Baseball-Related Program Activities

And without further adieu...



Looking forward to another baseball season!

Labels: bill james, predictions, sports illustrated

I can't believe I forgot to do this last year, especially given what happened in the American League East! In my defense, I was more interested in this prediction at the time.

For those of you just joining us, every year, baseballrelated.com presents the predictions from the baseball preview issue of Sports Illustrated, as well as the predictions produced by an extremely quick-and-dirty formula from a Bill James Baseball Abstract of the 1980s. It's now time to compare the 2008 predictions against the 2008 final standings.



Neither prediction did particularly well in 2008. Both failed on the surprising Rays, and on predicting the Tigers to finish first (actually, the Bill James formula had them tied with the Indians). The Bill James formula also predicted the Padres to finish first -- yikes.

But now we start with a clean slate for 2009, and two fresh sets of predictions. They will be posted here soon.

Labels: bill james, predictions, sports illustrated

From the February 13, 1967, issue of Sports Illustrated (via Uni Watch):

Labels: apes, sports illustrated, umpires, uni watch

Here's the cover of the May 26 issue of Sports Illustrated...



At first, I thought I was looking at some major mistakes in the artwork, but then I realized, no, the action depicted is taking place in Bizarro World. (That was a little less clear on my subscription copy, which has the address label printed over the bizarro advertising in the lower right corner.)

Labels: art, devil rays, sports illustrated, yankees

Yes, this blog is still in business. It's time for our annual look at the Sports Illustrated baseball predictions, all the better to laugh about later when the Cubs do not win the National League pennant. (Yes, that's what SI has predicted -- a Tigers-Cubs World Series, in fact, with the Tigers victorious.) As usual, they are accompanied by a set of predictions made using a quick-and-easy formula found in a Bill James Baseball Abstract from the '80s (double last season's win total, add the win total from two years ago, divide by 3).



In other news, although I have upgraded my TV watching to high-definition since last year, I have also had a schedule change at my job. I now work a normal Monday-through-Friday week, which means I will not be at home to watch the Opening Day games, as I did in 2007 and 2006 and 2005. Sorry about that. Perhaps by 2009, I will be independently wealthy, or I'll use a day of vacation time.

Labels: bill james, predictions, sports illustrated

The predictions were posted on March 29th, and exactly seven months later, it's now time to see how everyone did.


(Levi's predictions, made in the comments to the March 29th post, didn't actually include the Rockies, which I didn't notice until I was preparing this table. If he wants to lie in the comments to this post and claim he meant to put them in first or second place in the NL West, that's his prerogative.)

Labels: bill james, predictions, sports illustrated

Yes, my Sports Illustrated baseball preview issue arrived a week ago, but their predictions were printed on a dark green background in white text that came out a little blurry in my copy. And that's why it's taken me so long to post these!

Also, I realize I haven't yet used Bill James's quick-and-dirty prediction formula as I've done previously.



The biggest surprise in the Sports Illustrated predictions is the position of the Cubs, but I guess that's the eternal optimism for you.

Their World Series pick is for a freeway series, Angels over the Dodgers. Incidentally, they've changed the parking procedures at Dodger Stadium this year (and raised the parking rate from $10 to $15 in the process), so any late-arriving fans can be ascribed to the parking attendants not knowing what they're doing, rather than the usual apathy.

My schedule is clear for Monday and MLB Extra Innings will definitely be on DirecTV, if nowhere else, so I'm ready for another year of Opening Day blogging.

(Note primarily to myself for future reference: here's how I fixed the problem with the table.)

Labels: bill james, cubs, dodgers, predictions, sports illustrated

Steve Rushin's column in the new issue of Sports Illustrated is about Karl Cicitto, a collector of baseball books who has some 4,000 volumes in his house. As you can see even from the first paragraph in the free online preview of the column, Karl's pick for best baseball book is Veeck As in Wreck by Bill Veeck, available from the University of Chicago Press.

Labels: bill veeck, karl cicitto, sports illustrated, steve rushin

From the June 5 Sports Illustrated: "Life these days for the Tigers is one big bowl of Frito pie: They've got a little bit of everything, and the end result is better than you think. They are stick-to-the-ribs good."

Labels: food, sports illustrated, tigers

I'm not sure if "honor" is the right word, but in honor of Barry Bonds' current home run total, here's Milo Hamilton's call of Hank Aaron's 715th home run on April 8, 1974, while both members of baseballrelated.com were ensconced in wombs.

