Interleague Smitterleague

I've been waiting for someone to write this article so I could tear them apart. Thanks Rob Rains, that's a hell of a sweater. Me in regular typeface/Rob in Italics

Rains: Cardinals-Blue Jays? Yes, interleague play is for the birds

The Cardinals open a three-game series Tuesday night in Toronto. Pardon me if I yawn.
Understand, I have nothing against Canada. It is a fine country.

Communist.

I used to enjoy going to Montreal twice a year.

Pansy

I could tolerate Youpi, and the chorus of The Happy Wanderer from the fans at Olympic Stadium. I didn’t even mind going through customs, telling the nice agent that I had no intention of visiting a farm while I was in their country.

Which was a lie, Rob Reins smuggled trough 2,000 tons of Candian corn into our country during his tenure as a baseball beat writer. I can't prove this, but why would he prematurely deny it?
I
t’s interleague play that I can’t stand.

Here we go.

Having watched the Seattle Mariners and the Oakland A’s play the Cardinals for the past week, I realized once again how much I dislike one of Bud Selig’s favorite changes to the game. I will admit that when Bud created the wild card, I was against it too, but over the years I have changed my mind and realize that it has generated some extra excitement and interest late in the season that otherwise would not exist.
That is not the case with interleague play, however. It is an idea whose time has come and gone. If you are a National League club not named the Dodgers, Giants, Cubs or Mets, there are only two AL teams you would like to see on your schedule – the Yankees or Red Sox.

Really? I would think those were the LAST teams you would want to see. Unless you were the owner I suppose.

Those four NL clubs have built-in rivals who play in their same market, so those games are naturally appealing to fans in those areas. For all of the other match-ups going on over this two-week period? Forget it.
In addition to the Cardinals-Blue Jays excitement, fans in Washington are no doubt doing cartwheels about the Royals coming to town.

I'm going to guess that Rob has not been paying attention this year or he would know the Blue Jays are arguably the 4th best team in the AL. I think one would welcome a match up of two top teams in their respective leagues. Fans in Washington are still doing cartwheels over Strasburg being the second coming. But I'm sure when they see they get to beat the Royals for a few games they'll be even more ecstatic.

Thirty minutes up the road, fans in Baltimore are anxiously awaiting the arrival of the Florida Marlins. The Pirates certainly will have fans of the Texas Rangers excited, and I hope the Tampa Bay Rays have brought in extra ushers to handle the throngs of fans who will turn out with the Padres in town.

Because watching the Orioles play the Royals is much more exciting. Or the way people turn out to see the A's come into town.

Before anybody who likes interleague play, for some reason, points out there are a lot of uninteresting match-ups the rest of the season when the NL plays the NL and the AL plays the AL too, I will agree with you – with one major exception.

Alright he caught me there. Go on.

These teams are in the same league. They have to play each other. It’s how they decide who will win the division, and advance to the postseason.

Really? The A's vs. the Royals is how we decide who advances to the postseason?

I know the interleague games count in the standings too, and that’s part of the problem. It creates a tremendous imbalance in the schedule, especially for the teams that don’t have a natural rival, like the Cubs-White Sox, Mets-Yankees, etc.

Valid point number one, except EVERYONE has that imbalance. If you're not playing in the AL East, you have an advantage of playing a weaker schedule than anyone in the AL East. Schedules are not fair and balanced in any case.

The only true and fair way to decide a champion is by having every team in a division play the same opponents an equal number of times. That can’t happen with interleague play. Want just one example? The Dodgers play the Angels six times. Their division rival, the Padres, play the Mariners six times. The Dodgers also play a series each against the Yankees and Red Sox while the Padres get the Orioles and Blue Jays.

That's a rough break, but it's the luck of the draw. And it creates bigger matchups that generate more interest in the game. Kinda the price you pay if you are going to be one of the big boys.

Think the Dodgers won’t have a gripe if they lose the NL West to the Padres by a game?

Not really, I mean they have plenty of other games to make up the difference.

I also believe that interleague play has watered down the “importance” or at least interest in the All-Star game.

Using quotes around importance kinda ruins your own argument.

