Monday, May 31, 2004
More tales of mass-produced baked goods
There were no Hostess Baseballs at Ralphs today. There were plenty of Hostess Zingers, though, which rhymes with a baseball term ("dinger"), and which used to be a product of the Dolly Madison company and therefore used to be advertised by the "Peanuts" characters! See how this all fits together?
Now, does this mean I'm supposed to fill my luggage with Zingers, or does it mean I'm supposed to show up with empty luggage if I can't get Baseballs?
Levi: Surely you can make baseball-shaped snack cakes at home?
And you wouldn't think of leaving home for a long trip without some Hostess Fruit Pies, would you? Especially since we've already discovered that Doctor Octopus, for one, is aware of our itinerary?
Come on, Jim. You're supposed to be the good planner in this crew.
Steve: While I'm sure this will fall on deaf ears over at BRPA, maybe it's time you guys should consider corporate sponsorship. Perhaps you can get Interstate Brands to donate a suitcase full of baseballs for your trip.
Interstate Brands Corp.
Consumer Affairs
12 E. Armour Blvd.
Kansas City, MO 64111.
The phone number is (816) 502-4010.
Jim: What do fruit pies have to do with Dr. Octopus...do we keep throwing them at him until he has one in each tentacle, thus making him unable to grab us and do harm to us?
Trying to get corporate sponsorship sounds like a job for Levi.
Levi: "What do fruit pies have to do with Dr. Octopus?"
While you were reading about trains, Jim, the rest of us were rotting our minds with comic books. Rotting minds and rotting teeth go together, so Hostess advertised their fruit pies extensively in superhero comics.
The ads were like this.
Jim: See, I only read Archie comic books, which didn't rot your mind; they taught valuable life lessons such as the fact that brunettes are more desirable than blondes. Also, one character had an eating disorder (although the only consequence of it seemed to be the endless requests by Pop for him to pay his tab at the Chocklit Shoppe), so it's no wonder Hostess didn't advertise their products there.
Levi: When I was young, I had an Archie comic put out by Spire, a religious publisher. In it, some of Archie's buddies drink and drive and die, and Archie and friends (including, if I remember right, a ringer who was just in that issue (much like the dying friends) so he could spout some biblical verse.
Freaked me out and put me off Archie until adulthood. Now I can enjoy him, but when I was kid, I stayed away.
Jim: I also had a couple of the Spire Archie comics, mistakenly(?) purchased by my mother at some point. I don't remember the specific plot lines, but apparently, all the Spire Archies were about someone dying in a car accident, but not having to worry, because they were saved.
As a kid, I mostly bought the Archie digests, not the actual comic books, because that's what they had at Publix...sometimes in the checkout racks next to TV Guide and the Globe Mini Mags, and sometimes in the magazines/greeting cards section at the right front corner of the store. (I believe the link is to a picture of the actual Publix store I'm talking about...if not, it's absolutely identical, although the cars in the parking lot were slightly newer in my Archie digest-buying days.)
Jason: I had one of those religious Archie comics, as well. No car accidents, but instead the gang went to Africa to do missionary work. I think they ended up building a well for a poor village.
When I read it, I wondered why Archie got so preachy all of the sudden. Thanks for clearing it up, fellas!
Now, does this mean I'm supposed to fill my luggage with Zingers, or does it mean I'm supposed to show up with empty luggage if I can't get Baseballs?
Original comments...
Levi: Surely you can make baseball-shaped snack cakes at home?
And you wouldn't think of leaving home for a long trip without some Hostess Fruit Pies, would you? Especially since we've already discovered that Doctor Octopus, for one, is aware of our itinerary?
Come on, Jim. You're supposed to be the good planner in this crew.
Steve: While I'm sure this will fall on deaf ears over at BRPA, maybe it's time you guys should consider corporate sponsorship. Perhaps you can get Interstate Brands to donate a suitcase full of baseballs for your trip.
Interstate Brands Corp.
Consumer Affairs
12 E. Armour Blvd.
Kansas City, MO 64111.
The phone number is (816) 502-4010.
Jim: What do fruit pies have to do with Dr. Octopus...do we keep throwing them at him until he has one in each tentacle, thus making him unable to grab us and do harm to us?
Trying to get corporate sponsorship sounds like a job for Levi.
Levi: "What do fruit pies have to do with Dr. Octopus?"
While you were reading about trains, Jim, the rest of us were rotting our minds with comic books. Rotting minds and rotting teeth go together, so Hostess advertised their fruit pies extensively in superhero comics.
The ads were like this.
Jim: See, I only read Archie comic books, which didn't rot your mind; they taught valuable life lessons such as the fact that brunettes are more desirable than blondes. Also, one character had an eating disorder (although the only consequence of it seemed to be the endless requests by Pop for him to pay his tab at the Chocklit Shoppe), so it's no wonder Hostess didn't advertise their products there.
Levi: When I was young, I had an Archie comic put out by Spire, a religious publisher. In it, some of Archie's buddies drink and drive and die, and Archie and friends (including, if I remember right, a ringer who was just in that issue (much like the dying friends) so he could spout some biblical verse.
Freaked me out and put me off Archie until adulthood. Now I can enjoy him, but when I was kid, I stayed away.
Jim: I also had a couple of the Spire Archie comics, mistakenly(?) purchased by my mother at some point. I don't remember the specific plot lines, but apparently, all the Spire Archies were about someone dying in a car accident, but not having to worry, because they were saved.
As a kid, I mostly bought the Archie digests, not the actual comic books, because that's what they had at Publix...sometimes in the checkout racks next to TV Guide and the Globe Mini Mags, and sometimes in the magazines/greeting cards section at the right front corner of the store. (I believe the link is to a picture of the actual Publix store I'm talking about...if not, it's absolutely identical, although the cars in the parking lot were slightly newer in my Archie digest-buying days.)
Jason: I had one of those religious Archie comics, as well. No car accidents, but instead the gang went to Africa to do missionary work. I think they ended up building a well for a poor village.
When I read it, I wondered why Archie got so preachy all of the sudden. Thanks for clearing it up, fellas!
Labels: hostess baseballs
Now ensconced on the iPod
This is only tangentially baseball-related because of the "Peanuts" connection, and because it has the potential to be played on the trip: thanks to Cartoon Network kicking off the summer season by showing "Race for Your Life, Charlie Brown" this morning, I now have the two songs from the movie on my iPod. Yes, one of those is the theme song, in which Larry Finlayson sings the profound observations written by Ed Bogas that "the sunshine is brought to you absolutely free" and that "when the sun sets down, it is gone, Charlie Brown." It's almost as good of a summer song as "Kokomo"! As far as I can tell, Larry Finlayson never did anything else in his life.
By the way, the All-Movie Guide description of "Race for Your Life" (sorry, I can't link to it directly) lists some things that aren't actually in the movie, but were in other "Peanuts" animated shows (and the strip, of course), most notably "Charlie Brown gets a 'go away and leave me alone' bunkmate." Also, they claim it was made for TV (as opposed to a theatrical release), list Larry Finlayson as a songwriter (as opposed to a singer), and misspell Charles Schulz's name. So, in conclusion, do not trust the All-Movie Guide, not even if you're trying to look for additional credits for Larry Finlayson.
Levi: For my birthday, Stacey crocheted me a very nice red iPod cozy with a Cardinal on it. I'm willing to bet I'm the only person on earth with one of these.
Jim: A picture of the iPod cozy needs to be submitted to the iPod Lounge. Since I'm already a member of that site, I can do it if you e-mail me a picture.
By the way, the All-Movie Guide description of "Race for Your Life" (sorry, I can't link to it directly) lists some things that aren't actually in the movie, but were in other "Peanuts" animated shows (and the strip, of course), most notably "Charlie Brown gets a 'go away and leave me alone' bunkmate." Also, they claim it was made for TV (as opposed to a theatrical release), list Larry Finlayson as a songwriter (as opposed to a singer), and misspell Charles Schulz's name. So, in conclusion, do not trust the All-Movie Guide, not even if you're trying to look for additional credits for Larry Finlayson.
Original comments...
Levi: For my birthday, Stacey crocheted me a very nice red iPod cozy with a Cardinal on it. I'm willing to bet I'm the only person on earth with one of these.
Jim: A picture of the iPod cozy needs to be submitted to the iPod Lounge. Since I'm already a member of that site, I can do it if you e-mail me a picture.
Friday, May 28, 2004
More thinking on just rewards
I've been thinking a little more about the role one's behavior at baseball games could play in the handing down of eternal punishment or reward. It's a complex issue.
For example: Jeffrey Maier. You remember him. He's the twelve-year-old kid who helped win Game 1 of the 1996 ALCS for the Yankees by reaching over the fence and grabbing what would likely have been a flyout by Derek Jeter, turning it into a home run.
Now, my view on fan interference is this: feel free to interfere with a ball in play, but be sure of what you're doing before you stick that hand or glove out there. If you're rooting for the home team from the front row down the line, and the ball hit by the opponent is headed for the corner, a definite triple, feel free to lean over the fence and turn the ball into an automatic double. What I don't like to see is the fan who, wrapped up in his ignorant desire for a batted ball, turns his own team's triple into a double. It's all about thinking in advance. I guarantee that Scott Rolen, before each play, thinks through what he'll do in any situation. Is it too much to ask fans sitting at field level to do the same?
So Jeffrey Maier clearly fits into the category of righteous interference: he saw that Tony Tarasco was probably going to catch the ball. He may not have been sure that it would be ruled a home run if he caught it, but the consequence of not catching it was camped out beneath him. So grabbing it, despite the fact that he was taking a chance of being thrown out of a playoff game, was clearly the right thing to do.
But the situation gets more complex. After all, the team Mr. Maier was supporting with his action was the Yankees. And I like to think--Damn Yankees to the contrary--the gods know the Yankees are evil. What--you think the gods aren't as smart as a 6-year-old Sox fan? No, the gods definitely know the Yanks are evil. I think they allow the Yankees their success both as a trial to the rest of us, a test of our faith in our own teams, and as a kind of spiritual flypaper. Anyone foolish enough to fall prey to the easy seductions of the World Series trophies and the black-and-white pinstripes reveals a weakness sure to be noted by the gods.
So given that: was Jeffrey Maier's action a good action, in a philosophical sense? Is it likely to have added to the credit side of his spiritual ledger, or did it weigh down the debit?
See why the Old Testament God was so cranky? It's complex. I don't blame him for just sending plagues all the damn time rather than thinking about this kind of thing.
P.S. Added later
To clarify a bit the concept of "spiritual flypaper": I think of it kind of like the situation in Nina Simone's "Sinnerman": the sinnerman runs to the rock, and it can't hide him, then he runs to the river, and it's bleeding, and he runs to the sea to find it boiling, then he runs to the lord, who tells him to go to the devil.
The devil is waiting. He's always waiting. I picture him in a nicely tailored blue houndstooth smoking jacket, a circle of flattened cigarette butts around his spats a little indication of how long he's been waiting, knowing that the sinnerman would show up sooner or later.
Like the Yankees. They're content to wait until your team blows a 13-game lead or goes twelve years without a winning season or your cast-off first baseman rediscovers his youth in the very place Ponce de Leon came up empty.
Steve: So, according to this logic the Cubs are Isaac and Bartman is Abraham--only God decided not to intervene at the last minute.
Luke: >I don't blame him for just sending plagues all the damn time rather
>than thinking about this kind of thing.
How do you think we ended up with the wild card, green-screen ads and the Devil Rays? We also ended up with, for a time, Johnny Damon's hair, but if God truly loved us, the shaving cream would have turned to wine when it touched his face.
Other than a handful of personalities and talents who have made fandom worthwhile -- the Marks Grace, the Alberts Pujols, the Rickeys Henderson, the Antonios Alfonseca -- have there been any developments in the past 30 years to suggest God's grace? Streaming broadcasts, maybe, but one has to pay for them (that the Bill of Rights fails to mention our right to free baseball audio merely proves our forefathers' lack of foresight). All other changes to the game -- retractable domes, sponsored first pitches and lineup changes, elbow pads -- seem to be proof of God's retributive side.
Levi: So, Luke, you're saying that Selig is Satan?
Luke, hanger-on: I figured it went without saying, but just in case, I'll say it: Bud Selig is Satan.
"Allan H Bud Selig," after all, anagrams to "Hell! Bad! Sin! Luga!"
(Luga being the eskimo word for "menace to a great sport.")
For example: Jeffrey Maier. You remember him. He's the twelve-year-old kid who helped win Game 1 of the 1996 ALCS for the Yankees by reaching over the fence and grabbing what would likely have been a flyout by Derek Jeter, turning it into a home run.
Now, my view on fan interference is this: feel free to interfere with a ball in play, but be sure of what you're doing before you stick that hand or glove out there. If you're rooting for the home team from the front row down the line, and the ball hit by the opponent is headed for the corner, a definite triple, feel free to lean over the fence and turn the ball into an automatic double. What I don't like to see is the fan who, wrapped up in his ignorant desire for a batted ball, turns his own team's triple into a double. It's all about thinking in advance. I guarantee that Scott Rolen, before each play, thinks through what he'll do in any situation. Is it too much to ask fans sitting at field level to do the same?
So Jeffrey Maier clearly fits into the category of righteous interference: he saw that Tony Tarasco was probably going to catch the ball. He may not have been sure that it would be ruled a home run if he caught it, but the consequence of not catching it was camped out beneath him. So grabbing it, despite the fact that he was taking a chance of being thrown out of a playoff game, was clearly the right thing to do.
But the situation gets more complex. After all, the team Mr. Maier was supporting with his action was the Yankees. And I like to think--Damn Yankees to the contrary--the gods know the Yankees are evil. What--you think the gods aren't as smart as a 6-year-old Sox fan? No, the gods definitely know the Yanks are evil. I think they allow the Yankees their success both as a trial to the rest of us, a test of our faith in our own teams, and as a kind of spiritual flypaper. Anyone foolish enough to fall prey to the easy seductions of the World Series trophies and the black-and-white pinstripes reveals a weakness sure to be noted by the gods.
So given that: was Jeffrey Maier's action a good action, in a philosophical sense? Is it likely to have added to the credit side of his spiritual ledger, or did it weigh down the debit?
See why the Old Testament God was so cranky? It's complex. I don't blame him for just sending plagues all the damn time rather than thinking about this kind of thing.
P.S. Added later
To clarify a bit the concept of "spiritual flypaper": I think of it kind of like the situation in Nina Simone's "Sinnerman": the sinnerman runs to the rock, and it can't hide him, then he runs to the river, and it's bleeding, and he runs to the sea to find it boiling, then he runs to the lord, who tells him to go to the devil.
The devil is waiting. He's always waiting. I picture him in a nicely tailored blue houndstooth smoking jacket, a circle of flattened cigarette butts around his spats a little indication of how long he's been waiting, knowing that the sinnerman would show up sooner or later.
Like the Yankees. They're content to wait until your team blows a 13-game lead or goes twelve years without a winning season or your cast-off first baseman rediscovers his youth in the very place Ponce de Leon came up empty.
Original comments...
Steve: So, according to this logic the Cubs are Isaac and Bartman is Abraham--only God decided not to intervene at the last minute.
Luke: >I don't blame him for just sending plagues all the damn time rather
>than thinking about this kind of thing.
How do you think we ended up with the wild card, green-screen ads and the Devil Rays? We also ended up with, for a time, Johnny Damon's hair, but if God truly loved us, the shaving cream would have turned to wine when it touched his face.
Other than a handful of personalities and talents who have made fandom worthwhile -- the Marks Grace, the Alberts Pujols, the Rickeys Henderson, the Antonios Alfonseca -- have there been any developments in the past 30 years to suggest God's grace? Streaming broadcasts, maybe, but one has to pay for them (that the Bill of Rights fails to mention our right to free baseball audio merely proves our forefathers' lack of foresight). All other changes to the game -- retractable domes, sponsored first pitches and lineup changes, elbow pads -- seem to be proof of God's retributive side.
Levi: So, Luke, you're saying that Selig is Satan?
Luke, hanger-on: I figured it went without saying, but just in case, I'll say it: Bud Selig is Satan.
"Allan H Bud Selig," after all, anagrams to "Hell! Bad! Sin! Luga!"
(Luga being the eskimo word for "menace to a great sport.")
Labels: Jeffrey Maier, yankees
Thursday, May 27, 2004
Today's baseball-related press release
CBS has a new drama coming this fall that's baseball-related. Here's their official description:
Aaron Spelling! Mel Gibson! And it means I won't have to look at Kirsten Storms on "Days of Our Lives" anymore! (Interesting that she's the "rebellious older sister" on this show, since her character on "DOOL" is a goody two-shoes, younger than all of her half-siblings there.)
Levi: If only Boychick from San Pedro Beach Bums could be on the program. I wonder what he's up to these days?
Jim: I seriously came very close to mentioning "San Pedro Beach Bums" in the original posting.
Looks like Boychick hasn't done much with his career, to the extent that the only people he can get to submit information about him to the IMDB can't spell "New Jersey" correctly.
But there is a connection: Stuf appeared in the "Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century" movies for the Disney Channel, which star Kirsten Storms as the title character, so maybe there's hope for a guest-starring appearance for him on "Clubhouse."
Jason: Anyone remember the short-lived Fox sitcom "Hardball"? At least, I think it was called Hardball. Anyway, it was a about a baseball team, the Pioneers, and all the wacky hijinks its players got into.
One of my favorite TV lines was said by Mike Starr, who later appeared as one of the mean toughs in 'Dumb & Dumber': "I love this guy! But not in the way you think. I want to have sex with him!"
It was so good, I used it in an episode of 'Sucks to Yer Azmar'.
Eric J. Ritter: (*)(*)
wOOt!
Viveian: Kirsten Storms Rocks i canot wait to see her on CH!!~
Mike: Kristen Storen Storms is really HOT!!~
Jim: Is that you, Mike, my supervisor? Has closed-captioning "Days of Our Lives" finally driven you insane? We'll talk when you get into the office.
CLUBHOUSE (Tuesday, 9:00 PM) is a drama about a 16-year-old boy who becomes a man in a world of overgrown boys when he takes a job as a batboy for a professional baseball team. For the first time, Pete Young (Jeremy Sumpter) takes a risk - perhaps the only risk of his young life - when he applies for and lands his dream job as a batboy for the New York Empires. The problem is his single mom, Lynne (Mare Winningham), has no idea what he’s up to. Until now, he’s been the golden boy while his rebellious older sister, Betsy (Kirsten Storms), has always been in the doghouse. On the job, Pete becomes a part of a new family that includes Conrad Dean (Dean Cain), the team’s captain and star third baseman and one of the boy’s all-time idols who takes on the role of an older brother. Also, in the clubhouse is his boss, Lou Russo (Christopher Lloyd), a gruff but fair equipment manager who becomes a much-needed father figure; Rich (Marc Donato), a fellow batboy who just happens to be the general manager’s nephew; Carlos Tavares (John Ortiz), a rookie who believes that Pete is his good luck charm, and Jose Marquez (J.D. Pardo), the Empire’s territorial head batboy. Pete is over the moon at being a member of his favorite team, but he must still balance life at home and life in the big leagues as he faces the moral dilemmas and curve balls that life throws his way. Emmy Award-winners Aaron Spelling and E. Duke Vincent (“And The Band Played On,” “Day One”), Academy Award-winner Mel Gibson (“Braveheart”) and Bruce Davey (“The Passion of the Christ”), Daniel Cerone (“Charmed”) and Ken Topolsky (“Party of Five”) are the executive producers for Spelling Television.
Aaron Spelling! Mel Gibson! And it means I won't have to look at Kirsten Storms on "Days of Our Lives" anymore! (Interesting that she's the "rebellious older sister" on this show, since her character on "DOOL" is a goody two-shoes, younger than all of her half-siblings there.)
Original comments...
Levi: If only Boychick from San Pedro Beach Bums could be on the program. I wonder what he's up to these days?
Jim: I seriously came very close to mentioning "San Pedro Beach Bums" in the original posting.
Looks like Boychick hasn't done much with his career, to the extent that the only people he can get to submit information about him to the IMDB can't spell "New Jersey" correctly.
But there is a connection: Stuf appeared in the "Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century" movies for the Disney Channel, which star Kirsten Storms as the title character, so maybe there's hope for a guest-starring appearance for him on "Clubhouse."
Jason: Anyone remember the short-lived Fox sitcom "Hardball"? At least, I think it was called Hardball. Anyway, it was a about a baseball team, the Pioneers, and all the wacky hijinks its players got into.
One of my favorite TV lines was said by Mike Starr, who later appeared as one of the mean toughs in 'Dumb & Dumber': "I love this guy! But not in the way you think. I want to have sex with him!"
It was so good, I used it in an episode of 'Sucks to Yer Azmar'.
Eric J. Ritter: (*)(*)
wOOt!
Viveian: Kirsten Storms Rocks i canot wait to see her on CH!!~
Mike: Kristen Storen Storms is really HOT!!~
Jim: Is that you, Mike, my supervisor? Has closed-captioning "Days of Our Lives" finally driven you insane? We'll talk when you get into the office.
Labels: clubhouse, kirsten storms, tv
Wednesday, May 26, 2004
Twice the baseball?
I'm surprised Levi didn't mention this in the previous entry: that Cardinals-Pirates game that was rained out on Tuesday is most likely going to be made up as part of a doubleheader when the Pirates next visit St. Louis...which happens to be August 19th through 22nd, coinciding with our planned visit on the 22nd. So what are the odds they'll choose to do a Sunday doubleheader, and we'll get to see two games?
Levi: Have you worked up a doubleheader itinerary, in case every game we see ends up being a doubleheader? Can we make all the games if that happens?
And, on a side note, you do have a passport, right? Because I don't think they let you into Canadia without one these days.
Jim: If every game ends up being a doubleheader? I don't think that's going to happen unless we get some "Day After Tomorrow"-style weather within the next couple of months but things clear up by mid-August. For now, the doubleheader plan involves getting up earlier and/or driving faster.
Yes, I have a passport. Don't you have every post on this blog memorized?
Levi: I know it's unlikely that every game would end up a doubleheader, but do you want to be caught short if that happens? What's the only thing more impressive than ten games in ten cities in ten days? Why, it's 20 games in 20 cities in ten days!
Jim: I think you mean 20 games in 10 cities in 10 days, unless you're thinking the doubleheaders are going to be long enough that the home team is going to relocate between the two games. Which is a possibility for the Expos, I guess.
Original comments...
Levi: Have you worked up a doubleheader itinerary, in case every game we see ends up being a doubleheader? Can we make all the games if that happens?
And, on a side note, you do have a passport, right? Because I don't think they let you into Canadia without one these days.
Jim: If every game ends up being a doubleheader? I don't think that's going to happen unless we get some "Day After Tomorrow"-style weather within the next couple of months but things clear up by mid-August. For now, the doubleheader plan involves getting up earlier and/or driving faster.
Yes, I have a passport. Don't you have every post on this blog memorized?
Levi: I know it's unlikely that every game would end up a doubleheader, but do you want to be caught short if that happens? What's the only thing more impressive than ten games in ten cities in ten days? Why, it's 20 games in 20 cities in ten days!
Jim: I think you mean 20 games in 10 cities in 10 days, unless you're thinking the doubleheaders are going to be long enough that the home team is going to relocate between the two games. Which is a possibility for the Expos, I guess.
Labels: brpa, Cardinals, pirates, planning, rain, road trip
Rainout
Thursday night, Stacey and I helped out some friends who have six-week-old twin boys, staying overnight at their 37th-floor apartment and sitting up with one of the boys. While we were there, we got to watch a wild thunderstorm over the city, the park, and the lake. It was pretty amazing--I finally got to see the multiple lightning strikes on the Hancock Building that are captured in those time-lapse photos that are sold as posters in tourist shops downtown.
In the park below, four baseball fields were being flooded. In the morning, there was standing water all over the infield. That--and the Cardinals/Pirates rainout last night--reminded me of a time in high school when two ballplayers on the Carmi Bulldogs for some reason didn't want to play in the game scheduled for the next day. So late at night they went to the ballpark, ran a hose onto the field, and turned it on. They went home to bed and left the hose to do its work. Some beer might have been consumed at some point, too.
The field was flooded, and the game was canceled. But, the guys, being high schoolers, and not that adept at lying or covering up, got caught and suspended. It's always been one of my favorite stories of teenagers going to a fair amount of trouble to get out of doing something.
Maybe Toby can find the story in the Carmi Times archives and see if I've got the details right. I think I remember who the guys were, but I'd hate to libel someone.
Jon Solomon: I went to the Wilmington Blue Rocks game last night. There was a 70 minute lightning/rain delay in the top of the seventh inning. By the time the game ended, there were ~40 people in the stands out of the 4,500+ at first pitch. My friend Scooter and I moved down behind home plate and stood in the aisles, leading the crowd in cheers, trying to rally the home team (and earn a final appearance from Mr. Celery!). The Blue Rocks scored two in the bottom of the final frame to win 7-6. It was great.