Meanwhile, Albert Pujols is on the cover of Sports Illustrated again, for the second time in less than two months, and why not? Also in the issue is Baseball Prospectus's projected home run leader board from the year 2020, which I want to reproduce here for posterity:

1. Barry Bonds (765)
2. Hank Aaron (755)
3. Babe Ruth (714)
4. Alex Rodriguez (678)
5. Willie Mays (660)
6. Adam Dunn (638)
7. Ken Griffey Jr. (637)
8. Albert Pujols (620)
9. Manny Ramirez (589)
10. Sammy Sosa (588)
11. Robotic Hitting Unit HR-1 (587)
12. Frank Robinson (586)

One of the above was actually my own addition to the Baseball Prospectus list, solely to make Levi chuckle.

Labels: Albert Pujols, barry bonds, milo hamilton, predictions, robots, sports illustrated

In Levi's honor, Albert Pujols is on the cover of the Sports Illustrated baseball preview issue this year. And once again, here are their predictions, posted here so we can refer to them during the season and laugh at them in October.

NL East
1. Atlanta Braves
2. New York Mets
3. Philadelphia Phillies
4. Washington Nationals
5. Florida Marlins

NL Central
1. St. Louis Cardinals
2. Milwaukee Brewers
3. Houston Astros
4. Chicago Cubs
5. Pittsburgh Pirates
6. Cincinnati Reds

NL West
1. L.A. Dodgers
2. S.F. Giants
3. San Diego Padres
4. Arizona Diamondbacks
5. Colorado Rockies

AL East
1. New York Yankees
2. Boston Red Sox
3. Toronto Blue Jays
4. Tampa Bay Devil Rays
5. Baltimore Orioles

AL Central
1. Chicago White Sox
2. Cleveland Indians
3. Minnesota Twins
4. Detroit Tigers
5. Kansas City Royals

AL West
1. Oakland A's
2. L.A. Angels
3. Texas Rangers
4. Seattle Mariners

The two wild-card teams, they believe, will be the Angels and the Mets. White Sox vs. A's in the ALCS, Cardinals vs. Braves in the NLCS, and White Sox over the Cardinals.

Labels: Albert Pujols, predictions, sports illustrated

Paul Tagliabue now contends that his "as boring as standing in line at the supermarket" comment specifically refers to when he was on his law firm's softball team in the 1970s and they made him play right field. He should have listened to Peter, Paul and Mary's inspirational song about playing that position!

Labels: music, paul tagliabue, sports illustrated

From the January 23 issue of Sports Illustrated:

Despite being a childhood baseball fan, he dismisses the national pastime as "about as exciting as standing in line at the supermarket. Baseball doesn't test anything but your ability to withstand boredom."

Perhaps trying to soften the blow he's just landed on baseball's chin, he broadens his attack. "Look," he says with a sigh, "I think the popularity of all sports in our society is a measure of how much disposable income there is and how much interest we have in the unnecessary."

Clearly, Paul Tagliabue isn't paying enough attention to the tabloid headlines while he's at the checkout (granted, they have been a little boring of late, with the continuous Brad/Angelina/Jennifer/Vince talk).

Labels: paul tagliabue, sports illustrated

A hell of a full-body beatdown is administered to Phil "Scrap Iron" Garner by Tom Verducci at SI.com.

And every word of it seems right on. The manager did take several chances last night to put his team into the best position to win, then he complained about their effort afterwards.

That's a couple of the key ingredients for longterm bad karma.

Labels: phil garner, sports illustrated, tom verducci, world series

That's right, it's time once again to compare the Sports Illustrated predictions with what really happened in 2005. Oh, and I might as well throw in Bob's picks, while I'm at it, and I hope I've managed to correctly decipher all the cute names he used for the teams...

