Sunday, July 22, 2007

Definition: The Watermelon Sox

A lot of people love the Boston Red Sox. Regardless of if they're from Boston or not. They have an underdog complex, and regardless of the fact that the Red Sox have exorcised such demons and won it all back in 2004, there are legitimately a lot of fucking fans. I think they're alright, but their fans can be a little annoying. I wouldn't mind people in Atlanta being a little more loyal to the home team.



But today, what I'm going to discuss is the birth of the Watermelon Sox.

Boston, this season is a pretty good team, with decent pitching, a less suspect bullpen, and the usual slugging from Manny Ortez and company, including the impressive emergency of MLB's version of Sam Cassell, meaning the ugliest player in the league - Kevin Youkilis. But winning ways aside, the unfortunate passing of Red Auerbach made the Red Sox decide to honor him earlier in April.

So for an evening, the Boston Red Sox donned green jerseys to tribute the Celtics legend. To make things better, they defeated the Yankees in a come-from-behind, against Mariano Rivera. The jersey is now apparently a permanent item in the Wal-Mart sized Official Red Sox Merchandise store - players who didn't even participate in that particular game, Tim Wakefield, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Jonathan Papelbon, etc, have their names and numbers emblazoned on Celtic green on jerseys for sale.

But let's be frank here - the gesture was touching, but in actuality, it was pretty goofy looking.

My co-writer said it the best when he declared that the Red Sox looked like a bunch of watermelons. I thought about it for a second, and seconded that thought, when I was reminded of chunks of Bubbalicious gum, fresh out of their wrappers.

Look at Jason Varitek here - Navy blue helmet, green jersey, white pants, red knock-socks. Black cleats. Now I'm no fashion genius by any stretch of the imagination, but man, is that a whole lot of colors to be put together in one package.

I wonder what is going to happen when some big figure from the Boston Bruins die one day. I wonder if Varitek is going to have to mix in some yellow into the rainbow of colors he's already wearing.

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Definition: The FOX Pitcher

Every few weekends throughout the Major League season, FOX picks up a few games, some nationally televised, some more regional. And they get the All-Star game, as well as the majority of the MLB playoffs, and the World Series.

Despite the fact that baseball is a sport that can really only be broadcast in one way, all local and national markets show the game with their own little twists. Some add wider camera angles, some shoot so that only the pitcher, and those in the batter's circle are visible, really zoomed in tightly.

ESPN films in a fashion that finds a compromised point where the pitcher and batter are roughly in a square, dead center on the screen. The viewer will hear the words "Nationwide K-zone" about every 40 seconds. Also, ESPN plagues the viewers with commercials that plug "The Bronx is Burning" or other repeated ads that often go on too long, often resulting in the game coming back with the first few pitches already being thrown, or whenever Matt Diaz is leading off the inning, with one out already.

Here in Atlanta, we have the luxury of being broadcast on three different networks throughout the season, not including the occasional ESPN and FOX nods. SportSouth, FSN South, and TBS - their styles are pretty much the same, as there is few twists to the otherwise "uniform" way of broadcasting baseball.

But the FOX Network, not only do they have the intense, emotional commentary of Joe Buck, they are also notorious for a camera habit that I like to call...

The FOX Pitcher.

For reasons unknown, FOX cameras, prior to every single pitch, make sure to zoom in as much as possible to the head of the pitcher. It does not matter if it is a star like John Smoltz, or a middle reliever like Joel PiƱero, if they're pitching, you learn what they look like, very quickly. And it's not always flattering... like when a guy like Kelvim Escobar is pitching, and you can tell that he really wants to blow his nose after the inning, or how he could make a few extra bucks endorsing Proactiv®.

Why they do this, I have no idea. I suspect that perhaps by showing the pitcher's face, people can try to read into their emotions and what they might thinking. It might actually add to the drama of the game, especially if it's tight, and the crowd is going apeshit. Who knows?

I'm bored at work, and no piece of writing is complete without some visual evidence. So without further ado, I'm going to talk about FOX Pitchers: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

The Good - it's not that they're really that good, or handsome or anything, they're just not... well, bad or hideously ugly.



Tom Glavine's steely stare, and seemingly concrete face. Watching this man pitch makes me wonder if he's got a mask on, because his facial expression doesn't change throughout an entire game. Jonathan Papelbon, and his super-high-energy-intensity stare while reading signs from Varitek. And JJ Putz, after seeing him in action during the All-Star Game, even though he was on the brink of a BS, watching his slow, methodical routine of bending over for the cameras and staring at the ground, before slowly drawing his head upward with a homicidal stare to read the signs from Johjima. Now that I think about it, it's normally closers who have this kind of need for gimmicks (Like Chad Cordero and his flat-bill cap, but FOX would never show the Nationals unless they were in contention), perhaps it helps them get some sort of mental advantage - when trying to get through a high-pressure situation, I imagine any sort of advantage is beneficial, whether it is physical or mental.


The Bad - they're not good, but they're not quite disgusting.