Levi: Sounds like a great game, but I'm left with a lingering question:
Mr. Celery?
Steve: If I was a player on the Blue Rocks I'd want to be #2
Natch!
Levi: I have since this post learned that players in the movie Bull Durham soak the field in this fashion. I'm not surprised to learn that my high school classmates got the idea from a movie, I suppose. Not as surprised as you probably are that I haven't seen Bull Durham. I just added it to my Netflix queue.
Jon Solomon: Mr. Celery: http://www.llij.net/pictures/mr-celery2.html
He's a shy mascot, so he only comes out on the field when the Blue Rocks have a rally going, jumping up and down to "Song #2" by Blur. People in the stands shake stalks of celery at him. This is what we were doing behind home plate, produce held skyward.
Jason: Is Wilmington a strong celery-producing area? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm actually curious.
Jon Solomon: When I asked someone "why celery?" the first time I went to see the Blue Rocks play, the only answer I got was "exactly," followed by silence.
The Blue Rocks' new mascot this season is named "Rubble." Rubble is a small blue rock who flew in the slipstream down from Philadelphia when the Vet was imploded. He looks like Meatwad from Aqua Teen Hunger Force, kinda.
http://www.skiltech.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000003/2004-64full.jpg
Jon
Toby: I wouldn't have to look it up in the archives because I can remember the whole thing quite vividly. But it was one of my better friends involved, so I won't reveal any names.
BTW, Levi, the baseball team went 28-4 this season.
And thanks for the link.....
Levi: 28-4?
What's up with Carmi sports this year? Seriously. We ought to field a polo team, synchronized swimming, and maybe a biathlon team, just to see if they could win, too. Clearly there's success in the air this year.
In the park below, four baseball fields were being flooded. In the morning, there was standing water all over the infield. That--and the Cardinals/Pirates rainout last night--reminded me of a time in high school when two ballplayers on the Carmi Bulldogs for some reason didn't want to play in the game scheduled for the next day. So late at night they went to the ballpark, ran a hose onto the field, and turned it on. They went home to bed and left the hose to do its work. Some beer might have been consumed at some point, too.
The field was flooded, and the game was canceled. But, the guys, being high schoolers, and not that adept at lying or covering up, got caught and suspended. It's always been one of my favorite stories of teenagers going to a fair amount of trouble to get out of doing something.
Maybe Toby can find the story in the Carmi Times archives and see if I've got the details right. I think I remember who the guys were, but I'd hate to libel someone.
Original comments...
Jon Solomon: I went to the Wilmington Blue Rocks game last night. There was a 70 minute lightning/rain delay in the top of the seventh inning. By the time the game ended, there were ~40 people in the stands out of the 4,500+ at first pitch. My friend Scooter and I moved down behind home plate and stood in the aisles, leading the crowd in cheers, trying to rally the home team (and earn a final appearance from Mr. Celery!). The Blue Rocks scored two in the bottom of the final frame to win 7-6. It was great.
Levi: Sounds like a great game, but I'm left with a lingering question:
Mr. Celery?
Steve: If I was a player on the Blue Rocks I'd want to be #2
Natch!
Levi: I have since this post learned that players in the movie Bull Durham soak the field in this fashion. I'm not surprised to learn that my high school classmates got the idea from a movie, I suppose. Not as surprised as you probably are that I haven't seen Bull Durham. I just added it to my Netflix queue.
Jon Solomon: Mr. Celery: http://www.llij.net/pictures/mr-celery2.html
He's a shy mascot, so he only comes out on the field when the Blue Rocks have a rally going, jumping up and down to "Song #2" by Blur. People in the stands shake stalks of celery at him. This is what we were doing behind home plate, produce held skyward.
Jason: Is Wilmington a strong celery-producing area? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm actually curious.
Jon Solomon: When I asked someone "why celery?" the first time I went to see the Blue Rocks play, the only answer I got was "exactly," followed by silence.
The Blue Rocks' new mascot this season is named "Rubble." Rubble is a small blue rock who flew in the slipstream down from Philadelphia when the Vet was imploded. He looks like Meatwad from Aqua Teen Hunger Force, kinda.
http://www.skiltech.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000003/2004-64full.jpg
Jon
Toby: I wouldn't have to look it up in the archives because I can remember the whole thing quite vividly. But it was one of my better friends involved, so I won't reveal any names.
BTW, Levi, the baseball team went 28-4 this season.
And thanks for the link.....
Levi: 28-4?
What's up with Carmi sports this year? Seriously. We ought to field a polo team, synchronized swimming, and maybe a biathlon team, just to see if they could win, too. Clearly there's success in the air this year.
Baseball-related press release of the day
Major League Baseball reminds you to buckle up. Remember that, Levi, when you're driving home from Wrigley Field...oh, wait. Actually, what I love is the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration spokesman's awkward attempt to tie the message into baseball: "Just like a player would never face a 95 mph fastball without a helmet..." It's almost up to the level of a fake advertising slogan Dave Barry came up with in a column some years back: "Hit a home run against nasal discharge!"
(Despite my mockery of the press release, I do agree with the underlying message. Why, I wear my seat belt at all times, except when I need to lean way out to use the drive-thru ATM or grab the Double-Double from the person working the drive-thru window at In-n-Out. But the car is stopped at those times, assuming I've correctly shifted into "park.")
Levi: But what does Spider-Man have to say about buckling up?
Jim: "Since you probably can't quickly shoot a protective stream of sticky webbing out of your wrists if it looks like you're about to get into an accident..."
spidey: With the power of a drivers license comes the responsibility to buckle up.
Dr. Octopus: Don't listen to him, the web-slinging fool!
(Despite my mockery of the press release, I do agree with the underlying message. Why, I wear my seat belt at all times, except when I need to lean way out to use the drive-thru ATM or grab the Double-Double from the person working the drive-thru window at In-n-Out. But the car is stopped at those times, assuming I've correctly shifted into "park.")
Original comments...
Levi: But what does Spider-Man have to say about buckling up?
Jim: "Since you probably can't quickly shoot a protective stream of sticky webbing out of your wrists if it looks like you're about to get into an accident..."
spidey: With the power of a drivers license comes the responsibility to buckle up.
Dr. Octopus: Don't listen to him, the web-slinging fool!
Labels: advertising, dave barry, seat belts
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
Giving 110%
This isn't about baseball, but I figure baseball fans can relate to Dick Grasso's estimate of his efforts. Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly noted the following:
"New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer has decided to sue Richard Grasso, the former CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, for using various forms of chicanery to overpay himself. Spitzer listed several main bullet points to support his contention, but this is my favorite:
On a 1-to-10 performance scale used to determine compensation, Grasso at one point assigned himself a 13, Spitzer said."
Levi: Oh, and Eliot Spitzer's one of my heroes. He's going to make a great Vice-President or Attorney General in the Barack Obama administration in 2012.
"New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer has decided to sue Richard Grasso, the former CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, for using various forms of chicanery to overpay himself. Spitzer listed several main bullet points to support his contention, but this is my favorite:
On a 1-to-10 performance scale used to determine compensation, Grasso at one point assigned himself a 13, Spitzer said."
Original comments...
Levi: Oh, and Eliot Spitzer's one of my heroes. He's going to make a great Vice-President or Attorney General in the Barack Obama administration in 2012.
Labels: eliot spitzer
Like a middle-school dance
That's how my father described the atmosphere of Wrigley Field the first time he was there, astounded by the fact that seemingly no one ever sits down for more than a couple pitches before wandering off again hither and yon.
Ordinarily, because my season ticket seat is high up in the upper deck, where the slope allows me to see over the heads of the perambulators, that's just a minor source of annoyance for me. Kind of along the lines of that caused by people who don't understand that you let the passengers off the train first before attempting to board.
But Sunday, we were in the lower deck, section 108, where to see the game we had to see over or through anyone in the aisle. And everyone was always in the aisle. Which led me to a couple of possible solutions.
The first idea is for true baseball fans to work up an advertising and media campaign to make wandering fans realize that, come the Day of Judgment, their behavior at baseball games--like all bad behavior--will be held against them. Just as a good fan might get extra credit for, say, knocking the glove off an opposing fielder reaching into the stands to attempt a catch, a drunken lout will find his balance sheet slipping more into the red for every time he staggered back from the concession stand and unwittingly left most of his new beer down the back of, say, a nearby nun. The calculation that determines eternal damnation is a complex algorithm, of course, making Fermat's Last Theorem look like the formula for figuring E.R.A., but I have faith that trips up and down the aisle while yammering into two cell phones have their part in it. We just have to make the drunks realize it.
The second option is to have Pedometer Day at Wrigley Field every day. Each fan, upon entering, would get a pedometer, which he would be forced to wear during the entire game. At the conclusion of the game, everyone's pedometer would be checked, and anyone who walked more than the average beer vendor would have to stay and clean the park with a toothbrush. His own. This plan has the virtue of simplicity and a very American attempt to encourage good behavior through imprisonment and hard work.
Anyone have better ideas?
Steve: Maybe make a 3rd inning, 5th inning and 7th inning stretch where people can go to a designated area and exchange phone numbers.
At Wrigley only of course....
Ordinarily, because my season ticket seat is high up in the upper deck, where the slope allows me to see over the heads of the perambulators, that's just a minor source of annoyance for me. Kind of along the lines of that caused by people who don't understand that you let the passengers off the train first before attempting to board.
But Sunday, we were in the lower deck, section 108, where to see the game we had to see over or through anyone in the aisle. And everyone was always in the aisle. Which led me to a couple of possible solutions.
The first idea is for true baseball fans to work up an advertising and media campaign to make wandering fans realize that, come the Day of Judgment, their behavior at baseball games--like all bad behavior--will be held against them. Just as a good fan might get extra credit for, say, knocking the glove off an opposing fielder reaching into the stands to attempt a catch, a drunken lout will find his balance sheet slipping more into the red for every time he staggered back from the concession stand and unwittingly left most of his new beer down the back of, say, a nearby nun. The calculation that determines eternal damnation is a complex algorithm, of course, making Fermat's Last Theorem look like the formula for figuring E.R.A., but I have faith that trips up and down the aisle while yammering into two cell phones have their part in it. We just have to make the drunks realize it.
The second option is to have Pedometer Day at Wrigley Field every day. Each fan, upon entering, would get a pedometer, which he would be forced to wear during the entire game. At the conclusion of the game, everyone's pedometer would be checked, and anyone who walked more than the average beer vendor would have to stay and clean the park with a toothbrush. His own. This plan has the virtue of simplicity and a very American attempt to encourage good behavior through imprisonment and hard work.
Anyone have better ideas?
Original comments...
Steve: Maybe make a 3rd inning, 5th inning and 7th inning stretch where people can go to a designated area and exchange phone numbers.
At Wrigley only of course....
Labels: Wrigley Field
Monday, May 24, 2004
Media attention
Maura has invited us to drop by the studios of WPRB Radio in Princeton, New Jersey, and join her on her radio show on Friday, August 27. Quite a coincidence that Princeton is between Boston and Philadelphia, and she's going to have such a conveniently scheduled Friday afternoon time slot, isn't it? Anyway, the itinerary has been updated.
Jon Solomon: I suggest a show of nothing but songs about baseball. Speaking of which, Levi I have a gift for you when I see ya...
Levi: Maura: Will Tim Zarazhan be there? 'Cause I don't know if I can do a show without Tim around.
Jason: I onced listened in on Maura's show on WPBR through the courtesy of internet streamline broadcasting (or whatever you call it). I called in, and it took her 8 guesses before I told her who I was. I should probably keep in better touch.
maura: ooh, tim. shiver. i was hoping for an all-baseball-related show, actually. i thought that would be lots of fun. especially since i've had barbara manning's cover of 'joltin' joe dimaggio' in my head for a good portion of the weekend.
thatbob: Mr. Announcer and Nibbles, together again at last!
Original comments...
Jon Solomon: I suggest a show of nothing but songs about baseball. Speaking of which, Levi I have a gift for you when I see ya...
Levi: Maura: Will Tim Zarazhan be there? 'Cause I don't know if I can do a show without Tim around.
Jason: I onced listened in on Maura's show on WPBR through the courtesy of internet streamline broadcasting (or whatever you call it). I called in, and it took her 8 guesses before I told her who I was. I should probably keep in better touch.
maura: ooh, tim. shiver. i was hoping for an all-baseball-related show, actually. i thought that would be lots of fun. especially since i've had barbara manning's cover of 'joltin' joe dimaggio' in my head for a good portion of the weekend.
thatbob: Mr. Announcer and Nibbles, together again at last!
Labels: brpa, maura johnston, planning, radio, road trip
Your papers, please
In Boston, we'll be taking the Green Line from our hotel to Fenway Park for the game. Therefore, this item is of particular interest: they are soon going to start random ID checks of transit passengers in Boston.
If this is still going on in August, as much as I'd love to protest against it, I think becoming a test case would ruin the rest of the trip. So I'll grudgingly present my ID if necessary, although the real problem may be convincing the officer that the digital camera I'm carrying is for the purpose of taking pictures in and around Fenway Park, since some transit authorities are being a little touchy about photography of their property.
thatbob: Too bad the MBTA will be checking the *identity* of people riding their trains, instead of the *bomb-carrying status* of people riding their trains. I guess they just want to make sure that, in case of a bombing, all of the corpses can be identified?
Anyway, if I were you two, I wouldn't set foot in an unfamiliar train. Very, very dangerous things, trains. Very dangerous.
Historically unsound.
Levi: Now, does Jim have high enough celebrity status among railfans that the ID check is going to hold us up because of the ensuing autographs, or is he just objecting on grounds of privacy, civil liberties, and silliness?
Jim: I'm certainly no Mike Schafer!
If this is still going on in August, as much as I'd love to protest against it, I think becoming a test case would ruin the rest of the trip. So I'll grudgingly present my ID if necessary, although the real problem may be convincing the officer that the digital camera I'm carrying is for the purpose of taking pictures in and around Fenway Park, since some transit authorities are being a little touchy about photography of their property.
Original comments...
thatbob: Too bad the MBTA will be checking the *identity* of people riding their trains, instead of the *bomb-carrying status* of people riding their trains. I guess they just want to make sure that, in case of a bombing, all of the corpses can be identified?
Anyway, if I were you two, I wouldn't set foot in an unfamiliar train. Very, very dangerous things, trains. Very dangerous.
Historically unsound.
Levi: Now, does Jim have high enough celebrity status among railfans that the ID check is going to hold us up because of the ensuing autographs, or is he just objecting on grounds of privacy, civil liberties, and silliness?
Jim: I'm certainly no Mike Schafer!
Labels: boston, brpa, planning, road trip, security theater
Doug Pappas, RIP
I just learned from King Kaufman's Salon column that SABR member Doug Pappas died last week at age 43 of heat prostration while hiking.
Doug Pappas wasn't well known outside the SABR community, but he was a hell of a baseball fan. He was a Manhattan lawyer who seemed to spend all his free time researching and writing on the business side of baseball. He did amazing research, wrote clearly, and, because of the nature of Bud Selig's administration, he spent a lot of his time calling Bud Selig a liar, then backing it up. Just about any time in the last four years that you've heard me railing about Selig, it's been Doug Pappas's research I've been spouting. In my dream where I told off Selig for an hour in my kitchen, I might as well have had Pappas on my shoulder as my little good angel, feeding my lines.
As King Kaufmann points out, another of Pappas's regular targets was that silly Team Fan Cost Index thing that gets ginned up and sent to the media every spring, proving that it costs something like $36,250 to take a family of four to a game. Pappas would always do what Major League Baseball, if it were able to see beyond the next labor battle, should have done: he'd point out that this silly figure is based on a family buying four mid-range tickets, two ball caps, two beers, four sodas, four hot dogs, some pretzels, etc., but is passed off as the "average" cost for a family to attend a game. You might as well throw the cost of their SUV and parking ticket into the mix. The Team Fan Cost Index tells you very little about what a family might be able to go to a game for; all it does is (I assume) scare off a few middle class families every year when they see the story in their paper with the $36,250 figure in the first sentence. Every year, Pappas reminded anyone he could what useless junk that number is.
His site gives an idea of what he was up to. I loved his work, if only because I was glad that someone was so dedicated to the game. I love baseball, but I will always spend too much time on other areas to be truly knowledgeable, so I greatly appreciate those who are willing to spend their time helping me to better understand the game. Doug Pappas somehow made the time, and he made good use of it.
King Kaufman describes well what we've lost: "Those of us who love baseball had a watchdog in Pappas, someone to let us know about the damage being done to the game by those running it. I hope someone with anything like his smarts, insight and writing ability can take over that role, but that's asking a lot. He'll be sorely missed."
Steve: Levi,
Sometimes I think I am being a gadfly on this site but apart from that I just wanted you and Jim to know that I enjoy this blog immensely.
So, to this average ticket price thing. The average price just gives someone a "ballpark" figure of what it costs to go to the game. Below I've compiled the "low-cost" index for the Chicago teams but more on that later. First, I think it's telling that they do use the average. I think the point of this exercise is that team X is "family friendly" compared to team Y. An individual or a family can certainly go to the park more cheaply than the average but of course the average implies that a cheaper as well as a more expensive possibility exists. There is a social construction in this figure whether you, as a childless man, want to buy into that or not. In short, this figure is inclusive of families and the middle class. If you did a cheap index you would have to keep reducing it to its bare essentials. You would end up with one person, eating no food, sitting in the worst seats in the house. The index is not trying to figure out the cost to a single, stogie chomping scorecard keeping retiree, it's the cost of a family going to the game instead of going to Blockbuster, the movie theater or Chuck E Cheese.
Based on my informal research, you see a hell of a lot more families at Comiskey (if you see people there) than you do at Wrigley because its more family friendly but also more affordable. I see in one of your other posts that you are bemoaning the fact that Wrigley is a meat-market. The ticket charge there is essentially a cover charge. I will admit that a lot of bad parenting goes on but when you take the kids out of the house to a game who wants to be a taskmaster? So, if you buy one kid a program you have to buy the other one a program. When kids (and adults) go to the park they want souvenirs. Obviously you don't have to buy your kids jack squat at the park but I think most people would like to think that they would buy their kids something besides food. If not a hat then a pennant or a "thunder-stick" or some other BS. If you're middle class you probably aren't taking the kids on the el so you have to drive and so on and so on. The point of this is that costs a lot to go to the park whether you do it on the cheap or not. If you want to determine how much it costs to take a family to the park it would be silly to simply take the cost of the four cheapest tickets, no food, etc. People consume things at the ballpark and that needs to be taken into consideration. Still as an informal study I've tried to mirror the average for Chicago teams by following the same rubric but with more reasonable expenses.
Cubs
Ticket Price $14 each (but you can only go to three day games in Aug or any game in Sept or Oct -- another reason the average is telling)
Four Sodas (no beer) $2.50 each
Four Hot dogs: $2.75 each
No program
Two moderate souvenirs: $12 each
Public transport $1.75 x eight (four round trips)
Total cost $115
Sox
Ticket price $6each (but must attend one of 17 half price dates on a mon or tue)
Four Soda: $2.25
Four Hot Dogs: $2.75
No program
Two moderate souvenirs: $12 each
Public transport $1.75 x eight (four round trips)
Total: $82 (that's good value)
You could bring food from home and do this more cheaply but if someone is doing that you are either a cheap ass or a fat ass because you need more food than you can afford at the park. Good luck sitting though nine innings without buying anything at the park. As to ticket prices, if you want to take your kids to fireworks night or a weekend or a game during the summer at Wrigley this is blown out of the water. Again, this makes the average more telling than the baseline.
What about the "Baseball-related" itinerary? I would be very interested the average cost of this trip. What if you multiply your ballpark individual expense by four?
Levi: I think your analysis is correct, Steve, but you'll notice that without truly skimping--i.e., the kids won't be leaving the ballpark unhappy, because they've been fed and they've gotten some souvenirs--you've gotten a cost for the family drastically lower than our friends at Team Marketing Report. Their cost for the Cubs? $194.31. For the Sox? $160.23. All you did was do what any family on a budget would do: you looked for cheap seats. Period. TMR's use of the average ticket price is wrong because 1) the most expensive tickets both aren't available to the average budget-conscious family in the first place (They're held by season-ticket holders or scalpers, for the most part.) _and_ they're not of interest to the average budget-conscious family. A better plan would be to use the cost of the cheapest non-bleacher seat, because that's really what the family that has to count dollars will look at. You can even scrap the idea of looking for budget dates--although at Comiskey that would be silly, since _everybody_ looks at the two budget days*--and you'd still end up with a price much lower than TMR's.
Second, a casual fan doesn't buy a scorecard or program. Period.
Third, and this is my main complaint about this index: MLB should every year loudly refute this shit. Sure, they don't want to encourage people to bring their own food, and they don't want to mention that souvenirs are expensive, but there is absolutely no reason for them not to, every time this report comes out, mount a PR offensive about how cheap the cheap seats are, how great the views are in these new stadiums even from the cheap seats, what a great time kids have at the ballpark, and how goddamn expensive the movies are, let alone the NBA and NFL. The idea is to convince people that they can afford to get in the door. MLB knows that once they're there, they'll buy stuff, because that's what people do, and that's good for MLB. MLB sure as hell shouldn't let some outside group determine what people think it wil cost them to go to a ballgame. Yet every year, they not only let this story get out, but they almost encourage it, because they're always looking at any chance they can to say that players make too much money. And that's because the people who run MLB are shortsighted liars, for the most part.
The idea of keeping a running total of ballpark expenses for the trip is a fun one. I'll confer with Jim.
*The Sox tickets are way overpriced on non-budget days because the lease on Comiskey Park calls for the Sox to pay rent only in years in which they sell more than (I'm going to make up a number here, but that's not really important to the story) 1.5 million full-priced tickets. If I remember right, they've only paid rent once, in 2001 (?), primarily because they sell so many tickets at half price or through group sales or at a discount of some sort. And that's why they set their prices so high, because the marginal gain they would get from lowering them appears, to them, to be less than the gain from not paying rent. It's a silly, shortsighted strategy, of course, because getting a fan in the door is worth almost any cost in the long term. But again, they're MLB owners, so expecting the long view is just about futile.
Jim: Yes, I am definitely going to keep careful track of expenditures on the trip, if for no other reason than to make sure that Levi and the hangers-on pay their fair share for the hotel rooms and the rental car. So far, the only expenditure is that we've bought tickets for both the Red Sox and the Phillies. Both were $20, which is the second-cheapest seat you can get at Fenway Park (they have a very small amount of $12 seats), and the third-cheapest seat at Citizens Bank Park (they also have $15 and $18 seats). Actually, I've also paid for my plane ticket to Chicago already, but that's not relevant to this discussion.
To compare Chicago prices to southern California: both the Angels and Dodgers have a "family pack" for Wednesday and Sunday games, which includes four upper-deck seats, four hot dogs, and four sodas. The Dodgers' deal is $48 and also includes parking, and the Angels' deal is $39 without parking. Adding $24 in souvenirs to use Steve's matrix, they both come out to a little over $70. Not bad. (Actually, what the Angels' deal does include is $8 in game tokens for the pitching machines/hitting machines/whatever it is they have in the "interactive baseball-style game" area at Angel Stadium. So if that will pacify the kids enough that they don't need souvenirs, that really cuts the cost down.)
Steve: Okay, I think we can agree to agree. MLB should do a lot more to make themselves family friendly. Alas, it is clear they have given this terrain over to the minor leagues and are instead concerned with luxury suites and leather vibrating chairs right behind home plate. I think that probably gets to the core of why they don't try to squash the "average ticket" thing. They don't want to do anything to alter the perceived value of their sport. If they advertise how cheap or inexpensive their games can be, perhaps they fear that people will think of them as a lesser product. I think it's interesting the Red Sox and the Cubs are the two highest priced teams while the Expos are the lowest. Right there you see the difference between the Mercedes and the Kia. If a Mercedes cost as much as a Kia it would lose a lot of its luster, no? Baseball makes a hell of a lot more money off the luxury suites than the upper deck reserved so why do anything to advertise how cheap a game when you risk alienating people who are paying a far higher premium to see it?
thatbob: I can't help but notice that Levi's argument reflects upon his larger crusade against the abuse of the arithmetical average in describing American culture and economics.
Doug Pappas wasn't well known outside the SABR community, but he was a hell of a baseball fan. He was a Manhattan lawyer who seemed to spend all his free time researching and writing on the business side of baseball. He did amazing research, wrote clearly, and, because of the nature of Bud Selig's administration, he spent a lot of his time calling Bud Selig a liar, then backing it up. Just about any time in the last four years that you've heard me railing about Selig, it's been Doug Pappas's research I've been spouting. In my dream where I told off Selig for an hour in my kitchen, I might as well have had Pappas on my shoulder as my little good angel, feeding my lines.