SI Prediction             Bob's Prediction            Actual Results

                                 NL East

Atlanta Braves            N.Y. Mets                   Atlanta Braves
Florida Marlins           Atlanta Braves              Philadelphia Phillies
N.Y. Mets                 Philadelphia Phillies       Florida Marlins
Philadelphia Phillies     Florida Marlins             N.Y. Mets
Washington Nationals      Washington Nationals        Washington Nationals

                                NL Central

St. Louis Cardinals       St. Louis Cardinals         St. Louis Cardinals
Chicago Cubs              Chicago Cubs                Houston Astros
Houston Astros            Milwaukee Brewers           Milwaukee Brewers
Cincinnati Reds           Cincinnati Reds             Chicago Cubs
Milwaukee Brewers         Pittsburgh Pirates          Cincinnati Reds
Pittsburgh Pirates        Houston Astros              Pittsburgh Pirates

                                 NL West

San Francisco Giants      San Diego Padres            San Diego Padres
L.A. Dodgers              Colorado Rockies            Arizona Diamondbacks
San Diego Padres          L.A. Dodgers                San Francisco Giants
Arizona Diamondbacks      San Francisco Giants        L.A. Dodgers
Colorado Rockies          Arizona Diamondbacks        Colorado Rockies

                                 AL East

New York Yankees          New York Yankees            New York Yankees*
Boston Red Sox            Boston Red Sox              Boston Red Sox
Baltimore Orioles         Toronto Blue Jays           Toronto Blue Jays
Toronto Blue Jays         Baltimore Orioles           Baltimore Orioles
Tampa Bay Devil Rays      Tampa Bay Devil Rays        Tampa Bay Devil Rays

                                AL Central

Minnesota Twins           Detroit Tigers               Chicago White Sox
Cleveland Indians         Minnesota Twins              Cleveland Indians
Chicago White Sox         Chicago White Sox            Minnesota Twins
Detroit Tigers            Cleveland Indians            Detroit Tigers
Kansas City Royals        Kansas City Royals           Kansas City Royals

                                 AL West

L.A. Angels               Oakland A's                  L.A. Angels
Texas Rangers             L.A. Angels                  Oakland A's
Oakland A's               Seattle Mariners             Texas Rangers
Seattle Mariners          Texas Rangers                Seattle Mariners

*-The Yankees and Red Sox both finished with the same record (95-67),
and the MLB standings I'm looking at have the Red Sox on top for what
I believe are reasons relating to alphabetical order.  But it seems weird
to me to have the division champion listed under the wild-card team.

Sports Illustrated was better with their predictions than they were last year, but here's a special salute to Bob for predicting the correct division champion in the NL West (and they managed to finish with a winning record, too!).

One thing I noticed while perusing the final standings: the Cardinals had the same record at home and on the road (50-31). I believe earlier in the season, I made a tongue-in-cheek comment in this blog that the Cardinals were "boring." Clearly, the word I meant was "consistent."

Labels: predictions, sports illustrated

The May 30 issue of Sports Illustrated had to be forwarded to my new address, so I only received it just today. So Steve Rushin's column about keeping score at baseball games only just now came to my attention. This passage is of particular concern: "Those of us who keep score have joined Trekkies and train fanatics -- known as 'foamers' in the railroad industry -- in the pantheon of get-a-lifers."

So let's see: I know how to score baseball games and do it occasionally, Levi knows how to score baseball games and does it religiously, Levi has obviously seen "Star Trek" a few times since he often refers to me as James Tiberius Ellwanger for no good reason, and, of course, my enjoyment of trains has reached legendary status.

Original comments...

Levi: Aside from the personal slam, I have to take issue with this guy. At Wrigley Field, I regularly see people in my section keeping score. Some of them are the group of season ticket holders I've gotten to know over the past seven years, who are clearly dedicated fans, but I also see a lot of people with the scorecard and pencil they've bought on the way in, obviously not veteran scorers, but enjoying the game that way anyway.

Last week, I even had a stranger who showed up an inning late borrow my book for a minute fill in his card. I had to help him decipher my handwriting.

Labels: scoring, sports illustrated, steve rushin, trains

Here we go again! Sports Illustrated has Johnny Damon on the cover of the baseball preview issue this year, because clearly, they know who people want to see. And here's their predicted order of finish in the divisions:

NL East
1. Atlanta Braves
2. Florida Marlins
3. New York Mets
4. Philadelphia Phillies
5. Washington Nationals

NL Central
1. St. Louis Cardinals
2. Chicago Cubs
3. Houston Astros
4. Cincinnati Reds
5. Milwaukee Brewers
6. Pittsburgh Pirates

NL West
1. San Francisco Giants
2. L.A. Dodgers
3. San Diego Padres
4. Arizona Diamondbacks
5. Colorado Rockies

AL East
1. New York Yankees
2. Boston Red Sox
3. Baltimore Orioles
4. Toronto Blue Jays
5. Tampa Bay Devil Rays

AL Central
1. Minnesota Twins
2. Cleveland Indians
3. Chicago White Sox
4. Detroit Tigers
5. Kansas City Royals

AL West
1. L.A. Angels
2. Texas Rangers
3. Oakland A's
4. Seattle Mariners

Guess you can't go too far wrong with what are basically the final standings from last year. Remember, baseball is unlike mutual funds in that quite often, past performance is a guarantee of future results.

