Tuesday, September 28, 2004
ARE WE GOING TO PETEY LIKE IT’S 1999?
If so, it surely increases the likelihood that Pedro “…will get a ring.” In October, will we see the vintage mid-90’s gas with heat seeking missile control, the Bugs Bunny fall off the table change and Tony Soprano knee breaking curve or we will get the hittable high 80’s fastball with only flashes of his signature secondary off-speed pitches?
A look at Pedro’s pitching independent stats is as follows:
Year - K/9 - BB/9 - HR/9
2004 - 9.43 - 2.55 - 1.10
01-03 - 10.9 - 2.00 - 0.45
It doesn't take a math major to realize that Pedro's numbers have fallen off this season compared to his last three. The decrease in K/9 indicates that Petey is getting fewer swings and misses from hitters. Pedro's control has been off this season too with on average yielding ½ walk more over nine. But the most troubling stat is the increase in homer runs.
After seeing a spike in homers allowed, a look at the pitcher’s Ground ball-to-Fly ball ratio is helpful. Pedro’s 2004 G/F is .91. From 2001 to 2003, Petey’s ratio was 1.20. Pedro is inducing fewer groundballs than in the past. Groundballs can not turn into dingers, unlike fly balls. As a power pitcher it was unusual for Pedro to get more grounders than popups and .29 is not a large variance, but it is a concerning development. It raises the question: is Pedro throwing up in the zone more and is it by design due to the poor first half infield defense or does he have less control of his pitches resulting in him leaving more up in the zone to be hit as fly balls and homers?
The other interesting aspect of Pedro’s 26 homers allowed, that matched his career high set back in 1998, is the number in the first inning.
1st - 8 HR in 32 IN
2-9 - 18 HR in 180 IN
Pedro has given up 31% of his total number of homers allowed in the first inning, although he doesn't see a fall off in his other stats. His BB/9 and K/9 rates are actually better in the first inning than overall. It appears that Pedro is just having trouble keeping the ball in the yard in the first.
The conventional reasoning for Pedro's struggles in the first inning is that he has trouble warming up in cold weather. The official game time temperatures in games that Pedro has given up a homer vary from 48 to 82. Four are above and four are below 65 – the mean of the high and low. It doesn't appear that Pedro has anymore difficulty performing in colder weather this season which bodes well for October baseball.
Pedro should not have any more trouble getting loose and ready next week than he has all season long. The weather should not impact him too much. Hopefully, he will have confidence in his defense and control of his pitches keeping them down in the zone leading to fewer homers and more ground balls. We all want to Petey like it’s 1999!
*****
Arroyo should go in Game 3
If you believe in DIPS - as I and the Red Sox do - then we should not be worried about Bronson Arroyo pitching in front of the Fenway faithful.
R/K/BB/HR/H over 9 (please note that last night’s game is not included)
home – 7.2 / 6.6 / 2.8 / .9 / 11.8
away - 3.5 / 7.6 / 2.1 / .9 / 7.2
As you can see, the major difference between Yo-Yo's home and away splits is his H/9. It is certainly the major reason for the variance in his home and away R/9 stat. H/9 is also the most variable pitching stat because it is heavily dependent upon the seven players behind the pitcher. The pitcher has less control over that stat than any other. Since Yo-Yo's DIPS stats do not have significant difference home and away, then having Arroyo go in the first post season game at Fenway should not keep anyone up at night.
*****
One last note before I hit the left coast, it was cool that Sam Horn gave my and Tom Caron’s alamater, St. Mike's, props at the start of the pre-game show.
If so, it surely increases the likelihood that Pedro “…will get a ring.” In October, will we see the vintage mid-90’s gas with heat seeking missile control, the Bugs Bunny fall off the table change and Tony Soprano knee breaking curve or we will get the hittable high 80’s fastball with only flashes of his signature secondary off-speed pitches?
A look at Pedro’s pitching independent stats is as follows:
Year - K/9 - BB/9 - HR/9
2004 - 9.43 - 2.55 - 1.10
01-03 - 10.9 - 2.00 - 0.45
It doesn't take a math major to realize that Pedro's numbers have fallen off this season compared to his last three. The decrease in K/9 indicates that Petey is getting fewer swings and misses from hitters. Pedro's control has been off this season too with on average yielding ½ walk more over nine. But the most troubling stat is the increase in homer runs.
After seeing a spike in homers allowed, a look at the pitcher’s Ground ball-to-Fly ball ratio is helpful. Pedro’s 2004 G/F is .91. From 2001 to 2003, Petey’s ratio was 1.20. Pedro is inducing fewer groundballs than in the past. Groundballs can not turn into dingers, unlike fly balls. As a power pitcher it was unusual for Pedro to get more grounders than popups and .29 is not a large variance, but it is a concerning development. It raises the question: is Pedro throwing up in the zone more and is it by design due to the poor first half infield defense or does he have less control of his pitches resulting in him leaving more up in the zone to be hit as fly balls and homers?
The other interesting aspect of Pedro’s 26 homers allowed, that matched his career high set back in 1998, is the number in the first inning.
1st - 8 HR in 32 IN
2-9 - 18 HR in 180 IN
Pedro has given up 31% of his total number of homers allowed in the first inning, although he doesn't see a fall off in his other stats. His BB/9 and K/9 rates are actually better in the first inning than overall. It appears that Pedro is just having trouble keeping the ball in the yard in the first.
The conventional reasoning for Pedro's struggles in the first inning is that he has trouble warming up in cold weather. The official game time temperatures in games that Pedro has given up a homer vary from 48 to 82. Four are above and four are below 65 – the mean of the high and low. It doesn't appear that Pedro has anymore difficulty performing in colder weather this season which bodes well for October baseball.
Pedro should not have any more trouble getting loose and ready next week than he has all season long. The weather should not impact him too much. Hopefully, he will have confidence in his defense and control of his pitches keeping them down in the zone leading to fewer homers and more ground balls. We all want to Petey like it’s 1999!
*****
Arroyo should go in Game 3
If you believe in DIPS - as I and the Red Sox do - then we should not be worried about Bronson Arroyo pitching in front of the Fenway faithful.
R/K/BB/HR/H over 9 (please note that last night’s game is not included)
home – 7.2 / 6.6 / 2.8 / .9 / 11.8
away - 3.5 / 7.6 / 2.1 / .9 / 7.2
As you can see, the major difference between Yo-Yo's home and away splits is his H/9. It is certainly the major reason for the variance in his home and away R/9 stat. H/9 is also the most variable pitching stat because it is heavily dependent upon the seven players behind the pitcher. The pitcher has less control over that stat than any other. Since Yo-Yo's DIPS stats do not have significant difference home and away, then having Arroyo go in the first post season game at Fenway should not keep anyone up at night.
*****
One last note before I hit the left coast, it was cool that Sam Horn gave my and Tom Caron’s alamater, St. Mike's, props at the start of the pre-game show.
Monday, September 27, 2004
“YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!”
Glen Stout sheds some light on the anti-Semitic motivation in the evolution of the c-word in this month’s addition of Boston Baseball. Unfortunately, I can’t find the article on-line, but George Vecsey, whom Stout credits with the notion of the c-word, comes clean in the NY Times.
Back in 1986, hours before the sixth game of the World Series, I wrote an early-edition Sunday column that toyed with the concept of some cockamamie curse involving Babe Ruth and the Red Sox.
All I can say is that I don't want to be a part of the Frazee legend. My chronology about "Nanette" was wrong. I never read Fred Lieb. I had no glimmer of any ancient anti-Semitic link to Frazee, a prominent and popular New Yorker who had serious enemies in other parts of the country.
The facts are: 1) Frazee did not want to destroy the Red Sox, 2) Babe Ruth is no longer the greatest ballplayer of all-time, 3) the Red Sox are not unlucky, so there can be and is no c-word.
It is more romantic to think the Red Sox are c-worded. As Sox fans, it provides us with a kind of Badge of Honor - we are tirelessly devoted to a club that we know will never win. It allows us to feel superior to other fans. We don’t need that; the facts demonstrate what great fans we are.
Just like the Easter Bunny, the c-word is complete bull $hit. We should no longer believe in it. The facts do not support the notion. Now, it has created a mind-set of negativity that even reached the clubhouse, according to Grady Little, last October. It is inconsequential if fans have a pessimistic outlook, but our negative attitude seeped into the locker room. So the baseless fairy tale has to and should end.
Glen Stout sheds some light on the anti-Semitic motivation in the evolution of the c-word in this month’s addition of Boston Baseball. Unfortunately, I can’t find the article on-line, but George Vecsey, whom Stout credits with the notion of the c-word, comes clean in the NY Times.
Back in 1986, hours before the sixth game of the World Series, I wrote an early-edition Sunday column that toyed with the concept of some cockamamie curse involving Babe Ruth and the Red Sox.
All I can say is that I don't want to be a part of the Frazee legend. My chronology about "Nanette" was wrong. I never read Fred Lieb. I had no glimmer of any ancient anti-Semitic link to Frazee, a prominent and popular New Yorker who had serious enemies in other parts of the country.
The facts are: 1) Frazee did not want to destroy the Red Sox, 2) Babe Ruth is no longer the greatest ballplayer of all-time, 3) the Red Sox are not unlucky, so there can be and is no c-word.
It is more romantic to think the Red Sox are c-worded. As Sox fans, it provides us with a kind of Badge of Honor - we are tirelessly devoted to a club that we know will never win. It allows us to feel superior to other fans. We don’t need that; the facts demonstrate what great fans we are.
Just like the Easter Bunny, the c-word is complete bull $hit. We should no longer believe in it. The facts do not support the notion. Now, it has created a mind-set of negativity that even reached the clubhouse, according to Grady Little, last October. It is inconsequential if fans have a pessimistic outlook, but our negative attitude seeped into the locker room. So the baseless fairy tale has to and should end.
Friday, September 24, 2004
RUMBLINGS ON THE NEWS
Your club ain’t going to win many ballgames when your starter gives up five over five; plus, your Manager pitches your GM’s two biggest mistakes. As I said before, the O’s have been the difference in the A.L. East yet again.
On a positive and then funny note…
It didn't take long for Burks to do something positive. He received a rousing standing ovation…With a runner on first, Burks lined a single to center before he was lifted for a runner…and received another loud ovation. "It was emotional, I was so nervous," Burks said. "The reaction by the crowd was awesome. I really appreciated that."
A seventeen year MLB veteran “was so nervous.” It is a great game and times sure have changed on Yawkey Way. It is not the Yawkey way any longer.
Johnny Pesky on not being able to sit in the dugout…
"I'm hurt by it," Pesky said. "If that's the end, that's the end. I'm not going to jump in the Charles River over it because I can't swim, but I didn't think this could happen. The game has changed, I guess. I understand that."
Has Johnny been smokin’ with Yogi or is he just trying to get a piece of Yogi’s endorsement action?
Your club ain’t going to win many ballgames when your starter gives up five over five; plus, your Manager pitches your GM’s two biggest mistakes. As I said before, the O’s have been the difference in the A.L. East yet again.
On a positive and then funny note…
It didn't take long for Burks to do something positive. He received a rousing standing ovation…With a runner on first, Burks lined a single to center before he was lifted for a runner…and received another loud ovation. "It was emotional, I was so nervous," Burks said. "The reaction by the crowd was awesome. I really appreciated that."
A seventeen year MLB veteran “was so nervous.” It is a great game and times sure have changed on Yawkey Way. It is not the Yawkey way any longer.
Johnny Pesky on not being able to sit in the dugout…
"I'm hurt by it," Pesky said. "If that's the end, that's the end. I'm not going to jump in the Charles River over it because I can't swim, but I didn't think this could happen. The game has changed, I guess. I understand that."
Has Johnny been smokin’ with Yogi or is he just trying to get a piece of Yogi’s endorsement action?
SCORE BOARD WATCHING
Red Sox Nation should root against the Twins. No one wants to face Johan Santana, twice, in the loud, sold out, homer hanky Dome. Throw Brad Radke on the mound in Game 2 and I uncontrollably start biting my finger nails right now. Plus, Johnny Rock Star can’t find fall balls in the Dome. Even with the improved infield gloves and new carpet, some DLowe ground balls will find a few more holes than a grass field. The Twins are dangerous. Johan Santana can pull a 1991 Jack Morris. He probably won’t be pulling a Bill Russell (vomiting) before the postseason opener this year. The Sox definitely have an advantage in a seven game series, but in five, it is a toss up.
I’ll be rooting against the A’s too. I want Anaheim to go on a tear winning the West and over taking the Twins for the best record in the A.L. Since I’ll be in San Diego on Monday, October 4th, a short drive up to the O.C., a minor flight change and a wad of cash should get me into Game 1. Good times. Good times.
Other thoughts before heading to Fenway
• It is great to see Big Dog still doing wonderful work. Da Man has not slowed him and his peeps down one bit.
• I wonder how much money it takes for big stars like Sarah Jessica Parker and Lenny Kravitz to pimp for the Gap. It is only about $100 for El Guapo’s Ghost. I’m a cheap and easy date.
• Jim Caple writes...Meanwhile, Maddux's old team [Braves] is just games away from clinching its 13th consecutive playoff spot and 13th title in the past 14 seasons…and they have won ONE World Series in 12 tries. Could the Braves be c-word by Jane Fonda?
