Saturday, June 18, 2005

...Florida Baseball

Yeah, it's the second baseball entry in a row here in My Take On... Hey, can't all be my evil politics. But yeah, another conversation, and another thought about baseball. This time, instead of Barry Bonds, and instead of throwing made up statistical measurements around like some low cost sabermatrician, I'm just looking at Florida Baseball.

Baseball, leading up to the 1990s, had 26 teams. 14 in the AL and 12 in the NL. None of those 26 teams were in the state of Florida, home to such large markets as Tampa Bay and Miami. At that time, Florida baseball was the prodigious minor league system within the state, and college baseball. Then, in two consecutive rounds of expansion, when baseball went from 26 to 28, then from 28 to 30 teams, there was major league baseball in the state of Florida.

The Marlins first game was in 1993. A few seasons later, the Tampa Bay Devil Rays kicked things off. Both have had interesting histories.

In the short time that the Marlins have existed, they've taken the World Series twice. In the short time that the Devil Rays have existed, they've managed to be not the last place team in the American League East just once, and after that foray into the lofty heigths of 4th place last year, they're now in last place, 11 games back just from being in fourth, and 16.5 out of the running for being in first place.

And both now have their problems.

The Marlins are being evicted. After 2010, they're going to no longer be welcome to play their home games in Dolphin Stadium, because the stadium wanted to explore more lucrative sporting options. Like cricket. Seriously, one of the sports listed in the press release by the owners of Dolphin Stadium made it clear that they would rather host cricket events than Marlins baseball. That means that the Marlins are running out of time, as it takes, on average, 3-4 years to build a stadium. One year to finalize designs, and two to three to build the thing. The problem is that the Marlins have failed to secure all the funding that is necessary to build a new stadium. They've blown by several deadlines that have been put into place by MLB, and I'm guessing the league is going to start running out of patience with the team. My guess is that if they don't have funding in place by the end of the 2006 calendar year, that a one year search for a new city will launch, with a new site for the Marlins announced in 2007 or 2008 to give Las Vegas (or wherever else) a chance to build their stadium. That's 18 months that Miami has to save the Marlins. And that's me being kind.

The Devil Rays have another problem. For the last few years, they've been able to look good by comparrison, as they were drawing more people than the Montreal Expos. Last season, the Expos averaged 9,356 fans per game. Pathetic. A big part of why the team has moved, and nearly quadrupled it's number of fans per game. The Devil Rays managed just shy of 7,000 more fans per game. Just over 16,000. The problem is that attendance has falled off, even from this pathetic number, to the tune of 3,000 a game. 13,241 per game. And that's being skewed high by the fact that Red Sox fans manage to sell out Tropicana field (and I'm guessing outnumber home fans by 3 to 1). They find themselves 6,000 fans per game behind the #29 team. The largest gap, by far, between any two consecutive teams on the list of fans per game.

I'm surprised that there's been no talk about Devil Ray relocation. I suppose that's because (1) there's a team that might be in more immediate need of relocation and (2) there might be the question of "yeah...but is there a city without a team that will draw better". I look at the cities that tried to bring in the Expos when they were moving. Only three of them really had a good chance at the team. And one of those was Northern Virginia, which is now out of the running, probably forever, cause hopefully the Nationals ain't going anywhere, and if they do, I doubt the area would be able to lure back a fourth team. That leaves Las Vegas, who I think would be the prime candidate to get the Marlins if they had to move, and Hampton Roads. Maybe Nashville, maybe San Antonio. Hard to say how excited cities are if they didn't try for the 'Spos.

I wouldn't be surprised if Florida is baseball free by 2015. If the Marlins have to move, then after that, cities that want baseball will see that there have been two relocations in one decade (after over three decades without a relocation) and that there is a team that could possibly be courted. It's kinda sad, and it'll be interesting to see how things turn out.

Friday, June 17, 2005

...Barry Bonds

I was talking about Barry Bonds with someone today. It was a general progression of conversation. It started with debating that Casey (of Casey at the Bat) should have been intentionally walked. This makes sense, because first base was open, and he was, by the evidence in the poem, the most powerful hitter that mudville had. But, we wondered, was the IBB even a strategy back when Casey at the Bat was written. The answer is...probably not. Casey was written at 1888, and the earliest evidence of the intentional walk I can find is 1896, so Casey predated the strategy by 8 years.