It used to be if you were a fan of an AL or NL team, it was your one chance to see your players play against the stars of the other league. Now, we have seen Ichiro, so there really is nothing special about seeing him in the All-Star game.

Yes, as you can tell Rob does not watch any baseball that doesn't directly involve his team. So the All-Star game is the only time he can watch Ichiro.

Interest in the All-Star game was so bad a few years ago that Bud came up with the idea of having the game decide home field advantage for the World Series. And, worse, he still believes it is a good idea. I would laugh if it wasn’t so sad.

Yes we all hate that idea except Bud.

One of the things which used to be special about the World Series was facing a team that you might never have played at all, or only in spring training. Now we get World Series match-ups that could be the third series those teams have played in that season. That will do a lot for the television ratings.

Because nothing hurts interest between competators like history. Wrestling and MMA know this. That's why they never do rematches. Plus the next season you get to see the previous World Series competetors face off again. Why? Because it's a premium matchup that can only be created if you have interleague play.

Baseball fans in St. Louis don’t care about the Toronto Blue Jays.

Damn!

If we wanted to watch that team play, all we have to do is buy the package from MLB and we could watch all of their games we want. I hope the phone lines aren’t overloaded when you call to place your order.

Do you not like baseball Rob? I love the MLB package. But I'm a baseball fan, so...

Baseball has always been, and I believe always will be, a regional sport. People generally cheer for one team.

As opposed to what sport where you cheer for multiple teams? How did this line get through the editor? What does that have to do with Interleague play anyway?

We like the Cardinals, or the Cubs, or the Reds, or the Phillies. We watch a game or listen on the radio because our team is playing. We watch and pay attention to match-ups in our league because they affect our team. If the Reds are playing the Giants, we care, because a Reds loss helps the Cardinals. A Tampa Bay loss, or another loss by the Orioles, does nothing for us.

That has nothing to do with interleague play. And why wouldn't pay just as much attention to the Reds playing the Giants as you would the Reds playing the Mariners?
The opinion of the people in charge of baseball, of course, is that fans love inter-league play. They will throw out statistics about attendance figures, and how the inter-league games out-draw other games on an annual basis.

Stupid statistics, proving Rob wrong.

Of course they do – because of the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Cubs, the Dodgers and those inter-city games.

Rob, I know you don't pay attention to teams not in your league, but the Yankees and Red Sox draw the same no matter what. So do the Dodgers and Cubs. Interleague play probably means less to them than anyone else.

I think there’s also some funky arithmetic going on. The Cardinals said they had a sellout crowd of more than 42,000 fans for Sunday’s game against the A’s. Funny, but right after that figure was announced, I took a close look at one section in the upper deck in right field. I counted 13 people and 225 empty seats. I guess all of those folks picked the same time to go to the restroom or buy a hot dog.
There were several other sections, also down the left field line, which seemed to be about the same. How could that game be counted as a sell out?

Because they go by tickets available vs. how many seats are available. If you never make a back section available for purchase then it can't count against you.


Because Bud wants us to believe how great interleague play is.

Yes, it's a grand conspiracy.

I know there will be some Cardinal fans in Toronto for this series, even though it won’t be as many as will pack Kaufmann Stadium in Kansas City this weekend. That still doesn’t mean inter-league play is a good idea. Those same fans would be in Cincinnati or Pittsburgh or Atlanta too, if the Cardinals happened to be playing there.

Well traveling with your team is an expensive proposition. Maybe MLB should work out deals with the airlines to make it more accessible for fans.

This is the 14th season of inter-league play, and the original stated intention was that it would give baseball fans a chance to see all of the stars of the other league come through their city. Yes, that’s why the Cardinals have never played in Baltimore, and the Texas Rangers have never played in St. Louis, and why the Cardinals went to Detroit three years in a row.
In those 14 years, the Red Sox have played three regular-season games in St. Louis, the same number as the Yankees. Both series came in 2005, the final year at Busch Stadium II. I guess we will have to start building Busch Stadium IV to get those teams to come back again.
Either that, or play them in the World Series. Now, that sounds like an idea that not even Bud Selig or baseball could screw up.