Red Sox Nation should root against the Twins. No one wants to face Johan Santana, twice, in the loud, sold out, homer hanky Dome. Throw Brad Radke on the mound in Game 2 and I uncontrollably start biting my finger nails right now. Plus, Johnny Rock Star can’t find fall balls in the Dome. Even with the improved infield gloves and new carpet, some DLowe ground balls will find a few more holes than a grass field. The Twins are dangerous. Johan Santana can pull a 1991 Jack Morris. He probably won’t be pulling a Bill Russell (vomiting) before the postseason opener this year. The Sox definitely have an advantage in a seven game series, but in five, it is a toss up.
I’ll be rooting against the A’s too. I want Anaheim to go on a tear winning the West and over taking the Twins for the best record in the A.L. Since I’ll be in San Diego on Monday, October 4th, a short drive up to the O.C., a minor flight change and a wad of cash should get me into Game 1. Good times. Good times.
Other thoughts before heading to Fenway
• It is great to see Big Dog still doing wonderful work. Da Man has not slowed him and his peeps down one bit.
• I wonder how much money it takes for big stars like Sarah Jessica Parker and Lenny Kravitz to pimp for the Gap. It is only about $100 for El Guapo’s Ghost. I’m a cheap and easy date.
• Jim Caple writes...Meanwhile, Maddux's old team [Braves] is just games away from clinching its 13th consecutive playoff spot and 13th title in the past 14 seasons…and they have won ONE World Series in 12 tries. Could the Braves be c-word by Jane Fonda?
Thursday, September 23, 2004
“ALL THE NEWS THAT’S FIT FOR PRINT.” WHATEVER, BITCH.
I have to interrupt your usually scheduled post to thank Lando and the Millennium Falcon, “the fastest ship in the galaxy”, for getting back in time for last night’s game. Oh yeah, the walk off too. Now back to your regularly scheduled commentary.
****
Peter Mehlman wrote an article for the NY Times. It gets into a fictitious conversation with his “friend” and Red Sox fan. It is completely stupid, NOT funny.
When all is lost, losing is something you'll always have.
A pause.
"Yes," he says, "losing does mean a lot to me."
After some additional B.S., Mehlman goes on to say…
You tell him that one of the wonderful things about him is how he always has such low expectations and yet is always so disappointed. It's an incredibly charming trait, one of the things you love about him.
"I do have a flair, don't I?" he asks.
You tell him he has the kind of instincts for losing that can't be taught. That is why they call them instincts.
"Thank you," he says. "You're a good friend."
Mehlman closes with more garbage.
He's really getting it now. Time to stop shading the truth and just outright lie:
The unfettered, rapturous, blissful exhilaration of winning the World Series - it's kind of overrated.
"Really?"
You remind him you grew up a Yankees fan.
"Right, right."
Another silence.
Finally, your friend says, "So what can I do to make sure the Sox lose again?"
You tell him to trust his instincts. He'll figure it out.
Initially, I hated this article because it continues the negative attitude predominate within Red Sox Nation. I did not find it funny at all. After reading it a second and third time trying to find the humor in the piece, I just got pissed. I am so tried of this type of crap making it into wide read publications like Sports Illustrated.
Thoughts about what happens when the Red Sox do win it all get me heated too. The usual questions go something like this: Will people still be interested? Will people continue to flock to Fenway in droves? Will NESN’s ratings continue to climb? Will the romance be lost?
Yes. Yes. Yes. Hell no.
Most Red Sox fans are Boston Sports fans. BSF have always supported a winning club. The Celtics sold out the Boston Garden 662 consecutive games from December, 1980 to the last game on May 5, 1995. BSF’s interest in the original Big Three did not waver after their first Championship in 1981. It only grew during the ten plus years the team was either contending to or winning it all.
The same can be said with the Pats. The former laughing stock franchise in the NFL is now the model. It has over 100 consecutive sellouts and counting in an old and new stadium, since the Kraft family took over the club. Two Super Bowl wins has only increased fan interest in the team.
Neither example is a perfect comparison to the Sox, but it is some evidence to support the notion that the fever of Red Sox Nation will not wane with a World Series victory. The facts support just the opposite. Fan interest will increase and the Nation will grow, but we will only know for sure April 2005.
I have to interrupt your usually scheduled post to thank Lando and the Millennium Falcon, “the fastest ship in the galaxy”, for getting back in time for last night’s game. Oh yeah, the walk off too. Now back to your regularly scheduled commentary.
****
Peter Mehlman wrote an article for the NY Times. It gets into a fictitious conversation with his “friend” and Red Sox fan. It is completely stupid, NOT funny.
When all is lost, losing is something you'll always have.
A pause.
"Yes," he says, "losing does mean a lot to me."
After some additional B.S., Mehlman goes on to say…
You tell him that one of the wonderful things about him is how he always has such low expectations and yet is always so disappointed. It's an incredibly charming trait, one of the things you love about him.
"I do have a flair, don't I?" he asks.
You tell him he has the kind of instincts for losing that can't be taught. That is why they call them instincts.
"Thank you," he says. "You're a good friend."
Mehlman closes with more garbage.
He's really getting it now. Time to stop shading the truth and just outright lie:
The unfettered, rapturous, blissful exhilaration of winning the World Series - it's kind of overrated.
"Really?"
You remind him you grew up a Yankees fan.
"Right, right."
Another silence.
Finally, your friend says, "So what can I do to make sure the Sox lose again?"
You tell him to trust his instincts. He'll figure it out.
Initially, I hated this article because it continues the negative attitude predominate within Red Sox Nation. I did not find it funny at all. After reading it a second and third time trying to find the humor in the piece, I just got pissed. I am so tried of this type of crap making it into wide read publications like Sports Illustrated.
Thoughts about what happens when the Red Sox do win it all get me heated too. The usual questions go something like this: Will people still be interested? Will people continue to flock to Fenway in droves? Will NESN’s ratings continue to climb? Will the romance be lost?
Yes. Yes. Yes. Hell no.
Most Red Sox fans are Boston Sports fans. BSF have always supported a winning club. The Celtics sold out the Boston Garden 662 consecutive games from December, 1980 to the last game on May 5, 1995. BSF’s interest in the original Big Three did not waver after their first Championship in 1981. It only grew during the ten plus years the team was either contending to or winning it all.
The same can be said with the Pats. The former laughing stock franchise in the NFL is now the model. It has over 100 consecutive sellouts and counting in an old and new stadium, since the Kraft family took over the club. Two Super Bowl wins has only increased fan interest in the team.
Neither example is a perfect comparison to the Sox, but it is some evidence to support the notion that the fever of Red Sox Nation will not wane with a World Series victory. The facts support just the opposite. Fan interest will increase and the Nation will grow, but we will only know for sure April 2005.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
IN TITO WE TRUST
The box score tells the story of Curt Schilling's dominance. I echo Remy; it was the best performance by a Red Sox pitcher this season. But the Sox most questioned off season acquisition, Tito, out maneuvered MFY, Kathy Lee Mazzilli, in the eighth that allowed Bellhorn and company to bail out Foulke to get the win.
First, Tito came out to request the Umpires check the dealing Rodrigo Lopez's hat. It may or may not have had an affect on Lopez, but the pitcher did walk the next couple of batters.
With one out, first base open and Big Poppi up, Kathy Lee Mazzilli puts on Ortiz to face Trot Nixon. Mazzilli brings in tough southpaw, BJ Ryan, to face the feeble Nixon against lefties. Tito counters with Kevin Millar, who drives in the first and go ahead run.
It was a no brainer to pinch hit for Trot, but Kathy Lee Mazzilli did not realize this. If BJ came into the game to face Big Poppi, it is unlikely that Tito would have pinched hit for Ortiz with Nixon behind him and one out. Kathy Lee Mazzilli would have gotten the better match up - BJ versus Ortiz. Ortiz is 243/311/455 against southpaws this season and BJ has held LHB to 101/167/172 line. In contrast, Millar is 298/366/450 against LHP – virtually his career mark. Kathy Lee Mazzilli made a mistake and Tito took full advantage of it.
The credit for this win can be divided up - 70% Curt Schilling, 15% timely hitting and 5% good managing. The 5% won’t get much media coverage, as it should, but Tito was a factor in this much needed victory.
The box score tells the story of Curt Schilling's dominance. I echo Remy; it was the best performance by a Red Sox pitcher this season. But the Sox most questioned off season acquisition, Tito, out maneuvered MFY, Kathy Lee Mazzilli, in the eighth that allowed Bellhorn and company to bail out Foulke to get the win.
First, Tito came out to request the Umpires check the dealing Rodrigo Lopez's hat. It may or may not have had an affect on Lopez, but the pitcher did walk the next couple of batters.
With one out, first base open and Big Poppi up, Kathy Lee Mazzilli puts on Ortiz to face Trot Nixon. Mazzilli brings in tough southpaw, BJ Ryan, to face the feeble Nixon against lefties. Tito counters with Kevin Millar, who drives in the first and go ahead run.
It was a no brainer to pinch hit for Trot, but Kathy Lee Mazzilli did not realize this. If BJ came into the game to face Big Poppi, it is unlikely that Tito would have pinched hit for Ortiz with Nixon behind him and one out. Kathy Lee Mazzilli would have gotten the better match up - BJ versus Ortiz. Ortiz is 243/311/455 against southpaws this season and BJ has held LHB to 101/167/172 line. In contrast, Millar is 298/366/450 against LHP – virtually his career mark. Kathy Lee Mazzilli made a mistake and Tito took full advantage of it.
The credit for this win can be divided up - 70% Curt Schilling, 15% timely hitting and 5% good managing. The 5% won’t get much media coverage, as it should, but Tito was a factor in this much needed victory.
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
FOUR MORE...
• Jay Lovinger compares journalism icon, Bob Woodward, to World Series of Poker winner, Greg Raymer. As you can imagine, it is an interesting piece.
• Boston.com/the Boston Globe/the New York Times/the Boston Red Sox have posed this question: if you get...
one, and only one, of your two most fervent wishes: Either John Kerry will be inaugurated as the 44th president of the United States. Or the Boston Red Sox will win the World Series this fall.
As a liberal Dem., I’ll take the Sox World Series win and then do all I can to win back Congress.
• “Respek!” is the title of Sam Schechner’s article on Ali G.
Somehow, Sacha Baron Cohen, in the guise of a British would-be gangsta with a penchant for malapropisms and misunderstandings, managed to secure another passel of interviews with people like former EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman (who conceded that, yes, whale feces "have got to be massive") and archconservative Patrick Buchanan (who said that Saddam Hussein "was using BLTs on the Kurds"). In one episode, Richard Kerr, a former deputy director of the CIA, found himself debating whether terrorists could drive a train into the White House.
The f#cking CIA are you fr*%king joking! Anyway, Da Ali G show is laugh out loud, gut busting, piss your pants funny. When HBO throws in The Da Ali G Show with Sopranos, at no extra, I can’t understand why anyone reading this blog doesn’t have HBO.
• I rarely agree with Pat Buchanan, but he is right on with this outburst last week on the Daily Show.
“This President has led us into this debacle [Iraq]…and I think it is a mess…and I think we ought to remove him…and a new team will try to get us out of it. Why doesn’t John Kerry do that?”
Instead of "It's the economy, stupid!", it should be "Don't be stupid, speak about Iraq simply!"
• Jay Lovinger compares journalism icon, Bob Woodward, to World Series of Poker winner, Greg Raymer. As you can imagine, it is an interesting piece.
• Boston.com/the Boston Globe/the New York Times/the Boston Red Sox have posed this question: if you get...
one, and only one, of your two most fervent wishes: Either John Kerry will be inaugurated as the 44th president of the United States. Or the Boston Red Sox will win the World Series this fall.
As a liberal Dem., I’ll take the Sox World Series win and then do all I can to win back Congress.
• “Respek!” is the title of Sam Schechner’s article on Ali G.
Somehow, Sacha Baron Cohen, in the guise of a British would-be gangsta with a penchant for malapropisms and misunderstandings, managed to secure another passel of interviews with people like former EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman (who conceded that, yes, whale feces "have got to be massive") and archconservative Patrick Buchanan (who said that Saddam Hussein "was using BLTs on the Kurds"). In one episode, Richard Kerr, a former deputy director of the CIA, found himself debating whether terrorists could drive a train into the White House.
The f#cking CIA are you fr*%king joking! Anyway, Da Ali G show is laugh out loud, gut busting, piss your pants funny. When HBO throws in The Da Ali G Show with Sopranos, at no extra, I can’t understand why anyone reading this blog doesn’t have HBO.
• I rarely agree with Pat Buchanan, but he is right on with this outburst last week on the Daily Show.
“This President has led us into this debacle [Iraq]…and I think it is a mess…and I think we ought to remove him…and a new team will try to get us out of it. Why doesn’t John Kerry do that?”
Instead of "It's the economy, stupid!", it should be "Don't be stupid, speak about Iraq simply!"
RANDOM RUMBLINGS FROM BEYOND THE GRAVE
• As a baseball fan and amateur analyst, the scary clubs in a short series are the Twins and Red Sox. Both teams have some of the top starters. The Twins will start the un-hittable Johan Santana twice and the strike zone pounding Brad Radke at least once. The same can be said for the Sox with Pedro and Schilling pitching at a minimum three games out of five. Both scenarios are scary propositions for their opponent. Let's hope the Sox don't match up with the Twinkies.
• Alan Schwarz has a great article on Rocco Baldelli from Rhode Island (I am contractually bound as a New Englander to mention RI when writing about Baldelli). It describes how Baldelli has adapted this season to some physical changes (eye surgery and quad problem) by being more selective at the plate. If you recall Baldelli was a step behind Ichiro getting out of the box last season.
