Thursday, April 29, 2004
A Golden Age or Fool's Gold
It appears that I've been mentioning the Boston Red Sox a quite a bit on this blog. As you can see the automated ad system that Blogger is using (which is based on "key words" within the page) has decided to throw up a couple of ads for Boston Red Sox jackets. A Yankee fan hawking Red Sox jackets... what is up with this baseball season?
The last time I wrote in this space was two weeks ago tonight, there were already some small surprises. And now as the first month of the season nears completion, surprises have turned into stories.
How about the Tigers and Brewers both over .500, both with better records than the Yankees. How about the disappointing Blue Jays and Phillies.
Then there are the stories that really aren't surprises, but still getting a ton of ink: Roger Clemens' start in Houston, Barry Bonds making the BALCO fiasco irrelevant with a batting eye that discovers planets, the Red Sox pitching staff and the punchless homeless Expos.
I'd say this season is off to a fine start, overall. Of course the nature of the baseball season is that there is always stuff to write about, always new players, new storylines and new records. The first time that's happened in a game since 1947. The worst start of that pitcher's career. The hottest streak in that hitter's career. It's not a problem of finding material. The challenge is wading through all of it.
Rob Neyer is really pumped about the start of the season, to say the least. A week ago today, his column was titled "A Great, Great Game." And in it he made the case that 2004, that would be right now, is the best time to be a baseball fan. Ever.
His two main points: The accessibility of the games thanks to things like MLB's Extra Innings package, which allows my buddy in North Carolina to follow his Red Sox and scout the Yankees. And there's also MLB TV through the Internet, which I tried this month with mixed results. A couple of thoughts on MLB TV:
1) There are two screen options. One is about 2" x 2". The other is full screen. There is no in between, and that drove me nuts. To watch the small screen you need a magnifying glass. To watch the full screen you have to sit about 10 feet away from the monitor because the resolution is so poor. I talked to a MLB.com representative recently and they informed me that more screen options are in the pipeline.
2) It was nice to have, but as of right now my laptop (which is my only gig right now), is not wireless. To make the baseball-through-your-computer thing really cool, you need to be wireless. Especially if you have a family and don't have the luxury to sit in front of a computer screen for three hours.
3) I've cancelled my subscription, so my access will run out next week. The wireless factor might cause me to re-order in the future, or if the races look good in September. I also don't have the time to take advantage of it. I watch primarily two teams: the Yankees and the Red Sox. Since I don't need to watch them on my computer (they're blacked out for me anyway on MLB TV), the only games I'm watching on the computer are match-ups like San Diego-San Francisco, Kansas City-Cleveland, Baltimore-Tampa. And that's great. I especially love watching West Coast games after the Yanks/Sox/Braves etc. have wrapped up on their respective cable networks. But I'm just not watching these other games enough at this point in the season to make it worth it.
Back to Neyer... His other main point was that this is the best time to be a reader of baseball books. Some of you might not give a crap about this kind of thing, but over the past four or five years, baseball books have become an important complement to the season for me. Last year it was Moneyball and My Turn at Bat (Ted Williams' autobio). This year I'm going to finally read Ball Four (shame on me that I haven't yet) and definitely pick up Montville's new biography on Teddy Ballgame, which by many accounts is one of the best sports biographies ever written.
But more than just books, the Internet has made baseball writing, good baseball writing, more accessible and therefore a more prevelant part of the season.
Neyer might have a point, but I do think he's probably a little too giddy from the Yankees being under .500. It's early, and if this season has a familiar script as in recent years past, then the populace will still have the same gripes: economic equality, competitive imbalance, etc.
His column today was much more interesting.
I tried to do the exact same study about a year ago, but I lost energy after a couple hours and never completed it. If I was writing for ESPN, I'm sure I would've gotten a second wind. In any case, Neyer writes towards the end:
If by "competitive balance" we mean that a significant number of teams have a fighting chance to win the World Series, then we're probably at an all-time high. In any given season since 1994, roughly four out of every 10 teams finished the schedule within five games of either a division title or the wild card, and that's a lot of teams.
Neyer is really high on baseball right now; his exuberance just beams through these columns. But I think he's being clouded a bit by this April, which has been a bit wacky. As he alludes to, the main thing that has saved baseball from appearing not competitive at all is the shift to three divisions and the Wild Card. And, and I think this is the most important, now that we've moved past those dynastic Yankee teams of the late-90s who stand up with any other four-year runs in the game's history, the nature of the baseball playoffs allows for things like last year's Marlins, and the previous year's Angels.