Greg Maddux is one of my all-time favorite pitchers of all time, and I will cheer for him no matter who he plays for. I would favor him over Roger Clemens any day of the week. But let's be honest here, he's not exactly the best looking guy in the world, and looks downright silly when photographed in the midst of a pitch. When FOX cameras zoom into his face, you see a droopy, almost jowly face of a legend who is more concerned about getting you to slap a come-backer to his glove than what he looks like in the mirror. K-Rod and his Steve Urkel-like looks, and his Reggie Jackson-like glasses. If not for the fact that he is a damn good closer, I don't know what this guy's got going for him outside of baseball. And we have Dan Haren, who like most of the Oakland A's, looks like a dirty stoner, or a caveman in a uniform.


The Ugly - watching these guys on your screen makes it harder to watch the game.



Watching Game 5 of last year's World Series was rough - not because of the tightness of the game, and my lack of confidence that Jeff Weaver would get out of another inning, but of the constant close-ups of his face in between EVERY. SINGLE. PITCH. His eyesight has obviously deteriorated with age (as has his skill, seeing his record with Seattle now), but his mangey hair, creepy, pedophile stubble... let me know when Fernando Rodney stops committing errors and the Cards are up to bat, because I'm getting sick of Weaver's face. Kenny Rogers makes the best face while pitching ever. It's not pretty, he gets the job done regardless, but I can't help but laughing whenever I see his face go from FOX injected intensity, to this face from the time his feet are on the rubber to throw. Last, and certainly least, we have 'Ol Boomer, David Wells. The man has never been pretty to look at, and watching his left arm have to go around his massive gut en route to a lollipop curve is never a pretty sight. But he has a Perfect Game on his resume, and none of these other jabronis on the list can say so.



I love playoff baseball, but FOX can do without the constant closeups of every single pitcher. And considering the probable playoff teams for this year, Kelvim Escobar can hopefully work something out with Proactiv®.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

the all-star game sucks

never send a phillie to do a real ballplayer's job.

the NL will never win as long as representatives from teams like the phillies, diamondbacks and pirates are obligated to have representatives. the inferior league was smart - meche, jenks, and most importantly, the middle reliever voted-in as the "last in line all-star" okajima did not pitch.

la russa on the other hand used the pity vote chris young, a mediocre #2 starter with inflated stats to blow the game, and then guys like billy wagner who can't throw anything outside of the fucking middle of the plate clinches it.

amazingly cubs players pull the NL back, before a phillie ruins the excitement.

and la russa selfishly rests his star who only had to get a single base-hit to keep the game going. pujols wouldn't even have to try to run to first if he got a clean hit, homer or not. a base hit would have resulted in either a tie or the win, but la russa fucked that up.

Friday, July 6, 2007

A Great Mystery Solved

I mean no offense to people from Chicago with what I am about to write. Being a Nationals fan and someone who cheers for the hometown team no matter what I can somewhat relate to Cubs fans from Chicago. Of course Wrigley Field is also full of yuppies that care nothing for the game and just want to sit around and throw trash on the field. I guess a lot of Cubs fans throw themselves on the field.


Some teams just travel well. The Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals, and Mets always bring their fans, but those teams win. The Cubs haven’t won anything that anyone can remember. The last time they made it to the playoffs they lost because their second baseman couldn’t pick up a routine grounder. Don’t even try given me that crap about Bartman. I don’t understand how one foul ball that still had to be caught by stone hands Alou can lead to an eight run inning. The Cubs just don’t win, and they don’t win in funny fashion. They are a comedy to all baseball fans that are not Cubs fans. So it has always confused me as to why someone would bandwagon with the Cubs. Why would someone choose to be a loser?


I can understand wanting to follow a winning team, but choosing to be a Cubs fan is like choosing to be a Devil Rays fan, or have a root canal without anesthesia. It just never made much sense until I attended three games against the Cubs this week. I saw many people who should be eating chicken heads at the local fair all wearing Cubbies blue. So the only possible answer is bandwagon Cubs fans are born losers. They are just used to losing. It is what they do. Instead of being a poser and cheering for the Yankees or some other team that has won the World Series in anyone’s lifetime they don’t hide their identity. They are just losers.


The funniest conversation I heard was between a bandwagon Red Sox fan and a bandwagon Cubs fun discussing the amount of fans in the stadium. The Cubs fan was trying to figure out the percentage of Cubs to Nationals fans, and the Red Sox fan claimed there were more Red Sox fans in RFK than Nationals fan. There is always someone in every building in the world wearing a Red Sox hat. So the fact that this guy saw another one must mean there are most than those that came to cheer for the Nationals. Quick math here before I get to what the Cubs fan decided was the ratio of Cubs to Nats fans. The Nationals have 15,000 season ticket holds and last nights attendance was 22,000. 7,000 of the people were not season ticket holders. It is from this 7,000 were the Cubs fans were most likely to come from. The Cubs fan claimed that it was 60% Cubs fans at RFK. This of course is not possible, and I would say it was more like 20%. But Cubs fans are born losers and can’t count.