• Ichiro is certainly amazing.
"He can get a hit on a routine grounder to short, so he can keep getting hits even when his swing is off a bit,'' Boone said. "He had four infield hits in a game -- I've had six all year. He won't get a ball out of the infield and he'll get three hits. And the next day he'll hit bullets and get five hits. He can get hits so many ways.''
Despite the loss of revenue and backlash from fans, the Mariners should seriously consider taking offers on the corner outfielder. Suzuki will be 31 next season. He has tremendously quick hands, feet and legs. It allows him to get on-base, but eventually his speed will diminish and in most players it happens quickly. Suzuki certainly could be the exception, but why take the risk when your club needs to go through a rebuilding phase. Trading Ichiro could rapidly speed up that process. Plus, he is going to make more than $30 million over the next three seasons. The Mariners should move Ichiro now in the right deal while his value is likely at its peak.
• Jim Reeves has an interview with Orel Herisher on the Rangers pitching philosophy.
"We play so many games, throw so many pitches, so many balls are put into play, especially if you're not a strikeout pitcher, and we don't have many on this team. And so, if the ball is going to be put into play and the ball in the air has a chance to hurt you, better that the ball be put on the ground."
Soriano is likely out of the heart of Texass, but could DLowe surface in the Loner State?
• Laura Boswell of ESPN.com Page 3 could be my ideal woman.
Laura Boswell covers sports and the city in and around Washington, DC. Turn-ons: The Daily Show, board games and a really good vodka tonic. Turn-offs: Fur coats, diet soda and weak penalties for parole violators.
Perhaps, “ideal” was too strong. A “really good vodka tonic” is not possible. They all basically taste the same. Furthermore, one should not adulterate good vodka with tonic. I feel strongly about this and I guess the parole thing just kills the soul mate notion, anyway...just kidding.
• John Sickels really likes the Sox Dustin Pedroia.
These numbers are very similar to what he did for the Sun Devils: high batting average, lots of walks, excellent OBP, and more power than you expect from a short guy. He has a quick swing, superb plate discipline, and plays the game with energy and enthusiasm…Some scouts don't think he has the arm strength to play shortstop in the majors, projecting him to move over to second base eventually. Personally, I think he would be just fine at short, although the presence of Ramirez (who played much better this year than in 2003) could very well shift Pedroia to second in the long run. Either way, I think Dustin is going to be a very effective Major League hitter.
The presence of Dustin and Hanley certainly will have the Sox brass thinking about a possible short-term solution at shortstop.
• Even though I have disagreed with Gordon Edes, I respect him and enjoy most of his work. This line in a chat is priceless. ($hit has Mastercard trademarked that yet?)
Fat Paul from Watert… - ”I tell ya' Gordon, I think trading Nomar has broken the curse.” Gordon Edes - “What curse? Shaughnessy's not running this chat!”
One word, hilarious!
• As a baseball fan and amateur analyst, the scary clubs in a short series are the Twins and Red Sox. Both teams have some of the top starters. The Twins will start the un-hittable Johan Santana twice and the strike zone pounding Brad Radke at least once. The same can be said for the Sox with Pedro and Schilling pitching at a minimum three games out of five. Both scenarios are scary propositions for their opponent. Let's hope the Sox don't match up with the Twinkies.
• Alan Schwarz has a great article on Rocco Baldelli from Rhode Island (I am contractually bound as a New Englander to mention RI when writing about Baldelli). It describes how Baldelli has adapted this season to some physical changes (eye surgery and quad problem) by being more selective at the plate. If you recall Baldelli was a step behind Ichiro getting out of the box last season.
• Ichiro is certainly amazing.
"He can get a hit on a routine grounder to short, so he can keep getting hits even when his swing is off a bit,'' Boone said. "He had four infield hits in a game -- I've had six all year. He won't get a ball out of the infield and he'll get three hits. And the next day he'll hit bullets and get five hits. He can get hits so many ways.''
Despite the loss of revenue and backlash from fans, the Mariners should seriously consider taking offers on the corner outfielder. Suzuki will be 31 next season. He has tremendously quick hands, feet and legs. It allows him to get on-base, but eventually his speed will diminish and in most players it happens quickly. Suzuki certainly could be the exception, but why take the risk when your club needs to go through a rebuilding phase. Trading Ichiro could rapidly speed up that process. Plus, he is going to make more than $30 million over the next three seasons. The Mariners should move Ichiro now in the right deal while his value is likely at its peak.
• Jim Reeves has an interview with Orel Herisher on the Rangers pitching philosophy.
"We play so many games, throw so many pitches, so many balls are put into play, especially if you're not a strikeout pitcher, and we don't have many on this team. And so, if the ball is going to be put into play and the ball in the air has a chance to hurt you, better that the ball be put on the ground."
Soriano is likely out of the heart of Texass, but could DLowe surface in the Loner State?
• Laura Boswell of ESPN.com Page 3 could be my ideal woman.
Laura Boswell covers sports and the city in and around Washington, DC. Turn-ons: The Daily Show, board games and a really good vodka tonic. Turn-offs: Fur coats, diet soda and weak penalties for parole violators.
Perhaps, “ideal” was too strong. A “really good vodka tonic” is not possible. They all basically taste the same. Furthermore, one should not adulterate good vodka with tonic. I feel strongly about this and I guess the parole thing just kills the soul mate notion, anyway...just kidding.
• John Sickels really likes the Sox Dustin Pedroia.
These numbers are very similar to what he did for the Sun Devils: high batting average, lots of walks, excellent OBP, and more power than you expect from a short guy. He has a quick swing, superb plate discipline, and plays the game with energy and enthusiasm…Some scouts don't think he has the arm strength to play shortstop in the majors, projecting him to move over to second base eventually. Personally, I think he would be just fine at short, although the presence of Ramirez (who played much better this year than in 2003) could very well shift Pedroia to second in the long run. Either way, I think Dustin is going to be a very effective Major League hitter.
The presence of Dustin and Hanley certainly will have the Sox brass thinking about a possible short-term solution at shortstop.
• Even though I have disagreed with Gordon Edes, I respect him and enjoy most of his work. This line in a chat is priceless. ($hit has Mastercard trademarked that yet?)
Fat Paul from Watert… - ”I tell ya' Gordon, I think trading Nomar has broken the curse.” Gordon Edes - “What curse? Shaughnessy's not running this chat!”
One word, hilarious!
Monday, September 20, 2004
TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS
The Sox have to win three out of four versus the O’s. Period.
Since Kill Stein Vol I – Part II and III did not go according to plan, the Sox and the Nation have to refocus on just winning ballgames. If the Old Town Team won the series in the Bronx, everyone would be foolishly fixated on the A.L. East. The MFY know the Sox can beat ‘em. Neither club’s perception of the other was going to change after this series or the one this weekend.
Sneak Preview of the upcoming week:
Tuesday – Rumblings
Wednesday – “All the News that's Fit to Print”
Thursday – Score Board Watching
Friday – Pedro
The Sox have to win three out of four versus the O’s. Period.
Since Kill Stein Vol I – Part II and III did not go according to plan, the Sox and the Nation have to refocus on just winning ballgames. If the Old Town Team won the series in the Bronx, everyone would be foolishly fixated on the A.L. East. The MFY know the Sox can beat ‘em. Neither club’s perception of the other was going to change after this series or the one this weekend.
Sneak Preview of the upcoming week:
Tuesday – Rumblings
Wednesday – “All the News that's Fit to Print”
Thursday – Score Board Watching
Friday – Pedro
Saturday, September 18, 2004
KILL STEIN VOL I - PART I
Comments left on Bronx Banter sums it up...
Posted by: Hank at September 18, 2004 01:18 AM Rivera looked rattled. Lets face it folks, every other team in the league is intimidated by the Yanks. The Sox know they can beat us and they don't just fold when they're not leading us after 6 innings.
As Duke said in Rock IV, "You see?! You see?! He's not a machine, he's a man, he's a man!"
Where was Jeff Maier when you needed him? The fan in front of Manny when he made the catch on Cairo was wearing a Sox Tee and a Boston cap. He pretty much let Manny snatch it... Oh well, on the bright side, when the Yanks slip to the WC slot, they can tell themselves that the last two WS winners were WCs.
Where is the MFY swagger?
Comments left on Bronx Banter sums it up...
Posted by: Hank at September 18, 2004 01:18 AM Rivera looked rattled. Lets face it folks, every other team in the league is intimidated by the Yanks. The Sox know they can beat us and they don't just fold when they're not leading us after 6 innings.
As Duke said in Rock IV, "You see?! You see?! He's not a machine, he's a man, he's a man!"
Where was Jeff Maier when you needed him? The fan in front of Manny when he made the catch on Cairo was wearing a Sox Tee and a Boston cap. He pretty much let Manny snatch it... Oh well, on the bright side, when the Yanks slip to the WC slot, they can tell themselves that the last two WS winners were WCs.
Where is the MFY swagger?
Friday, September 17, 2004
DON’T BELIEVE THE HYPE
According to Baseball Prospectus, the Red Sox is a virtual lock for the playoffs (knock on wood) and so two are the MFY. Hence, the A.L. East crown is for home field advantage and a psychological advantage over each other if the pair advances past the first round. With no way to reasonably measure any an advantage in the mind game, let's take a look at the home and away stats for the MFY and Sox.
The Sox have won 51 games at home out of 88 wins or 58%. On the other hand, the MFY have won 54% of their games at home (Twins - 53%, Oaktown - 58% and the O.C. - 49%). It appears that the Sox would have more of an advantage playing three out of five at Fenway than the MFY.
It has been reported that the inventor of the DIPS concept and Sox consultant, Voros McCraken, was given the assignment to find hitters that would be more successful at Fenway than the average player. It seems like the Sox have done a good job with the acquisitions of Ferris B. Mueller (990/648) and Kevin Millar (1026/676). It is reflected in the club's numbers too. The Sox average 6.3 runs at Fenway and 5.3 on the road. It is no fluke either. The team has hit 262/344/444 on the road and 305/378/507 at friendly Fenway. A full run per game is significant over the long haul.
On the other hand, the MFY average 5.3 runs in the beautiful? Bronx and 5.7 on the road. The MFY hitting splits are basically the same at 267/351/455 at home and 272/359/464 away. Since both MFY Stadium and Fenway are essentially neutral parks, the Sox would have more of an advantage playing an extra game in Beantown than the MFY in the Bronx.
Neither club has a big split on the run prevention side of the game. The good guys have given up 4.7 runs at home and 4.4 away, while the MFY yield 4.7 at the Stadium and 5.3 on the road. The Sox and MFY defense independent pitching stats splits, K/9, K/BB, and HR/9, are fairly similar. Thus, it can be reasoned that the difference in home and away run prevention is mostly due to the glove work and park configuration. Regardless, it should not be much of a factor in a five or seven game series. (Intuitively, the MFY must have a disadvantage playing Sheffield, the weaker defender, in right field on the road since in most parks; your stronger defensive player usually patrols the area behind the second baseman. But I have no data to support my theory, and it certainly would not account for a half of run difference on a strikeout staff.)
Of course, any club would have an advantage playing in front of their fans in a comfortable environment. It appears the Sox would benefit more than the MFY and most clubs given the way they pound the ball at Fenway. But the advantage is only ONE game, IF it goes to a deciding game. It is not a big deal. Anything can happen in a short series.
*****
"The way he changes speeds and moves the ball around the plate - in and out, up and down - it makes it really, really hard to hit," said Javy Lopez of the Baltimore Orioles.
"I've always had a hard time, because it's hard to pick up his slider. You see the slider and the fastball pretty much the same. You only can tell if it's a slider when the ball is almost right on top of you."
I can't wait to see El Duker tonight. Is he for real? Hopefully not.
*****
Programming notice: The late end to Wednesday's game, my PC crashing, an auto issue, and no clean underwear lead to no Sox comments yesterday.
According to Baseball Prospectus, the Red Sox is a virtual lock for the playoffs (knock on wood) and so two are the MFY. Hence, the A.L. East crown is for home field advantage and a psychological advantage over each other if the pair advances past the first round. With no way to reasonably measure any an advantage in the mind game, let's take a look at the home and away stats for the MFY and Sox.
The Sox have won 51 games at home out of 88 wins or 58%. On the other hand, the MFY have won 54% of their games at home (Twins - 53%, Oaktown - 58% and the O.C. - 49%). It appears that the Sox would have more of an advantage playing three out of five at Fenway than the MFY.
It has been reported that the inventor of the DIPS concept and Sox consultant, Voros McCraken, was given the assignment to find hitters that would be more successful at Fenway than the average player. It seems like the Sox have done a good job with the acquisitions of Ferris B. Mueller (990/648) and Kevin Millar (1026/676). It is reflected in the club's numbers too. The Sox average 6.3 runs at Fenway and 5.3 on the road. It is no fluke either. The team has hit 262/344/444 on the road and 305/378/507 at friendly Fenway. A full run per game is significant over the long haul.
On the other hand, the MFY average 5.3 runs in the beautiful? Bronx and 5.7 on the road. The MFY hitting splits are basically the same at 267/351/455 at home and 272/359/464 away. Since both MFY Stadium and Fenway are essentially neutral parks, the Sox would have more of an advantage playing an extra game in Beantown than the MFY in the Bronx.