As King Kaufmann points out, another of Pappas's regular targets was that silly Team Fan Cost Index thing that gets ginned up and sent to the media every spring, proving that it costs something like $36,250 to take a family of four to a game. Pappas would always do what Major League Baseball, if it were able to see beyond the next labor battle, should have done: he'd point out that this silly figure is based on a family buying four mid-range tickets, two ball caps, two beers, four sodas, four hot dogs, some pretzels, etc., but is passed off as the "average" cost for a family to attend a game. You might as well throw the cost of their SUV and parking ticket into the mix. The Team Fan Cost Index tells you very little about what a family might be able to go to a game for; all it does is (I assume) scare off a few middle class families every year when they see the story in their paper with the $36,250 figure in the first sentence. Every year, Pappas reminded anyone he could what useless junk that number is.
His site gives an idea of what he was up to. I loved his work, if only because I was glad that someone was so dedicated to the game. I love baseball, but I will always spend too much time on other areas to be truly knowledgeable, so I greatly appreciate those who are willing to spend their time helping me to better understand the game. Doug Pappas somehow made the time, and he made good use of it.
King Kaufman describes well what we've lost: "Those of us who love baseball had a watchdog in Pappas, someone to let us know about the damage being done to the game by those running it. I hope someone with anything like his smarts, insight and writing ability can take over that role, but that's asking a lot. He'll be sorely missed."
Original comments:
Steve: Levi,
Sometimes I think I am being a gadfly on this site but apart from that I just wanted you and Jim to know that I enjoy this blog immensely.
So, to this average ticket price thing. The average price just gives someone a "ballpark" figure of what it costs to go to the game. Below I've compiled the "low-cost" index for the Chicago teams but more on that later. First, I think it's telling that they do use the average. I think the point of this exercise is that team X is "family friendly" compared to team Y. An individual or a family can certainly go to the park more cheaply than the average but of course the average implies that a cheaper as well as a more expensive possibility exists. There is a social construction in this figure whether you, as a childless man, want to buy into that or not. In short, this figure is inclusive of families and the middle class. If you did a cheap index you would have to keep reducing it to its bare essentials. You would end up with one person, eating no food, sitting in the worst seats in the house. The index is not trying to figure out the cost to a single, stogie chomping scorecard keeping retiree, it's the cost of a family going to the game instead of going to Blockbuster, the movie theater or Chuck E Cheese.
Based on my informal research, you see a hell of a lot more families at Comiskey (if you see people there) than you do at Wrigley because its more family friendly but also more affordable. I see in one of your other posts that you are bemoaning the fact that Wrigley is a meat-market. The ticket charge there is essentially a cover charge. I will admit that a lot of bad parenting goes on but when you take the kids out of the house to a game who wants to be a taskmaster? So, if you buy one kid a program you have to buy the other one a program. When kids (and adults) go to the park they want souvenirs. Obviously you don't have to buy your kids jack squat at the park but I think most people would like to think that they would buy their kids something besides food. If not a hat then a pennant or a "thunder-stick" or some other BS. If you're middle class you probably aren't taking the kids on the el so you have to drive and so on and so on. The point of this is that costs a lot to go to the park whether you do it on the cheap or not. If you want to determine how much it costs to take a family to the park it would be silly to simply take the cost of the four cheapest tickets, no food, etc. People consume things at the ballpark and that needs to be taken into consideration. Still as an informal study I've tried to mirror the average for Chicago teams by following the same rubric but with more reasonable expenses.
Cubs
Ticket Price $14 each (but you can only go to three day games in Aug or any game in Sept or Oct -- another reason the average is telling)
Four Sodas (no beer) $2.50 each
Four Hot dogs: $2.75 each
No program
Two moderate souvenirs: $12 each
Public transport $1.75 x eight (four round trips)
Total cost $115
Sox
Ticket price $6each (but must attend one of 17 half price dates on a mon or tue)
Four Soda: $2.25
Four Hot Dogs: $2.75
No program
Two moderate souvenirs: $12 each
Public transport $1.75 x eight (four round trips)
Total: $82 (that's good value)
You could bring food from home and do this more cheaply but if someone is doing that you are either a cheap ass or a fat ass because you need more food than you can afford at the park. Good luck sitting though nine innings without buying anything at the park. As to ticket prices, if you want to take your kids to fireworks night or a weekend or a game during the summer at Wrigley this is blown out of the water. Again, this makes the average more telling than the baseline.
What about the "Baseball-related" itinerary? I would be very interested the average cost of this trip. What if you multiply your ballpark individual expense by four?
Levi: I think your analysis is correct, Steve, but you'll notice that without truly skimping--i.e., the kids won't be leaving the ballpark unhappy, because they've been fed and they've gotten some souvenirs--you've gotten a cost for the family drastically lower than our friends at Team Marketing Report. Their cost for the Cubs? $194.31. For the Sox? $160.23. All you did was do what any family on a budget would do: you looked for cheap seats. Period. TMR's use of the average ticket price is wrong because 1) the most expensive tickets both aren't available to the average budget-conscious family in the first place (They're held by season-ticket holders or scalpers, for the most part.) _and_ they're not of interest to the average budget-conscious family. A better plan would be to use the cost of the cheapest non-bleacher seat, because that's really what the family that has to count dollars will look at. You can even scrap the idea of looking for budget dates--although at Comiskey that would be silly, since _everybody_ looks at the two budget days*--and you'd still end up with a price much lower than TMR's.
Second, a casual fan doesn't buy a scorecard or program. Period.
Third, and this is my main complaint about this index: MLB should every year loudly refute this shit. Sure, they don't want to encourage people to bring their own food, and they don't want to mention that souvenirs are expensive, but there is absolutely no reason for them not to, every time this report comes out, mount a PR offensive about how cheap the cheap seats are, how great the views are in these new stadiums even from the cheap seats, what a great time kids have at the ballpark, and how goddamn expensive the movies are, let alone the NBA and NFL. The idea is to convince people that they can afford to get in the door. MLB knows that once they're there, they'll buy stuff, because that's what people do, and that's good for MLB. MLB sure as hell shouldn't let some outside group determine what people think it wil cost them to go to a ballgame. Yet every year, they not only let this story get out, but they almost encourage it, because they're always looking at any chance they can to say that players make too much money. And that's because the people who run MLB are shortsighted liars, for the most part.
The idea of keeping a running total of ballpark expenses for the trip is a fun one. I'll confer with Jim.
*The Sox tickets are way overpriced on non-budget days because the lease on Comiskey Park calls for the Sox to pay rent only in years in which they sell more than (I'm going to make up a number here, but that's not really important to the story) 1.5 million full-priced tickets. If I remember right, they've only paid rent once, in 2001 (?), primarily because they sell so many tickets at half price or through group sales or at a discount of some sort. And that's why they set their prices so high, because the marginal gain they would get from lowering them appears, to them, to be less than the gain from not paying rent. It's a silly, shortsighted strategy, of course, because getting a fan in the door is worth almost any cost in the long term. But again, they're MLB owners, so expecting the long view is just about futile.
Jim: Yes, I am definitely going to keep careful track of expenditures on the trip, if for no other reason than to make sure that Levi and the hangers-on pay their fair share for the hotel rooms and the rental car. So far, the only expenditure is that we've bought tickets for both the Red Sox and the Phillies. Both were $20, which is the second-cheapest seat you can get at Fenway Park (they have a very small amount of $12 seats), and the third-cheapest seat at Citizens Bank Park (they also have $15 and $18 seats). Actually, I've also paid for my plane ticket to Chicago already, but that's not relevant to this discussion.
To compare Chicago prices to southern California: both the Angels and Dodgers have a "family pack" for Wednesday and Sunday games, which includes four upper-deck seats, four hot dogs, and four sodas. The Dodgers' deal is $48 and also includes parking, and the Angels' deal is $39 without parking. Adding $24 in souvenirs to use Steve's matrix, they both come out to a little over $70. Not bad. (Actually, what the Angels' deal does include is $8 in game tokens for the pitching machines/hitting machines/whatever it is they have in the "interactive baseball-style game" area at Angel Stadium. So if that will pacify the kids enough that they don't need souvenirs, that really cuts the cost down.)
Steve: Okay, I think we can agree to agree. MLB should do a lot more to make themselves family friendly. Alas, it is clear they have given this terrain over to the minor leagues and are instead concerned with luxury suites and leather vibrating chairs right behind home plate. I think that probably gets to the core of why they don't try to squash the "average ticket" thing. They don't want to do anything to alter the perceived value of their sport. If they advertise how cheap or inexpensive their games can be, perhaps they fear that people will think of them as a lesser product. I think it's interesting the Red Sox and the Cubs are the two highest priced teams while the Expos are the lowest. Right there you see the difference between the Mercedes and the Kia. If a Mercedes cost as much as a Kia it would lose a lot of its luster, no? Baseball makes a hell of a lot more money off the luxury suites than the upper deck reserved so why do anything to advertise how cheap a game when you risk alienating people who are paying a far higher premium to see it?
thatbob: I can't help but notice that Levi's argument reflects upon his larger crusade against the abuse of the arithmetical average in describing American culture and economics.
Labels: bud selig, doug pappas, King Kaufman
Lost weekend
Well, as you might have suspected, it was a sad weekend at the old ballpark for me, though not for 120,000 Cubs fans, puffed up with the arrogance that two playoff appearances in five years can bring.
Somehow, the Cardinals and Cubs managed to play three games in three days with no rain delays, despite strong thunderstorms and heavy rain all weekend. And somehow, the Cardinals managed to turn Glendon Rusch into the pitcher who pitched pretty well for the Mets in 2000, rather than the pitcher who was cut from the Brewers earlier this year. And the Cardinals managed three runs on only three hits against the remarkably good Matt Clement. Impressive, but it wasn't enough. So despair reigns, at least for a few days.
But there was one fully redeeming moment for me--a moment that was a huge highlight even for my Clement-fan wife and for Cubs-fan Luke--in Sunday night's game. The Cardinals were down 4-1, and with Albert Pujols at the plate, a chant arose. It began oddly--almost as if it had been planned in advance--with what seemed a whole section above and behind us shouting "Pujols sucks!" without any of the slow build that such chants usually require.
So as the first pitch comes in as a ball, the chant grows until most of the stadium is into it. "Pujols sucks! Pujols sucks! Pujols sucks!" The next pitch came in, and then it went out. And it kept going out, onto Waveland, or maybe Irving Park Road. The crowd fell silent, except for those of us who were giggling.
Wendell Berry, in a story I read Saturday, described a driver showing "the extended middle finger that contradicts all contradiction." It's hard to imagine a way in which Pujols could have more clearly demonstrated that he manifestly does not suck. Maybe if he had hit that home run, then taken the mound the next inning and set down the Cubs in order with three strikeouts on nine pitches. But that's asking a lot even of Pujols.
Luke: Who you calling arrogant? I should point out, Levi, that I cheered Pujols' home run almost as much as you did. It was more than worth giving up the run to see him shut the fans up.
Every time I get to Wrigley I'm more dismayed by the boorishness of the fans. I don't know whether I'm getting older and crankier or they're getting more boorish, or both. My money is on "both."
Levi: No, no, Luke. I'm not calling you out on that--in fact, I mentioned that you seemed to enjoy the moment. I know your fandom doesn't allow for absurd slander.
And I'm not saying Cardinals fans are perfect. I'm sure plenty of them are complete tools. But I haven't ever heard a chant like that one at Busch Stadium, and I'm not used to hearing the regular booing that the opposing team's best player has frequently been getting at Wrigley Field lately.
Jim: Glendon Rusch was already turned into a good pitcher by the Padres a week ago Sunday. Opposing pitcher David Wells was so distraught about the situation that he went home, threw a bottle against the wall, and ended up cutting himself on the broken glass (or at least that's what I assume happened).
Does Barry Bonds get booed at Busch?
Levi: I haven't seen Bonds play at Busch, so I don't know. I don't think he does, but I could be wrong.
And the Wells story was great because the story in the San Diego paper about his injury actually included, in the subhead, "Padres GM believes Wells's account." Imagine being viewed as so untrustworthy that your believablity merits mention in a headline.
Luke, hanger-on: Sorry, Levi, I scanned past that. Didn't mean to slanderously accuse you of slanderously accusing me of absurdly slandering Pujols, the second-best player in baseball. (Though, admittedly, I have in the past slandered his funny name, stonethrowing-in-a-glass-house notwithstanding.)
sandor: I tuned in for a little of the game (it was one of those rare times when my cable company decided to give me free ESPN), though I missed the impressive first inning rally. But how about that weather system? That must have been impressive to see from the stadium. When they came back from a commercial break early on, the cameraman was pulling pack to show the bizarrely shaped cloud formations out in the distance. It was so striking that Sarah and I felt compelled to take a walk around the neighborhood and witness it ourselves. I figured I'd the be the only person intrigued enough in clouds to notice, but no, everyone we passed was looking up in amazement.
thatbob: Re: strange clouds and weather systems. I haven't even told you all about the ghost boat.
Levi: According to people who watched the game at home, Pujols made a shushing motion sometime after the home run. I'm unclear on whether it was during the trot or after crossing the plate. It's the sort of thing that would ordinarily get you knocked on your ass the next time up, but in this case, I think even the opposing pitcher would understand.
Somehow, the Cardinals and Cubs managed to play three games in three days with no rain delays, despite strong thunderstorms and heavy rain all weekend. And somehow, the Cardinals managed to turn Glendon Rusch into the pitcher who pitched pretty well for the Mets in 2000, rather than the pitcher who was cut from the Brewers earlier this year. And the Cardinals managed three runs on only three hits against the remarkably good Matt Clement. Impressive, but it wasn't enough. So despair reigns, at least for a few days.
But there was one fully redeeming moment for me--a moment that was a huge highlight even for my Clement-fan wife and for Cubs-fan Luke--in Sunday night's game. The Cardinals were down 4-1, and with Albert Pujols at the plate, a chant arose. It began oddly--almost as if it had been planned in advance--with what seemed a whole section above and behind us shouting "Pujols sucks!" without any of the slow build that such chants usually require.
So as the first pitch comes in as a ball, the chant grows until most of the stadium is into it. "Pujols sucks! Pujols sucks! Pujols sucks!" The next pitch came in, and then it went out. And it kept going out, onto Waveland, or maybe Irving Park Road. The crowd fell silent, except for those of us who were giggling.
Wendell Berry, in a story I read Saturday, described a driver showing "the extended middle finger that contradicts all contradiction." It's hard to imagine a way in which Pujols could have more clearly demonstrated that he manifestly does not suck. Maybe if he had hit that home run, then taken the mound the next inning and set down the Cubs in order with three strikeouts on nine pitches. But that's asking a lot even of Pujols.
Original comments...
Luke: Who you calling arrogant? I should point out, Levi, that I cheered Pujols' home run almost as much as you did. It was more than worth giving up the run to see him shut the fans up.
Every time I get to Wrigley I'm more dismayed by the boorishness of the fans. I don't know whether I'm getting older and crankier or they're getting more boorish, or both. My money is on "both."
Levi: No, no, Luke. I'm not calling you out on that--in fact, I mentioned that you seemed to enjoy the moment. I know your fandom doesn't allow for absurd slander.
And I'm not saying Cardinals fans are perfect. I'm sure plenty of them are complete tools. But I haven't ever heard a chant like that one at Busch Stadium, and I'm not used to hearing the regular booing that the opposing team's best player has frequently been getting at Wrigley Field lately.
Jim: Glendon Rusch was already turned into a good pitcher by the Padres a week ago Sunday. Opposing pitcher David Wells was so distraught about the situation that he went home, threw a bottle against the wall, and ended up cutting himself on the broken glass (or at least that's what I assume happened).
Does Barry Bonds get booed at Busch?
Levi: I haven't seen Bonds play at Busch, so I don't know. I don't think he does, but I could be wrong.
And the Wells story was great because the story in the San Diego paper about his injury actually included, in the subhead, "Padres GM believes Wells's account." Imagine being viewed as so untrustworthy that your believablity merits mention in a headline.
Luke, hanger-on: Sorry, Levi, I scanned past that. Didn't mean to slanderously accuse you of slanderously accusing me of absurdly slandering Pujols, the second-best player in baseball. (Though, admittedly, I have in the past slandered his funny name, stonethrowing-in-a-glass-house notwithstanding.)
sandor: I tuned in for a little of the game (it was one of those rare times when my cable company decided to give me free ESPN), though I missed the impressive first inning rally. But how about that weather system? That must have been impressive to see from the stadium. When they came back from a commercial break early on, the cameraman was pulling pack to show the bizarrely shaped cloud formations out in the distance. It was so striking that Sarah and I felt compelled to take a walk around the neighborhood and witness it ourselves. I figured I'd the be the only person intrigued enough in clouds to notice, but no, everyone we passed was looking up in amazement.
thatbob: Re: strange clouds and weather systems. I haven't even told you all about the ghost boat.
Levi: According to people who watched the game at home, Pujols made a shushing motion sometime after the home run. I'm unclear on whether it was during the trot or after crossing the plate. It's the sort of thing that would ordinarily get you knocked on your ass the next time up, but in this case, I think even the opposing pitcher would understand.
Labels: Albert Pujols, Cardinals, cubs, glendon rusch
Thursday, May 20, 2004
What a gal!
The folks at Redbird Nation, the best Cardinals site on the internet, noticed that in an interview with Esquire this month, Emmylou Harris had this to say:
"During those long summer tours, there's nothing on television that doesn't rot your brain except for baseball. And I love the game. I love the history of the game. I love that fact that anything can happen but probably won't. But sometimes does. I love that you don't have to be a perfect human specimen to be a good player; you can be overweight, you can be too short, too skinny. Let's just say I'm a National League girl, because I don't belive in the designated hitter. And you can quote me on that."
sandor: In the documentary Down from the Mountain -- the film of the concert of the music of the movie "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" -- one of the most smile-inducing moments is when they show Emmylou Harris in her dressing room, being rushed out to the stage, furiously digging through her purse to find her wireless baseball score receiver so she can check on the status of the day's games.
thatbob: The days games. Plural. That's heartening. I was afraid that, as a southerner, she might just be some kind of Braves fan.
Jason: Basbeall? What's that?
Jim: There is no such thing as basbeall. There was never a typo in Levi's post. We have always been at war with Oceania.
"During those long summer tours, there's nothing on television that doesn't rot your brain except for baseball. And I love the game. I love the history of the game. I love that fact that anything can happen but probably won't. But sometimes does. I love that you don't have to be a perfect human specimen to be a good player; you can be overweight, you can be too short, too skinny. Let's just say I'm a National League girl, because I don't belive in the designated hitter. And you can quote me on that."
Original comments:
sandor: In the documentary Down from the Mountain -- the film of the concert of the music of the movie "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" -- one of the most smile-inducing moments is when they show Emmylou Harris in her dressing room, being rushed out to the stage, furiously digging through her purse to find her wireless baseball score receiver so she can check on the status of the day's games.
thatbob: The days games. Plural. That's heartening. I was afraid that, as a southerner, she might just be some kind of Braves fan.
Jason: Basbeall? What's that?
Jim: There is no such thing as basbeall. There was never a typo in Levi's post. We have always been at war with Oceania.
Labels: emmylou harris
Oh, say can you see?
As Jim and I are always saying to each other, here at Baseball-Related Program Activites 2004, we're nothing if not a family site. We're like those sportswriters who are always lamenting about ballplayers not signing autographs or building childrens' hospitals or fighting crime. We want the whole family involved in the game. We're even thinking of making our site play the Baha Men.
So when my friend Jon Solomon sent me a photo of Dodgers pitcher Jose Lima singing "The Star-Spangled Banner" at Dodger Stadium last week, his wife and son by his side, I thought, "This little bit of Lima Time is perfect for Baseball-Related Program Activities 2004! A patriotic family photo!"
Then I looked at the photo. And I have to admit that it took me a moment to focus on Francis Scott Key's view of the battle for Fort McHenry. After a few minutes, I decided that the people who run the site the photo was located on weren't including it because of Jose's singing or their love of country. Nor was that the case on another site, on which there's even a rude poll relating to one aspect (two aspects?) of the photo.
But I want you all to be clear that, as we are a family site, I bring this photo to your attention for the same reason that I'm sure Jon brought it to mine: we think it's pretty cool that Jose Lima got to sing "The Star-Spangled Banner."
Here at Baseball-Related Program Activities 2004, we--we take the road less traveled by. For the kids.
Levi: Oh, and last night, the woman who sang the National Anthem at Wrigley Field sang "For the ramparts we watched." I guess that's the opium-addled version, where the ramparts are streaming.
Jim: I'm not sure if Pax TV deserves to be the link for "a family site." Their Tampa affiliate is the broadcast home of the Devil Rays. (Yes, the Devil Rays really are bad enough that independent station "More TV 32" -- the equivalent of Channel 26, "The U," in Chicago -- which broadcast their games for the first few years didn't want to renew the broadcast rights, and apparently, nobody else wanted them either.)
toby: Just more proof--as I once discussed with Levi a long time ago--that EVERY single pro baseball player has a gorgeous wife. Do you remember Zane Smith of the Expos/Braves/Pirates.. Even he had a hot wife.
Levi: Jim reports that the phrase "Jose Lima's wife" has now passed "Johnny Damon's hair and beard" as the most common Google search that has led people to our site. I should have seen that coming.
Anonymous: Jim is correct
So when my friend Jon Solomon sent me a photo of Dodgers pitcher Jose Lima singing "The Star-Spangled Banner" at Dodger Stadium last week, his wife and son by his side, I thought, "This little bit of Lima Time is perfect for Baseball-Related Program Activities 2004! A patriotic family photo!"
Then I looked at the photo. And I have to admit that it took me a moment to focus on Francis Scott Key's view of the battle for Fort McHenry. After a few minutes, I decided that the people who run the site the photo was located on weren't including it because of Jose's singing or their love of country. Nor was that the case on another site, on which there's even a rude poll relating to one aspect (two aspects?) of the photo.
But I want you all to be clear that, as we are a family site, I bring this photo to your attention for the same reason that I'm sure Jon brought it to mine: we think it's pretty cool that Jose Lima got to sing "The Star-Spangled Banner."
Here at Baseball-Related Program Activities 2004, we--we take the road less traveled by. For the kids.
Original comments...
Levi: Oh, and last night, the woman who sang the National Anthem at Wrigley Field sang "For the ramparts we watched." I guess that's the opium-addled version, where the ramparts are streaming.
Jim: I'm not sure if Pax TV deserves to be the link for "a family site." Their Tampa affiliate is the broadcast home of the Devil Rays. (Yes, the Devil Rays really are bad enough that independent station "More TV 32" -- the equivalent of Channel 26, "The U," in Chicago -- which broadcast their games for the first few years didn't want to renew the broadcast rights, and apparently, nobody else wanted them either.)
toby: Just more proof--as I once discussed with Levi a long time ago--that EVERY single pro baseball player has a gorgeous wife. Do you remember Zane Smith of the Expos/Braves/Pirates.. Even he had a hot wife.
Levi: Jim reports that the phrase "Jose Lima's wife" has now passed "Johnny Damon's hair and beard" as the most common Google search that has led people to our site. I should have seen that coming.
Anonymous: Jim is correct
Labels: jose lima, national anthem
What's that song by the Who about going mobile?
To follow up on the post from a few days ago, I now have a cell phone. As promised, it's a pay-as-you-go plan with no free minutes, so the number will only be given out on a need-to-know basis. As also promised, it's not Nextel, it's Virgin Mobile, and I'm only slightly worried about the fact that everyone pictured on their web site and in their printed literature seems to be 10 years younger and 10 times more hip than me.
I promise never to be seen on camera at a baseball game talking into the phone, but I can't promise I won't be playing Tetris during a rain delay.
I promise never to be seen on camera at a baseball game talking into the phone, but I can't promise I won't be playing Tetris during a rain delay.
Labels: cell phones
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
The Big Unit
Last night was one of those rare occasions when I was glad The Superstation exists, because when the Cubs' announcers mentioned that the Unit had a perfect game through 8, we were able to switch over and watch the 9th.
The Unit was throwing as well as I've ever seen. He looked a little sweaty, but not tired.
With one out to go, he stepped off the mound and kind of composed himself, and Skip Carey said, "Johnson holds a little team meeting with himself."
With two outs to go, the Braves home crowd stood, cheering for Johnson to get the last out. But Stacey noticed at least one guy wearing a rally cap. Her thought: only a Braves fan would attempt to root for both a perfect game against his team and a rally for his team at the same time.
Then Johnson struck out the last hitter, and his catcher, Robby Hammock, leaped into the air, high, several times while the Unit smiled. That was the best part, I think, seeing the Unit smile. I'm not sure I've ever seen that.
And seeing his teammates touch his hair. I know I've never seen that.
So congratulations to the Big Unit, one of my very favorite players. Couldn't have done it to a better team.
