90 mph splitters during his 400-inning seasons. He simply didn't have to.
Point being, I doubt very much that the pitchers who played 100 years ago had stronger shoulders. I think they pretty much lobbed the ball over the plate.
"But even worse is the law of unintended consequence. Once the pitch count mattered so much, opposing teams began to concentrate on making the pitcher pitch more pitches."
Smart. Because bullpen pitchers are usually worse than starting pitchers.
Actually, this difference in ability was even more stark in, say, the '50s and the '60s. Maybe the batters should have taken more pitches and tried to tire out the starter.
"Suddenly, actually hitting pitches is subsidiary to simply staying at the plate as long as possible."
Does Frank Deford even watch baseball games?
Hitting pitches is hardly subsidiary to simply staying at the plate as long as possible. I'm guessing that Vlad Guerrero will get more MVP votes than Kevin Youkilis. I'm guessing most observers realize that Robinson Cano is having a better offensive year than Mark Loretta.
Ideally, a batter works the count, walks a lot, strikes out a little, and combines a high batting average with speed, power, and an ability to hit situationally. Good luck finding that player.
"Baseball is beginning to remind me of basketball before there was a 24-second clock, when the idea was to freeze the ball."
Foul balls are your problem with Nine Man Stand Around?
"Next time you watch a baseball game, take note of how many foul balls there are. Really. This is one statistic somebody should start paying attention to."
Ummm, okay. I agree that there are a lot of foul balls in baseball games. It's not exactly like watching a basketball team freeze the ball, but there are certainly a lot of foul balls.
"It's easier to foul off pitches now, because the new parks don't have much extra territory where foul pops can be caught and because hitters are stronger, with whippier bats, so they can get around on pitches at the last instant and bang it foul."
It's easier to foul off pitches now? Compared to when?
I actually wish foul balls was a statistic that was tracked more carefully. It would probably prove that Frank Defords "whippier bat" theory is nonsense.
Deford's genius solution to baseball's non-existent problem?:
"Play ball! Pitch the ball! Swing at the ball! Hit the ball!"
Just don't hit it foul.
If you hit the ball foul, you're ruining the game of baseball.
Lou Gehrig died of Lou Gehrig's Disease ...
... what are the odds of that?
At the end of Jon Heyman's article about AL breakout players is a similar misunderstanding of cause and effect:
"Maybe all Alex Rodriguez needed was some support from the home folk. Is it a coincidence that he got hot as soon as Yankee Stadium crowds started to show him some love?"
At the end of Jon Heyman's article about AL breakout players is a similar misunderstanding of cause and effect:
"Maybe all Alex Rodriguez needed was some support from the home folk. Is it a coincidence that he got hot as soon as Yankee Stadium crowds started to show him some love?"
Monday, September 04, 2006
Selective Memory.
"The lead in the division is nine games, the magic number is down to 18 and the fans have become downright leisurely, wandering in and out of the action like a U.S. Open crowd prowling the outer courts. The atmosphere around Yankee Stadium is laid-back, almost friendly."
Good thing Alex Rodriguez has played so brilliantly in the past several games. If he hadn't, the lead in the division might be only six or seven games. With three games remaining vs. Boston.
Also, please remember that the White Sox and Twins are potential Yankee playoff opponents. These games are damned important.
"It can mean only one thing: Alex Rodriguez is set up to have a monstrous September."
That would be good, right? Trying to clinch the pennant? Trying to get home field advantage throughout the playoffs?
"He is three days into it, and if the month ended today, he already would have one fewer home run than he managed in the entire month of August."
I keep hearing how terrible and nightmarish ARod's month of August was.
In August, ARod hit .277/.364/.482 with 5 homeruns, 8 doubles, 22 rbis, and 18 runs scored.
"But then, the pennant race is over. The pressure is off. Suddenly, it's A-Rod Time."
The pennant race isn't over. I'm pleased and surprised that the Red Sox have collapsed so quickly. But the pennant race isn't over until it's over.
Certainly, the race for homefield advantage isn't over.
Doesn't Wallace Matthews want Game Seven of the ALCS at home?
"All of the tension has gone out of the American League East race as the Red Sox, hobbled by injuries and rocked by misfortune, spin hopelessly out of contention. For the first time in many Septembers, all is well in the Bronx."
Good thing ARod hit .333 in the five game sweep of Boston.
Good thing ARod has contributed 31 hrs and 104 rbis this season.
There might be a lot of tension in the AL East race if the Yankees had an inferior player at third base.
"The Yankees are chasing nobody and nobody is chasing them."