Neither club has a big split on the run prevention side of the game. The good guys have given up 4.7 runs at home and 4.4 away, while the MFY yield 4.7 at the Stadium and 5.3 on the road. The Sox and MFY defense independent pitching stats splits, K/9, K/BB, and HR/9, are fairly similar. Thus, it can be reasoned that the difference in home and away run prevention is mostly due to the glove work and park configuration. Regardless, it should not be much of a factor in a five or seven game series. (Intuitively, the MFY must have a disadvantage playing Sheffield, the weaker defender, in right field on the road since in most parks; your stronger defensive player usually patrols the area behind the second baseman. But I have no data to support my theory, and it certainly would not account for a half of run difference on a strikeout staff.)
Of course, any club would have an advantage playing in front of their fans in a comfortable environment. It appears the Sox would benefit more than the MFY and most clubs given the way they pound the ball at Fenway. But the advantage is only ONE game, IF it goes to a deciding game. It is not a big deal. Anything can happen in a short series.
*****
"The way he changes speeds and moves the ball around the plate - in and out, up and down - it makes it really, really hard to hit," said Javy Lopez of the Baltimore Orioles.
"I've always had a hard time, because it's hard to pick up his slider. You see the slider and the fastball pretty much the same. You only can tell if it's a slider when the ball is almost right on top of you."
I can't wait to see El Duker tonight. Is he for real? Hopefully not.
*****
Programming notice: The late end to Wednesday's game, my PC crashing, an auto issue, and no clean underwear lead to no Sox comments yesterday.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
PART II?
I got sucked into the World Series of Poker last night and well…the second half is never coming. It was going to be tooling on Tom Verducci’s article about the Sox in SI. It is similar to other mainstream articles about the trade. In short, just read Joe Sheenan’s pay-per-view article on Baseball Prospectus.
As was their intent, the Sox have allowed many fewer runs, nearly one per game, since acquiring the two defensive specialists. They've also hit a bit better:
RS/G RA/G
Before (101 games) 5.67 4.88
After (37 games) 6.19 3.92
He goes on to say that…
Now, I didn't like the trade, and I still think that pointing to it as the primary cause of the Sox' good play since it happened is wrong. (I believe the Latin term for the fallacy is post hoc ergo propter hoc; just because A came after B doesn't mean that A caused B.)
There is no denying that the Sox are a better defensive club with Cabrera and Minky rather than Nomar and Millar. It should also be noted that the return of Bill Mueller helped in the field/run prevention, as well. The Sox pitchers in defense independent stats have performed better since the deal - most notably, BB/9 is down a full walk. It has been a combined effort in preventing runs.
Back to the new infielders, Cabrera has certainly had an impact, but Minky has no bat and by starting only 15 games has not added significant value in the field, either. The Sox had better internal and external options - Dave McCarty and John Olerud, respectfully – over Minky. The Twins were desperate to part with the first baseman’s salary and attitude with Justin Morneau ready to rock in the dome. With Millar's option vested for next season, the Sox have plenty of corner outfielders/DH/1B options for 2005. The only reasoning for acquiring Minky – the Twins did not have to be a part of the deadline deal – was for the gold glove spin.
When is the spin cycle going to end?
I got sucked into the World Series of Poker last night and well…the second half is never coming. It was going to be tooling on Tom Verducci’s article about the Sox in SI. It is similar to other mainstream articles about the trade. In short, just read Joe Sheenan’s pay-per-view article on Baseball Prospectus.
As was their intent, the Sox have allowed many fewer runs, nearly one per game, since acquiring the two defensive specialists. They've also hit a bit better:
RS/G RA/G
Before (101 games) 5.67 4.88
After (37 games) 6.19 3.92
He goes on to say that…
Now, I didn't like the trade, and I still think that pointing to it as the primary cause of the Sox' good play since it happened is wrong. (I believe the Latin term for the fallacy is post hoc ergo propter hoc; just because A came after B doesn't mean that A caused B.)
There is no denying that the Sox are a better defensive club with Cabrera and Minky rather than Nomar and Millar. It should also be noted that the return of Bill Mueller helped in the field/run prevention, as well. The Sox pitchers in defense independent stats have performed better since the deal - most notably, BB/9 is down a full walk. It has been a combined effort in preventing runs.
Back to the new infielders, Cabrera has certainly had an impact, but Minky has no bat and by starting only 15 games has not added significant value in the field, either. The Sox had better internal and external options - Dave McCarty and John Olerud, respectfully – over Minky. The Twins were desperate to part with the first baseman’s salary and attitude with Justin Morneau ready to rock in the dome. With Millar's option vested for next season, the Sox have plenty of corner outfielders/DH/1B options for 2005. The only reasoning for acquiring Minky – the Twins did not have to be a part of the deadline deal – was for the gold glove spin.
When is the spin cycle going to end?
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
BIG HELP - NO HELP
Part II of my Sunday, not Saturday, Red Sox Journal is temporarily on hold. With the off night, I went to see The Corporation. No doubt. It was one of the most intellectually stimulating films that I’ve seen in quite some time. The first part is humorous, as well, comparing corporations to psychopaths. The end of the film was like a populous pep rally. It was informative and uplifting, but not so entertaining. The Corporation does get El Guapo’s Ghost full endorsement. It can be seen at the Savoy in Vermont’s capital city, Film Forum in NYC, Coolidge Corner in Brookline and other places.
Two other notes: Soxaholix is a must read today and I’m looking for some job leads. If your company is hiring, please drop me an email. I am not sure how much I can offer your employer, but you will at least benefit from having another Sox fan in the office. Thanks for you assistance.
Part II of my Sunday, not Saturday, Red Sox Journal is temporarily on hold. With the off night, I went to see The Corporation. No doubt. It was one of the most intellectually stimulating films that I’ve seen in quite some time. The first part is humorous, as well, comparing corporations to psychopaths. The end of the film was like a populous pep rally. It was informative and uplifting, but not so entertaining. The Corporation does get El Guapo’s Ghost full endorsement. It can be seen at the Savoy in Vermont’s capital city, Film Forum in NYC, Coolidge Corner in Brookline and other places.
Two other notes: Soxaholix is a must read today and I’m looking for some job leads. If your company is hiring, please drop me an email. I am not sure how much I can offer your employer, but you will at least benefit from having another Sox fan in the office. Thanks for you assistance.
Monday, September 13, 2004
SATURDAY RED SOX JOURNAL - Part 1
Yesterday, I rose from my slumber and as usual needed a beverage from Columbia. Unlike most mornings of pleasant weather, I drove to the coffee shop, Uncommon Grounds, located just five blocks away. The motivation to drive was not to increase the profits of the oligopoly more commonly known as the Mobile, Texaco, BP and Shell. The desire was to purchase the new SI with Big Schil on the cover at the bookstore behemoth, Barnes and Noble. For some reason, B&N's competition, Borders and across the street from Uncommon Grounds, did not have the new SI in yet. Some Borders heads should roll for giving my business to B&N and subjecting me to MFY garbage.
Downtown Burlington is laid out in a way that increases traffic - both pedestrian and auto. The center of the city, Church Street, is not open to cars and even bikes and boards. Hence, I needed to take a round about route to Uncommon. It necessitated a drive by a cheap diner and to my surprise in the window was a picture of the Herman Ruth with language about the c-word.
Older readers know I have argued that Red Sox Nation should no longer believe in any c-word because Ruth is no longer the best ballplayer of all-time. But I have never explained why I have never believed in the c-word.
C-word can be defined as some continuous spiritual power that negatively influences an outcome. Constant bad luck could logically prompt the discussion of a c-word. The Red Sox have not had consistently bad luck. The facts do not support the media’s notion.
Baseball standings, unlike football and other sports, is less influenced by luck. After 162 contests over six months, luck, chance, and hot streaks trend to even out with the best clubs making the postseason. But in a five and seven game series over three weeks, luck and hot streaks do play a part in determining the World Champ.
The best team (i.e. Seattle's 116 win season) does not always equate to winning the playoffs. A good club, defined by making the postseason, also needs to get lucky to win a World Championship. Unfortunately, the Red Sox have not been in enough second seasons to be considered unlucky.
From 1920 - Ruth's first season in New York - to 2003, the Sox have qualified for the post season only nine times. The Sox are nine out of 82 (11%) and zero for nine. Nine appearances is not enough evidence of bad luck to label any franchise as c-word.
Furthermore, the Sox only made the second season once from 1920 to 1969. During those 49 years, the best club in each League fought for the right to be called World Champions. Thus, the team with the best regular season record in each league had a 50% chance of winning it all. Those are certainly better odds than today’s 12.5%.
The Red Sox are not c-word. They have not been consisently unlucky. The franchise has not had enough chances to have bad luck. The Sox have not fielded enough good teams. Inept ownership and questionable front office decisions has hampered the Sox shot for a World Championship more than any c-word.
Times are certainly changing though. New ownership and management are beginning to get out from under the decisions of the past regime. The best indication that the tide is turning is when MFY fans need to cite in their diner window some media drummed up notion of a supernatural hex. The old MFY comeback - we'll win in the end because we are the Yankees – is gone. Confidence in MFY land is diminishing. The Red Sox are turning the corner and I am certainly glad that I got a seat on the bus.
Yesterday, I rose from my slumber and as usual needed a beverage from Columbia. Unlike most mornings of pleasant weather, I drove to the coffee shop, Uncommon Grounds, located just five blocks away. The motivation to drive was not to increase the profits of the oligopoly more commonly known as the Mobile, Texaco, BP and Shell. The desire was to purchase the new SI with Big Schil on the cover at the bookstore behemoth, Barnes and Noble. For some reason, B&N's competition, Borders and across the street from Uncommon Grounds, did not have the new SI in yet. Some Borders heads should roll for giving my business to B&N and subjecting me to MFY garbage.
Downtown Burlington is laid out in a way that increases traffic - both pedestrian and auto. The center of the city, Church Street, is not open to cars and even bikes and boards. Hence, I needed to take a round about route to Uncommon. It necessitated a drive by a cheap diner and to my surprise in the window was a picture of the Herman Ruth with language about the c-word.
Older readers know I have argued that Red Sox Nation should no longer believe in any c-word because Ruth is no longer the best ballplayer of all-time. But I have never explained why I have never believed in the c-word.
C-word can be defined as some continuous spiritual power that negatively influences an outcome. Constant bad luck could logically prompt the discussion of a c-word. The Red Sox have not had consistently bad luck. The facts do not support the media’s notion.
Baseball standings, unlike football and other sports, is less influenced by luck. After 162 contests over six months, luck, chance, and hot streaks trend to even out with the best clubs making the postseason. But in a five and seven game series over three weeks, luck and hot streaks do play a part in determining the World Champ.
The best team (i.e. Seattle's 116 win season) does not always equate to winning the playoffs. A good club, defined by making the postseason, also needs to get lucky to win a World Championship. Unfortunately, the Red Sox have not been in enough second seasons to be considered unlucky.
From 1920 - Ruth's first season in New York - to 2003, the Sox have qualified for the post season only nine times. The Sox are nine out of 82 (11%) and zero for nine. Nine appearances is not enough evidence of bad luck to label any franchise as c-word.
Furthermore, the Sox only made the second season once from 1920 to 1969. During those 49 years, the best club in each League fought for the right to be called World Champions. Thus, the team with the best regular season record in each league had a 50% chance of winning it all. Those are certainly better odds than today’s 12.5%.
The Red Sox are not c-word. They have not been consisently unlucky. The franchise has not had enough chances to have bad luck. The Sox have not fielded enough good teams. Inept ownership and questionable front office decisions has hampered the Sox shot for a World Championship more than any c-word.
Times are certainly changing though. New ownership and management are beginning to get out from under the decisions of the past regime. The best indication that the tide is turning is when MFY fans need to cite in their diner window some media drummed up notion of a supernatural hex. The old MFY comeback - we'll win in the end because we are the Yankees – is gone. Confidence in MFY land is diminishing. The Red Sox are turning the corner and I am certainly glad that I got a seat on the bus.
Sunday, September 12, 2004
GET A FREAKIN' CLUE!
Mazzilli and the O's have been killing the Sox all season. This afternoon's game was horrible. I wasn't against the firing of Mazzilli until he blew today's game. BJ Ryan has, by far, been the O's best pitcher and one of the most dominate relievers in the game. But conventional wisdom says with a tie game at home, it's "closer" time and that is exactly what Mazzilli did. He went to struggling Jorge Julio. Julio then gives up homers to Sheffield and Matsui. JUST TERRIBLE! This move was so wrong on many different levels. Mazzilli not only needs some smart pills but balls to go against the today's baseball grain too. Mazzilli will find his sack and take his smart pills by next week though just in time for the Sox series. I had to get this off my chest. Screw you, Mazzilli, you MFY!
Mazzilli and the O's have been killing the Sox all season. This afternoon's game was horrible. I wasn't against the firing of Mazzilli until he blew today's game. BJ Ryan has, by far, been the O's best pitcher and one of the most dominate relievers in the game. But conventional wisdom says with a tie game at home, it's "closer" time and that is exactly what Mazzilli did. He went to struggling Jorge Julio. Julio then gives up homers to Sheffield and Matsui. JUST TERRIBLE! This move was so wrong on many different levels. Mazzilli not only needs some smart pills but balls to go against the today's baseball grain too. Mazzilli will find his sack and take his smart pills by next week though just in time for the Sox series. I had to get this off my chest. Screw you, Mazzilli, you MFY!