Jon Solomon: Thankfully they made similar mention during the NBA playoffs (or was it the Mets game on MSG?) that Johnson was perfect through seven, so my Dad and I were able to switch over and watch it together.
sandor: My friend Jason was at the Yankee/Red Sox game a few years ago when Mike Mussina pitched 8 2/3 innings of perfect ball, only to have it ruined with a hit by ugly ducking Carl Everett. He said the entire Fenway crowd was on its feet, as Atlanta's was here, but not to cheer on the pitcher about to make history; he said they were still rooting for their Sox to break it up. Even with Everett, who pretty much everyone in Boston hated, at the plate. Which I guess makes sense, if you're the Red Sox and you're about to be put in the history books for the wrong reason, thanks to those bastard Yankees.
I tried to console him (Jason, not Mussina) by explaining he probably witnessed a rarer feat: "Sure, a perfect game is rare, but isn't a pitcher going perfect for only 8 2/3 innings only to have it broken up on the last out is even rarer!" (I don't actually know if this is true, but I imagine so.) Anyway, he wasn't consoled.
Levi: I will go to my grave believing that the reason Jim and I didn't see Frank Castillo throw a no-hitter against the Cardinals on September 25, 1995 is that, with two outs in the 9th, I cheered for Castillo to retire Bernard Gilkey.
The god repaid my breaking faith with the Cardinals by allowing Gilkey to hit a triple into the right-field corner.
Never again will I root against the Cardinals for any reason in any situation. Sorry about that, Jim.
thatbob: The Unit isn't as fat as I'd like, but he sure is ugly! And I'm a big fan of anything that strikes out Braves. Go Big Unit!
Levi: Re: my post above. That should read "The gods." I'm nothing if not a polytheist. Well, except for an athiest, that is.
Jim: Well, "the god" is probably appropriate if you're a polytheist, because there is probably one specific god of Punishing Levi for Rooting Against the Cardinals. Obviously, he doesn't have as many responsibilities as, say, Zeus, so when he gets a chance to do his thing, he's going to take it.
Jason: PLRAC? (pronounced pul-rak)
Levi: My coworker, Jim, says, "Maybe touching the Unit's hair is like touching a snake's skin. You know, you expect it to be all slimy, but it's really cool and dry."
Secho: I was in the pressbox at Shea Stadium scoring the Mets-Cards game during the perfect game hubbub. I happen to sit right in the middle of several members of the Japanese media, who were unfazed by reports of the Unit's perfection through 8, but outraged when Colin Porter was sent to pinch hit for So Taguchi in the top of the 9th. Taguchi had entered the game in a double-switch in the bottom of the 8th, an inning after 74-year-old Ray Lankford butchered a can of corn in left.
Anyway, the point: Longtime Met and Yankee official scorer Bill Shannon was sitting nearby, recounting every no-hitter he remembered in New York, and recalling who the official scorer was for each off the top of his head. It was unbelievable, hearing him talk about Larsen's game in '56. He noted there were 3 official scorers that day, as there are in World Series games, and tossed their names off as if he'd seen them yesterday, and then talked about a couple of pitches Larsen got away with in that game: "He threw a 2-2 hanging slider, but it was fouled back." How does he remember this stuff? I don't even remember most of Game 7 of the NLCS last year.
Levi: My memories of last year's NLCS game 7 are clouded with despair.
I think that's how you know the Cubs are only my backup team. If they were my real team, the despair would only bring the events into ever-clearer focus. Leading to more despair.
toby: Do I detect a bit of Braves-hating in that entry, Leviticus? I hope so.
A loyal Pirate fan
Francisco Cabrerra is the devil.
Anonymous: It could be worse, you could be a red sox fan
The Unit was throwing as well as I've ever seen. He looked a little sweaty, but not tired.
With one out to go, he stepped off the mound and kind of composed himself, and Skip Carey said, "Johnson holds a little team meeting with himself."
With two outs to go, the Braves home crowd stood, cheering for Johnson to get the last out. But Stacey noticed at least one guy wearing a rally cap. Her thought: only a Braves fan would attempt to root for both a perfect game against his team and a rally for his team at the same time.
Then Johnson struck out the last hitter, and his catcher, Robby Hammock, leaped into the air, high, several times while the Unit smiled. That was the best part, I think, seeing the Unit smile. I'm not sure I've ever seen that.
And seeing his teammates touch his hair. I know I've never seen that.
So congratulations to the Big Unit, one of my very favorite players. Couldn't have done it to a better team.
Original comments...
Jon Solomon: Thankfully they made similar mention during the NBA playoffs (or was it the Mets game on MSG?) that Johnson was perfect through seven, so my Dad and I were able to switch over and watch it together.
sandor: My friend Jason was at the Yankee/Red Sox game a few years ago when Mike Mussina pitched 8 2/3 innings of perfect ball, only to have it ruined with a hit by ugly ducking Carl Everett. He said the entire Fenway crowd was on its feet, as Atlanta's was here, but not to cheer on the pitcher about to make history; he said they were still rooting for their Sox to break it up. Even with Everett, who pretty much everyone in Boston hated, at the plate. Which I guess makes sense, if you're the Red Sox and you're about to be put in the history books for the wrong reason, thanks to those bastard Yankees.
I tried to console him (Jason, not Mussina) by explaining he probably witnessed a rarer feat: "Sure, a perfect game is rare, but isn't a pitcher going perfect for only 8 2/3 innings only to have it broken up on the last out is even rarer!" (I don't actually know if this is true, but I imagine so.) Anyway, he wasn't consoled.
Levi: I will go to my grave believing that the reason Jim and I didn't see Frank Castillo throw a no-hitter against the Cardinals on September 25, 1995 is that, with two outs in the 9th, I cheered for Castillo to retire Bernard Gilkey.
The god repaid my breaking faith with the Cardinals by allowing Gilkey to hit a triple into the right-field corner.
Never again will I root against the Cardinals for any reason in any situation. Sorry about that, Jim.
thatbob: The Unit isn't as fat as I'd like, but he sure is ugly! And I'm a big fan of anything that strikes out Braves. Go Big Unit!
Levi: Re: my post above. That should read "The gods." I'm nothing if not a polytheist. Well, except for an athiest, that is.
Jim: Well, "the god" is probably appropriate if you're a polytheist, because there is probably one specific god of Punishing Levi for Rooting Against the Cardinals. Obviously, he doesn't have as many responsibilities as, say, Zeus, so when he gets a chance to do his thing, he's going to take it.
Jason: PLRAC? (pronounced pul-rak)
Levi: My coworker, Jim, says, "Maybe touching the Unit's hair is like touching a snake's skin. You know, you expect it to be all slimy, but it's really cool and dry."
Secho: I was in the pressbox at Shea Stadium scoring the Mets-Cards game during the perfect game hubbub. I happen to sit right in the middle of several members of the Japanese media, who were unfazed by reports of the Unit's perfection through 8, but outraged when Colin Porter was sent to pinch hit for So Taguchi in the top of the 9th. Taguchi had entered the game in a double-switch in the bottom of the 8th, an inning after 74-year-old Ray Lankford butchered a can of corn in left.
Anyway, the point: Longtime Met and Yankee official scorer Bill Shannon was sitting nearby, recounting every no-hitter he remembered in New York, and recalling who the official scorer was for each off the top of his head. It was unbelievable, hearing him talk about Larsen's game in '56. He noted there were 3 official scorers that day, as there are in World Series games, and tossed their names off as if he'd seen them yesterday, and then talked about a couple of pitches Larsen got away with in that game: "He threw a 2-2 hanging slider, but it was fouled back." How does he remember this stuff? I don't even remember most of Game 7 of the NLCS last year.
Levi: My memories of last year's NLCS game 7 are clouded with despair.
I think that's how you know the Cubs are only my backup team. If they were my real team, the despair would only bring the events into ever-clearer focus. Leading to more despair.
toby: Do I detect a bit of Braves-hating in that entry, Leviticus? I hope so.
A loyal Pirate fan
Francisco Cabrerra is the devil.
Anonymous: It could be worse, you could be a red sox fan
Labels: randy johnson
Tuesday, May 18, 2004
We're not watching our own network
Several times during tonight's hockey game on ESPN2, play-by-play announcer Gary Thorne promoted tomorrow night's baseball coverage by saying, "Barry Bonds and the Giants travel to Wrigley Field to take on Sosa and the Cubs."
Problem is, the ESPN2 "Bottom Line" ticker was repeating "Cubs OF Sammy Sosa (back) to be put on DL Wednesday."
And then there was some actual breaking news on the Bottom Line: congratulations to Randy Johnson on the perfect game. Couldn't have happened to a scarier-looking guy! I'm still going to refer to him as The Big Eunuch, but not when he's within earshot.
Jason: I thought I was the only one in the Western United States watching this game.
Actually, I only watched the replay at midnight, but I still tuned in. Let's hear it for a Tampa Bay-Calgary Stanley Cup Final!
Problem is, the ESPN2 "Bottom Line" ticker was repeating "Cubs OF Sammy Sosa (back) to be put on DL Wednesday."
And then there was some actual breaking news on the Bottom Line: congratulations to Randy Johnson on the perfect game. Couldn't have happened to a scarier-looking guy! I'm still going to refer to him as The Big Eunuch, but not when he's within earshot.
Original comments...
Jason: I thought I was the only one in the Western United States watching this game.
Actually, I only watched the replay at midnight, but I still tuned in. Let's hear it for a Tampa Bay-Calgary Stanley Cup Final!
Labels: randy johnson, sammy sosa
Monday, May 17, 2004
A thought on ballpark food
On Tuesday at Tropicana Field, I had a grouper sandwich; on Wednesday at Dodger Stadium, I had a Dodger Dog (included with the "family pack" ticket package); on Sunday at Petco Park, I had fish tacos. I think on the trip I'm going to try some local specialty at most of the ballparks, because even though my digestive system is used to me putting a lot of items consisting of meat and meat by-products down the hatch, I'm not sure it can handle a hot dog a day for 10 days. I'm also not sure what Levi's going to eat on the trip, other than Tim Horton's doughnuts while we're in Canada, if he's still practicing vegetarianism.
Levi: "Practicing"? I think I've got this vegetarian thing down by now.
And surely there will be enough to eat. Ballpark pizza is one of the worst foods in the world, but in St. Louis, for example, they've got a stand that sells veggie burgers and another that sells reasonably good burritos.
maura: i guess that seals the identity of the person who's going to try the schmitter at citizens bank park, then....
Jon Solomon: There are GREAT veggie dogs to be had in Toronto at SkyDome. They've got a whole vegetarian stand down on the first level, in fact.
Steve: My long list of reasons why baseball should be contracted just got longer. Veggie dogs? inside domes? in Canada?!? Great American pastime indeed. There's plenty of things vegetarians can eat at the ballpark--french fries, nachos, pretzels, peanuts, pizza, sunflower seeds, beer, big league chew, ice cream (if you aren't vegan) lemon freeze (if you are vegan) free diced onions at wrigley....
Jim: A cheese steak on a Kaiser roll with fried salami, fried onions, tomato, and secret sauce?! There is nothing about that I don't like, except that if it's $5.25 at the actual McNally's, I shudder to think how much they're charging at Citizens Bank Park.
Levi: Let's all give a moment of appreciation to Jim Bouton for inventing Big League Chew. That's almost as great an achievement as writing Ball Four.
thatbob: My only quibble: I wish it had been called Big League Chaw. (God, it sucks to be me. I really can't enjoy *anything*.)
thatbob: Re: veggie dogs inside domes in Canada. You know what Yogi Berra would say to that: "Only in America."
Jason: You could always eat before the game...if you're a COMMUNIST!
sarah: jon's post brought back some very scary and sad memories of the near-deserted vegetarian food stand at the expos game we went to in montreal. the echo of fans banging empty seats followed me into the dark back alleys of the food court. the whole adventure took me close to an hour, since i believe they had to actually form the tofu into veggie-dog shapes by hand. plus, a mishap involving a foul ball spilled our whole dinner onto my shirt anyway.
good times. good times.
Original comments...
Levi: "Practicing"? I think I've got this vegetarian thing down by now.
And surely there will be enough to eat. Ballpark pizza is one of the worst foods in the world, but in St. Louis, for example, they've got a stand that sells veggie burgers and another that sells reasonably good burritos.
maura: i guess that seals the identity of the person who's going to try the schmitter at citizens bank park, then....
Jon Solomon: There are GREAT veggie dogs to be had in Toronto at SkyDome. They've got a whole vegetarian stand down on the first level, in fact.
Steve: My long list of reasons why baseball should be contracted just got longer. Veggie dogs? inside domes? in Canada?!? Great American pastime indeed. There's plenty of things vegetarians can eat at the ballpark--french fries, nachos, pretzels, peanuts, pizza, sunflower seeds, beer, big league chew, ice cream (if you aren't vegan) lemon freeze (if you are vegan) free diced onions at wrigley....
Jim: A cheese steak on a Kaiser roll with fried salami, fried onions, tomato, and secret sauce?! There is nothing about that I don't like, except that if it's $5.25 at the actual McNally's, I shudder to think how much they're charging at Citizens Bank Park.
Levi: Let's all give a moment of appreciation to Jim Bouton for inventing Big League Chew. That's almost as great an achievement as writing Ball Four.
thatbob: My only quibble: I wish it had been called Big League Chaw. (God, it sucks to be me. I really can't enjoy *anything*.)
thatbob: Re: veggie dogs inside domes in Canada. You know what Yogi Berra would say to that: "Only in America."
Jason: You could always eat before the game...if you're a COMMUNIST!
sarah: jon's post brought back some very scary and sad memories of the near-deserted vegetarian food stand at the expos game we went to in montreal. the echo of fans banging empty seats followed me into the dark back alleys of the food court. the whole adventure took me close to an hour, since i believe they had to actually form the tofu into veggie-dog shapes by hand. plus, a mishap involving a foul ball spilled our whole dinner onto my shirt anyway.
good times. good times.
Labels: brpa, food, planning, road trip
Don't go to the supermarket hungry
This box of delight was on sale at Ralphs today. (Marked at $3.79, rang up at $2.50.) The official Hostess site doesn't seem to acknowledge its existence, so I had to take my own picture. I think it should be the Official Snack Cake of this trip.
You know, if it turns out that real baseballs have a vanilla cream center these days, it might explain a lot of things.
Jason: There's a Hostess thrift store not too far away in Burbank. (Well, it's probably too far away for the Chicago folks.) I should see if I can find some Baseballs there. Last time I went, I brought home a box of Chocodiles.
Levi: Wow, Hug. I hadn't thought about Chocodiles in years.
Jim, this is like when Maggie found a stash of John Kruk folders at a dollar store: Your duty is to buy all the boxes of these that you can, then pack them in your luggage.
Steve: Levi, in case you haven't noticed the girth of your fellow midwesterners, its not like these are hard to find.
I vote that Jim packs nothing but Hostess in his luggage and if he wants a change of clothes must go to the local thrift store for an outfit featuring the logo of home team in the town you are currently visiting. And thanks for mentioning John Kruk.
Jim: Official TSA policy: "Avoid packing food and drink items in checked baggage." Sorry.
thatbob: Nonsense, Jim. You can (1) "avoid" packing the Hostess Baseballs in your checked luggage all day - all weekend, even! - and then, at the last minute, pack them anyway. (This is what I would do). Or you can (2) pack the maximum limit of carry-on with Hostess Baseballs, and not check any luggage. (This is what you should do.)
No excuses! No regrets!
Jason: Or, you could ship a case or 2 to Levi, and then pick them up from him and carry them in your rental car.
Steve: I think we are distilling this down to its essential meaning...
Jim is not allowed to pack any luggage for this trip unless it is filled with hostess baseballs and his diet for the entire trip must consist entirely of hostess baseballs. Now that would be a cool documentary!!
Levi: And _I've_ distilled Steve's post to its essence: Steve loves to see people barf out car windows.
You know, if it turns out that real baseballs have a vanilla cream center these days, it might explain a lot of things.
Original comments...
Jason: There's a Hostess thrift store not too far away in Burbank. (Well, it's probably too far away for the Chicago folks.) I should see if I can find some Baseballs there. Last time I went, I brought home a box of Chocodiles.
Levi: Wow, Hug. I hadn't thought about Chocodiles in years.
Jim, this is like when Maggie found a stash of John Kruk folders at a dollar store: Your duty is to buy all the boxes of these that you can, then pack them in your luggage.
Steve: Levi, in case you haven't noticed the girth of your fellow midwesterners, its not like these are hard to find.
I vote that Jim packs nothing but Hostess in his luggage and if he wants a change of clothes must go to the local thrift store for an outfit featuring the logo of home team in the town you are currently visiting. And thanks for mentioning John Kruk.
Jim: Official TSA policy: "Avoid packing food and drink items in checked baggage." Sorry.
thatbob: Nonsense, Jim. You can (1) "avoid" packing the Hostess Baseballs in your checked luggage all day - all weekend, even! - and then, at the last minute, pack them anyway. (This is what I would do). Or you can (2) pack the maximum limit of carry-on with Hostess Baseballs, and not check any luggage. (This is what you should do.)
No excuses! No regrets!
Jason: Or, you could ship a case or 2 to Levi, and then pick them up from him and carry them in your rental car.
Steve: I think we are distilling this down to its essential meaning...
Jim is not allowed to pack any luggage for this trip unless it is filled with hostess baseballs and his diet for the entire trip must consist entirely of hostess baseballs. Now that would be a cool documentary!!
Levi: And _I've_ distilled Steve's post to its essence: Steve loves to see people barf out car windows.
Labels: hostess baseballs
Better than goose eggs
Cardinals farmhand Brad Thompson of the Tennesse Smokies threw six shutout innings on Friday night, running his string of scoreless innings to 52, two short of the minor-league record.
The local Krispy Kreme franchise in Sevierville has promised Thompson free donuts for life if he breaks the record.
That's got to be better than whatever major-league-consecutive-shutout-innnings-record-holder Orel Hershiser got for announcing his intention to attend a theme park in the aftermath of the Dodgers' World Series victory in 1988.
Levi: And I forgot to mention the next-best thing about this story: the holder of the record is Urban Shocker, regular denizen of the upper-reaches of lists of the best baseball names.
Steve: I hope he gets the record because as far as I'm concerned baseball can't have enough fat pitchers.
thatbob: Say, isn't it about time you guys got represented at http://www.chicagobloggers.com/, which cross-references area bloggers by CTA and Metra stop?
Jason: The local Krispy Kreme doughnut flavor of the week (or month, I forget which) is Strawberry Shortcake. I highly recommend purchasing a few if available in your area.
Jason: I also used to have a Smokies hat back when they were the Knoxville Smokies. I even purchased it in Evanston at some corner sports apparel shop that might not even be around anymore.
The local Krispy Kreme franchise in Sevierville has promised Thompson free donuts for life if he breaks the record.
That's got to be better than whatever major-league-consecutive-shutout-innnings-record-holder Orel Hershiser got for announcing his intention to attend a theme park in the aftermath of the Dodgers' World Series victory in 1988.
Original comments...
Levi: And I forgot to mention the next-best thing about this story: the holder of the record is Urban Shocker, regular denizen of the upper-reaches of lists of the best baseball names.
Steve: I hope he gets the record because as far as I'm concerned baseball can't have enough fat pitchers.
thatbob: Say, isn't it about time you guys got represented at http://www.chicagobloggers.com/, which cross-references area bloggers by CTA and Metra stop?
Jason: The local Krispy Kreme doughnut flavor of the week (or month, I forget which) is Strawberry Shortcake. I highly recommend purchasing a few if available in your area.
Jason: I also used to have a Smokies hat back when they were the Knoxville Smokies. I even purchased it in Evanston at some corner sports apparel shop that might not even be around anymore.
Labels: brad thompson, krispy kreme, tennessee smokies
Sunday, May 16, 2004
A waffle at the beach is a sandy Eggo
First of all, yes, there was the obligatory letter to the sports editor in Saturday's L.A. Times complaining about people at Dodger Stadium doing the wave during Alex Cora's marathon at-bat.
Today I went to one of 2004's new ballparks, Petco Park, with Cathryn and Jennifer (and Jason, who took this picture)...
It is a very nice place, albeit colder than Qualcomm Stadium, thanks to the breezes coming off San Diego Bay, and the fact that we were under the overhang. In fact, we were in the very top row of the upper deck section to the left of the "first base tower" in the picture below...
In the top row, there's some bizarreness involving the steel supports holding up the overhang, so although we had seats 7 through 10, there was about a 6-inch gap between seat 7 and seat 8, although it wasn't like there was a giant metal post in the way or anything like that. (There was also a gap of about 18 inches between seat 6 and seat 3. Seats 4 and 5 were missing.) Anyway, this is the view of the diamond from way up there...
And this is the view of downtown San Diego. Unfortunately, I didn't manage to get a picture of a plane landing (they come in just beyond the skyscrapers, eventually disappearing behind them)...
The lawn looked like a nice place to hang out...
So did the seats in front of the Western Metal Supply building...
And if you've got to pick one Padres player to hang out with, it's got to be David Wells...
The final line...
In conclusion, Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia, where we'll be on August 27th, has a lot to live up to. I already think it's going to lose points for not being right downtown. But it may gain points for being warmer than Petco Park...next time, I'm going to wear long pants and at least bring a sweatshirt. Or try to get seats at least a few rows farther down, which will be in the sun.
maura: how about that ben sheets!!
Levi: On paper, the building they left in left field struck me as really dopey, almost as bad as the flagpole and hill at Bush/Cheney Field in Houston--though not nearly as bad as the stupid train at the same park.
But now that I've seen the new San Diego park on TV, I've changed my mind. The building's kinda cool.
Jim: What? Trains are not stupid. The fact that Houston has better train service at their baseball stadium than they do at their actual train station (a 3-day-a-week Amtrak train to L.A. and Orlando) is kind of stupid, but me ranting about inequities in government transportation funding is off-topic for this blog.
Levi: Actually, the train in Houston is remarkably similar to Amtrak rides I've taken. You sit on it for a long time and it doesn't go anywhere. Then it goes, but only a short way, at which point it stops and changes direction. Then you sit again for a long time.
But at least the train doesn't turn into a bus.
sandor: Trains going forwards and backwards and forwards again? Sounds like my trip on the L yesterday. Halfway between Irving Park and the Addison, the brown line train I was on stopped, then started going in reverse. In 10 years of riding L trains, I've never experienced such a thing happening. I didn't even realize they had a reverse gear. It was quite shocking.
Sorry, off-topic. But I thought worth sharing.
thatbob: "Thank you for not requesting autographs"?!? WTF?!?
thatbob: Now obviously those seats at Western Metal Supply Co. are supposed to be reminiscent of Wrigleyville rooftops, or that book depository (or whatever) in Baltimore. What I can't figure out is if the seats are actually part of the park, ie. ticketed revenue, or just an authorized use by a lucky neighbor. What's going on there?
Levi: Silly Bob. There's no way that a modern park would ever let any chance at a dollar slip by. Those aren't only seats: they're expensive luxury box thingies, and they bring in buckets of the ready for the Padres.
Jim: "Thank you for not requesting autographs": It was Photo Day, and you're just supposed to take pictures of the players, not ask them for autographs.
The ground floor of the Western Metal Supply building is the main Padres store, and then there's standing room in front of it; each other individual level is, I believe, a single "party suite," available on a per-game basis for your corporate get-together or other function. There's no actual suite on the roof, just some tables with umbrellas to go along with the ballpark seating, but it, too, seems to be a special group seating area.
Jason: What Jim forgot to mention - and I am shocked that he did - was the fact that he took a trolley train to the game. Must have been the sugar high from too many Hostess Baseballs to affect his memory.
Jim: I thought me taking a trolley was a "that goes without saying" kind of thing. Yes, parking near Petco Park is expensive, so the trolley was the best option.
thatbob: I'm a *big* fan of selling the crappiest seats in the house to the stupidest people with the most money! I heartily approve! God Bless You, Petco Park!
Today I went to one of 2004's new ballparks, Petco Park, with Cathryn and Jennifer (and Jason, who took this picture)...
It is a very nice place, albeit colder than Qualcomm Stadium, thanks to the breezes coming off San Diego Bay, and the fact that we were under the overhang. In fact, we were in the very top row of the upper deck section to the left of the "first base tower" in the picture below...
In the top row, there's some bizarreness involving the steel supports holding up the overhang, so although we had seats 7 through 10, there was about a 6-inch gap between seat 7 and seat 8, although it wasn't like there was a giant metal post in the way or anything like that. (There was also a gap of about 18 inches between seat 6 and seat 3. Seats 4 and 5 were missing.) Anyway, this is the view of the diamond from way up there...
And this is the view of downtown San Diego. Unfortunately, I didn't manage to get a picture of a plane landing (they come in just beyond the skyscrapers, eventually disappearing behind them)...
The lawn looked like a nice place to hang out...