The Yankees are chasing the Tigers for best record in the AL.
" 'He can put up numbers like nobody,' Joe Torre said after the 10-1 win. 'It's great to see him having such relaxed at-bats.'
And that, friends, sums up the Alex Rodriguez conundrum in two revealing sentences."
It sums up the Joe Torre conundrum in two revealing sentences.
When any player on the Yankees has a bad game, guess why? They were "uncomfortable."
When any player on the Yankees has a good game, guess why? They were "comfortable."
How convenient.
"So what? Around here, performance is gauged not by stats but by situations. It's not so much what you do but when you do it, and against whom. All too often, when Rodriguez does it, it doesn't really matter."
As we all know by now, that's completely untrue. Matthews works backwards, as usual.
The games against Seattle and the Angels must have been important. Why? Because ARod stunk out the joint.
The games against Minnesota and Detroit must not have been important. Why? Because ARod hit 5 homeruns in 4 games.
"Like yesterday. The game mattered only to the Minnesota Twins, who are fighting for the wild-card spot. The Yankees are just killing time between now and October, trying out kid pitchers and hoping nobody important gets hurt before the playoffs."
Odd.
I thought the Yankee were trying to (a) clinch their division, and, for the hundredth time, (b) catch the Tigers for best record in the AL.
Winning is good. Winning is always good. Let's not complicate the main objectives of competitive sports.
Led by ARod, the Yankees stormed through two playoff teams and went 4-2 on the homestand. This helped extend the lead in the AL East to nine games.
But if ARod keeps slumping and the team keeps losing, then the lead isn't nine games.
"Of course Rodriguez is relaxed. Nobody goes into a slump during batting practice."
I couldn't argue with Matthews when he referred to Yankee fans as "hypocrites." But he's gone too far when he says the Twins' pitchers are batting practice pitchers.
Oh, by the way, players absolutely slump during batting practice. Watch batting practice sometime.
"By the end of this relaxed September, Rodriguez will have compiled his customarily impressive numbers. A lot of fans will forget the agonies of the summer, the .213 batting average in June, the 10 strikeouts in 15 at-bats against the Angels in late August, the 22 errors, the appalling failures to come through in truly key situations."
Not sure when the Yankees have had "truly key" situations this season, but ARod has come through in plenty of them.
I also think a lot of fans will remember ARod's failures this season.
But why should we remember? You just told us that none of that matters because it wasn't the playoffs.
Good thing Alex Rodriguez has played so brilliantly in the past several games. If he hadn't, the lead in the division might be only six or seven games. With three games remaining vs. Boston.
Also, please remember that the White Sox and Twins are potential Yankee playoff opponents. These games are damned important.
"It can mean only one thing: Alex Rodriguez is set up to have a monstrous September."
That would be good, right? Trying to clinch the pennant? Trying to get home field advantage throughout the playoffs?
"He is three days into it, and if the month ended today, he already would have one fewer home run than he managed in the entire month of August."
I keep hearing how terrible and nightmarish ARod's month of August was.
In August, ARod hit .277/.364/.482 with 5 homeruns, 8 doubles, 22 rbis, and 18 runs scored.
"But then, the pennant race is over. The pressure is off. Suddenly, it's A-Rod Time."
The pennant race isn't over. I'm pleased and surprised that the Red Sox have collapsed so quickly. But the pennant race isn't over until it's over.
Certainly, the race for homefield advantage isn't over.
Doesn't Wallace Matthews want Game Seven of the ALCS at home?
"All of the tension has gone out of the American League East race as the Red Sox, hobbled by injuries and rocked by misfortune, spin hopelessly out of contention. For the first time in many Septembers, all is well in the Bronx."
Good thing ARod hit .333 in the five game sweep of Boston.
Good thing ARod has contributed 31 hrs and 104 rbis this season.
There might be a lot of tension in the AL East race if the Yankees had an inferior player at third base.
"The Yankees are chasing nobody and nobody is chasing them."
The Yankees are chasing the Tigers for best record in the AL.
" 'He can put up numbers like nobody,' Joe Torre said after the 10-1 win. 'It's great to see him having such relaxed at-bats.'
And that, friends, sums up the Alex Rodriguez conundrum in two revealing sentences."
It sums up the Joe Torre conundrum in two revealing sentences.
When any player on the Yankees has a bad game, guess why? They were "uncomfortable."
When any player on the Yankees has a good game, guess why? They were "comfortable."
How convenient.
"So what? Around here, performance is gauged not by stats but by situations. It's not so much what you do but when you do it, and against whom. All too often, when Rodriguez does it, it doesn't really matter."