Friday, September 10, 2004
INTERVIEW WITH STEVE KETTMANN
Steve Kettmann author of “One Day at Fenway” agreed to a few questions from El Guapo’s Ghost about his book and the State of the Red Sox. Kettmann has reported for various publications like the New York Times, the New Republic, and the Village Voice. Kettmann was also a sports reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle.
The first half of the interview can be read here.
El Guapo's Ghost:
One of the criticisms I have read about your book is that some of the quotes were not very interesting. I disagree. I like to hear that Senator Mitchell, John Henry and other non-regular people have the same reaction as I do when watching a ballgame and go to great lengths to follow the club. It demonstrates that on one level we are all fans from the owner’s box to the Fenway bleachers. Is that a point you were trying to make with the book?
STEVE KETTMANN:
I think it’s safe to say that’s THE point I was trying to make with the book. Baseball is a great equalizer, or it is for people who care about it, really care about it. Roger Angell did a great riff on this, after Carlton Fisk’s homer, which I quoted in the tribute I wrote to him a few years ago in Salon. “I suddenly remembered all my old absent and distant Sox-afflicted friends (and all the other Red Sox fans, all over New England), and I thought of them -- in Brookline, Mass., and Broolin, Maine; in Beverly Farms and Mashpee and Presque Isle and North Conway and Damriscotta; in Pomfret, Connecticut, and Pomfret, Vermont, in Waland and Providence and Revere and Nashua, and in both the Concords and all five Manchesters; and in Ramond, New Hampshire (where Carlton Fisk lives) and Bellows Falls, Vermont (where Carlton Fisk was born), and I saw all of them dancing and shouting and kissing and leaping about like the fans at Fenway -- jumping up and down in their bedrooms and kitchens and living rooms, and in bars and trailers, and even in some boats here and there, I supposed, and on the back-country roads (a lone driver getting the news over the radio and blowing his horn over and over, and finally pulling up and getting out and leaping up and down on the cold macadam, yelling into the night) and all of them, for once at least, utterly joyful and believing in that joy -- alight with it.”
Roger is a legend, one of the greatest baseball writers ever, and yet, during the two months I spent at the New Yorker in 2002, working with him as editor of his most recent book, Game Time, he and I would lapse into conversations about a ballgame the day before, or a player we had both enjoyed watching, and the differences between us melted away.
I loved how this was true for the characters in One Day at Fenway, too. George Mitchell was so happy, sitting there at Fenway, and then later I found out he had his friends drive him in circles at Logan Airport, so he could listen to as much of that day’s game as possible before getting on a plane and starting his trip to Northern Ireland. That sounded to me like exactly the kind of thing I would do – or any real fan. A lot of the small details in the game point in the same direction – a real baseball fan is a fan first, and a billionaire or an umpire or a scoreboard worker or a manager or a general manager second.
EGG:
Did Spike Lee explain the inconsistencies in his baseball allegiances? On
page 42, it is said that "as a kid in Brooklyn, he hated the Yankees and
loved the Mets." What's the deal with Lee now loving the team from the
Bronx? Is he a bandwagon fan?
KETTMANN:
Growing up in Brooklyn, all the kids in Lee's neighborhood were Mets fans, he said, and it was not even an option to be anything else. But later on, he took to the Yankees, and has been a passionate fan of theirs for many years now. Given the way Lee has stuck with the Knicks, always a fan, through some pretty awful periods, I don't think the bandwagon-jumper label fits with him.
EGG:
Did you contemplate adding at least a paragraph about the Yankees poor racial integration history since it was a reason for Lee’s dislike of the Red Sox?
KETTMANN:
Yes, I gave serious thought to discussing the Yankees’ record on racial integration, and asked Spike Lee about it. He had plenty to say about that, too. It was a tough call, but in the end, I opted against it. Lee’s discussion of the Red Sox and race is included because it offered a strong subtext to what happened later in the book: Spike Lee throwing out the first pitch that day at Fenway, and wearing a Derek Jeter jersey. Charles Steinberg of the Red Sox told me that when he asked Lee to throw out the first pitch, he was specifically thinking of the team’s history on race, and felt that it was an important opportunity to make a symbolic statement. It was in service of that symbolism that I included Lee’s remarks about race and the Red Sox.
EGG:
One of the points you make in the Epilogue is that "It [the c-word] exists if enough people feel that it does." I certainly agree and think that the fans negativity somewhat becomes a self-filling prophecy. Peter Farrelly exemplified it perfectly when he says "'I remember never thinking for a moment that they were going to win.'" The owners' marketing strategy only further increases the fans' obsession with beating the Yankees, the c-word and pessimism. (It is partially offset with their Keep the Faith campaign.) The ownership is encouraging this mindset and culture. Do you feel this is counterproductive to accomplishing the main goal: winning a World Series?
KETTMANN:
It's a tricky one, isn't it? Like being in quicksand: If you thrash around, to try to get out, you only sink deeper. But I still think the Red Sox ownership group is playing their hand the only way they can - pointing everything toward beating the Yankees. I think you are right in saying that they risk unleashing more negativism in New England with that focus, but that's only if more years go by without a World Series championship. On that point, based on being around them, I don't think they are pessimistic at all. I think they really believe they can do this. That might in part be because - like me - they came from somewhere else. They were not born and bred as passionate Sox fans, like a Peter Farrelly or a Rich Maloney (who worked in the Green Monster for 14 years, putting up scores by hand). Does that mean they are in for a rude awakening at some point? Possibly, but I don't think so.
EGG:
The owners are not negative at all (my third grade teacher just rolled her eyes). It is one of the characteristics I like most about Boston’s New Big Three. But focusing so much on the Yankees is a problem. It creates a goal that is not necessary. Baseball’s rules have changed. The Red Sox do not need to beat the Yankees to win a World Series. If that happens, I would be afraid that when the smoke cleared the story would emerge that the c-word still looms because the Sox did not beat the Yankees on their trip to winning it all and the New England baseball negativity would continue.
KETTMANN:
That’s an excellent point, especially now that it’s looking like the Red Sox have a good chance of catching the Yankees in the American League East. I’m with you: If the Red Sox win the World Series, Henry and his group will have contributed what they set out to do. That victory would not be diminished even slightly if the Red Sox don’t face the Yankees in the postseason.
EGG:
As you mention, a major objective of the Sox, for various reasons, is controlling the story in the media that eventually gets to the fans or consumers. The expanded NESN Red Sox programming, the owners speaking directly to the fans through email and on web sites, and The New York Times Company's ownership of both the Red Sox and The Boston Globe have all likely, at least in part, been investments in a means to controlling not only the spin of the story, but the agenda as well. Do you feel this type of media control is good for the fans and the game?
KETTMANN:
When you put it like that, I have to wonder. They most definitely crave control of both the message and the agenda. That's absolutely right. But the reason why I don't see that as sinister or damaging is that Red Sox fans as a group are far too energetic and passionate and diverse ever to be controlled in any meaningful way. What I took from the weeks I spent around the organization was a pointed interest in being accountable and accessible - that might in part be about manipulation, but only a fool would think he could control Red Sox fans without in turn being controlled by them. The Henry-Werner-Lucchino group's commitment to public outreach, in various ways, gives the public real control over THEM. That is why it can be so difficult working in the Red Sox front office, but also why it makes perfect sense that, as Brian Cashman and others told me, these people really are fans.
EGG:
First, I need to clarify. I don’t see it as “sinister” either because I doubt it was the main reason for the integration. My feeling is that the vertical integration – owning interests in both the Globe and NESN – was done purely to make money and pay less to the other clubs. A secondary or after the fact benefit for having the “Red Sox Corp.” is the opportunity to better control the story.
The Sox and the media have totally forgotten that the club has lost two potential HOF SS in a span of eight months. Jenkins recent article in NYTimes is a prime example. He doesn’t even acknowledge the loss of A.R. and barely mentions the any thing that Cabrera has done on the field. If one story appears in the Globe/Times or a NESN segment is produced on how the Red Sox lost two potential HOF SS in a span of eight months, I’ll end it. I just don’t feel that story will appear.
Fans like citizens need to be exposed to different views on the issues in order to form a knowledgeable opinion of their own. It can’t be even close to optimal if the Sox have business interests or ties in many of the companies that cover the club. It raises too many red flags. As I said before, I don’t feel it is “sinister” just the nature of the beast, but one has to question whether the average Red Sox fans gets exposure to enough view points in the mainstream media.
KETTMANN:
That’s where you come in – I agree that the more different viewpoints are out there, being expressed energetically and responsibly, the better off everyone is. Red Sox fans are lucky to have a robust community of blogs, and let’s hope that community continues to grow and thrive. There are a lot of good sites – yours, Boston Dirt Dogs, Obey Pedro - and on and on. As an author publishing a book on the Sox, I was very aware of how important your perspectives all were. And believe me, I think the sportswriters who cover the team are well aware of those perspectives, too.
EGG:
Flattery will get you everywhere with me. Thanks and I agree that it is a good time to hear varying opinions, although I see a concerning trend – the acquisition or creation of weblogs by mainstream media companies.
For this group, the most notable one is The New York Times Company’s purchase of the aforementioned Boston Dirt Dogs site. Not that I see any change in their coverage, but I would think they now have Editors. If you have an Editor, I am not sure you are a blog any longer. It appears that Twins Geek has some kind of affiliation with the Star Tribune as well.
Don’t get me wrong, I would certainly jump at the chance to make a living at blogging. But as bloggers gain more access due to great work and popularity(Athletics Nation has hit the mother load of late), and blogs become more mainstream by acquisition and/or creation by major media outlets, we (bloggers) run the risk that “real” journalists deal with “not biting the hand that feeds you” too hard. In the long run, there is the real potential to decrease the number of opinions easily accessible to Joe Public.
I’ll get off my soap box to again thank Steve Kettmann for taking the time out of his busy schedule to chat with us.
Steve Kettmann author of “One Day at Fenway” agreed to a few questions from El Guapo’s Ghost about his book and the State of the Red Sox. Kettmann has reported for various publications like the New York Times, the New Republic, and the Village Voice. Kettmann was also a sports reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle.
The first half of the interview can be read here.
El Guapo's Ghost:
One of the criticisms I have read about your book is that some of the quotes were not very interesting. I disagree. I like to hear that Senator Mitchell, John Henry and other non-regular people have the same reaction as I do when watching a ballgame and go to great lengths to follow the club. It demonstrates that on one level we are all fans from the owner’s box to the Fenway bleachers. Is that a point you were trying to make with the book?
STEVE KETTMANN:
I think it’s safe to say that’s THE point I was trying to make with the book. Baseball is a great equalizer, or it is for people who care about it, really care about it. Roger Angell did a great riff on this, after Carlton Fisk’s homer, which I quoted in the tribute I wrote to him a few years ago in Salon. “I suddenly remembered all my old absent and distant Sox-afflicted friends (and all the other Red Sox fans, all over New England), and I thought of them -- in Brookline, Mass., and Broolin, Maine; in Beverly Farms and Mashpee and Presque Isle and North Conway and Damriscotta; in Pomfret, Connecticut, and Pomfret, Vermont, in Waland and Providence and Revere and Nashua, and in both the Concords and all five Manchesters; and in Ramond, New Hampshire (where Carlton Fisk lives) and Bellows Falls, Vermont (where Carlton Fisk was born), and I saw all of them dancing and shouting and kissing and leaping about like the fans at Fenway -- jumping up and down in their bedrooms and kitchens and living rooms, and in bars and trailers, and even in some boats here and there, I supposed, and on the back-country roads (a lone driver getting the news over the radio and blowing his horn over and over, and finally pulling up and getting out and leaping up and down on the cold macadam, yelling into the night) and all of them, for once at least, utterly joyful and believing in that joy -- alight with it.”
Roger is a legend, one of the greatest baseball writers ever, and yet, during the two months I spent at the New Yorker in 2002, working with him as editor of his most recent book, Game Time, he and I would lapse into conversations about a ballgame the day before, or a player we had both enjoyed watching, and the differences between us melted away.
I loved how this was true for the characters in One Day at Fenway, too. George Mitchell was so happy, sitting there at Fenway, and then later I found out he had his friends drive him in circles at Logan Airport, so he could listen to as much of that day’s game as possible before getting on a plane and starting his trip to Northern Ireland. That sounded to me like exactly the kind of thing I would do – or any real fan. A lot of the small details in the game point in the same direction – a real baseball fan is a fan first, and a billionaire or an umpire or a scoreboard worker or a manager or a general manager second.
EGG:
Did Spike Lee explain the inconsistencies in his baseball allegiances? On
page 42, it is said that "as a kid in Brooklyn, he hated the Yankees and
loved the Mets." What's the deal with Lee now loving the team from the
Bronx? Is he a bandwagon fan?
KETTMANN:
Growing up in Brooklyn, all the kids in Lee's neighborhood were Mets fans, he said, and it was not even an option to be anything else. But later on, he took to the Yankees, and has been a passionate fan of theirs for many years now. Given the way Lee has stuck with the Knicks, always a fan, through some pretty awful periods, I don't think the bandwagon-jumper label fits with him.
EGG:
Did you contemplate adding at least a paragraph about the Yankees poor racial integration history since it was a reason for Lee’s dislike of the Red Sox?