So did the seats in front of the Western Metal Supply building...
And if you've got to pick one Padres player to hang out with, it's got to be David Wells...
The final line...
In conclusion, Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia, where we'll be on August 27th, has a lot to live up to. I already think it's going to lose points for not being right downtown. But it may gain points for being warmer than Petco Park...next time, I'm going to wear long pants and at least bring a sweatshirt. Or try to get seats at least a few rows farther down, which will be in the sun.
Original comments...
maura: how about that ben sheets!!
Levi: On paper, the building they left in left field struck me as really dopey, almost as bad as the flagpole and hill at Bush/Cheney Field in Houston--though not nearly as bad as the stupid train at the same park.
But now that I've seen the new San Diego park on TV, I've changed my mind. The building's kinda cool.
Jim: What? Trains are not stupid. The fact that Houston has better train service at their baseball stadium than they do at their actual train station (a 3-day-a-week Amtrak train to L.A. and Orlando) is kind of stupid, but me ranting about inequities in government transportation funding is off-topic for this blog.
Levi: Actually, the train in Houston is remarkably similar to Amtrak rides I've taken. You sit on it for a long time and it doesn't go anywhere. Then it goes, but only a short way, at which point it stops and changes direction. Then you sit again for a long time.
But at least the train doesn't turn into a bus.
sandor: Trains going forwards and backwards and forwards again? Sounds like my trip on the L yesterday. Halfway between Irving Park and the Addison, the brown line train I was on stopped, then started going in reverse. In 10 years of riding L trains, I've never experienced such a thing happening. I didn't even realize they had a reverse gear. It was quite shocking.
Sorry, off-topic. But I thought worth sharing.
thatbob: "Thank you for not requesting autographs"?!? WTF?!?
thatbob: Now obviously those seats at Western Metal Supply Co. are supposed to be reminiscent of Wrigleyville rooftops, or that book depository (or whatever) in Baltimore. What I can't figure out is if the seats are actually part of the park, ie. ticketed revenue, or just an authorized use by a lucky neighbor. What's going on there?
Levi: Silly Bob. There's no way that a modern park would ever let any chance at a dollar slip by. Those aren't only seats: they're expensive luxury box thingies, and they bring in buckets of the ready for the Padres.
Jim: "Thank you for not requesting autographs": It was Photo Day, and you're just supposed to take pictures of the players, not ask them for autographs.
The ground floor of the Western Metal Supply building is the main Padres store, and then there's standing room in front of it; each other individual level is, I believe, a single "party suite," available on a per-game basis for your corporate get-together or other function. There's no actual suite on the roof, just some tables with umbrellas to go along with the ballpark seating, but it, too, seems to be a special group seating area.
Jason: What Jim forgot to mention - and I am shocked that he did - was the fact that he took a trolley train to the game. Must have been the sugar high from too many Hostess Baseballs to affect his memory.
Jim: I thought me taking a trolley was a "that goes without saying" kind of thing. Yes, parking near Petco Park is expensive, so the trolley was the best option.
thatbob: I'm a *big* fan of selling the crappiest seats in the house to the stupidest people with the most money! I heartily approve! God Bless You, Petco Park!
Labels: game report, padres, petco park
Friday, May 14, 2004
More actual road trip-related content
Maura will be joining us for the game in Cleveland as well as the previously planned Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. The itinerary has been updated. Hope she likes the Pennsylvania and Ohio Turnpikes!
Levi: Mo' Mo! Mo' Mo!
That's gotta be a good thing.
Original comments...
Levi: Mo' Mo! Mo' Mo!
That's gotta be a good thing.
Labels: brpa, maura johnston, planning, road trip
Actual content related to the road trip
While I was in Tampa, I got to hear my mother complain, "I can't believe you're going to (insert city here), but you're only spending one night there, and all you'll be doing is going to a baseball game!"
In between the kvetching, she did bring up another point: a cell phone might come in handy on the trip. But you, Levi, don't have one, do you? And I'm the only person in L.A. who doesn't have one. I may get one of those prepaid, pay-as-you-go deals.
Luke: What, do you have tickets behind the plate?
Levi: Now--apologies to the Holderbys--while I'm sure that many people have said, "I can't believe you're going to Detroit," I have trouble believing that anyone has ever said, "I can't believe you're going to Detroit, but you're only spending one night, and all you'll be doing is going to a baseball game."
Jim: No, I would absolutely not call someone from a baseball game to tell them to watch me on TV. And I definitely wouldn't get Nextel service, solely because their walkie-talkie feature is much more annoying for those nearby than a regular cell phone is (and I know this for a fact because of someone near me using the walkie-talkie feature at the Padres game I went to last year).
You're right, although my mother's family lived in the Detroit suburbs for some years, she was most concerned about Montreal, and to a lesser extent Boston and Toronto.
maura: ohh, i loathe those walkie-talkie phones. when i took the bus to and from work in philadelphia, they were like the plague.
i was debating leaving my phone at home for our trip, but then i realized that i needed a backup plan in case of train problems. alas.
In between the kvetching, she did bring up another point: a cell phone might come in handy on the trip. But you, Levi, don't have one, do you? And I'm the only person in L.A. who doesn't have one. I may get one of those prepaid, pay-as-you-go deals.
Original comments...
Luke: What, do you have tickets behind the plate?
Levi: Now--apologies to the Holderbys--while I'm sure that many people have said, "I can't believe you're going to Detroit," I have trouble believing that anyone has ever said, "I can't believe you're going to Detroit, but you're only spending one night, and all you'll be doing is going to a baseball game."
Jim: No, I would absolutely not call someone from a baseball game to tell them to watch me on TV. And I definitely wouldn't get Nextel service, solely because their walkie-talkie feature is much more annoying for those nearby than a regular cell phone is (and I know this for a fact because of someone near me using the walkie-talkie feature at the Padres game I went to last year).
You're right, although my mother's family lived in the Detroit suburbs for some years, she was most concerned about Montreal, and to a lesser extent Boston and Toronto.
maura: ohh, i loathe those walkie-talkie phones. when i took the bus to and from work in philadelphia, they were like the plague.
i was debating leaving my phone at home for our trip, but then i realized that i needed a backup plan in case of train problems. alas.
Labels: brpa, cell phones, planning, road trip
Best at-bat ever?
Around here, and around the Internet, all the news from Wednesday's Cubs-Dodgers game was about Alex Cora's at-bat.
For those of you who missed it, here's the pitch-by-pitch.
Pitch 1 - Ball
Pitch 2 - Called Strike
Pitch 3 - Ball
Pitch 4 - Foul
Pitch 5 - Foul
Pitch 6 - Foul
Pitch 7 - Foul
Pitch 8 - Foul
Pitch 9 - Foul
Pitch 10 - Foul
Pitch 11 - Foul
Pitch 12 - Foul
Pitch 13 - Foul
Pitch 14 - Foul
Pitch 15 - Foul
Pitch 16 - Foul
Pitch 17 - Foul
Pitch 18 - Home run to right field. Jason Grabowski and Alex Cora score
Because I had just watched the Cardinals game and had to get up at 5:45 the next morning to get to work early, I went to bed just before that inning. Stacey came into the bedroom early in Cora's at-bat to inform me that Cubs announcer Pat Hughes had said, "For those of you just returning from a brief vacation, Alex Cora is still at bat."
Much later--or so it seemed to my sleep-addled brain--she returned to tell me that Cora had fouled off fourteen pitches. Soon after, she sadly delivered the news of his home run. But even though she's a Matt Clement fan and was sad to see him lose the battle, she was willing to concede that it was pretty impressive.
Two other notes:
1. Is Matt Morris trying to take up Johnny Damon's slack? Check out this photo. It's not there yet, but he's on his way to turning his hideous chin friend into a real beard.
2. The comment by Pat Hughes reminds me of two great baseball radio moments I've been meaning to share with you. One is a great bit of description by Cardinals announcer Mike Shannon. Describing Matt Morris pulling up short to stop at third base, he said, "He stopped so short that if he'd been a train, he would have jackknifed the last half-dozen cars."
The second is from a discussion Ron Santo and Pat Hughes were having the other day at Wrigley. It was chilly and windy, but Pat, expecting better weather, had decided to have the crew take out the window panes that protect the announcers from the elements. Ron was on his case about it, complaining that after so many years at Wrigley, surely he knew better than to take out the windows in May. Pat peppered Ron with questions like, "So, Ron, would you say it's a pain to have these windows out?" and "So, Ron, would you say that it's an open-and-shut case?" Ron continued his rant, oblivious to the joking.
Levi: Baseball Prospectus has a good point about Damon's beard: he missed a chance to raise much more money for charity. He should have set up two accounts, one for keeping the beard, one for shaving it, and asked for donations to each. The one with most donations decides the fate of the greatest beard of the decade.
stacey: levi, what is the point is saying i'm a matt clement fan without linking to a photo of him? he steals my heart with his super pitching, tall socks, and super cuteness!
Luke: The at-bat reminded me of Matt Williams' great at-bat in the 1989 NLCS against the Cubs, although it was only eight foul balls. Here's an interesting write-up about it (scroll down to "Foul ball!").
"According to research by STATS Inc., each foul ball shifts the balance in favor of the batter. After Williams's fifth foul, he was the favorite over Wilson. Why? Physically, the more pitches a batter sees, the better he can adjust to movement and velocity, and therefore time his swing. There is also the psychological toll on the pitcher to consider."
There's also some talk of the precision foul ball, like the scene in "The Natural" where Hobbs tries to snipe the photographer when he's taking BP after his injury.
"The carefully aimed foul ball is a rare but potent weapon, as Richie Ashburn once discovered. The Phillies outfielder was one of the best ever at repeatedly fouling balls off to frustrate and overwork pitchers, skilled enough to lead the league four times in on-base percentage. There came a day, however, when one of Ashburn's teammates called upon him to fine-tune his fouling skills. The teammate, who was angry at his wife, implored Ashburn to hit the ball at his wife, sitting in the left-field stands. Ashburn forgot about it until he happened to spray some fouls in that general area. When his teammate yelled from the bench, "two seats over, one row back and you've got her," Ashburn hit the next ball elsewhere, drawing the line at assault.
"Ted Williams, in My Turn At Bat, confessed to an occasion when he didn't draw such a line. Maddened by one of his chronic Fenway Park hecklers, Williams tried to hit the critic with a foul ball. Since the fan sat behind third base, Williams had to go literally out of his way in his attempt, eschewing his pull-hitting instincts to aim left for several swings. He didn't hit his target, but he probably made his point.
"...
"Any discussion of foul balls must celebrate Luke Appling, the Michelangelo of the mis-hit. Appling once deliberately fouled two dozen balls into the stands to get even with his own ballclub's failure to provide free passes for a couple of his friends. Another time, he aimed at a peanut vendor who had laughed when a fan was struck by Appling's previous foul. "I'll fix him," Appling declared, then nailed him in the head; the vendor had to be carried out."
There are worse claims to fame than to be the "Michelangelo of the mis-hit."
Steve: So...ah....um....ah....who ...uh...will join me in my...uh...loathing of Ron Santo? It seems that...ah....just when I have enough ammo to spread my..uh... hatred (like when he irresponsibly crashed his car after suffering insulin shock, like when he was characterized as "despondent" after not getting into the hall of fame) he goes and becomes...um....ah.... a double amputee without a bladder. I feel like...um...Frank Grimes in that Simpsons episode. You know....the...um...the....um...the....only person I'm destroying with this..um... hatred for Santo is myself. Um....Um....Worst color guy ever! All....ah...he's good for is ....YESSS!!!!... rooting in the pressbox, kissing Sammy's ass, ("just because Sammy has struck out seven times in a row, it doesn't mean he's not seeing the ball good." He's due.) wearing Pat Hughes out about his clothes and going on ad nauseum about the attendance quiz. But God forbid YOU rather than he make a joke about one of his three toupees. Pat Hughes is a Saint.
Levi: I'm not entirely sure I believe the Luke Appling story--two dozen fouls is more than I've ever heard of anybody hitting. But I could be wrong. To do that to demonstrate irritation is a pretty hilarious reason.
Every pitch of the Cora at-bat is at MLB.com, so I got to see it. Three things stood out. First, Clement kept throwing the same pitch, to the same location, over and over. His location was right on, every time. Second, Cora hit all but one of his fouls to the first-base side, and they almost all looked very very similar. None was in the air, which made the home run seem even more surprising. And third, after a few pitches, Vin Scully was stuck saying, "And another foul." Over and over again.
Levi: I love Santo, despite agreeing with nearly every word Steve says. Especially that Pat Hughes is a Saint.
Luke: I will! I will! As Levi and Stacey and Bob well know, I agree with nearly word Steve says, especially that Ron Santo is the worst color guy ever.
Bob can testify how I put my palms to my ears when, in the 9th inning of a close game, Ron has nothing to add but "Noooo!" and "Yesssss!" and "Ohhhhhh!" and "Heyyyyy!" My latest annoyance has been his tendency to start anecdotes with two outs, resulting in Pat having to say, ".... and Sammy Sosa strikes out to end the enning. We'll hear the rest of Ron's story about (nonsense unrelated to baseball) after this break."
Come the Sox series, I'll be listening to Ed and John over on AM 1000. Sometimes I even prefer to listen to the Sox game, so brilliant are Ed and John, and count on the occasional update to know how my Cubs are doing.
Steve: Amen to the Rooney and Farmer comment, but don't you think Farmer is getting a little out there at times? Sometimes he gets this "know it all" air about him that makes him a bit pretentious. Iíve learned a lot about baseball from listening to those guys. They can make the AL fun. Back to Hughes and Santo: Here's another one that might not actually have happened but might as well have.
Pat: Bases full of Cubs two outs
Ron: Uh...I..uh got a fax here from....uh....Beverly in Davenport Iowa. She loves the...uh...Cubs and wants to uh...wish...
Pat: Alou hits a drive...
Ron: Yes!!! Cmon! Yes!!
Pat: And Bonds squeezes it for out #3
Ron: No!!!!
Levi, why do you love Santo so much? Is it for the same reason every kid at the Special Olympics gets a medal? That's what's so frustrating about this hatred. No one will contradict my general assesment of the man, instead they just say stuff like "He's a legend" or try to start some argument with me about Santo being in the Hall of Fame.
Levi: I will admit to being completely bowled over--robbed of my ability to think critically--by his resolute fandom, his Charlie-Brown-worthy yo-yoing between absurd, childlike hopefulness and Dostoevskian despair, and by his (apparently) complete lack of any pretension.
Plus, he should be in the Hall of Fame.
stacey: although i concede that ron santo is an absolutely horrid baseball announcer, i really do enjoy listening to ron and pat. it's like hanging out with two great friends. one of them knows a lot about baseball, and the other one's got a french-speaking canadian dog and a Really fat cat that exercises until it is sweaty in a giant hampster ball. and they both really love the cubs.
For those of you who missed it, here's the pitch-by-pitch.
Pitch 1 - Ball
Pitch 2 - Called Strike
Pitch 3 - Ball
Pitch 4 - Foul
Pitch 5 - Foul
Pitch 6 - Foul
Pitch 7 - Foul
Pitch 8 - Foul
Pitch 9 - Foul
Pitch 10 - Foul
Pitch 11 - Foul
Pitch 12 - Foul
Pitch 13 - Foul
Pitch 14 - Foul
Pitch 15 - Foul
Pitch 16 - Foul
Pitch 17 - Foul
Pitch 18 - Home run to right field. Jason Grabowski and Alex Cora score
Because I had just watched the Cardinals game and had to get up at 5:45 the next morning to get to work early, I went to bed just before that inning. Stacey came into the bedroom early in Cora's at-bat to inform me that Cubs announcer Pat Hughes had said, "For those of you just returning from a brief vacation, Alex Cora is still at bat."
Much later--or so it seemed to my sleep-addled brain--she returned to tell me that Cora had fouled off fourteen pitches. Soon after, she sadly delivered the news of his home run. But even though she's a Matt Clement fan and was sad to see him lose the battle, she was willing to concede that it was pretty impressive.
Two other notes:
1. Is Matt Morris trying to take up Johnny Damon's slack? Check out this photo. It's not there yet, but he's on his way to turning his hideous chin friend into a real beard.
2. The comment by Pat Hughes reminds me of two great baseball radio moments I've been meaning to share with you. One is a great bit of description by Cardinals announcer Mike Shannon. Describing Matt Morris pulling up short to stop at third base, he said, "He stopped so short that if he'd been a train, he would have jackknifed the last half-dozen cars."
The second is from a discussion Ron Santo and Pat Hughes were having the other day at Wrigley. It was chilly and windy, but Pat, expecting better weather, had decided to have the crew take out the window panes that protect the announcers from the elements. Ron was on his case about it, complaining that after so many years at Wrigley, surely he knew better than to take out the windows in May. Pat peppered Ron with questions like, "So, Ron, would you say it's a pain to have these windows out?" and "So, Ron, would you say that it's an open-and-shut case?" Ron continued his rant, oblivious to the joking.
Original comments...
Levi: Baseball Prospectus has a good point about Damon's beard: he missed a chance to raise much more money for charity. He should have set up two accounts, one for keeping the beard, one for shaving it, and asked for donations to each. The one with most donations decides the fate of the greatest beard of the decade.
stacey: levi, what is the point is saying i'm a matt clement fan without linking to a photo of him? he steals my heart with his super pitching, tall socks, and super cuteness!
Luke: The at-bat reminded me of Matt Williams' great at-bat in the 1989 NLCS against the Cubs, although it was only eight foul balls. Here's an interesting write-up about it (scroll down to "Foul ball!").
"According to research by STATS Inc., each foul ball shifts the balance in favor of the batter. After Williams's fifth foul, he was the favorite over Wilson. Why? Physically, the more pitches a batter sees, the better he can adjust to movement and velocity, and therefore time his swing. There is also the psychological toll on the pitcher to consider."
There's also some talk of the precision foul ball, like the scene in "The Natural" where Hobbs tries to snipe the photographer when he's taking BP after his injury.
"The carefully aimed foul ball is a rare but potent weapon, as Richie Ashburn once discovered. The Phillies outfielder was one of the best ever at repeatedly fouling balls off to frustrate and overwork pitchers, skilled enough to lead the league four times in on-base percentage. There came a day, however, when one of Ashburn's teammates called upon him to fine-tune his fouling skills. The teammate, who was angry at his wife, implored Ashburn to hit the ball at his wife, sitting in the left-field stands. Ashburn forgot about it until he happened to spray some fouls in that general area. When his teammate yelled from the bench, "two seats over, one row back and you've got her," Ashburn hit the next ball elsewhere, drawing the line at assault.
"Ted Williams, in My Turn At Bat, confessed to an occasion when he didn't draw such a line. Maddened by one of his chronic Fenway Park hecklers, Williams tried to hit the critic with a foul ball. Since the fan sat behind third base, Williams had to go literally out of his way in his attempt, eschewing his pull-hitting instincts to aim left for several swings. He didn't hit his target, but he probably made his point.
"...
"Any discussion of foul balls must celebrate Luke Appling, the Michelangelo of the mis-hit. Appling once deliberately fouled two dozen balls into the stands to get even with his own ballclub's failure to provide free passes for a couple of his friends. Another time, he aimed at a peanut vendor who had laughed when a fan was struck by Appling's previous foul. "I'll fix him," Appling declared, then nailed him in the head; the vendor had to be carried out."
There are worse claims to fame than to be the "Michelangelo of the mis-hit."
Steve: So...ah....um....ah....who ...uh...will join me in my...uh...loathing of Ron Santo? It seems that...ah....just when I have enough ammo to spread my..uh... hatred (like when he irresponsibly crashed his car after suffering insulin shock, like when he was characterized as "despondent" after not getting into the hall of fame) he goes and becomes...um....ah.... a double amputee without a bladder. I feel like...um...Frank Grimes in that Simpsons episode. You know....the...um...the....um...the....only person I'm destroying with this..um... hatred for Santo is myself. Um....Um....Worst color guy ever! All....ah...he's good for is ....YESSS!!!!... rooting in the pressbox, kissing Sammy's ass, ("just because Sammy has struck out seven times in a row, it doesn't mean he's not seeing the ball good." He's due.) wearing Pat Hughes out about his clothes and going on ad nauseum about the attendance quiz. But God forbid YOU rather than he make a joke about one of his three toupees. Pat Hughes is a Saint.
Levi: I'm not entirely sure I believe the Luke Appling story--two dozen fouls is more than I've ever heard of anybody hitting. But I could be wrong. To do that to demonstrate irritation is a pretty hilarious reason.
Every pitch of the Cora at-bat is at MLB.com, so I got to see it. Three things stood out. First, Clement kept throwing the same pitch, to the same location, over and over. His location was right on, every time. Second, Cora hit all but one of his fouls to the first-base side, and they almost all looked very very similar. None was in the air, which made the home run seem even more surprising. And third, after a few pitches, Vin Scully was stuck saying, "And another foul." Over and over again.
Levi: I love Santo, despite agreeing with nearly every word Steve says. Especially that Pat Hughes is a Saint.
Luke: I will! I will! As Levi and Stacey and Bob well know, I agree with nearly word Steve says, especially that Ron Santo is the worst color guy ever.
Bob can testify how I put my palms to my ears when, in the 9th inning of a close game, Ron has nothing to add but "Noooo!" and "Yesssss!" and "Ohhhhhh!" and "Heyyyyy!" My latest annoyance has been his tendency to start anecdotes with two outs, resulting in Pat having to say, ".... and Sammy Sosa strikes out to end the enning. We'll hear the rest of Ron's story about (nonsense unrelated to baseball) after this break."
Come the Sox series, I'll be listening to Ed and John over on AM 1000. Sometimes I even prefer to listen to the Sox game, so brilliant are Ed and John, and count on the occasional update to know how my Cubs are doing.
Steve: Amen to the Rooney and Farmer comment, but don't you think Farmer is getting a little out there at times? Sometimes he gets this "know it all" air about him that makes him a bit pretentious. Iíve learned a lot about baseball from listening to those guys. They can make the AL fun. Back to Hughes and Santo: Here's another one that might not actually have happened but might as well have.
Pat: Bases full of Cubs two outs
Ron: Uh...I..uh got a fax here from....uh....Beverly in Davenport Iowa. She loves the...uh...Cubs and wants to uh...wish...
Pat: Alou hits a drive...
Ron: Yes!!! Cmon! Yes!!
Pat: And Bonds squeezes it for out #3
Ron: No!!!!
Levi, why do you love Santo so much? Is it for the same reason every kid at the Special Olympics gets a medal? That's what's so frustrating about this hatred. No one will contradict my general assesment of the man, instead they just say stuff like "He's a legend" or try to start some argument with me about Santo being in the Hall of Fame.
Levi: I will admit to being completely bowled over--robbed of my ability to think critically--by his resolute fandom, his Charlie-Brown-worthy yo-yoing between absurd, childlike hopefulness and Dostoevskian despair, and by his (apparently) complete lack of any pretension.
Plus, he should be in the Hall of Fame.
stacey: although i concede that ron santo is an absolutely horrid baseball announcer, i really do enjoy listening to ron and pat. it's like hanging out with two great friends. one of them knows a lot about baseball, and the other one's got a french-speaking canadian dog and a Really fat cat that exercises until it is sweaty in a giant hampster ball. and they both really love the cubs.
Labels: alex cora, cubs, dodgers, matt clement, pat hughes, ron santo, stacey shintani
Thursday, May 13, 2004
Not the Trolley Dodgers anymore
A question that could have far-reaching implications for the road trip, where we'll be seeing games on consecutive nights in cities that are several hundred miles apart: would I have a good time seeing games on consecutive nights in cities that are several thousand miles apart?
The link between the Devil Rays and the Dodgers? Why, former Devil Ray Wilson Alvarez, of course. He's the white blob on the left side of this picture, getting ready to pitch to Sammy Sosa...
You know when an at-bat is going on a long time when the scoreboard operator has enough time to type in something like this...
Cora fouled 14 times in a row, and each one was accompanied by some Little Leaguers in our section trying to start The Wave, which would peter out a couple of sections over because nobody else really cared. And then Cora hit a home run.
The answer is, yes, I had a good time, although I was pretty tired by the end of the game shortly after 10:00 Pacific time, since I had been up since 6:00 A.M. Eastern time. I'm not expecting any jet lag on the road trip. Fortunately, I didn't have to be behind the wheel to get out of the Dodger Stadium parking lots...
In the L.A. Times on Thursday morning, the headline spotlighted Alvarez (pulled after 101 pitches), but the picture is of Cora being congratulated after the at-bat that went on forever...
Levi: That's a remarkably pointless headline.
Biggest surprise for me in that game? Learning that Wilson Alvarez is in the league again, and that, despite losing some weight, he's still a very big man.