I have no witty ending. I like interleague play, I think it freshens things up. On a small sample size I always try to get tickets to whatever team from the other league my local team plays. I mean if your a Brewers fan wouldn't you get tired of play the Pirates 20+ times a year? Well maybe not.

Case Closed.

Good Article Part VIII

This article by Steve Kelley. My second ever article on here was about me falling for a columnists bad prediction. Steve Kelley actually has the guts to call himself out on his poor prognostication (after he gets an email about it at least). It's good to see a journalist taking responsibility for their poor guesses and not assuming everyone has the memory of a mouse.

How to Cherry Pick Stats

By Mark Potash. (Me in regular/him in Italics)

Like a shot of "5-Hour Energy," interleague play gives the White Sox a boost when they need it most. No crash later? We'll see about that.
On paper, the Sox are the second-hottest team in baseball, having won six straight games and 10 of their last 11 to reach the .500 mark (34-34), still 5 1/2 games behind the Twins and four behind the Tigers in the AL Central. (The Rangers have won eight straight and 11 of 12).
The big question is whether or not this is fool's gold. The bulk of the Sox' recent streak has come against the Cubs, Pirates and Nationals. The Cubs are in a season-long funk, losing 12 of their last 19 games; the Pirates have lost 18 of their last 23, including 12 in a row; the Nationals have lost 15 of their last 21 -- three of their six victories in that span came against the Pirates.

So far those are some pretty good reasons why this was a mirage. The White Sox Pythagorean btw is 32-36.

There's no doubt that interleague play is a drop in class for American League teams. It has been for years and this one is no different. The AL leads the NL 92-76 so far in 2010. American League pitchers in particular have an easier time against National League teams -- and vice-versa. Roy Halladay is 8-3 with a 1.51 ERA against NL teams this season. He's 0-3 with a 6.86 ERA against the AL. And he's been in the National League for less than three months.

Yes, let's take his ERA from this year as opposed to the 07-09 when he had an ERA of 3.03 in the AL (does include interleague games from those years. But still). And let's keep in mind he put those numbers up in the AL East. That is example #1 of cherry picking stats.

This is old hat for Sox fans. In 2008, a 12-6 record in interleague play helped keep them afloat in the AL Central and they barely hung on to win the division title. Last year the Sox were 28-33 when interleague play (they were 12-6 again) sparked a 15-5 run that put them 2 1/2 games back in the division. The momentum kept them in contention until August, when they lost nine of 10 against the Red Sox, Yankees and Twins and were done.

That right there just screams "We are not a playoff caliber team."

But as dubious as the competition has been of late, the current streak has a better feel to it this year.

So one reason this year is different is Mark feeeeeels differently about it. Solid.

The Sox are winning because they've been playing better baseball -- and not just because they're playing weaker competition.

Um, you just spent half the article pointing out how they were facing weaker teams. They beat the Cubs, Pirates, and Nationals. Went 8-1 against them. What was their record against the Red Sox, Yankees and Twins last year again? It seems you mentioned it earlier.

Stephen Strasburg literally looked like Sandy Koufax on Friday night...

Here is a picture of Koufax. Here is one of Strasburg. Or is this Koufax and this Strasburg? (side note, the chest hair in the second picture is nuts.) I can't tell because they LITERALLY look alike.

...and the Sox found a way to win. I don't recall that happening too often in previous years.

That's cause Strasburg wasn't in the league in previous years. And I'm willing to bet the White Sox won other games 1-0. Hey here's one now! (45 second to find that on bbref.com. Most of that was loading time.) Here's a game a Chicagoan should probably remember, especially if it's their job to cover sports. That's being specific. If I want to be a jerk I'll point out that the White Sox 'found' a way to win 79 times last year.

In the current 10-1 streak, the Sox have won with timely pitching,

I don't have any clue what that means. The pitchers get people out during the course of the game. Not before the game or after the game, but during. That's timely.

timely hitting and timely defense.

See previous joke.

They're 4-1 in one-run games (14-8 for the season). They've won four games with three runs or less.