I can already tell this season isn't going to be quite as good as 2004. No MLB team will be serving poutine at its concession stands, and worse yet, Hostess doesn't seem to be making Baseballs this year.

In other news, the famous iPod has been sold, and it is on its way to the purchaser.

Original comments...

Luke, hanger-on: Most important: Do you predict a baseball-related road trip this year?

Levi: There has been some discussion, but we have yet to finalize any plans, primarily because the "Levi" part of the team isn't very good at getting organized enough to finalize plans.

Labels: predictions, sports illustrated

I guess I should make mention of the fact that the Boston Red Sox are the Sports Illustrated Sportsmen of the Year, which I guess makes sense, since as of now, the Sox winning is the feel-good sports story of the year. The story in Sports Illustrated is about Red Sox fans, which means it's heartwarming and tearjerking, not to mention heartjerking and tearwarming.

The problem is with the timing, since this issue came out at the beginning of December (I guess it was tied to a TV special where they revealed the choice). What happens if, for example, Brett Favre thwarts an invasion of Earth sometime between now and the end of the year? Well, maybe now that the Sox won the World Series, it won't matter so much if we're enslaved by aliens.

Labels: red sox, sports illustrated

Levi's obviously extremely busy at work, but if we all clap our hands, maybe he'll show up and make some observations on the playoffs once they get under way tomorrow.

Subheads in today's L.A. Times: "Angels have conjured a special season, and if the franchise is haunted by ghosts of '86 playoff loss to Boston, the players seem unaware of it" and "The Dodgers had 53 come-from-behind wins, 26 in final at-bat, but keeping that magic going against powerful Cardinals won't be easy."

Now we get to make fun of Sports Illustrated for being very wrong about the National League division winners in their before-the-season predictions. The teams we saw on the trip are in bold.

SI Prediction              Actual Results

                     NL East
Philadelphia Phillies      Atlanta Braves
Florida Marlins            Philadelphia Phillies
Atlanta Braves             Florida Marlins
Montreal Expos             New York Mets
New York Mets              Montreal Expos

                    NL Central
Chicago Cubs               St. Louis Cardinals
Houston Astros             Houston Astros
St. Louis Cardinals        Chicago Cubs
Cincinnati Reds            Cincinnati Reds
Milwaukee Brewers          Pittsburgh Pirates
Pittsburgh Pirates         Milwaukee Brewers

                     NL West
Arizona Diamondbacks       L.A. Dodgers
San Francisco Giants       San Francisco Giants
San Diego Padres           San Diego Padres
L.A. Dodgers               Colorado Rockies
Colorado Rockies           Arizona Diamondbacks

                     AL East
New York Yankees           New York Yankees
Boston Red Sox             Boston Red Sox
Toronto Blue Jays          Baltimore Orioles
Baltimore Orioles          Tampa Bay Devil Rays
Tampa Bay Devil Rays       Toronto Blue Jays

                   AL Central
Minnesota Twins            Minnesota Twins
Chicago White Sox          Chicago White Sox
Kansas City Royals         Cleveland Indians
Cleveland Indians          Detroit Tigers
Detroit Tigers             Kansas City Royals

                     AL West
Oakland A's                Anaheim Angels
Anaheim Angels             Oakland A's
Seattle Mariners           Texas Rangers
Texas Rangers              Seattle Mariners

In other news, over the offseason, the Dodgers are going to add 1,600 more ridiculously expensive seats to Dodger Stadium by moving the dugouts forward into what's now foul territory and putting in more seats between the current ridiculously expensive seats behind home plate and the new dugouts. They'll also be transforming the current rubberized warning track into a dirt track. I hope having the new expensive seats distracts them from raising ticket prices elsewhere in the stadium, namely, the reserved level (third deck) tickets that are currently $17, $12, and $10.