Tom Ellwanger: And at the Ranger/Devil Ray game on the afternoon of May 13, in order of perceived excitement:
1. The Rangers pitcher picked two Devil Rays players off first base, including Maura's favorite player. Per the surprisingly diplomatic Lou Piniella, no right-handed pitcher can have that good a pickoff move without balking, in this case with his knee, "but the umpires didn't see it."
2. The Rangers blew both resulting run-downs in different ways, something which nobody in the stands--all 2,600 of us--had seen since Little League. In one case, the picked off runner made second and got credit for a stolen base, producing the same result as a balk call (assuming Lou was correct).
3. The Devil Rays won the game. The starting pitcher got the win, the new-from-Durham setup man got his 95 mph fastballs close enough to the plate that people swung at them, and the closer got the save (save number 4 out of 11 total victories).
4. Raymond came down the aisle and stopped to kiss Jim's new stepmother. No photographer was around to memorialize this poignant image.
5. Jim's new stepmother wishes that Jim's father had used the ready-made excuse to pound this obnoxious mascot into the real-clay infield, but he (Jim's father) was too stunned by the entire spectacle to react that quickly.
Baseball fever! We have it in Tampa. Oh, Rocco Baldelli bobblehead doll night is next Tuesday, but I'm going to the Lightning/Flyer game.
Levi: At least with Rocco Baldelli bobblehead day, the Rays are sure they won't be faced with the ignominy of having to cancel the day because the player's in the minors again, like they were forced to do with Jason Tyner bobblehead day.
The link between the Devil Rays and the Dodgers? Why, former Devil Ray Wilson Alvarez, of course. He's the white blob on the left side of this picture, getting ready to pitch to Sammy Sosa...
You know when an at-bat is going on a long time when the scoreboard operator has enough time to type in something like this...
Cora fouled 14 times in a row, and each one was accompanied by some Little Leaguers in our section trying to start The Wave, which would peter out a couple of sections over because nobody else really cared. And then Cora hit a home run.
The answer is, yes, I had a good time, although I was pretty tired by the end of the game shortly after 10:00 Pacific time, since I had been up since 6:00 A.M. Eastern time. I'm not expecting any jet lag on the road trip. Fortunately, I didn't have to be behind the wheel to get out of the Dodger Stadium parking lots...
In the L.A. Times on Thursday morning, the headline spotlighted Alvarez (pulled after 101 pitches), but the picture is of Cora being congratulated after the at-bat that went on forever...
Original comments...
Levi: That's a remarkably pointless headline.
Biggest surprise for me in that game? Learning that Wilson Alvarez is in the league again, and that, despite losing some weight, he's still a very big man.
Tom Ellwanger: And at the Ranger/Devil Ray game on the afternoon of May 13, in order of perceived excitement:
1. The Rangers pitcher picked two Devil Rays players off first base, including Maura's favorite player. Per the surprisingly diplomatic Lou Piniella, no right-handed pitcher can have that good a pickoff move without balking, in this case with his knee, "but the umpires didn't see it."
2. The Rangers blew both resulting run-downs in different ways, something which nobody in the stands--all 2,600 of us--had seen since Little League. In one case, the picked off runner made second and got credit for a stolen base, producing the same result as a balk call (assuming Lou was correct).
3. The Devil Rays won the game. The starting pitcher got the win, the new-from-Durham setup man got his 95 mph fastballs close enough to the plate that people swung at them, and the closer got the save (save number 4 out of 11 total victories).
4. Raymond came down the aisle and stopped to kiss Jim's new stepmother. No photographer was around to memorialize this poignant image.
5. Jim's new stepmother wishes that Jim's father had used the ready-made excuse to pound this obnoxious mascot into the real-clay infield, but he (Jim's father) was too stunned by the entire spectacle to react that quickly.
Baseball fever! We have it in Tampa. Oh, Rocco Baldelli bobblehead doll night is next Tuesday, but I'm going to the Lightning/Flyer game.
Levi: At least with Rocco Baldelli bobblehead day, the Rays are sure they won't be faced with the ignominy of having to cancel the day because the player's in the minors again, like they were forced to do with Jason Tyner bobblehead day.
Labels: cubs, dodgers, game report, wilson alvarez
Wednesday, May 12, 2004
Raised on Devil Ray-dio
First and most importantly, I have solved a mystery that has been puzzling Levi ever since last July, regarding the end of a certain White Sox-Devil Rays game, captured by Levi's TiVo and replayed endlessly. The question was, what was the deal with the Devil Rays mascot, Pansy the Wuss-Wuss Fish Who Can't Keep It Up (a.k.a. Raymond), when he was jumping around with the players?
The answer is that if the Rays are behind, he spends the bottom of the ninth standing around on top of the visitors' dugout, dressed in a black shirt and mask, "disguised" as Rally Ray. Unfortunately, I was unable to get a good picture of him as he was unsuccessfully attempting to work his mojo against the Rangers on Tuesday night:
And now, more pictures:
Tropicana Field, as seen from the Interstate. It's hard to tell, but we were driving through a sudden, very brief cloudburst at this point, approximately 6:40 P.M., and that's why the city of St. Petersburg built a dome in the late 1980s.
The view from my seat, on the club level. I have to admit that this would be a very nice stadium if not for the permanent roof.
Plenty of good seats available. The official attendance was 10,389, but there were probably fewer than 7,000 people actually at the game. This is what happens when a team has lost its last five games and 12 out of its last 14, and plays a Tuesday night game against a team other than the Yankees or Red Sox, and doesn't give away some sort of promotional item. They did not play Guess the Attendance on the scoreboard.
Maura's favorite player!
The final line.
Headline in the Tampa Tribune.
Headline in the Dallas Morning News (it was a coincidence that I was changing planes not too far away from The Ballpark at Arlington...excuse me, Ameriquest Field).
Unfortunately, although the Lowry Park Zoo in Tampa has a "please touch" ray pond, since they're all the rage these days, they haven't labeled which ones are the devil rays. (Insert your own joke here, or better yet, in the comments.)
Original comments...
maura: haha, i was totally going to ask you where the picture of rocco was!! nice work, my friend, nice work. have you been to other roofed parks ever? i have never seen a baseball game indoors, and man people i know sure hate tropicana field.
maura: i am really sad about the rays this season, too, but i think i've mentioned that. sigh
Levi: I've been to a game at the Metrodome, with Stacey and Sarah Meisch and Dan Rivkin and Baggarly. We all kind of enjoyed it, although it was weird. The worst part was leaving a 65-degree sunny day to enter a 65-degree fluorescent-lit dome.
Steve: As much as I'm glad Jim was able to enjoy a trip home, (and catch an AL game in a dome) his attention to detail makes a strong case that baseball could use some contraction.
Jim: Nah, I'd have the same attention to detail even if the AL still had only eight teams. But it'll all be worth it if I get on "Super Millionaire."
Steve: I hear you on that super millionare. Will you be my phone a friend if I make it? I don't like the new "jury" lifeline. Even though they should be super brainy, I don't trust them. They are there at the producers behest no?
Labels: devil rays, game report, pansy, rangers, tropicana field
Tenderized by throwing fastballs at it repeatedly
Devil Rays pictures shortly. First, here's this, from a supermarket ad in today's Dallas Morning News:
Labels: advertising, nolan ryan
Tuesday, May 11, 2004
Nothing gold can stay
Enjoy it while you can, folks. The Boston Herald is reporting the following:
"Johnny Damon has agreed to shave his beard May 21 as part of a charity venture, but he's not going to shear his long locks of hair. The center fielder, who has 3-for-4 last night and has raised his average to .283, agreed to shave when Gillette offered to contribute $15,000 to Boston Public Library."
According to an AP story, Gillette asked Damon to pick a charity.
I guess if the beard is gonna go, might as well help support a library.
Oh, and in today's search for Damon photos, I found a forum on beards with a thread on new baseball facial hair this season. But please don't let it distract you so much that you never return here.
sandor: Damon's mom will be happy. Apparently she thinks he's no longer as cute as he used to be.
Levi: Maybe shaving is a Mother's Day gift?
Luke: If only I were a rich eccentric, because then I'd offer $15,001 to charity for him to *NOT* shave it.
"Johnny Damon has agreed to shave his beard May 21 as part of a charity venture, but he's not going to shear his long locks of hair. The center fielder, who has 3-for-4 last night and has raised his average to .283, agreed to shave when Gillette offered to contribute $15,000 to Boston Public Library."
According to an AP story, Gillette asked Damon to pick a charity.
I guess if the beard is gonna go, might as well help support a library.
Oh, and in today's search for Damon photos, I found a forum on beards with a thread on new baseball facial hair this season. But please don't let it distract you so much that you never return here.
Original comments...
sandor: Damon's mom will be happy. Apparently she thinks he's no longer as cute as he used to be.
Levi: Maybe shaving is a Mother's Day gift?
Luke: If only I were a rich eccentric, because then I'd offer $15,001 to charity for him to *NOT* shave it.
Labels: johnny damon
Sunday, May 09, 2004
Also, Jim never had a mullet
Q. What has Levi done many, many times in his life that Jim had never done until last night, at least as far as he can remember?
A. Fall asleep listening to a West Coast baseball game on the radio. True, Devil Rays announcer Paul Olden is no Jack Buck, and "edgy" news/talk station WFLA is no "classy" news/talk station KMOX, but it was a neat experience. I may have to do it more often than once every 29-1/2 years.
I actually almost turned it off once the Angels scored five runs in the seventh inning, but decided to stay up for updates on the Rangers-Tigers game which ended up being won by Texas 16-15 in the 10th inning. I also wondered idly how many times in his Devil Rays broadcasting career Paul Olden has had to say something like, "Things have gone bad for the Rays," as he did a couple of times during the last inning and a half last night.
Levi: I bet he has had to say that about as often as Bob Uecker, despite it being only April, has had to dig for topics of discussion during a blowout.
Tom Ellwanger: Well, at least they were competitive for 7 innings. Make that 6-1/2.
Levi: I have to admit that I'm impressed the D-Rays have a radio affiliate. Remember a few seasons ago when the Expos, at the worst point of their mismanagement, had no English-language radio broadcasts?
Actually, the Devil Rays are much better off than the Expos. First, they're outhitting Barry Bonds, at least. And second, they're averaging on the season more fans per game than the Expos drew in total for their three weeekend games against St. Louis.
A. Fall asleep listening to a West Coast baseball game on the radio. True, Devil Rays announcer Paul Olden is no Jack Buck, and "edgy" news/talk station WFLA is no "classy" news/talk station KMOX, but it was a neat experience. I may have to do it more often than once every 29-1/2 years.
I actually almost turned it off once the Angels scored five runs in the seventh inning, but decided to stay up for updates on the Rangers-Tigers game which ended up being won by Texas 16-15 in the 10th inning. I also wondered idly how many times in his Devil Rays broadcasting career Paul Olden has had to say something like, "Things have gone bad for the Rays," as he did a couple of times during the last inning and a half last night.
Original comments...
Levi: I bet he has had to say that about as often as Bob Uecker, despite it being only April, has had to dig for topics of discussion during a blowout.
Tom Ellwanger: Well, at least they were competitive for 7 innings. Make that 6-1/2.
Levi: I have to admit that I'm impressed the D-Rays have a radio affiliate. Remember a few seasons ago when the Expos, at the worst point of their mismanagement, had no English-language radio broadcasts?
Actually, the Devil Rays are much better off than the Expos. First, they're outhitting Barry Bonds, at least. And second, they're averaging on the season more fans per game than the Expos drew in total for their three weeekend games against St. Louis.
Labels: angels, devil rays, paul olden, radio
Saturday, May 08, 2004
Report from the Tampa Bay area
As you come down the escalator toward baggage claim at Tampa International Airport, there are these big LCD screens that list all the current incoming flights and their assigned baggage carousels. But there's a panel in the middle that the airport uses to welcome whatever convention, group, or Mafia den is coming to town. Friday afternoon, it read "LIGHTNING VS. PHILADELPHIA FLYERS, SAT. & MON./Devil Rays vs. Texas Rangers, Tues., Wed. Thurs." Nice to know not everyone has hockey fever; however, I have a feeling that very few of the people coming into the airport on Friday afternoon are going to be at any one of those Devil Rays games. But I will.
Labels: devil rays, tampa
Friday, May 07, 2004
Bodily functions
Well, the demand from some quarters has been so high that I have to make sure you know about how Moises Alou, who doesn't use batting gloves, toughens his hands.
According to an item a ways down in this column, he pees on them.
So don't hi-five him. And when he comes to the plate, shout, "Hey, Ol' Pee-Hands!" Sounds very 19th-century.
Oh, and on the topic of waste, here's Barry Bonds's take on the Spider-Man controversy:
"What the [bleep] are you asking me for? I don't care. Our job is to play ball, not to worry about what ad is on the billboard. I don't care. They can have [bleepin'] dog-poo as bases so I have to step in [bleep] as far as I'm concerned. What the hell."
As Redbird Nation, where I found the quote, says: It's easy to hate Bonds, but it's hard to hate his incorrigible Bondsness.
Actually, we probably shouldn't spread the idea of dog-poo bases. I wouldn't put it past Selig, if someone in the dog-poo industry offered him money. King Kaufman at Salon is at his best today on this topic.
According to an item a ways down in this column, he pees on them.
So don't hi-five him. And when he comes to the plate, shout, "Hey, Ol' Pee-Hands!" Sounds very 19th-century.
Oh, and on the topic of waste, here's Barry Bonds's take on the Spider-Man controversy:
"What the [bleep] are you asking me for? I don't care. Our job is to play ball, not to worry about what ad is on the billboard. I don't care. They can have [bleepin'] dog-poo as bases so I have to step in [bleep] as far as I'm concerned. What the hell."
As Redbird Nation, where I found the quote, says: It's easy to hate Bonds, but it's hard to hate his incorrigible Bondsness.
Actually, we probably shouldn't spread the idea of dog-poo bases. I wouldn't put it past Selig, if someone in the dog-poo industry offered him money. King Kaufman at Salon is at his best today on this topic.
Labels: advertising, barry bonds, King Kaufman, moises alou, spider-man
Thursday, May 06, 2004
Step on Schpidah!
Certainly Major League Baseball couldn't possibly be trying to get people to hate them a little less.
Oh, wait, surprisingly, they are, although it's a little unclear whether MLB or Sony backed off first.
Levi: That's good, because much as I love Spider-Man, I was about to call Alistair Smythe and ask how much he would charge to make a new Spider-Slayer.
Jim: And I was hoping I'd be able to get all the way through the lyrics to They Might Be Giants' "Spider." I guess I still might.
Oh, wait, surprisingly, they are, although it's a little unclear whether MLB or Sony backed off first.
Original comments...
Levi: That's good, because much as I love Spider-Man, I was about to call Alistair Smythe and ask how much he would charge to make a new Spider-Slayer.
Jim: And I was hoping I'd be able to get all the way through the lyrics to They Might Be Giants' "Spider." I guess I still might.
Labels: advertising, spider-man
"There was about the same similarity between the leagues"
The Library of Congress has on its web site a selection of Spalding Base Ball Guides from 1889 to 1939.
The title quote is from the "Editorial Comment" article near the front of the 1939 guide, which ends with the statement "The new century begins with the promise of a rare battle in the younger league, and with just as good a one to establish supremacy in the older. May the best club win, and then the battle for the one grand championship which will settle all—for another year."
The title quote is from the "Editorial Comment" article near the front of the 1939 guide, which ends with the statement "The new century begins with the promise of a rare battle in the younger league, and with just as good a one to establish supremacy in the older. May the best club win, and then the battle for the one grand championship which will settle all—for another year."
Labels: baseball books
Much more music every morning
Apple allowed me to redownload "The Ballad of John Rocker" this morning, after, no doubt, everyone on the Cupertino campus shared a laugh about the bizarre assortment of downloads in that one particular batch of songs.
Unfortunately, none of the songs that have been mentioned in the comments to my May 3 post about baseball music are available in the iTunes Music Store. They do have some Dan Bern albums, but not the one containing "Gamblin' With My Love (Pete Rose)."
Jon Solomon: Here are some more links:
http://www.dancingaboutarc.com/lists/baseballlist.html
http://www.nwfolk.com/songlists/baseball.html
http://chicoescuela1.tripod.com/Index.htm
Jon
Unfortunately, none of the songs that have been mentioned in the comments to my May 3 post about baseball music are available in the iTunes Music Store. They do have some Dan Bern albums, but not the one containing "Gamblin' With My Love (Pete Rose)."
Original comments...
Jon Solomon: Here are some more links:
http://www.dancingaboutarc.com/lists/baseballlist.html
http://www.nwfolk.com/songlists/baseball.html
http://chicoescuela1.tripod.com/Index.htm
Jon
Labels: music
A man's word is his Bonds
There's some interesting back-and-forth between Levi and Steve in the comments related to Levi's May 4 post about Barry Bonds. Unfortunately, the display of those comments gets truncated at a certain point, it looks like, and I probably won't have a chance to try to fix the problem until at least May 13 because I'll be too busy watching the Devil Rays, among other activities.
So for now, here's Steve's final comment in its entirety:
Levi: I'll take it.
Now I just have to not fret that Bonds is hitting in the .270s this week.
So for now, here's Steve's final comment in its entirety:
Well Levi, you may be on to something with your Bonds-fawning but more on that in a moment. Back to the steroid scandal, I am less willing to offer a benefit of the doubt than you. In a court of law one is innocent until proven guilty but in the court of public opinion I think there is more than enough circumstantial evidence to implicate Bonds through his close association with already indicted people.
I contend Bonds was juiced up and hit 73 primarily as a result of this. His previous career high HR was 49 the year before. You contend he dedicated himself to changing his game and powering the ball out of the stadium. The next year he only hit 46HR-- why the drop off? First he played in 10 less games. One remarkable fact I have learned thanks to this discussion is that Bonds has never played 162 games in a season. He played in 143 the years before and after the 73HR. The year after Bonds hit 73 HR his IBB almost doubled, and he walked 21 more times (in 10 less games) Clearly I can't make my case that Bonds was juiced based on statistical evidence. He is a remarkable player. Let's run down some of your other points.
Regarding the segregation of baseball. Bonds does have the advantage of playing against the best players in the entire world. In a functional sense, one might argue that the integration of baseball MUST have led to league expansion because it could absorb better players. Still, baseball was integrated in 1947 and didn't expand until 1962 (15 years) I still contend this is, at best, a wash. However, one argument that would support your point in a twisted sense is the way in which Latin players are essentially farmed. Back in Ruth's day there weren't baseball colonies gathering in countless youngsters and signing them to contracts when they are in there early teens. In that sense, the players may be of better quality because they've made an industry out of it.
As talk turns to league contraction it's clear that many players in today's game don't belong on major league rosters. I would argue the nature of specialization is really there to protect the superstars. Middle relievers are the baseball equivalent of cannon fodder. They go out there and they soak up innings. They aren't good enough to start and they aren't good enough to close. If it weren't for the fact that there are so many teams you might well have a league full of Curt Schillings ready to go the distance against the Bonds' of the world. In terms of closers, there are certainly a few world-beaters, Gagne, Smoltz, Eck, Rivera. But for every one of those guys there's a head case with a big heater. Maybe it's just me but I think baseball has become much more of a psychological sport. Why is it that 32 teams don't have 32 awesome closers? It's because pitching in that context is much more mental than physical. I think 90% of hitters have a clear advantage when they are going up against a "closer" in the 90s
On your point about travel, you've certainly got me there but regarding day v night games the Giants play the second most amount of day games in baseball (or at least they used to). And, if you listen to the Cubs, playing baseball in the day is harder because you have less time to "adjust" ie. sleep off the hangover. The players of Ruth's era worked hard, played harder and then went back to work.
The parks of the old days all had their quirks but in general were much bigger than the parks of today. Sure if you can hit the porch in Tiger Stadium you are not necessarily bad-ass but if you hit a ball to dead center in the Polo Grounds you better hope you and your 4-lb bat got every bit of it.
In context, Bonds stands head and shoulders above most of league but I think A-Rod or Manny Ramirez are probably as good as he is. Of course, the trick is to put together a career of these mind-boggling numbers. It is remarkable that Bonds seems to be improving with age. 73HR is a gaudy number but I honestly think it will be broken again. It won't linger there for 30+ years like Maris. Again, compared to the rest of league, Ruth definitely stands out more than Bonds. It's too bad Gould passed or we might beg him to turn his analysis to this question. Do you know anyone at Stats? Gould may have a point but I still say, more pitchers, smaller ballparks, better nutrition and better equipment make hitting less of an art than it was in the old days. Bonds has clearly reduced it to a science. He is the MJ of baseball. I would say Ruth is more like Wilt Chamberlain. And I still think he sets the standards by which other players must be judged.
I've enjoyed this lively debate and in the spirit of our baseball wagers of years past I have one for you (but it doesn't involve fellatio) If Bonds hits .400 this year (based on the minimum number of plate appearances to qualify for the batting title) I will 1) concede your point that he is better than Ruth and 2) treat you and your wife to a baseball game at a minor league stadium of your choosing within a 90 mile radius of your home. I think that covers Schaumburg (big whoop), Kane County, Gary, Joliet, Beloit and maybe another one that is slipping my mind. If Bonds fails to hit .400, I want 12 bottles of any (1) of these beers: PBR, Special Export or Old Style. Good luck.
Original comments...
Levi: I'll take it.
Now I just have to not fret that Bonds is hitting in the .270s this week.
Labels: barry bonds
Wednesday, May 05, 2004
Schpidah! (he is our hero)
Certainly Major League Baseball couldn't possibly do anything else that would make people hate them even more.
No, wait, they could.
This was called to my attention by my fellow captioner Joe, who points out that one thing he doesn't like about NASCAR is that you don't know which ad you're supposed to be looking at at any given moment.
By the way, it looks like if the total length of the comments to a post goes beyond a certain point, the display will just be truncated, although the text is apparently saved somewhere (all comments get e-mailed to me, and I got Steve's latest Barry Bonds missive in its entirety, so I do know the terms of the bet he's proposing with Levi). I may try to poke around and see if I can figure out if there's a way to get the length limit.
Levi: Jim-- It could just be me, because I have been involved in the discussion, but I was actually thinking that the discussion Steve and I were having, if it's okay with him, might be interesting enough to make an actual post out of. Is there a way you can do that with what you've been emailed? Or--again, if it's okay with Steve--just post the entirety of his latest comment, with a reference to the location of the rest of the discussion?
Levi
thatbob: What seems really weird to me about the Spider-Man advertising is MLB's assertion that, by accepting these ads, they will themselves be reaching a younger target demographic. They seem to have the programmer/advertiser roles reversed, as if more teenagers would watch 60 Minutes if they could only land a Mountain Dew advertising campaign. And by this logic - MLB seeks to horn on on Spider-Man's young fanbase - MLB should be paying Columbia Pictures and Marvel Comics for the right to appropriate Spidey images - not the other way around.
So how could this possibly work? Are there thought to be little Spider-Man fans running around who are going to ask dad to make sure to get ball tickets on Spider-Man day? And then, after watching a game, become long time fans? If so, then "Excelsior!" I wish them luck.
See, I think Spider-Man and Sponge Bob gate promotions and merchandising actually make some sense. I wouldn't mind a Spidey bobblehead in a Cubs uniform (though it's probably asking too much to think Peter Parker would be anything but a Mets fan). But that's no reason to start cluttering up the field of gameplay.
In other words, their cluttering up the field of gameplay has nothing to do with attracting a youth audience at all, but is really an ends in itself. Motor oil, prescription drug, and automobile ads are certainly on their way.
Levi: The Sox director of media relations said they hadn't yet decided how much they are going to get into this--the participating home teams have some leeway (Which, I think, is a good sign that this is a stupid, stupid idea.). She said, "We'll make our decision based on how much it enhances the fan experience."
Let's see. How much do silly, annoying ads enhance the fan experience? Zero. So I guess they won't have anything out there at all.
Also, this is in direct contravention of the rules, which specify white canvas bags and white rubber for the mound.
Finally, if you're the Spider-Man promo people, how do you decide that this is a good use of your money? Are you looking ahead to the controversy and all the publicity? Or do you really think little ads on the bases are a good way to get the word out to the right people?
sandor: The only people I see as being at all an audience for these silly ads are the players themselves. The ads themselves are so small no fan -- save the occasional intruder -- will be able to see them. I'm imagining a situation where a player gets on first base, idles around a bit while the pitcher warms up, looks down and sees the ad, and says to the first baseman, "You don't anything tonight? Wanna catch the new Spider-man?"
sandor: Obviously that's supposed to be "You doin' anything tonight? ..."
Jim: Memo to players and umpires for that weekend's games: "More close plays at first base." That will allow the TV cameras to get a good view of the ads during incessant slow-motion replays.
Steve: What upsets me most about this is how cynical it is. The justification is that they need to attact a new fans. How are they going to skew young just because kids see their favorite movie characters on the bases? Who the hell sees the top of second base anyway? Here's a few ideas to really attract younger fans:
1) more affordable tickets
2) playoff and world series games that don't end until after midnight
3) make players sign more autographs
4) pick up the pace because even for a fan, three + hours of baseball can be boring.