Thursday, May 17, 2007

Conflict of Allegiances

Bobby Cox does it again, and leaves a tiring starting pitcher in, one inning too many. Chuck James struggles to get out of the sixth inning, and watches his lead disintegrate and vanish when Chad Paronto raises his hand and accepts the role as "currently unreliable Braves relief pitcher."

A pitcher must know when they fuck up, when Dmitri Young is able to score from first base.

Anyway, this weekend, I am going out to Boston for some fun, food, and of course baseball. I paid a ludicrous amount, but I have tickets to Sunday's game at the hallowed grounds of Fenway Park, as my Atlanta Braves take on the Inferior League's Boston Red Sox for a three-game series.

The game I will be going to will be Tim Hudson vs. Tim Wakefield, which will be an interesting match-up - Andruw Jones, provided he sheds his coat of sucktitude and stop striking out like Adam Dunn blindfolded, can actually have the chance to steal some bases against the slow pitching knuckleballer. Hudson, will hopefully perform brilliantly, and then it will be a lull every time Wakefield takes the mound.

Unfortunately, I was unable to get tickets to the highly anticipated John Smoltz vs. Daisuke Matsuzaka matchup on Saturday - I'd put my money on Dice-K, since as is the usual MO, Young-Unproven Pitcher vs. John Smoltz usually results in a loss for the future Hall of Famer.

However, the biggest problem with this weekend is that the Yankees will be playing the Mets. I dislike both teams, and although the answer is quite simple, I don't like it regardlessly. I will have to pull for the Yankees, so that they can help the Braves regain the top spot in the NL East. Unfortunately, the way those teams are playing, I forsee Jose Reyes having a field day with the Yankees, and the Mets taking that series winning at least two of the three games.

As for the Braves, I'm hoping for a 2/3 series win, seeing as how Friday's game is a toss up in the air, with the Lerew vs. Player-to-be-Named-Later/Cash matchup, Smoltz likely losing Saturday, and Hudson hopefully getting the win on Sunday, but all in all, I'm more looking forward to actually being at Fenway Park.

But with the way Andruw Jones is playing, the Braves will probably get swept. Here's how I would put the batting order to help teach Andruw how to earn his money again:

1. K. Johnson
2. W. Harris
3. E. Renteria
4. C. Jones
5. B. McCann
6. J. Francoeur
7. A. Jones
8. S. Thorman
9. Pitcher
DH (for Interleague): J. Saltalamacchia

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Chris Broussard is an idiot

I was at the gym, running on the treadmill, watching SportsCenter as is the norm, while I am at the gym. "The Fag," Jay Mariotti was having a one-on-one chat with some nobody whose name I occasionally recognize on the ESPN website, Chris Broussard.

They're "discussing" the recent incidents involving King Gravy Train AKA Robert Horry hip checking Steve Nash, and the subsequent suspensions of Horry, Stoudemire and Boris Diaw. Same shit, different voices, Horry did it deliberately, Nash sold it like he was hit with the foreign object, and so forth.

But then out of nowhere, Broussard pulls the one card that had absolutely no involvement whatsoever in this argument.

The Race Card.

Obviously, the suspension of three black players is the NBA's way of oppressing black basketball players. Who shouldn't be playing in the white man's NBA Playoffs.

The last time I checked, Bruce Bowen, Shawn Marion, Michael Finley, James Jones, among the many others riding the pine are all black men.

Who are not suspended.

Who will be playing in the next game.

Oh yeah, Horry's hip check has everything to do with race.

Chris Broussard, go fuck yourself, you racist piece of shit.

Moneyball is Overrated

Billy Beane might be the hero to many bloggers and sportswriters, but he isn’t to me. The main theory of moneyball is that defense and speed don’t matter. It doesn’t matter if a base runner goes station to station just as long as he has a good OBP. It also doesn’t matter that he can’t field his position and has 20 errors a year. The theory is that errors, stolen bases, and good defensive plays don’t make as much of a difference over the course of a season as getting on base and extra base hits. Extra base hits and high OBP are nice, and the moneyball theory has been proven right over the course of a season. But the goal of sports is to win a championship. Something moneyball has never done.

The flaw in the theory is that while over the course of a regular season stolen bases, errors, and good defensive plays don’t matter, in the post-season they can change a game. The post-post season is about winning one game at a time and ultimately a series. One great defensive play can give a team momentum that can be carried into the next game and for the rest of the series. In the post-season a team doesn’t face a number 5 starter, and they rarely face a number 4. When facing the best pitching in the league scoring runs is at a premium. One of the best ways is to manufacture a run, something moneyball is against. If a guy hits a lead-off double late in a 1-1 game the next hitter should be bunting, if the lead-off guy gets on base by a walk or single he should try and steal, and the hitters need to give themselves up to get the run in. Of course a three run homer is better than a sac fly, but how many three run homers do you think Johan Santana is going to give up?

So until the A’s get some rings on their fingers then moneyball is a failure, and those who practice it, fools.