KETTMANN:
Yes, I gave serious thought to discussing the Yankees’ record on racial integration, and asked Spike Lee about it. He had plenty to say about that, too. It was a tough call, but in the end, I opted against it. Lee’s discussion of the Red Sox and race is included because it offered a strong subtext to what happened later in the book: Spike Lee throwing out the first pitch that day at Fenway, and wearing a Derek Jeter jersey. Charles Steinberg of the Red Sox told me that when he asked Lee to throw out the first pitch, he was specifically thinking of the team’s history on race, and felt that it was an important opportunity to make a symbolic statement. It was in service of that symbolism that I included Lee’s remarks about race and the Red Sox.
EGG:
One of the points you make in the Epilogue is that "It [the c-word] exists if enough people feel that it does." I certainly agree and think that the fans negativity somewhat becomes a self-filling prophecy. Peter Farrelly exemplified it perfectly when he says "'I remember never thinking for a moment that they were going to win.'" The owners' marketing strategy only further increases the fans' obsession with beating the Yankees, the c-word and pessimism. (It is partially offset with their Keep the Faith campaign.) The ownership is encouraging this mindset and culture. Do you feel this is counterproductive to accomplishing the main goal: winning a World Series?
KETTMANN:
It's a tricky one, isn't it? Like being in quicksand: If you thrash around, to try to get out, you only sink deeper. But I still think the Red Sox ownership group is playing their hand the only way they can - pointing everything toward beating the Yankees. I think you are right in saying that they risk unleashing more negativism in New England with that focus, but that's only if more years go by without a World Series championship. On that point, based on being around them, I don't think they are pessimistic at all. I think they really believe they can do this. That might in part be because - like me - they came from somewhere else. They were not born and bred as passionate Sox fans, like a Peter Farrelly or a Rich Maloney (who worked in the Green Monster for 14 years, putting up scores by hand). Does that mean they are in for a rude awakening at some point? Possibly, but I don't think so.
EGG:
The owners are not negative at all (my third grade teacher just rolled her eyes). It is one of the characteristics I like most about Boston’s New Big Three. But focusing so much on the Yankees is a problem. It creates a goal that is not necessary. Baseball’s rules have changed. The Red Sox do not need to beat the Yankees to win a World Series. If that happens, I would be afraid that when the smoke cleared the story would emerge that the c-word still looms because the Sox did not beat the Yankees on their trip to winning it all and the New England baseball negativity would continue.
KETTMANN:
That’s an excellent point, especially now that it’s looking like the Red Sox have a good chance of catching the Yankees in the American League East. I’m with you: If the Red Sox win the World Series, Henry and his group will have contributed what they set out to do. That victory would not be diminished even slightly if the Red Sox don’t face the Yankees in the postseason.
EGG:
As you mention, a major objective of the Sox, for various reasons, is controlling the story in the media that eventually gets to the fans or consumers. The expanded NESN Red Sox programming, the owners speaking directly to the fans through email and on web sites, and The New York Times Company's ownership of both the Red Sox and The Boston Globe have all likely, at least in part, been investments in a means to controlling not only the spin of the story, but the agenda as well. Do you feel this type of media control is good for the fans and the game?
KETTMANN:
When you put it like that, I have to wonder. They most definitely crave control of both the message and the agenda. That's absolutely right. But the reason why I don't see that as sinister or damaging is that Red Sox fans as a group are far too energetic and passionate and diverse ever to be controlled in any meaningful way. What I took from the weeks I spent around the organization was a pointed interest in being accountable and accessible - that might in part be about manipulation, but only a fool would think he could control Red Sox fans without in turn being controlled by them. The Henry-Werner-Lucchino group's commitment to public outreach, in various ways, gives the public real control over THEM. That is why it can be so difficult working in the Red Sox front office, but also why it makes perfect sense that, as Brian Cashman and others told me, these people really are fans.
EGG:
First, I need to clarify. I don’t see it as “sinister” either because I doubt it was the main reason for the integration. My feeling is that the vertical integration – owning interests in both the Globe and NESN – was done purely to make money and pay less to the other clubs. A secondary or after the fact benefit for having the “Red Sox Corp.” is the opportunity to better control the story.
The Sox and the media have totally forgotten that the club has lost two potential HOF SS in a span of eight months. Jenkins recent article in NYTimes is a prime example. He doesn’t even acknowledge the loss of A.R. and barely mentions the any thing that Cabrera has done on the field. If one story appears in the Globe/Times or a NESN segment is produced on how the Red Sox lost two potential HOF SS in a span of eight months, I’ll end it. I just don’t feel that story will appear.
Fans like citizens need to be exposed to different views on the issues in order to form a knowledgeable opinion of their own. It can’t be even close to optimal if the Sox have business interests or ties in many of the companies that cover the club. It raises too many red flags. As I said before, I don’t feel it is “sinister” just the nature of the beast, but one has to question whether the average Red Sox fans gets exposure to enough view points in the mainstream media.
KETTMANN:
That’s where you come in – I agree that the more different viewpoints are out there, being expressed energetically and responsibly, the better off everyone is. Red Sox fans are lucky to have a robust community of blogs, and let’s hope that community continues to grow and thrive. There are a lot of good sites – yours, Boston Dirt Dogs, Obey Pedro - and on and on. As an author publishing a book on the Sox, I was very aware of how important your perspectives all were. And believe me, I think the sportswriters who cover the team are well aware of those perspectives, too.
EGG:
Flattery will get you everywhere with me. Thanks and I agree that it is a good time to hear varying opinions, although I see a concerning trend – the acquisition or creation of weblogs by mainstream media companies.
For this group, the most notable one is The New York Times Company’s purchase of the aforementioned Boston Dirt Dogs site. Not that I see any change in their coverage, but I would think they now have Editors. If you have an Editor, I am not sure you are a blog any longer. It appears that Twins Geek has some kind of affiliation with the Star Tribune as well.
Don’t get me wrong, I would certainly jump at the chance to make a living at blogging. But as bloggers gain more access due to great work and popularity(Athletics Nation has hit the mother load of late), and blogs become more mainstream by acquisition and/or creation by major media outlets, we (bloggers) run the risk that “real” journalists deal with “not biting the hand that feeds you” too hard. In the long run, there is the real potential to decrease the number of opinions easily accessible to Joe Public.
I’ll get off my soap box to again thank Steve Kettmann for taking the time out of his busy schedule to chat with us.
Thursday, September 09, 2004
KILL STEIN VOL. I opens Friday, September 17th in New York
As you may recall, I was cautiously optimist about the Sox chances over this last tough stretch.
A 6-3 record or better would make it difficult for the Wild Card to come out of the West, since the threesome are scheduled to beat up on one another the later half the September.
I never dreamed that the Old Town Team could go 8-1. Yes, 8 and f!ck!ing 1, folks.
The latest triumphs are supported by the club’s run differential. The Sox have been underperforming for most of the season. Now it is all coming together (although I have a slight concern about the pen) and translating into wins. This is not a fluke. The Sox are real. They have been the entire season.
Soxaholix summed up the transformation of the club nicely.
The Red Sox' progress this year is fucking glacial … What started slowly, beneath the surface, is now a merciless churning …
It will eventually make its way to the Bronx next Friday as a part of the quest to KILL STEIN. Volume II of KILL STEIN opens the following week in Boston.
IT’S SO ON!
As you may recall, I was cautiously optimist about the Sox chances over this last tough stretch.
A 6-3 record or better would make it difficult for the Wild Card to come out of the West, since the threesome are scheduled to beat up on one another the later half the September.
I never dreamed that the Old Town Team could go 8-1. Yes, 8 and f!ck!ing 1, folks.
The latest triumphs are supported by the club’s run differential. The Sox have been underperforming for most of the season. Now it is all coming together (although I have a slight concern about the pen) and translating into wins. This is not a fluke. The Sox are real. They have been the entire season.
Soxaholix summed up the transformation of the club nicely.
The Red Sox' progress this year is fucking glacial … What started slowly, beneath the surface, is now a merciless churning …
It will eventually make its way to the Bronx next Friday as a part of the quest to KILL STEIN. Volume II of KILL STEIN opens the following week in Boston.
IT’S SO ON!
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
Finally - today's post got published! I have had trouble with blogger all day today. My apologizes to all.
RAIN DOWN ON ME
There is no need to get into the he said – she said shit. We have an outcome on the MFY-D-Ray fiasco. The clubs play a double dip today. BUT, it is supposed to rain all day today and tomorrow in the Bronx. It is likely that at least one game will need to be rescheduled.
Over the next three weeks or so of the regular season, the clubs do not have a common off day. The mostly like scenario would be that if any of the potential rainout(s) have playoff implications, then the game(s) would be played on Monday, October 4th - the day before the start of the playoffs. Given the state of the MFY rotation, it would be a significant disadvantage for them to play one or more games the first Monday in October. Since it is likely that the MFY will make the postseason, would they give up or forfeit the A.L. East crown and home field?
News and Notes
• MLB will not make a decision on the Expos. My guess is that Selig will work some kind of franchise swap. My money is on Atlanta-Baltimore-DC three-way action.
• As if anyone needed another reason to be pissed at Buddy Boy Selig. If Selig wants to take credit for the wild card and interleague play, he could also take credit for making Bush president. No other baseball commissioner can make such a claim.
• After the RNC Convention, I have become a fan of the Bush twins. They are hilarious. I so want to pardo with them.
• The D-Rays have decided that their top prospects will learn on the job in Tampa. For their few fans, I hope ownership doesn't start crying poor when Rocco, Crawford, BJ and company all become arbitration eligible around the same time.
• Grady Fuson should get a call from Theo about a Special Assistant to the GM position.
• Erin Ness gets in World Series of Poker by qualifying in a Maxim office tournament? It doesn't matter how she got in the tournie. Any screen time for Erin is a good thing. She is certainly a cutie as well as this Sox staffer, who flashes the leather at Fenway.
• It is almost time for some football, which reminds me that Bill Parcells, Jerry Jones and Drew Henson had a hand in making the acquisition of A-Hole budget neutral.
• It is probably just me, but Oakland Coliseum’s outfield and foul ground look about twice as big as Fenway's.
• Sox road games need to be in HD; bring the HD cameras on the road. If ESPN can do it, so can NESN.
• Nick Swisher and Moneyball are linked forever in the baseball world. The central theme of the book and the A's philosophy is to find undervalued assets. My theory on one of the reasons for the A’s stat driven draft is that they knew OBP/walks would become trendy or appropriately valued in the marketplace so they drafted it. Fewer Scott Hatties would be available for the A’s each season. It was more cost effective to draft players with good plate discipline then to sign them as free agents in the future.
• Nice story on Abe Alvarez. I saw him last year in Burlington pitching for Lowell then a year later at Fenway. Unfortunately, he doesn’t project as anything more than a #4 at this time, but I am rooting for him to prove me wrong.
There is no need to get into the he said – she said shit. We have an outcome on the MFY-D-Ray fiasco. The clubs play a double dip today. BUT, it is supposed to rain all day today and tomorrow in the Bronx. It is likely that at least one game will need to be rescheduled.
Over the next three weeks or so of the regular season, the clubs do not have a common off day. The mostly like scenario would be that if any of the potential rainout(s) have playoff implications, then the game(s) would be played on Monday, October 4th - the day before the start of the playoffs. Given the state of the MFY rotation, it would be a significant disadvantage for them to play one or more games the first Monday in October. Since it is likely that the MFY will make the postseason, would they give up or forfeit the A.L. East crown and home field?
News and Notes
• MLB will not make a decision on the Expos. My guess is that Selig will work some kind of franchise swap. My money is on Atlanta-Baltimore-DC three-way action.
• As if anyone needed another reason to be pissed at Buddy Boy Selig. If Selig wants to take credit for the wild card and interleague play, he could also take credit for making Bush president. No other baseball commissioner can make such a claim.
• After the RNC Convention, I have become a fan of the Bush twins. They are hilarious. I so want to pardo with them.
• The D-Rays have decided that their top prospects will learn on the job in Tampa. For their few fans, I hope ownership doesn't start crying poor when Rocco, Crawford, BJ and company all become arbitration eligible around the same time.
• Grady Fuson should get a call from Theo about a Special Assistant to the GM position.
• Erin Ness gets in World Series of Poker by qualifying in a Maxim office tournament? It doesn't matter how she got in the tournie. Any screen time for Erin is a good thing. She is certainly a cutie as well as this Sox staffer, who flashes the leather at Fenway.
• It is almost time for some football, which reminds me that Bill Parcells, Jerry Jones and Drew Henson had a hand in making the acquisition of A-Hole budget neutral.
• It is probably just me, but Oakland Coliseum’s outfield and foul ground look about twice as big as Fenway's.
• Sox road games need to be in HD; bring the HD cameras on the road. If ESPN can do it, so can NESN.
• Nick Swisher and Moneyball are linked forever in the baseball world. The central theme of the book and the A's philosophy is to find undervalued assets. My theory on one of the reasons for the A’s stat driven draft is that they knew OBP/walks would become trendy or appropriately valued in the marketplace so they drafted it. Fewer Scott Hatties would be available for the A’s each season. It was more cost effective to draft players with good plate discipline then to sign them as free agents in the future.
• Nice story on Abe Alvarez. I saw him last year in Burlington pitching for Lowell then a year later at Fenway. Unfortunately, he doesn’t project as anything more than a #4 at this time, but I am rooting for him to prove me wrong.
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
Q & A with JOHN GIZZI
I was hoping to post this on Monday and John Gizzi was more than happy to comply on short notice. Due to my strong attention to detail, I did not realize that Monday was Labor Day and forgot set up my email accordingly. Hence, this is getting posted a day late.