Then, through the searches about IBBs, we found some old articles about the thought that there might be a Barry Bonds rule. Some kind of rule that would respond to the obscene number of walks that Bonds was getting (and this was written after a season he had just gotten in the 60+ range, and in 2004 he drew 120 doses of pitcher respect). Of course, the natural problem with any IBB rule is that the classic IBB (catcher stands up, and takes a step away from the batter, then just plays catch with the pitcher for four throws) would be replaced with walks that, while intentional, don't look such.

But this all brought us to the king of IBBs. Barry Bonds. And the one thing that amazes me about him. There is one element of his ability that I don't think any steroid scandal can take away. He has, likely, the best eye in the game. He can pick out balls, he can choose his pitches, and he probably creates more quality at bats than most players can hope for. Even without his unquestionably larger-than-they-used-to-be arms, he's dangerous, just because he knows when to swing, and when not to.

So, I started crunching the numbers of the 2004 season, and was surprised.

First, his main stats. 373 AB. 135 H. 232 BB. 41 K.

So we know he got 120 IBB, which leaves 112 of those walks as "unintentional". (Though how many of those were just four unhittable pitches without being a classic IBB is unknowable). So, let's say that 485 plate appearances that he got legitimately pitched to. Of those, only 8.5% resulted in being struck out, and an amazing 23% of those resulted in being walked. Hits, home runs, anything power like that...that can be affected by steroids. But, knowing when to swing? That's pure talent.

Let's run a comparrison. Nick Johnson right now has the best batting average on the Washington Nationals, and one of the top five in the National League.

228 AB. 74 H. 40 BB (6 IBB). 46 K.

So, legitimate plate appearances? 262. 13% walks, 17% strikeouts.

Major league leader in walks this season is Adam Dunn (a left fielder for the Reds)

213 AB. 53 H. 50 BB (6 IBB). 70 K.

That's 257 of what I'm calling "legitimate" plate appearances. 17% walks, 27% strikeouts.

It's no coincidence that these numbers are nowhere near the numbers that Bonds manages. So yes, perhaps the home run record might be tarnished...but he might still be one of the best at-plate guys to ever shoulder a bat.

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

...being a product of my era

Something came to mind when I was sweating through an 80 degree apartment, and complaining to everyone who would listen/read about my lack of air conditioning...

One of those questions that people always ask (what people? You know, those people. Them. The kinds of people who ask these questions...) is "if you could live in any other era, which would it be?"

Oh god. Just shoot me!

I can't imagine that I would have lived to the ripe old age of 25 if I lived in any other era.

One of the things that people would occasionally point out to me while I was slogging through a few days without air conditioning is that AC is a fairly recent invention. Even more recent that it's widely available in private homes. When it was 90 degrees outside and 82 degrees inside, the only option was to be happy it wasn't 90 degrees inside, fan yourself, and just think some cool thoughts. I just can't do that! I'm built for the cold! I have blood about as thick as molassas, and when it gets hot out, there's no way to deal with it! I'd have collapsed of heat stroke and skin blistering and flaking off years ago.

Or take what I'm doing right now.

Right now I have two browser windows open. Two instant messanger programs. IRC. And a service for buying music whenever the fuck I want directly from the damn internets! I'm connected! I'm wired in! I love it!

For someone so introverted as myself, it's really the way to get out into the world. I've met so many more people and done so many more things than if I'd never had the internet. I've got people I consider close friends who are in England. I've been to Vegas. I've been to Austin. I've been BACK to Vegas. I would have never done any of this. And what the hell would I do with my free time if the internet didn't exist, if I couldn't be connected. I'd probably have died from boredom if I hadn't succumbed to the heat.

So.

What other age would I want to live in?

I can't think of any better time to be alive, or at least to be alive and myself, than right now. All those peopl who want to live in the middle ages? Fucking insane. The 1800s? Oh god no. Ladies and gentlemen, this is here. This is now. THIS is when it all is! For all the little foibles of the turn of the millenium, there has been no better time in human history to be alive, to be around, to just BE.

Live it up.

Friday, June 10, 2005

...Legislating comfort

There's something about the modern era of politics that always interests me. It's when people from opposite ends of the spectrum start to make the same arguements for seemingly (and actually) completely different issues. I just noticed one of these today.

There are those on the far right who are uncomfortable with the idea of homosexuals getting married. Oh please, like you know this is the real reason behind most of the legislation. Sure, it gets trumped up as protecting families, thinking of the children, and hiding behind the Bible. However, I think what it really comes down to is that a lot of the people against gay marriage are just thinking to themselves "well...ick!" They don't want it to happen, they'd be uncomfortable with it happening, so by God, the government needs to do something about it.