Original comments...

Toby: Levi is probably too busy still celebrating NU's big win over Ohio State Saturday. ...And rightfully so.

Jim: But he's not posting on the Football-Related Program Activities blog, either! Oh, wait, there is no such thing. Football ticket prices (especially in the NFL) and game schedules don't lend themselves to road trips.

An e-mail from my father: "Wore my NU hat to the Bucs game and was literally hugged by Buckeye haters." That's "Bucs" for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, not the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Labels: predictions, sports illustrated

Work has continued being busier than I'd like, so there's just this today, from an article on the Cardinals in Sports Illustrated:

"On Sept. 20, after a 7-4 victory over Milwaukee clinched the NL Central title, La Russa cut himself and his charges loose, romping around the visitors' clubhouse at Miller Park soaked in champagne and beer. When King gave him an impromptu ice bath from a plastic wastebasket, La Russa, easily 75 pounds lighter than King, chased the reliever around the clubhouse, leaping on top of him and riding him piggyback, fists pumping in the air."

Wild weekend of baseball coming up.

Original comments...

Dan: Where was John Mabry throughout all this?

Jim: He was scoring dope for a teammate!

Ha ha! Sorry.

Labels: Cardinals, ray king, sports illustrated, tony la russa

Two notes on 1980s baseball:

1) In thanks for my participation in his wedding, my brother got me a copy of the October 25, 1982 Sports Illustrated, which featured the Cardinals/Brewers World Series on its cover. The issue went to press after the Brewers took a 3 games to 2 Series lead. Whitey Herzog come across as pretty grouchy, even petty, making excuse for his team’s sloppy play and attempting to lower expectations. Herzog was without a doubt a good manager for that team, but I think I prefer LaRussa’s straightforwardness, combativeness, and arrogance, at least when it comes to talking about losses.

There’s a photo from the end of game 5 in Milwaukee showing County Stadium’s scoreboard reminding fans, “Last week, Ben Oglivie was injured because fans were on the field. Pleast stay off the field.” The bottom half of the photo is of the field covered with happy fans.

In the article, Gorman Thomas, talking of the Brewers being down two games to one, is quoted, “We were in the same boat in Baltimore at the end of the regular season, the same boat when we went to California in the playoffs, the same boat when we went to St. Louis to play on their rug. We’re still riding the same boat whether it’s PT-109 or the Love Boat or whatever. When the ship is in the harbor, they try to bomb it. And the submarines are always out there waiting for us.” After the Brewers tied up the series at 2, Thomas said, “The submarines have drawn back, submerged. They’ve been struck by our depth charges.”

And one last thing about the article. Sports Illustrated style in 1982, apparently, called for fielding positions to be capitalized. So you get Shortstop Robin Yount and Center Fielder Willie McGee. Might as well hyphenate “base-ball” while you’re at it.

2) At Fenway Park, the scoreboard showed a baseball blooper reel . . . from the late 80s. I assume they've been showing the same reel for nearly twenty years. Surprisingly enough, Bill Buckner does not make the blooper reel. I guess the traagedy+time=comedy equation is still a little short on the time side.

Labels: bill buckner, brewers, Cardinals, gorman thomas, sports illustrated, whitey herzog

The Sports Illustrated cover curse strikes again! The Devil Rays have a losing record since the "10 things that are awesome about baseball" issue came out last Thursday with their name mentioned on the cover (2-4), and now with his blown save today, Eric Gagne is not quite so awesome anymore. The other items specifically listed: "Perfect Randy Johnson," "Yankee Economics," and "Must-see Barry Bonds." So let's see: Randy Johnson gets hypnotized into thinking he's a chicken, Barry Bonds falls into a bottomless pit...

Labels: devil rays, eric gagne, simpsons, sports illustrated

The new issue of Sports Illustrated contains an article titled "10 Reasons Why Baseball Is Awesome Now," or something like that. Their reasons:

1. A lot of teams are still in contention for playoff spots (more teams are within 5 games of at least a wild card spot at this point in the season than in any year since the current playoff format was adopted).
2. Attendance and TV ratings are up.
3. The Yankees are a big draw, both at home and on the road.
4. Devil Rays!
5. They're about to announce what they're going to do with the Expos. (Speaking of which, they're playing the Blue Jays this weekend in San Juan instead of, I don't know, somewhere in Canada?! Well, at least no one will be able to point to a sudden uptick in attendance if there's a lawsuit seeking to block the move.)
6. Padres!
7. Randy Johnson! Tom Glavine! Roger Clemens!
8. Barry Bonds!
9. There's going to be an international baseball tournament next March.
10. Eric Gagne!