John Gizzi writes for ESPN.com as the A’s Fantasy Correspondent. In 2000 and 2001, John won the distinguished Tobin Cup for literature. He continues to provide great insight into our rivals out West.
El Guapo's Ghost:
When checking out the A’s, the single biggest surprise is Eric Chavez’s numbers versus lefties. Is there an explanation for Eric Chavez’s numbers against southpaws – more practice, mental, batting stance, voodoo magic?
John Gizzi:
What's helped Chavez is that he's standing further away from the plate—allowing him to hang in longer against a southpaw's breaking pitches—and using a closed stance, keeping his shoulder more square to the hitting zone. More than anything else, it's been his improved plate discipline that has accounted for a general spike in his peripheral numbers, most notably his walk rate. Whether Chavez can carry those improvements into the playoffs remains to be seen.
El Guapo's Ghost:
The last time I checked, the A’s staff was ranked first in ERA, but 8th in K/9, 7th in BB and 2nd in homers - likely assisted by playing at the Coliseum. As a believer in DIPS, I feel that a significant portion of the credit for the A’s run prevention should be given to the fielders. The club is second in the A.L. in defensive efficiency, but the starters, particularly, get most of the credit from the media. Kotsay has a rep for being solid; Dye and Chavez are gold glovers; Brynes with his speed should have good range, so both collectively and individually why don’t the A’s get more national attention for their work with the leather?
John Gizzi:
Why don't they get more national attention, period? Oh, right. Because the baseball world belongs to the Yankees and the Red Sox; teams like the A's and Twins are merely lucky to be allowed to play in the post-season.
At any rate, I am skeptical about DIPS. It's an interesting new metric, but, like so many of the new metrics, at the end of the day what have we learned? That the pitcher only has a certain amount of control when a ball is put in play? This seems patently obvious, and explains why, partly, strikeout pitchers have such value and why in many cases strikeout is not just another out. (I'm playing devil's advocate, somewhat. As anyone who reads Baseball Prospectus or Baseball Primer or who runs their own blog knows, for a hitter strikeouts are not as evil as the mainstream pundits make them out to be. On the other hand, nor are they as innocent as the stat-heads would have us believe.)
The A's play good defense. And in the case of Chavez and Mark Kotsay, it's excellent. But if anything, the A's have been lucky this year, because Harden, Zito, Redman, and, more recently, Mulder, have allowed their fair share of baserunners. It's a circular argument, but have the A's not allowed more runs because of good defense or because of "good luck," i.e. the balls not going through in key situations? Stat-heads tend to promote the latter theory for any team except the A's—this would be like FOX News criticizing the Republican Party—but the reality, of course, is that it's a combination of both good luck and good defense. Such a radical conclusion—a hybrid theory, that is—counters the dualistic thinking that dominates and poisons modern discourse. But I digress.
El Guapo's Ghost:
What’s the status of the pen? On paper, it appears to be deep with a variety of options. Even though results have been rollercoaster like, do you feel it has the potential to be a strength in the fall similar to the Sox last season?
John Gizzi:
I don't like the bullpen. Dotel, despite his propensity to hang sliders, is a buzz-saw, and Duchscherer has some positives, but nobody else impresses me. They're getting the job done, however, at least statistically; but if the A's have a weakness going into the post-season—other than Mulder's recent command problems and Harden's inconsistency—it's the lack of a power pitcher to set up Dotel. Oh, yeah: and that afore-mentioned "habit" Dotel has developed—hanging breaking pitches.
El Guapo's Ghost:
The A’s offensive attack is certainly better than last season’s even with the loss of Chavez for an extended period of time. The addition of Kotsay and Dye to the lineup has helped along with the overachieving numbers from Hattie, Brynes, and Miller. This season’s lineup is clearly better and more balanced. With that being said, is this a better team than last year’s?
John Gizzi:
It's a better team, because the A's no longer have Terrence Long. I'm not being glib; it's the dead-on truth. OK, seriously: the team looks about the same as it ever has, but if I had to say for sure if they're better or worse, I'd say, overall, a bit "worse." (It's hard to carp on a team that, including this year, has gone to the post-season five straight years while losing two MVPs.)
For starters, it's a bit younger than in the past. I worry about players like Harden, Crosby, and even Byrnes, who've never played this much in their careers, wearing out come October. And even Mulder, who missed most of August and September last year, may be tiring; he's been mediocre (at best) lately, having lost the command that he has always had at his disposal.
Then there are the old guys: Miller is 34 and semi-regular Mark McLemore is 39. This is above and beyond the general mediocrity of those players.
And then there are the wounded: Jermaine Dye has a splint on his left thumb, a serious impediment to hitting, to say nothing of the difficulties Dye must face trying to eat asparagus with his left hand.
And then there are the struggling/inconsistent/streaky: Barry Zito, Mark Redman, and Erubiel Durazo. With Mulder's recent struggles and Harden's raw youth, Tim Hudson is the only reliable starter the A's have right now; Zito and Redman are OK in spots, but do you want them pitching in Fenway in October? Well, maybe Red Sox nation does, but A's fans are less sanguine. And if Erubiel goes into one his notorious funks? (He'll go twenty games without hitting a home run and then bust out with five or six in a five-game span.) Not pretty.
Merge all the questions/problems, including the bullpen concerns, and what do we get? This is the year the A's will finally get out of the first round.
El Guapo's Ghost:
Arroyo – Zito, Lowe – Redman and Hudson – Pedro are the scheduled starters for the series. Do you think either team has an advantage?
John Gizzi:
Who cares? The media likes to provide as much drama as they can—it's what they do, complete with themed music for hurricanes, wars, elections, daring pet rescues, etc.—but in reality this series is not a crucial one. Barring catastrophic injuries, the A's are going to win the AL West, and the Red Sox are, at the very least, going to win the AL Wild Card. So bring on October already!
El Guapo's Ghost:
Don't get me started on the mainstream media. But I do feel that this series is important. It could be a factor in determining home field advantage. Both the Sox and A's have impressive home records while only playing 500 ball on the road.
I was hoping to post this on Monday and John Gizzi was more than happy to comply on short notice. Due to my strong attention to detail, I did not realize that Monday was Labor Day and forgot set up my email accordingly. Hence, this is getting posted a day late.
John Gizzi writes for ESPN.com as the A’s Fantasy Correspondent. In 2000 and 2001, John won the distinguished Tobin Cup for literature. He continues to provide great insight into our rivals out West.
El Guapo's Ghost:
When checking out the A’s, the single biggest surprise is Eric Chavez’s numbers versus lefties. Is there an explanation for Eric Chavez’s numbers against southpaws – more practice, mental, batting stance, voodoo magic?
John Gizzi:
What's helped Chavez is that he's standing further away from the plate—allowing him to hang in longer against a southpaw's breaking pitches—and using a closed stance, keeping his shoulder more square to the hitting zone. More than anything else, it's been his improved plate discipline that has accounted for a general spike in his peripheral numbers, most notably his walk rate. Whether Chavez can carry those improvements into the playoffs remains to be seen.
El Guapo's Ghost:
The last time I checked, the A’s staff was ranked first in ERA, but 8th in K/9, 7th in BB and 2nd in homers - likely assisted by playing at the Coliseum. As a believer in DIPS, I feel that a significant portion of the credit for the A’s run prevention should be given to the fielders. The club is second in the A.L. in defensive efficiency, but the starters, particularly, get most of the credit from the media. Kotsay has a rep for being solid; Dye and Chavez are gold glovers; Brynes with his speed should have good range, so both collectively and individually why don’t the A’s get more national attention for their work with the leather?
John Gizzi:
Why don't they get more national attention, period? Oh, right. Because the baseball world belongs to the Yankees and the Red Sox; teams like the A's and Twins are merely lucky to be allowed to play in the post-season.
At any rate, I am skeptical about DIPS. It's an interesting new metric, but, like so many of the new metrics, at the end of the day what have we learned? That the pitcher only has a certain amount of control when a ball is put in play? This seems patently obvious, and explains why, partly, strikeout pitchers have such value and why in many cases strikeout is not just another out. (I'm playing devil's advocate, somewhat. As anyone who reads Baseball Prospectus or Baseball Primer or who runs their own blog knows, for a hitter strikeouts are not as evil as the mainstream pundits make them out to be. On the other hand, nor are they as innocent as the stat-heads would have us believe.)
The A's play good defense. And in the case of Chavez and Mark Kotsay, it's excellent. But if anything, the A's have been lucky this year, because Harden, Zito, Redman, and, more recently, Mulder, have allowed their fair share of baserunners. It's a circular argument, but have the A's not allowed more runs because of good defense or because of "good luck," i.e. the balls not going through in key situations? Stat-heads tend to promote the latter theory for any team except the A's—this would be like FOX News criticizing the Republican Party—but the reality, of course, is that it's a combination of both good luck and good defense. Such a radical conclusion—a hybrid theory, that is—counters the dualistic thinking that dominates and poisons modern discourse. But I digress.
El Guapo's Ghost:
What’s the status of the pen? On paper, it appears to be deep with a variety of options. Even though results have been rollercoaster like, do you feel it has the potential to be a strength in the fall similar to the Sox last season?
John Gizzi:
I don't like the bullpen. Dotel, despite his propensity to hang sliders, is a buzz-saw, and Duchscherer has some positives, but nobody else impresses me. They're getting the job done, however, at least statistically; but if the A's have a weakness going into the post-season—other than Mulder's recent command problems and Harden's inconsistency—it's the lack of a power pitcher to set up Dotel. Oh, yeah: and that afore-mentioned "habit" Dotel has developed—hanging breaking pitches.
El Guapo's Ghost:
The A’s offensive attack is certainly better than last season’s even with the loss of Chavez for an extended period of time. The addition of Kotsay and Dye to the lineup has helped along with the overachieving numbers from Hattie, Brynes, and Miller. This season’s lineup is clearly better and more balanced. With that being said, is this a better team than last year’s?
John Gizzi:
It's a better team, because the A's no longer have Terrence Long. I'm not being glib; it's the dead-on truth. OK, seriously: the team looks about the same as it ever has, but if I had to say for sure if they're better or worse, I'd say, overall, a bit "worse." (It's hard to carp on a team that, including this year, has gone to the post-season five straight years while losing two MVPs.)
For starters, it's a bit younger than in the past. I worry about players like Harden, Crosby, and even Byrnes, who've never played this much in their careers, wearing out come October. And even Mulder, who missed most of August and September last year, may be tiring; he's been mediocre (at best) lately, having lost the command that he has always had at his disposal.
Then there are the old guys: Miller is 34 and semi-regular Mark McLemore is 39. This is above and beyond the general mediocrity of those players.
And then there are the wounded: Jermaine Dye has a splint on his left thumb, a serious impediment to hitting, to say nothing of the difficulties Dye must face trying to eat asparagus with his left hand.
And then there are the struggling/inconsistent/streaky: Barry Zito, Mark Redman, and Erubiel Durazo. With Mulder's recent struggles and Harden's raw youth, Tim Hudson is the only reliable starter the A's have right now; Zito and Redman are OK in spots, but do you want them pitching in Fenway in October? Well, maybe Red Sox nation does, but A's fans are less sanguine. And if Erubiel goes into one his notorious funks? (He'll go twenty games without hitting a home run and then bust out with five or six in a five-game span.) Not pretty.
Merge all the questions/problems, including the bullpen concerns, and what do we get? This is the year the A's will finally get out of the first round.
El Guapo's Ghost:
Arroyo – Zito, Lowe – Redman and Hudson – Pedro are the scheduled starters for the series. Do you think either team has an advantage?
John Gizzi:
Who cares? The media likes to provide as much drama as they can—it's what they do, complete with themed music for hurricanes, wars, elections, daring pet rescues, etc.—but in reality this series is not a crucial one. Barring catastrophic injuries, the A's are going to win the AL West, and the Red Sox are, at the very least, going to win the AL Wild Card. So bring on October already!
El Guapo's Ghost:
Don't get me started on the mainstream media. But I do feel that this series is important. It could be a factor in determining home field advantage. Both the Sox and A's have impressive home records while only playing 500 ball on the road.
Friday, September 03, 2004
INTERVIEW WITH STEVE KETTMANN
Steve Kettmann author of “One Day at Fenway” agreed to a few questions from El Guapo’s Ghost about his book and the State of the Red Sox. Kettmann has reported for various publications like the New York Times, the New Republic, and the Village Voice. Kettmann was also a sports reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle.
Below is the first half of the interview. The second half will be posted likely next week and discusses Spike Lee, Peter Farrelly, the media and Boston’s New Big Three.
EL GUAPO’S GHOST:
Since it was the first thing that I saw when I picked up your book, I have to ask: what's up with Bernie Williams on the cover of One Day at Fenway(said with half of a smile)?
STEVE KETTMANN:
The people at Simon & Schuster wanted to come up with something fresh and different for the cover, partly to show that this was meant to be a book about America, too, or at least a slice of American life, so they went with the red, white and blue, which definitely grabs the attention. The title tells you this is a book about the Red Sox, but without Bernie on the front cover, the "One Day at Fenway" could be with Tampa Bay in town or, gasp, Kansas City. This way, one glance tells you this is a book about the best rivalry in U.S. sports, the Sox and the Yanks. All that said - I am hoping we might be able to print up a limited Fenway-only edition of the book that would put Pedro on the front cover. For the true Sox fan, it's a given that any book focusing on a single Red Sox game would have to include the Yankees as antagonists and foils.