One-run games are mostly luck. The other stat...I don't know what that signifies. At all.

They've pitched 32 of 34 scoreless innings with a one-run lead.

They have a good bullpen, but that stat seems more like luck than anything. Not the scoreless innings part, but when they come.

They've allowed 14 runs in 11 games after the fourth inning -- eight of them while they had leads of four runs or more.

I love baseball and baseball stats. I have NO IDEA what the first half of that means. He just randomly picked 11 games and randomly picked an inning as a cut off. It means less than nothing. Mark, listen, just say the White Sox bullpen is doing well and give their ERA.

They're scoring runs for Freddy Garcia (55 in his last nine starts) and playing defense for Jake Peavy.

I can imagine Paul Konerko standing up in front of all the starters on opening day:
"Alright, so we, the offense, have come to the decision that we are only going to play the games half-assed. So each of you have to choose: we can play immaculate defense for you; or we can rock the ball on offense for you."
Buehrle: "Why can't you do both?"
Paul sighs, "Mark you just don't understand baseball. Now everyone choose quickly, I gotta get to the Blackhawks game."
"But we have a game tonight!"
Paul shakes his head: "Mark, you're really starting to become a problem."

When Garcia allowed three runs in the fourth inning to fall behind 3-1 against the Nationals on Sunday, the Sox responded with six straight hits and four runs for a 5-3 lead. Garcia pitched two scoreless innings and the Nationals didn't score again.

Yeah the relief staff really shut the Nats down. Shame they don't get any press from Potash. I mean you can't even mention Putz (ERA+ 203)? Or Santos (ERA+ 173)?

Yes it was the Nationals. And the Cubs. And the Pirates. But I would submit that while the Sox aren't as good as Kenny Williams thought, they've been an underachieving team all season.

According to their Pythag they're OVERachieving.

Sometimes a team like that just needs a little boost to get them on track. Of course you have to see it to believe it -- this is the White Sox we're talking about. But I have a feeling this season is not over yet.

And as we already established, Mark's feeeeelings are what matter. That and his horrible interpretations on statistics.

Case Closed!

Blogamania Goes International

This is a big moment for my blog. Never before have we ventured out of the continental United States to find bad sports journalism. I even ignored that Alaskan Telegraph column where they argued Pete Fuyoltic's heart and grit along with a young up and coming husky named Banana's would win him the Iditarod. We all know through sabermetrics that winning the Iditarod is about sled control and friction reduction rate.
Now, thanks to the big soccer thingy that's going on, and my ability to read English, I get to rip apart and article in My Telegraph UK. Sounds reputable enough, let's go (me in italics/Colin Farmeryin regular):

France’s ship goes down with barely a hand on deck…

When I read this headline on Google, I thought it was literal. As if France had a giant ocean liner that was sinking and the crew just abandoned ship leaving all the passengers to fend for themselves. I kinda feel bad for stereotyping...but not too bad.

France’s World Cup hopes lie in tatters ce soir after a truly shocking performance against Mexico which lacked the fundamantals any supporter of a team deserves.

I'm sorry, what lacked "fundamantals (sic)?" Besides your grammar! Ohhhhh! English put down! Seriously though, read that line. What exactly lacked fundamentals? Their hopes? Mexico? It's a poorly constructed sentence.

The scoreline may have only said 0-2 at the end, but if France had shipped five goals they could hardly have complained. From the pre-match rituals, le Capitaine Patrice Evra had the demeanour of a man who looked like he didn’t believe his team could win the toss, let alone the match.

How on Earth did you judge that? You give us no indication. You just magically decided that Evra didn't believe his team could win. No reason like his shoulders were slumped, he was sobbing and running away, nothing.

En France they expect any player to mouille le maillot – literally soak the shirt – when they turn out for their team. There were several who barely broke sweat.

I really like the idea that Farmeryin has a sweat per minute index he keeps track of to determine how hard a player is trying.

The rest of the article is the usual, you should start the younger players to get them experience stuff and actual soccer analysis. Blah...
But this goes to show that even in England, their columnists grand inferences based of no real information.

Case Closed.