Levi: Steve--you're right on. The only thing they're doing on this list is speeding up games--and even that, they're doing half-assed. Games are getting shorter, but not much, and they're not taking the couple of immediately available steps they could to improve things.
I think of it like this: I like to see a lot of _innings_ of baseball. Not a lot of _hours_ of baseball. The faster, the better.
No, wait, they could.
This was called to my attention by my fellow captioner Joe, who points out that one thing he doesn't like about NASCAR is that you don't know which ad you're supposed to be looking at at any given moment.
By the way, it looks like if the total length of the comments to a post goes beyond a certain point, the display will just be truncated, although the text is apparently saved somewhere (all comments get e-mailed to me, and I got Steve's latest Barry Bonds missive in its entirety, so I do know the terms of the bet he's proposing with Levi). I may try to poke around and see if I can figure out if there's a way to get the length limit.
Original comments...
Levi: Jim-- It could just be me, because I have been involved in the discussion, but I was actually thinking that the discussion Steve and I were having, if it's okay with him, might be interesting enough to make an actual post out of. Is there a way you can do that with what you've been emailed? Or--again, if it's okay with Steve--just post the entirety of his latest comment, with a reference to the location of the rest of the discussion?
Levi
thatbob: What seems really weird to me about the Spider-Man advertising is MLB's assertion that, by accepting these ads, they will themselves be reaching a younger target demographic. They seem to have the programmer/advertiser roles reversed, as if more teenagers would watch 60 Minutes if they could only land a Mountain Dew advertising campaign. And by this logic - MLB seeks to horn on on Spider-Man's young fanbase - MLB should be paying Columbia Pictures and Marvel Comics for the right to appropriate Spidey images - not the other way around.
So how could this possibly work? Are there thought to be little Spider-Man fans running around who are going to ask dad to make sure to get ball tickets on Spider-Man day? And then, after watching a game, become long time fans? If so, then "Excelsior!" I wish them luck.
See, I think Spider-Man and Sponge Bob gate promotions and merchandising actually make some sense. I wouldn't mind a Spidey bobblehead in a Cubs uniform (though it's probably asking too much to think Peter Parker would be anything but a Mets fan). But that's no reason to start cluttering up the field of gameplay.
In other words, their cluttering up the field of gameplay has nothing to do with attracting a youth audience at all, but is really an ends in itself. Motor oil, prescription drug, and automobile ads are certainly on their way.
Levi: The Sox director of media relations said they hadn't yet decided how much they are going to get into this--the participating home teams have some leeway (Which, I think, is a good sign that this is a stupid, stupid idea.). She said, "We'll make our decision based on how much it enhances the fan experience."
Let's see. How much do silly, annoying ads enhance the fan experience? Zero. So I guess they won't have anything out there at all.
Also, this is in direct contravention of the rules, which specify white canvas bags and white rubber for the mound.
Finally, if you're the Spider-Man promo people, how do you decide that this is a good use of your money? Are you looking ahead to the controversy and all the publicity? Or do you really think little ads on the bases are a good way to get the word out to the right people?
sandor: The only people I see as being at all an audience for these silly ads are the players themselves. The ads themselves are so small no fan -- save the occasional intruder -- will be able to see them. I'm imagining a situation where a player gets on first base, idles around a bit while the pitcher warms up, looks down and sees the ad, and says to the first baseman, "You don't anything tonight? Wanna catch the new Spider-man?"
sandor: Obviously that's supposed to be "You doin' anything tonight? ..."
Jim: Memo to players and umpires for that weekend's games: "More close plays at first base." That will allow the TV cameras to get a good view of the ads during incessant slow-motion replays.
Steve: What upsets me most about this is how cynical it is. The justification is that they need to attact a new fans. How are they going to skew young just because kids see their favorite movie characters on the bases? Who the hell sees the top of second base anyway? Here's a few ideas to really attract younger fans:
1) more affordable tickets
2) playoff and world series games that don't end until after midnight
3) make players sign more autographs
4) pick up the pace because even for a fan, three + hours of baseball can be boring.
Levi: Steve--you're right on. The only thing they're doing on this list is speeding up games--and even that, they're doing half-assed. Games are getting shorter, but not much, and they're not taking the couple of immediately available steps they could to improve things.
I think of it like this: I like to see a lot of _innings_ of baseball. Not a lot of _hours_ of baseball. The faster, the better.
Labels: advertising, spider-man
Fan reaction
At last night's Cubs game, the notoriously impatient Corey Patterson received a loud outburst of cheering and applause from Section 528 when he took a ball on the first pitch, something very few of us had ever seen him do.
Later in that at-bat, though, when he swung and missed at a terrible curveball out of the strike zone, he got roundly booed by the same large group.
But he righted the balance on the Corey-o-Meter later by receiving a standing ovation from our section for taking a walk.
As the scoreboard graphic of a phantom gliding down to first at the Metrodome will tell you, "Walks will haunt." If only the Cubs--who seem to understand it on the pitching side--could realize that they are capable of doing some haunting themselves.
Or, for the sake of my Cardinals, maybe it's best that they don't.
Later in that at-bat, though, when he swung and missed at a terrible curveball out of the strike zone, he got roundly booed by the same large group.
But he righted the balance on the Corey-o-Meter later by receiving a standing ovation from our section for taking a walk.
As the scoreboard graphic of a phantom gliding down to first at the Metrodome will tell you, "Walks will haunt." If only the Cubs--who seem to understand it on the pitching side--could realize that they are capable of doing some haunting themselves.
Or, for the sake of my Cardinals, maybe it's best that they don't.
Labels: corey patterson, cubs, walks haunt
Tuesday, May 04, 2004
Return of The Shooter
I just remembered: I dreamed last night that I met Rod Beck at Simon's! He was sitting at the bar, in street clothes, having a Schlitz. He was as shaggy as usual, but he'd added a Burl Ives-style beard, of all things. Didn't look too good on him.
We talked for a minute about baseball. I was polite and didn't ask him about the unspecified personal problems that have kept him off the Padres roster since late in Spring Training.
It was a pleasant dream. Here's wishing The Shooter well in dealing with whatever he's going through. I want to see that arm dangle again, preferably while he's shutting down, say, Houston.
We talked for a minute about baseball. I was polite and didn't ask him about the unspecified personal problems that have kept him off the Padres roster since late in Spring Training.
It was a pleasant dream. Here's wishing The Shooter well in dealing with whatever he's going through. I want to see that arm dangle again, preferably while he's shutting down, say, Houston.
Player A and Player B
One of my favorite of the games played by Rob Neyer in his column is comparing unnamed Player A with unnamed Player B.
Today, we're going to play that game--but I'll make it easier for you. Player A is Barry Lamar Bonds.
Barry Bonds so far this season:
HR BB BA OBP SLG
10 44 .463 .704 1.111
Player B so far this season:
HR BB BA OBP SLG
14 55 .216 .268 .308
Sure, Player B's counting numbers are impressive--but the discrepancy between the huge number of walks and home runs and the low on-base percentage and slugging percentage surely have tipped you off that I'm being intentionally misleading.
Player B is not a single player. It's the Montreal Expos. They've needed 903 plate appearances to compile those numbers.
Barry Bonds has needed only 98.
Barring injury, he's going to break his own record of 198 walks. While doing that, he's going to pass Rickey Henderson for most walks all-time. He's going to break his own intentional walk record of 64.
And I'll say it on the record: he's going to hit .400.
Baggarly, I hope the circus of a .400 season will help compensate for boredom of covering the suprising wreckage of the Giants team in general. We're watching Babe Ruth here, only far, far more impressive in context. I don't expect ever to see his like again. We should watch him every chance we get.
Steve: Far more impressive than Babe Ruth?!??! This is a joke right? Let's start with the obvious... 154 game season and only eight teams (that's right eight) in the AL. No one will ever convince me that the overall quality of the players was not better in those days. 97mph fastball or no, back in the 30s Farnsworth is running a drill press....
Now for some less tangible but no less important factors that contribute to Bonds' success. First, if I wear enough body armor to win a walk on part in Lord of the Rings, I'd feel pretty good about standing on the plate too. Oh for a spunky manager to tell his pitcher to back Bonds off the plate. You think the managers and pitchers of yore would give two shits about Bonds superstar status? They'd pitch him inside until he backed up or suffered a season ending hand injury...oh wait. Still, I can't wait to see Clemens pitch to Bonds this year.
Back to the point-- between a juiced baseball and a juiced player that 73 will have an asterisk next to it some day. From 49 to 73 is very Brady Anderson-esque. Sure, Babe Ruth was on the sauce and he had a little more protection in the lineup but his OBP and his slugging % are still better than Bonds. Bonds is one of the best players of all time and he is deserving of accolades but has too many negatives to be worthy of all the hyperbole you like to shower him with.
Levi: Leaving aside the steroids question, since there's no definite evidence against Bonds, and leaving aside the juiced ball question, since test after test has been done of the ball and found little to no difference between balls of today and balls of previous years (Even in the weird power year of 1987, there was no difference.), here are the important points I think are in Bonds's favor in an argument against Ruth:
1) Ruth never had to face black players. This is, clearly, a biggie. As a pitcher, he never would have had to face Bonds. As a hitter, he never would have had to face a pitcher like Bob Gibson or a fielder like Ozzie Smith.
2) Ruth never had to face Latin or Asian players. He never had to hit against a Pedro Martinez or Byung-Hung Kim or Hideo Nomo.
3) Ruth had less travel, fewer places. Yes, it was by train, so the trips were longer, but he was only having to travel in the Northeast. That's got to be easier.
4) The number of ballplayers has grown, certainly, but the growth--even if you add in athletes stolen away by other sports--hasn't come close to keeping up with the increase in the U.S. population in that period. Add in the worldwide scouting that teams do now, and we have far, far more than four times as many people available from which to cull not quite four times as many ballplayers.
4) Ruth never had to face ace relievers, working fully rested. Instead, because starters threw complete games, he got to face tired starters far more often than does Bonds. Starters were probably less tired in the ninth than they are now, because they're more used to pitching far into the game and because--as interviews with old-time pitchers will tell you--they, for the most part, didn't have to work as hard as starters today. They state clearly that they didn't have to be at full intensity on every pitch. Now, when a garden-variety shortstop is strong enough to tie a game with one swing, pitchers are forced to concentrate more closely on every single pitch, and that wears out a pitcher more. Still, that doesn't compensate for the difference between even a good starter in the 9th and a rested Billy Wagner or John Smoltz who's able to throw as hard as possible, knowing he only has to throw twenty pitches or so.
5) Ruth didn't play many night games. It's generally acknowledged that hitting at night is a bit more difficult than hitting in full daylight.
6) Ruth played half his games in a ballpark that is very favorable to left-handed hitters. Bonds plays half his games in one of the hardest parks for any hitter in the majors. Ruth, in general, played on the road in bigger parks than Bonds, did, to be fair.
7) Pitchers facing Ruth didn't have the wealth of information available that pitchers facing Bonds have. Pitchers facing Bonds can, if they want, quickly watch every atbat he's had this year. The converse is true, of course: Ruth couldn't scout pitchers in advance the way Bonds can. But, given Ruth's character and reputation as not the hardest worker, can you see him doing much of that?
8) True, Ruth didn't have body armor. And the thing Bonds wears on his elbow is absurd and should be stopped by the league--it's over the top. But at least a few other players employ equally absurd devices (Craig Biggio, for example), yet they don't seem to get the same results, or even anywhere near the same results.
9) Stephen Jay Gould's best writing about baseball was about the disappearance of the .400 hitter. I can't remember now which book it was in, but he argued that baseball, as a fairly consistent system (no insane rules changes), shows the characteristics of any system over time: variation decreases, and things settle around a norm, with far fewer extreme outliers. He buttressed his argument with evidence like the decrease in the number of absurdly good or absurdly bad teams, the decrease in the number of hitters who stood head and shoulders above or below the league, and the same with pitchers. I can't do his argument justice right here, but it was convincing, and the conclusion was that achievements remarkably greater (or worse--see 2003 Detroit Tigers) than everyone else are far more difficult these days than they used to be.
That's just off the top of my head, but I think that's quite a few points directly in Bonds's favor. The only true advantages that Bonds has that Ruth didn't are the smaller road parks (an advantage that disappears if you look, as you should, at the relationship of the achievement to the league norms) and the tremendous advances in our understanding of nutrition and physical fitness since Ruth's time. I've read about Bonds's workout regimen. It's insane. Other players who've tried it for even a few days have dropped out, exhausted. Maybe Ruth would have adhered to a similar regimen if he were to play today; he sure wasn't known for taking care of himself, but you really never know what such an amazingly talented person would do under different circumstances.
The real question is, is what Bonds is doing, relative to the league, as impressive as what Ruth did, relative to his league? On the face of it, it's clearly not. The year Ruth hit 54 homers, only two other _teams_ even had that many. But I think all the arugments you're making, Steve, when really looked at, turn around and support Bonds. Maybe they don't entirely close the gap--Ruth was an unbelievable player, and I would love to have seen him hit--but I think they clearly make the comparison worth thinking about. And if Bonds finishes the year with numbers even remotely like this--at age 41--I'll be serious that he's better than Ruth.
Levi: Oh, and a couple of other things:
1) While advanced nutrition techniques and physical fitness regimes have benefitted hitters much more than pitchers, they have benefitted pitchers (and fielders) some, too. The fielders today are almost certainly better than in the old days, on average, for reasons ranging from the established fact that people in developed countries are faster, quicker, bigger, and stronger than they were 75 years ago to the better and larger gloves fielders use. Even such a great play as Willie Mays's catch of Vic Wertz's line drive in the 1954 World Series doesn't look _that_ impressive these days. I really believe I've seen plays just as good, by guys who aren't even that well known for their fielding.
2) One advantage Bonds has that Ruth didn't, but would definitely have made use of: thin-handled, scoop-ended bats. The understanding of the physics of bat speed has been crucial to the increase in power in the past decades. Look at the bats on ESPN Classic even in the 1980s. They're giant and unwieldy.
3) Ruth, too, played most of his hitting career in a high-offense era. He largely created that era with his understanding of how to hit, and he stood head and shoulders above it, but he did benefit from other changes that other hitters benefitted from, too, like the introduction of a truly livelier ball and the more frequent substitution of new balls into play (following the death of Ray Chapman on a pitch where he didn't seem to see the dirty, beat-up baseball at all).
4) The bit about 49 homers to 73 is, I assume, a steroids reference. Again, I suppose it's possible. But from what I've seen since Bonds began hitting more home runs, it's been largely because he has become even more selective than he was as a younger player, he's taking more of an uppercut swing, and his swing has shortened considerably since his younger days. The shortened swing could be argued as a reflection of the benefits of steroids, if it turns out he's on them, and you could even say his selectivity would benefit from the quicker hands and wrists that steroid-assisted strength might add. But in the absence of evidence, I'll stay with the argument that Bonds decided, following Sosa/McGwire in 1998, to hit more home runs, and he adjusted his swing and approach accordingly.
Levi: Re-reading my post, I agree that I shouldn't have said "far, far more impressive."
I think it's more impressive, but the emphatic additions were probably too much.
Steve: We'll continue this tomorrow. You have many good points, some of which I was going to deploy (especially the nutrition angle) As I sign off for the day however I want to start with this. I'm a little troubled by the subtle undertones of this statement....
1) Ruth never had to face black players. This is, clearly, a biggie. As a pitcher, he never would have had to face Bonds.....Ruth never had to face Latin or Asian players. He never had to hit against a Pedro Martinez or Byung-Hung Kim or Hideo Nomo.
I don't really see what race has to do with it. I think the league was small enough that even though it segregated against many deserving players, this did very little to alter the overall talent pool. If there were players from different races in the league do you really think it would have made a noticable difference spread out over an entire career? Anyway, Bob Gibson would have backed Bonds off the plate, too.
A guy stood at the plate with a heavy-ass bat, hung over and sweating booze in his flannels and made it happen. It's kind of like you and your little glove from intramurals. I'm surprised you ever caught anything with that. That you could do it 99% of the time made me respect your skills as a fielder. You didn't need fancy equipment and to this subjective observer I would say that glove was even a handicap. You weren't basket catching anything. You understood the fundamentals of how to catch a ball, rarely practiced but were ,daresay, a natural. That's what I'm getting at stats or no (stats which I think still support my arguments) Bonds is a robot but Ruth was a giant. It's like preferring Kraftwerk to Hank Williams or Woody Guthrie. Digital v analog. Cats v dogs. Two different things and we'll get to the steroids tomorrow but I think you are being a little Scalia-esque with the level of proof you seem to require.
Levi: I agree with your assertion (and I am pleased by the compliment to my fielding. Go small gloves!): Ruth really did tower over the field. It's indisputable.
The reason that the absence of black, Latino, or Asian players is important is not that they are black, Latino, or Asian: it's that their absence means that the league was manifestly _not_ composed of the best available players, let alone the best available athletes. Maybe it was composed of most of the best available. Maybe even 80% or 90%. But there is no argument that can convince me that excluding 10-15% of the US population (let alone the world population) from consideration on grounds that have nothing to do with talent will result in a league with an overall talent level as high as the one we have now, where teams--for all the biases they're still working with--are looking for the best baseball players, worldwide, with no other considerations.
It's not about race, per se. It's about cutting off a source of talent. What galls about it is that the exclusion was based on race, certainly, but for this argument, that's not the important part of the point.
Steve: Well Levi, you may be on to something with your Bonds-fawning but more on that in a moment. Back to the steroid scandal, I am less willing to offer a benefit of the doubt than you. In a court of law one is innocent until proven guilty but in the court of public opinion I think there is more than enough circumstantial evidence to implicate Bonds through his close association with already indicted people.
I contend Bonds was juiced up and hit 73 primarily as a result of this. His previous career high HR was 49 the year before. You contend he dedicated himself to changing his game and powering the ball out of the stadium. The next year he only hit 46HR-- why the drop off? First he played in 10 less games. One remarkable fact I have learned thanks to this discussion is that Bonds has never played 162 games in a season. He played in 143 the years before and after the 73HR. The year after Bonds hit 73 HR his IBB almost doubled, and he walked 21 more times (in 10 less games) Clearly I can't make my case that Bonds was juiced based on statistical evidence. He is a remarkable player. Let's run down some of your other points.
Regarding the segregation of baseball. Bonds does have the advantage of playing against the best players in the entire world. In a functional sense, one might argue that the integration of baseball MUST have led to league expansion because it could absorb better players. Still, baseball was integrated in 1947 and didn't expand until 1962 (15 years) I still contend this is, at best, a wash. However, one argument that would support your point in a twisted sense is the way in which Latin players are essentially farmed. Back in Ruth's day there weren't baseball colonies gathering in countless youngsters and signing them to contracts when they are in there early teens. In that sense, the players may be of better quality because they've made an industry out of it.
As talk turns to league contraction it's clear that many players in today's game don't belong on major league rosters. I would argue the nature of specialization is really there to protect the superstars. Middle relievers are the baseball equivalent of cannon fodder. They go out there and they soak up innings. They aren't good enough to start and they aren't good enough to close. If it weren't for the fact that there are so many teams you might well have a league full of Curt Schillings ready to go the distance against the Bonds' of the world. In terms of closers, there are certainly a few world-beaters, Gagne, Smoltz, Eck, Rivera. But for every one of those guys there's a head case with a big heater. Maybe it's just me but I think baseball has become much more of a psychological sport. Why is it that 32 teams don't have 32 awesome closers? It's because pitching in that context is much more mental than physical. I think 90% of hitters have a clear advantage when they are going up against a "closer" in the 90s
On your point about travel, you've certainly got me there but regarding day v night games the Giants play the second most amount of day games in baseball (or at least they used to). And, if you listen to the Cubs, playing baseball in the day is harder because you have less time to "adjust" ie. sleep off the hangover. The players of Ruth's era worked hard, played harder and then went back to work.
The parks of the old days all had their quirks but in general were much bigger than the parks of today. Sure if you can hit the porch in Tiger Stadium you are not necessarily bad-ass but if you hit a ball to dead center in the Polo Grounds you better hope you and your 4-lb bat got every bit of it.
In context, Bonds stands head and shoulders above most of league but I think A-Rod or Manny Ramirez are probably as good as he is. Of course, the trick is to put together a career of these mind-boggling numbers. It is remarkable that Bonds seems to be improving with age. 73HR is a gaudy number but I honestly think it will be broken again. It won't linger there for 30+ years like Maris. Again, compared to the rest of league, Ruth definitely stands out more than Bonds. It's too bad Gould passed or we might beg him to turn his analysis to this question. Do you know anyone at Stats? Gould may have a point but I still say, more pitchers, smaller ballparks, better nutrition and better equipment make hitting less of an art than it was in the old days. Bonds has clearly reduced it to a science. He is the MJ of baseball. I would say Ruth is more like Wilt Chamberlain. And I still think he sets the standards by which other players must be judged.
I've enjoyed this lively debate and in the spirit of our baseball wagers of years past I have one for you (but it doesn't involve fellatio) If Bonds hits .400 this year (based on the minimum number of plate appearances to qualify for the batting title) I will 1) concede your point that he is better than Ruth and 2) treat you and your wife to a baseball game at a minor league stadium of your choosing within a 90 mile radius of your home. I think that covers Schaumburg (big whoop), Kane County, Gary, Joliet, Beloit and maybe another one that is slipping my mind. If Bonds fails to hit .400, I want 12 bottles of any (1) of these beers: PBR, Special Export or Old Style. Good luck.
Steve: Where'd the rest of my post go?
I can't recreate it again but basically it said that I am right and you are wrong and in our tradition of talking ball, we need to put a wager on it (no fellatio involved)
If Bonds hits .400 based on enough plate appearances to qualify for the batting title I will...
1) Admit that Bonds is better than Ruth and, indeed, the best player of all time.
2) Host you and Stacey to a minor league ballgame within a 90-mile radius of your house. You can pick from such whistle stops as Schamburg, Cook County, Joliet, Kane County, Gary or Beloit.
If Bonds fails to hit .400 I want a 12pack bottles of either PBR or Special Export.
Today Bonds says he won't hit .400 because he buys Levi's argument that pitchers are just too good.
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cs0405050295may05,1,5667075.story?coll=cs-baseball-print
Today, we're going to play that game--but I'll make it easier for you. Player A is Barry Lamar Bonds.
Barry Bonds so far this season:
HR BB BA OBP SLG
10 44 .463 .704 1.111
Player B so far this season:
HR BB BA OBP SLG
14 55 .216 .268 .308
Sure, Player B's counting numbers are impressive--but the discrepancy between the huge number of walks and home runs and the low on-base percentage and slugging percentage surely have tipped you off that I'm being intentionally misleading.
Player B is not a single player. It's the Montreal Expos. They've needed 903 plate appearances to compile those numbers.
Barry Bonds has needed only 98.
Barring injury, he's going to break his own record of 198 walks. While doing that, he's going to pass Rickey Henderson for most walks all-time. He's going to break his own intentional walk record of 64.
And I'll say it on the record: he's going to hit .400.
Baggarly, I hope the circus of a .400 season will help compensate for boredom of covering the suprising wreckage of the Giants team in general. We're watching Babe Ruth here, only far, far more impressive in context. I don't expect ever to see his like again. We should watch him every chance we get.
Original comments...
Steve: Far more impressive than Babe Ruth?!??! This is a joke right? Let's start with the obvious... 154 game season and only eight teams (that's right eight) in the AL. No one will ever convince me that the overall quality of the players was not better in those days. 97mph fastball or no, back in the 30s Farnsworth is running a drill press....
Now for some less tangible but no less important factors that contribute to Bonds' success. First, if I wear enough body armor to win a walk on part in Lord of the Rings, I'd feel pretty good about standing on the plate too. Oh for a spunky manager to tell his pitcher to back Bonds off the plate. You think the managers and pitchers of yore would give two shits about Bonds superstar status? They'd pitch him inside until he backed up or suffered a season ending hand injury...oh wait. Still, I can't wait to see Clemens pitch to Bonds this year.
Back to the point-- between a juiced baseball and a juiced player that 73 will have an asterisk next to it some day. From 49 to 73 is very Brady Anderson-esque. Sure, Babe Ruth was on the sauce and he had a little more protection in the lineup but his OBP and his slugging % are still better than Bonds. Bonds is one of the best players of all time and he is deserving of accolades but has too many negatives to be worthy of all the hyperbole you like to shower him with.
Levi: Leaving aside the steroids question, since there's no definite evidence against Bonds, and leaving aside the juiced ball question, since test after test has been done of the ball and found little to no difference between balls of today and balls of previous years (Even in the weird power year of 1987, there was no difference.), here are the important points I think are in Bonds's favor in an argument against Ruth:
1) Ruth never had to face black players. This is, clearly, a biggie. As a pitcher, he never would have had to face Bonds. As a hitter, he never would have had to face a pitcher like Bob Gibson or a fielder like Ozzie Smith.