Comments? Additions? Reasons why baseball sucks, instead?

Original comments...

Levi: I have as little interest as humanly possible in an international baseball tournament. In fact, I'm kind of actively against it. If there's one thing I don't need to see again, it's a stadium of people shouting "USA! USA! USA!"

Actually, I'm always bugged by these lists because of their premise. Look, baseball's always there. That's one of its greatest charms. If you're too busy with other things to pay attention, that's your loss. Even when they were talking all through the nineties about how baseball was in trouble, attendance was at astonishingly high levels compared to all of baseball history except like 1990-93. It was way high compared to other sports. Revenues were up across the board. And despite a few remarkably mismanaged teams (Sorry, Toby), nearly every team had a shot at the postseason at some point in the decade.

But despite my complaining, I'll take good news and positive coverage wherever. The Yanks/Red Sox game the other night, on _cable_, won the time slot in NYC. That's unbelievable for a regular-season game.

And I'd add one more thing to this list: the Cubs. Anytime the Cubs are this successfull, in winning and attendance, it's good for baseball.

stacey: it should be noted that levi is not always this cranky. he accidentally slept in this morning, and that probably accounts for this grouchy post.

ps: eric gagne is on the all-cute team!

Levi: Yeah, that probably sounded crankier than it should have. The reasons the guy gives are all good, and they're all fun aspects of this season.

Eric Gagne is so awesome he should be two reasons. And Scott Rolen's defense should be a reason all by itself.

Steve: I just want to vote that the Padres are decidedly uncool. They may have a new stadium, they may have my initials on their hat, and San Diego may be the home of Mandy Stadtmiller but their uniform looks like a college or minor league team. I could be talking out the other end here but I can't help but think they are going out of their way to be PC and disavow their "padre-ness" in the wake of the catholic church sex scandal. Instead, they should embrace it. Can't you see the headlines, "Wells, Beck, Bugger Dodgers."

Jim: Their mascot, the Swinging Friar, was very visible at the game I went to at Petco Park in May.

Toby: I got some reasons why baseball sucks now
--3 1/2-hour games
--Interleague play (two teams meeting in the World Series that have already played each other)
--Fat managers wearing uniforms (no other sport does this)
--I can't go one *#!@ing summer without seeing a replay of Fancisco Cabrerra's hit to win the 1992 NLCS (as if I don't see that whole inning enough in my own nightmares)
--An average family's cost to go to a game - approx. $80
--No Jack Buck anymore (and though I used to always defend him when people put him down, Mike Shannon isn't nearly as good without him)
--Paying for autographs
--No more powder blue road uniforms
--Does every team need a new park every four or five years???
--Too many teams
--A good ERA is in the mid 3's
And most of all
--An unprecedented 14 years of sucking for the once-proud franchise known as the Pittsburgh Pirates. They will never compete again.

(The point, in case you missed it, is that any sport is fun when your team is winning... and not so much when they're losing... though my last-place team just swept Levi's first-place team)

Luke: File under suck:

ESPN's behind-the-plate ads, seen on TV (fugly!)

ESPN's behind-the-plate ads, seen in person (fuglier!)

ESPN making Wrigley games night games so I can't go

Retractable roofs

Fewer double headers

Major League Baseball allowing into the park fans who do not intend to stay for the entire game

MLB allowing fans into the park after the first pitch

Absence of European soccer-style relegation, which would deal nicely with the problem of too many teams

Beers more than $3

Tribune Co.

Rooftop owners

Tribune Co. vs. Rooftop owners

Warm-up jerseys worn during games (especially at home)

The off-season

File under awesome:

3 1/2 hour games!

Fat managers wearing uniforms!

My team winning

Derek Jeter and his game face

Dusty Baker's contempt for pitch counts

There's going to be an international baseball tournament this August

Wayner Messmer and the perfect, sub-3:00 National Anthem

$2.25 malt cups

Ed and John

Sox fans blaming the rain on the Cubs

Roadtrip blogs

Johnny Damon's hair

No more powder-blue road uniforms; less teal

Labels: sports illustrated