EGG:
The concept of the book - to compile various perspectives on the same game- is an interesting topic. As you mentioned, you were concerned about picking a boring game, but were you equally concerned about selecting uninteresting interviewees? Did all of the subjects make it into the book or did you hedge your bets and follow many fans on that day? It seems like you got very lucky with Marty Martin and to a lesser extent the Gordon-Baxter couple.
KETTMANN:
That's a very insightful question. If this was a movie, a lot of footage would have ended up on the cutting-room floor. As one example of leads I pursued that in the end did not shape the book: George Steinbrenner was in a particularly dark frame of mind in late August 2003, during the days leading up to the Saturday game chronicled in my book. He was in Ohio for a football game, and through a lot of work, I was able to establish that he would be watching that Saturday's game at a particular hotel bar. I arranged to have a reporter in place - the daughter of a sports columnist - and she sat near the large table marked RESERVED for Steinbrenner and his group. But the game started and there was no sign of George. In fact, he never showed. Too bad. I think that would have added a lot to the book, having real-time glimpses of Steinbrenner reacting to a frustrating game.
Ed Rapuano was the crew chief that day, and I put a lot into developing him as a character. I spoke to Rapuano on the phone weeks before the game, and he told me he had a passion for off-season wine-making. Perfect, I thought: Something to make an umpire come across in a more three-dimensional way. So I called up a friend of mine, Pete Danko, who used to be a sports columnist for the Riverside Press-Enterprise in Southern California. Danko lives in Napa now, and has put years into learning wine and the wine business. So I arranged for Danko to fly to Boston for the game, and to get as much material as he could from Rapuano. But in the end, as good as the stuff was from Rapuano, I decided I had to focus on Mark Carlson, since he was the home-plate umpire, and was much more involved in the game. He even went out to the mound at one point and compared notes with Pedro Martinez on the sore throats they had both recently had (strep). So Rapuano, who has a good reputation and struck me as likable and interesting, barely appears in the book.
To get back to the broader question: Yes, I was very, very concerned about whether each of the characters was engaging enough to earn their keep. But that was early in the project. Later on, it seemed more important to capture the day and the game, through a variety of voices and perspectives, and to trust that if the day and the game were exciting and compelling, the characters would be, too. So, for example, at times I quote people saying routine types of things that some readers might find a little dull. But I've been pleased that a variety of readers have told me that for them this book was a real page-turner: They stayed up late, sticking with it long after they thought they would put it down. If that's how people feel, I think it stems from two things: One, still and always, nothing beats a good plot, and the story of this game had a great plot. And two, I like these people, and I think that comes through in the portraits.
EGG:
The initial reaction from the national media was that Grady Little's contract was not renewed because he did not pull Pedro and that the Sox needed a sacrificial lamb. The Boston media has done an adequate job explaining it was more than just one misstep in October. A couple of instances in your book demonstrate that Little was not the Sox guy from the start. On page 280, Lucchino states to Henry regarding a pitching matchup, "Posada was 0-for-4 lifetime against Kim." Henry's reply, "You think that's statistically significant?" "'It is to the manager,' Lucchino said." I
think that summed up the Sox's opinion of Little and the major reason for his dismissal. Did the Sox brass make any positive comments regarding Little as a Manager?
KETTMANN:
Funny you should mention that exchange - it was the same one that Billy Beane told me was his favorite quote in the book. I definitely heard positive things about Little from various people in the Red Sox front office, but most of the time I was around the team was during the regular season. In the book I describe the scene in the Red Sox clubhouse at Yankee Stadium after the Game Seven disaster, and try to convey what it was like to be in that room. But I didn't have any inside information on what took place in the days and weeks after that. I'd just say this about Grady Little: I think he was judged too harshly. Put it this way: If the Red Sox win the World Series this year - and sitting here at Fenway after they just won their eighth straight game, I don't think it's at all crazy to say I believe they will win this year - I think many people, especially players, would see that World Series victory as something that Grady Little helped contribute to in some important ways.
Steve Kettmann author of “One Day at Fenway” agreed to a few questions from El Guapo’s Ghost about his book and the State of the Red Sox. Kettmann has reported for various publications like the New York Times, the New Republic, and the Village Voice. Kettmann was also a sports reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle.
Below is the first half of the interview. The second half will be posted likely next week and discusses Spike Lee, Peter Farrelly, the media and Boston’s New Big Three.
EL GUAPO’S GHOST:
Since it was the first thing that I saw when I picked up your book, I have to ask: what's up with Bernie Williams on the cover of One Day at Fenway(said with half of a smile)?
STEVE KETTMANN:
The people at Simon & Schuster wanted to come up with something fresh and different for the cover, partly to show that this was meant to be a book about America, too, or at least a slice of American life, so they went with the red, white and blue, which definitely grabs the attention. The title tells you this is a book about the Red Sox, but without Bernie on the front cover, the "One Day at Fenway" could be with Tampa Bay in town or, gasp, Kansas City. This way, one glance tells you this is a book about the best rivalry in U.S. sports, the Sox and the Yanks. All that said - I am hoping we might be able to print up a limited Fenway-only edition of the book that would put Pedro on the front cover. For the true Sox fan, it's a given that any book focusing on a single Red Sox game would have to include the Yankees as antagonists and foils.
EGG:
The concept of the book - to compile various perspectives on the same game- is an interesting topic. As you mentioned, you were concerned about picking a boring game, but were you equally concerned about selecting uninteresting interviewees? Did all of the subjects make it into the book or did you hedge your bets and follow many fans on that day? It seems like you got very lucky with Marty Martin and to a lesser extent the Gordon-Baxter couple.
KETTMANN:
That's a very insightful question. If this was a movie, a lot of footage would have ended up on the cutting-room floor. As one example of leads I pursued that in the end did not shape the book: George Steinbrenner was in a particularly dark frame of mind in late August 2003, during the days leading up to the Saturday game chronicled in my book. He was in Ohio for a football game, and through a lot of work, I was able to establish that he would be watching that Saturday's game at a particular hotel bar. I arranged to have a reporter in place - the daughter of a sports columnist - and she sat near the large table marked RESERVED for Steinbrenner and his group. But the game started and there was no sign of George. In fact, he never showed. Too bad. I think that would have added a lot to the book, having real-time glimpses of Steinbrenner reacting to a frustrating game.
Ed Rapuano was the crew chief that day, and I put a lot into developing him as a character. I spoke to Rapuano on the phone weeks before the game, and he told me he had a passion for off-season wine-making. Perfect, I thought: Something to make an umpire come across in a more three-dimensional way. So I called up a friend of mine, Pete Danko, who used to be a sports columnist for the Riverside Press-Enterprise in Southern California. Danko lives in Napa now, and has put years into learning wine and the wine business. So I arranged for Danko to fly to Boston for the game, and to get as much material as he could from Rapuano. But in the end, as good as the stuff was from Rapuano, I decided I had to focus on Mark Carlson, since he was the home-plate umpire, and was much more involved in the game. He even went out to the mound at one point and compared notes with Pedro Martinez on the sore throats they had both recently had (strep). So Rapuano, who has a good reputation and struck me as likable and interesting, barely appears in the book.
To get back to the broader question: Yes, I was very, very concerned about whether each of the characters was engaging enough to earn their keep. But that was early in the project. Later on, it seemed more important to capture the day and the game, through a variety of voices and perspectives, and to trust that if the day and the game were exciting and compelling, the characters would be, too. So, for example, at times I quote people saying routine types of things that some readers might find a little dull. But I've been pleased that a variety of readers have told me that for them this book was a real page-turner: They stayed up late, sticking with it long after they thought they would put it down. If that's how people feel, I think it stems from two things: One, still and always, nothing beats a good plot, and the story of this game had a great plot. And two, I like these people, and I think that comes through in the portraits.
EGG:
The initial reaction from the national media was that Grady Little's contract was not renewed because he did not pull Pedro and that the Sox needed a sacrificial lamb. The Boston media has done an adequate job explaining it was more than just one misstep in October. A couple of instances in your book demonstrate that Little was not the Sox guy from the start. On page 280, Lucchino states to Henry regarding a pitching matchup, "Posada was 0-for-4 lifetime against Kim." Henry's reply, "You think that's statistically significant?" "'It is to the manager,' Lucchino said." I
think that summed up the Sox's opinion of Little and the major reason for his dismissal. Did the Sox brass make any positive comments regarding Little as a Manager?
KETTMANN:
Funny you should mention that exchange - it was the same one that Billy Beane told me was his favorite quote in the book. I definitely heard positive things about Little from various people in the Red Sox front office, but most of the time I was around the team was during the regular season. In the book I describe the scene in the Red Sox clubhouse at Yankee Stadium after the Game Seven disaster, and try to convey what it was like to be in that room. But I didn't have any inside information on what took place in the days and weeks after that. I'd just say this about Grady Little: I think he was judged too harshly. Put it this way: If the Red Sox win the World Series this year - and sitting here at Fenway after they just won their eighth straight game, I don't think it's at all crazy to say I believe they will win this year - I think many people, especially players, would see that World Series victory as something that Grady Little helped contribute to in some important ways.
Thursday, September 02, 2004
GAME NOTES
It is somewhat understandable that Tito called on Timlin in the seventh. He was warming up when the Sox were only up by four and Anaheim’s offense was clicking with one of the best pens in the game. Perhaps, Timlin had to come into the game after an extended period in the pen getting loose, but he did not need to start the eighth inning.
The Sox were up by six runs going into the bottom half of the eighth. Both Leskanic and Embree had at least two days off in a row. Since they came into the game, the duo was healthy and available. It was a near perfect spot for Leskanic to work two innings with Embree as the safety net. As we know, Tito stuck with Timlin.
Timlin has now pitched in back-to-back games, his outings are always of the high stress variety (throwing nearly all heaters), and the club does not have a scheduled day off anytime soon. Put it all into a pot and stir, and Walhalla - Timlin is likely unavailable tonight. With Foulke’s availability iffy or day-by-day, there was no reason to use your second most reliable reliever up by six and with only six outs required for the win. Tito may have made a critical error during this all important nine game stretch.
One other tidbit, Nixon should be activated on Sunday after a three day rehab assignment. The timing is perfect. He serves his three game suspension Sunday – Tuesday. Two of the three scheduled starters are southpaws (Zito and Redman on Monday and Tuesday). Hopefully, Nixon will be ready to face the Beantown Bar Brawler, Tim Hudson, on Wednesday. I want four more WINS – boys.
It is somewhat understandable that Tito called on Timlin in the seventh. He was warming up when the Sox were only up by four and Anaheim’s offense was clicking with one of the best pens in the game. Perhaps, Timlin had to come into the game after an extended period in the pen getting loose, but he did not need to start the eighth inning.
The Sox were up by six runs going into the bottom half of the eighth. Both Leskanic and Embree had at least two days off in a row. Since they came into the game, the duo was healthy and available. It was a near perfect spot for Leskanic to work two innings with Embree as the safety net. As we know, Tito stuck with Timlin.
Timlin has now pitched in back-to-back games, his outings are always of the high stress variety (throwing nearly all heaters), and the club does not have a scheduled day off anytime soon. Put it all into a pot and stir, and Walhalla - Timlin is likely unavailable tonight. With Foulke’s availability iffy or day-by-day, there was no reason to use your second most reliable reliever up by six and with only six outs required for the win. Tito may have made a critical error during this all important nine game stretch.
One other tidbit, Nixon should be activated on Sunday after a three day rehab assignment. The timing is perfect. He serves his three game suspension Sunday – Tuesday. Two of the three scheduled starters are southpaws (Zito and Redman on Monday and Tuesday). Hopefully, Nixon will be ready to face the Beantown Bar Brawler, Tim Hudson, on Wednesday. I want four more WINS – boys.
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
A WIN IS A WIN
I didn’t see much of last night’s game. I have a hard time believing that one myself. The news came down yesterday, appropriately at high noon that my position has been transferred to another division within the organization. It is okay. Change is not necessarily bad, but I don’t have any details on who may be my manager(s) other than the CFO so I am apprehensive about the situation and so are my colleagues. Thus, I spent most of the evening discussing the restructuring.
But when I did pop my head up at the set, I saw the Sox were dominating Anaheim and the MFY were getting their asses handed to them by the Indians. It certainly raised my spirits. Other than Myers, literally, not being able to get a hitter out, it was great night for Red Sox Nation. Unfortunately, the MFY can’t be given three losses for getting bent over by the Indians, so at 7:05 p.m. tonight that huge loss means nothing any longer. A loss is just a loss.
I didn’t see much of last night’s game. I have a hard time believing that one myself. The news came down yesterday, appropriately at high noon that my position has been transferred to another division within the organization. It is okay. Change is not necessarily bad, but I don’t have any details on who may be my manager(s) other than the CFO so I am apprehensive about the situation and so are my colleagues. Thus, I spent most of the evening discussing the restructuring.
But when I did pop my head up at the set, I saw the Sox were dominating Anaheim and the MFY were getting their asses handed to them by the Indians. It certainly raised my spirits. Other than Myers, literally, not being able to get a hitter out, it was great night for Red Sox Nation. Unfortunately, the MFY can’t be given three losses for getting bent over by the Indians, so at 7:05 p.m. tonight that huge loss means nothing any longer. A loss is just a loss.
Thank you - Red Sox!
This site is not associated with the Boston Red Sox, Major League Baseball nor Major League Players Assoication
© 2003-2010 Thomas J. Fratamico, III
All Rights Reserved