2) Ruth never had to face Latin or Asian players. He never had to hit against a Pedro Martinez or Byung-Hung Kim or Hideo Nomo.
3) Ruth had less travel, fewer places. Yes, it was by train, so the trips were longer, but he was only having to travel in the Northeast. That's got to be easier.
4) The number of ballplayers has grown, certainly, but the growth--even if you add in athletes stolen away by other sports--hasn't come close to keeping up with the increase in the U.S. population in that period. Add in the worldwide scouting that teams do now, and we have far, far more than four times as many people available from which to cull not quite four times as many ballplayers.
4) Ruth never had to face ace relievers, working fully rested. Instead, because starters threw complete games, he got to face tired starters far more often than does Bonds. Starters were probably less tired in the ninth than they are now, because they're more used to pitching far into the game and because--as interviews with old-time pitchers will tell you--they, for the most part, didn't have to work as hard as starters today. They state clearly that they didn't have to be at full intensity on every pitch. Now, when a garden-variety shortstop is strong enough to tie a game with one swing, pitchers are forced to concentrate more closely on every single pitch, and that wears out a pitcher more. Still, that doesn't compensate for the difference between even a good starter in the 9th and a rested Billy Wagner or John Smoltz who's able to throw as hard as possible, knowing he only has to throw twenty pitches or so.
5) Ruth didn't play many night games. It's generally acknowledged that hitting at night is a bit more difficult than hitting in full daylight.
6) Ruth played half his games in a ballpark that is very favorable to left-handed hitters. Bonds plays half his games in one of the hardest parks for any hitter in the majors. Ruth, in general, played on the road in bigger parks than Bonds, did, to be fair.
7) Pitchers facing Ruth didn't have the wealth of information available that pitchers facing Bonds have. Pitchers facing Bonds can, if they want, quickly watch every atbat he's had this year. The converse is true, of course: Ruth couldn't scout pitchers in advance the way Bonds can. But, given Ruth's character and reputation as not the hardest worker, can you see him doing much of that?
8) True, Ruth didn't have body armor. And the thing Bonds wears on his elbow is absurd and should be stopped by the league--it's over the top. But at least a few other players employ equally absurd devices (Craig Biggio, for example), yet they don't seem to get the same results, or even anywhere near the same results.
9) Stephen Jay Gould's best writing about baseball was about the disappearance of the .400 hitter. I can't remember now which book it was in, but he argued that baseball, as a fairly consistent system (no insane rules changes), shows the characteristics of any system over time: variation decreases, and things settle around a norm, with far fewer extreme outliers. He buttressed his argument with evidence like the decrease in the number of absurdly good or absurdly bad teams, the decrease in the number of hitters who stood head and shoulders above or below the league, and the same with pitchers. I can't do his argument justice right here, but it was convincing, and the conclusion was that achievements remarkably greater (or worse--see 2003 Detroit Tigers) than everyone else are far more difficult these days than they used to be.
That's just off the top of my head, but I think that's quite a few points directly in Bonds's favor. The only true advantages that Bonds has that Ruth didn't are the smaller road parks (an advantage that disappears if you look, as you should, at the relationship of the achievement to the league norms) and the tremendous advances in our understanding of nutrition and physical fitness since Ruth's time. I've read about Bonds's workout regimen. It's insane. Other players who've tried it for even a few days have dropped out, exhausted. Maybe Ruth would have adhered to a similar regimen if he were to play today; he sure wasn't known for taking care of himself, but you really never know what such an amazingly talented person would do under different circumstances.
The real question is, is what Bonds is doing, relative to the league, as impressive as what Ruth did, relative to his league? On the face of it, it's clearly not. The year Ruth hit 54 homers, only two other _teams_ even had that many. But I think all the arugments you're making, Steve, when really looked at, turn around and support Bonds. Maybe they don't entirely close the gap--Ruth was an unbelievable player, and I would love to have seen him hit--but I think they clearly make the comparison worth thinking about. And if Bonds finishes the year with numbers even remotely like this--at age 41--I'll be serious that he's better than Ruth.
Levi: Oh, and a couple of other things:
1) While advanced nutrition techniques and physical fitness regimes have benefitted hitters much more than pitchers, they have benefitted pitchers (and fielders) some, too. The fielders today are almost certainly better than in the old days, on average, for reasons ranging from the established fact that people in developed countries are faster, quicker, bigger, and stronger than they were 75 years ago to the better and larger gloves fielders use. Even such a great play as Willie Mays's catch of Vic Wertz's line drive in the 1954 World Series doesn't look _that_ impressive these days. I really believe I've seen plays just as good, by guys who aren't even that well known for their fielding.
2) One advantage Bonds has that Ruth didn't, but would definitely have made use of: thin-handled, scoop-ended bats. The understanding of the physics of bat speed has been crucial to the increase in power in the past decades. Look at the bats on ESPN Classic even in the 1980s. They're giant and unwieldy.
3) Ruth, too, played most of his hitting career in a high-offense era. He largely created that era with his understanding of how to hit, and he stood head and shoulders above it, but he did benefit from other changes that other hitters benefitted from, too, like the introduction of a truly livelier ball and the more frequent substitution of new balls into play (following the death of Ray Chapman on a pitch where he didn't seem to see the dirty, beat-up baseball at all).
4) The bit about 49 homers to 73 is, I assume, a steroids reference. Again, I suppose it's possible. But from what I've seen since Bonds began hitting more home runs, it's been largely because he has become even more selective than he was as a younger player, he's taking more of an uppercut swing, and his swing has shortened considerably since his younger days. The shortened swing could be argued as a reflection of the benefits of steroids, if it turns out he's on them, and you could even say his selectivity would benefit from the quicker hands and wrists that steroid-assisted strength might add. But in the absence of evidence, I'll stay with the argument that Bonds decided, following Sosa/McGwire in 1998, to hit more home runs, and he adjusted his swing and approach accordingly.
Levi: Re-reading my post, I agree that I shouldn't have said "far, far more impressive."
I think it's more impressive, but the emphatic additions were probably too much.
Steve: We'll continue this tomorrow. You have many good points, some of which I was going to deploy (especially the nutrition angle) As I sign off for the day however I want to start with this. I'm a little troubled by the subtle undertones of this statement....
1) Ruth never had to face black players. This is, clearly, a biggie. As a pitcher, he never would have had to face Bonds.....Ruth never had to face Latin or Asian players. He never had to hit against a Pedro Martinez or Byung-Hung Kim or Hideo Nomo.
I don't really see what race has to do with it. I think the league was small enough that even though it segregated against many deserving players, this did very little to alter the overall talent pool. If there were players from different races in the league do you really think it would have made a noticable difference spread out over an entire career? Anyway, Bob Gibson would have backed Bonds off the plate, too.
A guy stood at the plate with a heavy-ass bat, hung over and sweating booze in his flannels and made it happen. It's kind of like you and your little glove from intramurals. I'm surprised you ever caught anything with that. That you could do it 99% of the time made me respect your skills as a fielder. You didn't need fancy equipment and to this subjective observer I would say that glove was even a handicap. You weren't basket catching anything. You understood the fundamentals of how to catch a ball, rarely practiced but were ,daresay, a natural. That's what I'm getting at stats or no (stats which I think still support my arguments) Bonds is a robot but Ruth was a giant. It's like preferring Kraftwerk to Hank Williams or Woody Guthrie. Digital v analog. Cats v dogs. Two different things and we'll get to the steroids tomorrow but I think you are being a little Scalia-esque with the level of proof you seem to require.
Levi: I agree with your assertion (and I am pleased by the compliment to my fielding. Go small gloves!): Ruth really did tower over the field. It's indisputable.
The reason that the absence of black, Latino, or Asian players is important is not that they are black, Latino, or Asian: it's that their absence means that the league was manifestly _not_ composed of the best available players, let alone the best available athletes. Maybe it was composed of most of the best available. Maybe even 80% or 90%. But there is no argument that can convince me that excluding 10-15% of the US population (let alone the world population) from consideration on grounds that have nothing to do with talent will result in a league with an overall talent level as high as the one we have now, where teams--for all the biases they're still working with--are looking for the best baseball players, worldwide, with no other considerations.
It's not about race, per se. It's about cutting off a source of talent. What galls about it is that the exclusion was based on race, certainly, but for this argument, that's not the important part of the point.
Steve: Well Levi, you may be on to something with your Bonds-fawning but more on that in a moment. Back to the steroid scandal, I am less willing to offer a benefit of the doubt than you. In a court of law one is innocent until proven guilty but in the court of public opinion I think there is more than enough circumstantial evidence to implicate Bonds through his close association with already indicted people.
I contend Bonds was juiced up and hit 73 primarily as a result of this. His previous career high HR was 49 the year before. You contend he dedicated himself to changing his game and powering the ball out of the stadium. The next year he only hit 46HR-- why the drop off? First he played in 10 less games. One remarkable fact I have learned thanks to this discussion is that Bonds has never played 162 games in a season. He played in 143 the years before and after the 73HR. The year after Bonds hit 73 HR his IBB almost doubled, and he walked 21 more times (in 10 less games) Clearly I can't make my case that Bonds was juiced based on statistical evidence. He is a remarkable player. Let's run down some of your other points.
Regarding the segregation of baseball. Bonds does have the advantage of playing against the best players in the entire world. In a functional sense, one might argue that the integration of baseball MUST have led to league expansion because it could absorb better players. Still, baseball was integrated in 1947 and didn't expand until 1962 (15 years) I still contend this is, at best, a wash. However, one argument that would support your point in a twisted sense is the way in which Latin players are essentially farmed. Back in Ruth's day there weren't baseball colonies gathering in countless youngsters and signing them to contracts when they are in there early teens. In that sense, the players may be of better quality because they've made an industry out of it.
As talk turns to league contraction it's clear that many players in today's game don't belong on major league rosters. I would argue the nature of specialization is really there to protect the superstars. Middle relievers are the baseball equivalent of cannon fodder. They go out there and they soak up innings. They aren't good enough to start and they aren't good enough to close. If it weren't for the fact that there are so many teams you might well have a league full of Curt Schillings ready to go the distance against the Bonds' of the world. In terms of closers, there are certainly a few world-beaters, Gagne, Smoltz, Eck, Rivera. But for every one of those guys there's a head case with a big heater. Maybe it's just me but I think baseball has become much more of a psychological sport. Why is it that 32 teams don't have 32 awesome closers? It's because pitching in that context is much more mental than physical. I think 90% of hitters have a clear advantage when they are going up against a "closer" in the 90s
On your point about travel, you've certainly got me there but regarding day v night games the Giants play the second most amount of day games in baseball (or at least they used to). And, if you listen to the Cubs, playing baseball in the day is harder because you have less time to "adjust" ie. sleep off the hangover. The players of Ruth's era worked hard, played harder and then went back to work.
The parks of the old days all had their quirks but in general were much bigger than the parks of today. Sure if you can hit the porch in Tiger Stadium you are not necessarily bad-ass but if you hit a ball to dead center in the Polo Grounds you better hope you and your 4-lb bat got every bit of it.
In context, Bonds stands head and shoulders above most of league but I think A-Rod or Manny Ramirez are probably as good as he is. Of course, the trick is to put together a career of these mind-boggling numbers. It is remarkable that Bonds seems to be improving with age. 73HR is a gaudy number but I honestly think it will be broken again. It won't linger there for 30+ years like Maris. Again, compared to the rest of league, Ruth definitely stands out more than Bonds. It's too bad Gould passed or we might beg him to turn his analysis to this question. Do you know anyone at Stats? Gould may have a point but I still say, more pitchers, smaller ballparks, better nutrition and better equipment make hitting less of an art than it was in the old days. Bonds has clearly reduced it to a science. He is the MJ of baseball. I would say Ruth is more like Wilt Chamberlain. And I still think he sets the standards by which other players must be judged.
I've enjoyed this lively debate and in the spirit of our baseball wagers of years past I have one for you (but it doesn't involve fellatio) If Bonds hits .400 this year (based on the minimum number of plate appearances to qualify for the batting title) I will 1) concede your point that he is better than Ruth and 2) treat you and your wife to a baseball game at a minor league stadium of your choosing within a 90 mile radius of your home. I think that covers Schaumburg (big whoop), Kane County, Gary, Joliet, Beloit and maybe another one that is slipping my mind. If Bonds fails to hit .400, I want 12 bottles of any (1) of these beers: PBR, Special Export or Old Style. Good luck.
Steve: Where'd the rest of my post go?
I can't recreate it again but basically it said that I am right and you are wrong and in our tradition of talking ball, we need to put a wager on it (no fellatio involved)
If Bonds hits .400 based on enough plate appearances to qualify for the batting title I will...
1) Admit that Bonds is better than Ruth and, indeed, the best player of all time.
2) Host you and Stacey to a minor league ballgame within a 90-mile radius of your house. You can pick from such whistle stops as Schamburg, Cook County, Joliet, Kane County, Gary or Beloit.
If Bonds fails to hit .400 I want a 12pack bottles of either PBR or Special Export.
Today Bonds says he won't hit .400 because he buys Levi's argument that pitchers are just too good.
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cs0405050295may05,1,5667075.story?coll=cs-baseball-print
Labels: barry bonds, expos
Monday, May 03, 2004
Always with more music
Thanks to Sandy for sending me an iTunes Music Store gift certificate. The baseball songs purchased with it: "Opening Day" by the Folk Implosion, "Baseball" by Michael Franks, and two tracks by John McCutcheon, "Baseball on the Block" and "World Series '57." I also bought "The Ballad of John Rocker" by Tim Wilson, but there was an error while it was downloading, and the Check for Purchased Music option isn't finding it...so let's just say that it's kind of embarrassing to be sending an e-mail regarding a song about John Rocker to Apple customer support.
Other than the previously discussed "Piazza New York Catcher" situation, the only other potential baseball song remaining on my list is now "Night Game" by Paul Simon. I'm thinking I may see if I can find a used copy of the album it appears on, "Still Crazy After All This Years," as long as I'm going to be looking for "Dear Catastrophe Waitress." It might not be a big loss if I can't find it, since "Night Game" may be the most depressing baseball song ever.
This still leaves me with some money remaining on my iTunes account, so please use the comments function or e-mail me directly if you have any suggestions for baseball songs I haven't already mentioned in this blog and that aren't on either volume of Rhino Records' "Baseball's Greatest Hits," which I already have. (Note: The songs on this CD are not baseball songs.)
Yes, I do know about the "Diamond Cuts" compilations, the track listings of which I have already been through to see what was available on the iTunes Music Store. Not a lot, it turns out, although a few of them duplicate content from "Baseball's Greatest Hits," and a few others are different artists' renditions of songs on "BGH."
Levi: There's that Kenny Rogers song from about four years ago that he played at Wrigley Field, about a boy tossing up a ball to hit it, but missing it again and again.
Don't buy it.
sandor: I don't know what your threshhold is for what makes one a baseball song. If it's pretty extremely low, you should take a listen to Steve Poltz's "Silver Lining," which has these pleasant little lines in it:
I used to rely on luck
to earn an honest buck.
I didn't feel so stuck.
I didn't limp around like John Kruk.
References to baseball and testicular cancer in one line. Pretty amazing.
Jon Solomon: "line drive to the forehead" - Blunderbuss.
There's also a SF Seals 45 with "doc ellis" and two other baseball songs.
"my black ass" by Shellac is about shadowball.
I'm sure more will come to me.
Jon
Levi: And there's a great Dan Bern song, "Gambling with My Love" about Pete Rose and Bart Giammatti meeting in a hotel room for a night of drinking, wherein Giammatti tries all night to get Rose to just be honest and 'fess up.
Steve: You can't forget Steve Goodman's "A Dying Cub Fan's Last Request". The same album (Affordable Art) has Steve's mandolin-y version of "Take Me Out to the Ballgame."
Jim: "A Dying Cub Fan's Last Request" is on "Baseball's Greatest Hits," volume 1, so I've already got it. One of the best baseball songs ever.
Jon Solomon: "Baseball Bat" by Courtney Love (the band, not the person) came to me while driving back from Philadelphia tonight.
Jon
maura: do you have the baseball songs by barbara manning? they're not on itunes, but a friend of mine has them on mp3.
thatbob: I'm really surprised and a little disappointed that Jon Solomon can't come up with any baseball-related Christmas songs.
Jon Solomon: This was the best I could do:
http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/traditional5.shtml
Other than the previously discussed "Piazza New York Catcher" situation, the only other potential baseball song remaining on my list is now "Night Game" by Paul Simon. I'm thinking I may see if I can find a used copy of the album it appears on, "Still Crazy After All This Years," as long as I'm going to be looking for "Dear Catastrophe Waitress." It might not be a big loss if I can't find it, since "Night Game" may be the most depressing baseball song ever.
This still leaves me with some money remaining on my iTunes account, so please use the comments function or e-mail me directly if you have any suggestions for baseball songs I haven't already mentioned in this blog and that aren't on either volume of Rhino Records' "Baseball's Greatest Hits," which I already have. (Note: The songs on this CD are not baseball songs.)
Yes, I do know about the "Diamond Cuts" compilations, the track listings of which I have already been through to see what was available on the iTunes Music Store. Not a lot, it turns out, although a few of them duplicate content from "Baseball's Greatest Hits," and a few others are different artists' renditions of songs on "BGH."
Original comments...
Levi: There's that Kenny Rogers song from about four years ago that he played at Wrigley Field, about a boy tossing up a ball to hit it, but missing it again and again.
Don't buy it.
sandor: I don't know what your threshhold is for what makes one a baseball song. If it's pretty extremely low, you should take a listen to Steve Poltz's "Silver Lining," which has these pleasant little lines in it:
I used to rely on luck
to earn an honest buck.
I didn't feel so stuck.
I didn't limp around like John Kruk.
References to baseball and testicular cancer in one line. Pretty amazing.
Jon Solomon: "line drive to the forehead" - Blunderbuss.
There's also a SF Seals 45 with "doc ellis" and two other baseball songs.
"my black ass" by Shellac is about shadowball.
I'm sure more will come to me.
Jon
Levi: And there's a great Dan Bern song, "Gambling with My Love" about Pete Rose and Bart Giammatti meeting in a hotel room for a night of drinking, wherein Giammatti tries all night to get Rose to just be honest and 'fess up.
Steve: You can't forget Steve Goodman's "A Dying Cub Fan's Last Request". The same album (Affordable Art) has Steve's mandolin-y version of "Take Me Out to the Ballgame."
Jim: "A Dying Cub Fan's Last Request" is on "Baseball's Greatest Hits," volume 1, so I've already got it. One of the best baseball songs ever.
Jon Solomon: "Baseball Bat" by Courtney Love (the band, not the person) came to me while driving back from Philadelphia tonight.
Jon
maura: do you have the baseball songs by barbara manning? they're not on itunes, but a friend of mine has them on mp3.
thatbob: I'm really surprised and a little disappointed that Jon Solomon can't come up with any baseball-related Christmas songs.
Jon Solomon: This was the best I could do:
http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/traditional5.shtml
Labels: music, sandy weisz
Those wacky Texans
Sandy passes along this Johnny Damon-related photo.
Levi: Damon's hair and beard were all over the ESPN Sunday night game last night. Our TV was trembling, it was so excited.
Original comments...
Levi: Damon's hair and beard were all over the ESPN Sunday night game last night. Our TV was trembling, it was so excited.
Labels: johnny damon
Sunday, May 02, 2004
Carlos Zambrano and Matt Morris are both good pitchers
Steve Stone, at one point during today's Cubs-Cardinals telecast: "I just had a booth tragedy. I rested my Tootsie Pop on my lemonade, and it fell in."
Also, I'm going to assume the local WGN station identification announcement is usually played at a reasonable volume, as opposed to the one on Superstation WGN, which was cranked way up high, apparently to match the action! in the big shows they were promoting today, "Andromeda" and "Mutant X."
Also, I'm going to assume the local WGN station identification announcement is usually played at a reasonable volume, as opposed to the one on Superstation WGN, which was cranked way up high, apparently to match the action! in the big shows they were promoting today, "Andromeda" and "Mutant X."
Labels: candy, steve stone
Saturday, May 01, 2004
There's a lot to like
Bob seems to have been spending all day reading this blog from beginning to end. He left a comment related to the very first entry which I might as well address. I listed the four potential itineraries and said, "I actually have reasons for liking all four of these itineraries, so I don't really care which one eventually gets chosen." Bob wondered what those reasons were.
All four included at least nine games in nine different ballparks, including the places I specifically wanted to go, Montreal and Pittsburgh, and the place Levi specifically wanted to go, Boston. And then there were also more specific areas of interest for each of the four.
Itinerary #1 was the earliest in the year, so I wouldn't have to deal with feelings of anticipation as long. It also included a scheduled day with no game, neatly placed on the itinerary between Boston and Philadelphia, which could have been used to see Stephanie D'Abruzzo in "Avenue Q," or go to the Baseball Hall of Fame, or see the Red Sox twice, assuming we could afford the tickets. It also went across Memorial Day, so I'd save a vacation day from my job.
Itinerary #2 was the only one to include all four of last season's League Championship Series participants, plus featured two games in the same city on consecutive days, which is neat even if one of the teams is the Yankees. And it was the only one with the Devil Rays, and the travel would be in the reverse direction of the other three.
Itinerary #3 included the Cardinals, which I knew would make Levi giddy with glee, as well as the only stadium that probably won't be around anymore within the next three years, Busch Stadium (unless they tear Olympic Stadium down the instant the Expos leave Montreal).
Itinerary #4 was the only one to include a game in Baltimore, in the first of the new retro ballparks, and it would probably have allowed us to economize by staying with my aunt and uncle in the Philadelphia suburbs for a full three days. It also was the only one to include a minor-league game as originally drawn up, although we ended up adding one to the beginning of Itinerary #3. It also went across Labor Day, so it was another potential vacation day saving.
It's probably a little late to be thinking about the alternate itineraries now, since we've been seriously committed to Itinerary #3 since February, when we got the Red Sox and Phillies tickets. I'm probably going to revisit them once the dates roll around and the games are played, and we'll have some "we could have been there!" hindsight.
thatbob: Perhaps I'm building you a cumulative index (hottt!!!).
All four included at least nine games in nine different ballparks, including the places I specifically wanted to go, Montreal and Pittsburgh, and the place Levi specifically wanted to go, Boston. And then there were also more specific areas of interest for each of the four.
Itinerary #1 was the earliest in the year, so I wouldn't have to deal with feelings of anticipation as long. It also included a scheduled day with no game, neatly placed on the itinerary between Boston and Philadelphia, which could have been used to see Stephanie D'Abruzzo in "Avenue Q," or go to the Baseball Hall of Fame, or see the Red Sox twice, assuming we could afford the tickets. It also went across Memorial Day, so I'd save a vacation day from my job.
Itinerary #2 was the only one to include all four of last season's League Championship Series participants, plus featured two games in the same city on consecutive days, which is neat even if one of the teams is the Yankees. And it was the only one with the Devil Rays, and the travel would be in the reverse direction of the other three.
Itinerary #3 included the Cardinals, which I knew would make Levi giddy with glee, as well as the only stadium that probably won't be around anymore within the next three years, Busch Stadium (unless they tear Olympic Stadium down the instant the Expos leave Montreal).
Itinerary #4 was the only one to include a game in Baltimore, in the first of the new retro ballparks, and it would probably have allowed us to economize by staying with my aunt and uncle in the Philadelphia suburbs for a full three days. It also was the only one to include a minor-league game as originally drawn up, although we ended up adding one to the beginning of Itinerary #3. It also went across Labor Day, so it was another potential vacation day saving.
It's probably a little late to be thinking about the alternate itineraries now, since we've been seriously committed to Itinerary #3 since February, when we got the Red Sox and Phillies tickets. I'm probably going to revisit them once the dates roll around and the games are played, and we'll have some "we could have been there!" hindsight.
Original comments...
thatbob: Perhaps I'm building you a cumulative index (hottt!!!).
Labels: brpa, planning, road trip
One more musical note
A while back, Stacey had suggested the song "Piazza New York Catcher" by Belle & Sebastian to me. I almost got it with the code she gave me, but I instead decided to purchase the entire "Dear Catastrophe Waitress" album at some point in the future. I'm sure I'll make it to Amoeba Music at least once before the trip, and I wouldn't be surprised if they have a used copy or two (of course, the problem with going to Amoeba Music is that I can't get out of there without spending at least $40 on used CDs).
Levi: If you're feeling sinister . . . we have the disc and I could make sure the song is on my iPod . . . and yours.
Original comments...
Levi: If you're feeling sinister . . . we have the disc and I could make sure the song is on my iPod . . . and yours.
Labels: music