It appears that I've been mentioning the Boston Red Sox a quite a bit on this blog. As you can see the automated ad system that Blogger is using (which is based on "key words" within the page) has decided to throw up a couple of ads for Boston Red Sox jackets. A Yankee fan hawking Red Sox jackets... what is up with this baseball season?
The last time I wrote in this space was two weeks ago tonight, there were already some small surprises. And now as the first month of the season nears completion, surprises have turned into stories.
How about the Tigers and Brewers both over .500, both with better records than the Yankees. How about the disappointing Blue Jays and Phillies.
Then there are the stories that really aren't surprises, but still getting a ton of ink: Roger Clemens' start in Houston, Barry Bonds making the BALCO fiasco irrelevant with a batting eye that discovers planets, the Red Sox pitching staff and the punchless homeless Expos.
I'd say this season is off to a fine start, overall. Of course the nature of the baseball season is that there is always stuff to write about, always new players, new storylines and new records. The first time that's happened in a game since 1947. The worst start of that pitcher's career. The hottest streak in that hitter's career. It's not a problem of finding material. The challenge is wading through all of it.
Rob Neyer is really pumped about the start of the season, to say the least. A week ago today, his column was titled "A Great, Great Game." And in it he made the case that 2004, that would be right now, is the best time to be a baseball fan. Ever.
His two main points: The accessibility of the games thanks to things like MLB's Extra Innings package, which allows my buddy in North Carolina to follow his Red Sox and scout the Yankees. And there's also MLB TV through the Internet, which I tried this month with mixed results. A couple of thoughts on MLB TV:
1) There are two screen options. One is about 2" x 2". The other is full screen. There is no in between, and that drove me nuts. To watch the small screen you need a magnifying glass. To watch the full screen you have to sit about 10 feet away from the monitor because the resolution is so poor. I talked to a MLB.com representative recently and they informed me that more screen options are in the pipeline.
2) It was nice to have, but as of right now my laptop (which is my only gig right now), is not wireless. To make the baseball-through-your-computer thing really cool, you need to be wireless. Especially if you have a family and don't have the luxury to sit in front of a computer screen for three hours.
3) I've cancelled my subscription, so my access will run out next week. The wireless factor might cause me to re-order in the future, or if the races look good in September. I also don't have the time to take advantage of it. I watch primarily two teams: the Yankees and the Red Sox. Since I don't need to watch them on my computer (they're blacked out for me anyway on MLB TV), the only games I'm watching on the computer are match-ups like San Diego-San Francisco, Kansas City-Cleveland, Baltimore-Tampa. And that's great. I especially love watching West Coast games after the Yanks/Sox/Braves etc. have wrapped up on their respective cable networks. But I'm just not watching these other games enough at this point in the season to make it worth it.
Back to Neyer... His other main point was that this is the best time to be a reader of baseball books. Some of you might not give a crap about this kind of thing, but over the past four or five years, baseball books have become an important complement to the season for me. Last year it was Moneyball and My Turn at Bat (Ted Williams' autobio). This year I'm going to finally read Ball Four (shame on me that I haven't yet) and definitely pick up Montville's new biography on Teddy Ballgame, which by many accounts is one of the best sports biographies ever written.
But more than just books, the Internet has made baseball writing, good baseball writing, more accessible and therefore a more prevelant part of the season.
Neyer might have a point, but I do think he's probably a little too giddy from the Yankees being under .500. It's early, and if this season has a familiar script as in recent years past, then the populace will still have the same gripes: economic equality, competitive imbalance, etc.
His column today was much more interesting.
I tried to do the exact same study about a year ago, but I lost energy after a couple hours and never completed it. If I was writing for ESPN, I'm sure I would've gotten a second wind. In any case, Neyer writes towards the end:
If by "competitive balance" we mean that a significant number of teams have a fighting chance to win the World Series, then we're probably at an all-time high. In any given season since 1994, roughly four out of every 10 teams finished the schedule within five games of either a division title or the wild card, and that's a lot of teams.
Neyer is really high on baseball right now; his exuberance just beams through these columns. But I think he's being clouded a bit by this April, which has been a bit wacky. As he alludes to, the main thing that has saved baseball from appearing not competitive at all is the shift to three divisions and the Wild Card. And, and I think this is the most important, now that we've moved past those dynastic Yankee teams of the late-90s who stand up with any other four-year runs in the game's history, the nature of the baseball playoffs allows for things like last year's Marlins, and the previous year's Angels.