As we all know by now, that's completely untrue. Matthews works backwards, as usual.
The games against Seattle and the Angels must have been important. Why? Because ARod stunk out the joint.
The games against Minnesota and Detroit must not have been important. Why? Because ARod hit 5 homeruns in 4 games.
"Like yesterday. The game mattered only to the Minnesota Twins, who are fighting for the wild-card spot. The Yankees are just killing time between now and October, trying out kid pitchers and hoping nobody important gets hurt before the playoffs."
Odd.
I thought the Yankee were trying to (a) clinch their division, and, for the hundredth time, (b) catch the Tigers for best record in the AL.
Winning is good. Winning is always good. Let's not complicate the main objectives of competitive sports.
Led by ARod, the Yankees stormed through two playoff teams and went 4-2 on the homestand. This helped extend the lead in the AL East to nine games.
But if ARod keeps slumping and the team keeps losing, then the lead isn't nine games.
"Of course Rodriguez is relaxed. Nobody goes into a slump during batting practice."
I couldn't argue with Matthews when he referred to Yankee fans as "hypocrites." But he's gone too far when he says the Twins' pitchers are batting practice pitchers.
Oh, by the way, players absolutely slump during batting practice. Watch batting practice sometime.
"By the end of this relaxed September, Rodriguez will have compiled his customarily impressive numbers. A lot of fans will forget the agonies of the summer, the .213 batting average in June, the 10 strikeouts in 15 at-bats against the Angels in late August, the 22 errors, the appalling failures to come through in truly key situations."
Not sure when the Yankees have had "truly key" situations this season, but ARod has come through in plenty of them.
I also think a lot of fans will remember ARod's failures this season.
But why should we remember? You just told us that none of that matters because it wasn't the playoffs.
Sunday, September 03, 2006
Eight games up.
Get out the little violins and enter Mike Lupica's pro-Bosox world:
"Around here," the Yankees would be crucified if they missed the playoffs.
The Red Sox and their $120 million payroll couldn't absorb some injuries? Boo hoo.
Lupica, did you look closely at my reaction when I heard about David Ortiz's heart palpitations? I was crying inside, but it just came out as a hearty laugh.
"By the way, the Red Sox are the latest example of how fast things change.
In a month, they lose their captain, Jason Varitek.
They lose their right fielder, Trot Nixon.
They lose David Ortiz with an irregular heartbeat and Manny Ramirez with a bad knee, or whatever it is bothering Manny these days.
This week they find out that Jon Lester, the best young pitcher they have, a kid with a 7-2 record, is suffering from a cancer known as anaplastic large-cell lymphoma.
Then Jonathan Papelbon, one of the best stories of the whole season as the Red Sox closer, takes himself out of Friday night's game when he feels something go wrong inside his right shoulder.
The Red Sox announce after the game that Curt Schilling is hurt and has to miss a start, too.
All that in a month.
And around here, we still treat this year's edition of the Yankees like the Fighting 69th."
"Around here," the Yankees would be crucified if they missed the playoffs.
The Red Sox and their $120 million payroll couldn't absorb some injuries? Boo hoo.
Lupica, did you look closely at my reaction when I heard about David Ortiz's heart palpitations? I was crying inside, but it just came out as a hearty laugh.
Blame it on the rain.
"Crack!"
Mike Fitzpatrick started his story with some onomatopoeia. It really grabbed my attention.
"Alex Rodriguez connected on a big swing and sent a long drive soaring toward the black batter's eye beyond the center-field fence.
It definitely sounded like a home run. And right off the bat, it looked like a no-doubter.
Not on this day, though."Maybe so, but ...
"A gusting wind also kept Robinson Cano's deep drive in the ballpark, and the Minnesota TwinsNew York Yankees 6-1 Saturday in a game called during the eighth inning because of rain."
Yeah, but ...
... THE TWINS HIT TWO HOMERUNS!!!
Mike Fitzpatrick started his story with some onomatopoeia. It really grabbed my attention.
"Alex Rodriguez connected on a big swing and sent a long drive soaring toward the black batter's eye beyond the center-field fence.
It definitely sounded like a home run. And right off the bat, it looked like a no-doubter.
Not on this day, though."Maybe so, but ...
"A gusting wind also kept Robinson Cano's deep drive in the ballpark, and the Minnesota TwinsNew York Yankees 6-1 Saturday in a game called during the eighth inning because of rain."
Yeah, but ...
... THE TWINS HIT TWO HOMERUNS!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)