I think even most of those saying "But look! Leviticus!" are just using that as a way around saying, "oh come on, just look at that, I don't want to see that!" Sure, there might be some out there who view it purely from a liturgical point of view, but I bet if you polled them, most would say they're uncomfortable around a homosexual couple.

They're uncomfortable. Laws get passed.

Now, look at the other side of the spectrum, my fellow liberals, where most of the fight for banning smoking in public places comes from. Because they're protecting health, thinking of the children, and hiding behind suspect medical studies. However, what it comes down to is that they're uncomfortable being in the same are with a smoker. They think to themselves, "well...ick!" And so, by God, the government needs to do something about it.

It's all the same thing, though, this idea that the government should create and enforce laws based on people's comfort level. And it's not just these issues. Look at the FCC's crusade to "clean up" television and radio. Why? Cause people are uncomfortable about having seen 0.3 seconds of Janet Jackson's boob, or hearing Howard Stern.

Now, I'll admit... Howard Stern does make me uncomfortable. Being around smokers makes me uncomfortable. Being around ANY overly affectionate couple, whether it be male-female, male-male, and (in spite of stereotypes of my gender) female-female. I'm not as uncomfortable around swearing, but that's just one of the four. And yet... And yet I manage to just avoid situations where I am uncomfortable. I don't go to smoky bars. I ignore couples. I don't listen to Stern. Quite amazingly, I can manage to do these things, and still live a very happy life, and not think that it is the role of the government to legislate based on my comfort level. If it was, I could damn well think of a lot of things that would be illegal, including pushy crowds, Hummers (the cars...sicko), female body builders, and Maryland drivers. But apparently I'm just one voice, and there's a much louder one out there yelling "I don't like this! There should be a law!"

Friday, June 03, 2005

...St. Petersburg, Florida

This past week, I went back to St. Pete for the first time in several years. I think the last time I went there, I wanted to leave before New Years Eve, as I had plans with my girlfriend of the time. So yeah, it's been awhile. I was going there for a funeral. However, as I'd had, and acted on, the opportunity to say good-bye to my grandmother a little under a year ago, this wasn't so much an opportunity to say good-bye to her, as it was an opportunity to say good-bye to the city of St. Pete.

That's not to say I'm never going back. But I just don't know why or when. There's no real ties there anymore. I have relatives there, but none of a nature close enough to drop everything and go visit. I'd be more likely to head there if I was desperate to see a Devil Rays game, or if I get a chance to live my dream (or one of them, anyway) of doing an entire Spring Training with the Nats, as they'd have a few games in beautiful Al Lang Field.

St. Pete has changed in the time that I've known it. And thus, as the cliche goes, it has somehow remained very much the same. Two of the activities that my parents and I would always take part in while there (going to a St Pete Cards game, and visiting Sunken Gardens) are no longer possible. Many of the rest still exist. The Pier is still there, with the Columbia Restaurant, perhaps one of the finest Cuban/Spanish restaurants I know of. The Yacht Club is still there, and my great uncle is still a former Commodore of it, so we still get white glove treatment when we show up for a meal.

But St. Pete has decided that it needs to appeal to people slightly younger than retirement age. Thus has come about The Baywalk, a wonderful shopping destination witha few nice restauratns, some shops, and a beautiful Movico-run movie theater, where I went for my second viewing of Sith. However, the locals, the retirees, the older crowd, they hate it. Because it brings in the young crowd, with their hippity hop music, and their tendency to occasionally get into scuffles. The night before I arrived, there was apparently a knife fight at the Baywalk that started with an argument between two girls.

And the way the story is told is what makes me know that St. Pete hasn't really changed. Becasue, of course, it was two black girls. Which is made quite clear.

And the Yacht Club. Very much the southern institution, proper gentlemen having proper meals at a place that, until a half decade ago, still required ties for anyone over 18 who was eating there. Someone pointed out new members of the club. I'd never seen it before, but the club now had at the very least one black family who were now members. Or, as it was put, "see our new members? They've been out in the sun too long."

Now. I don't know. I realize that when I'm in St. Pete that I'm hanging around people of an age that these attitudes were, if not appropriate, were at least still quite common, quite the status quo. Still, it's quite a shock when this becomes quite apparent. I'm good about keeping my mouth shut, because these people are family, so I don't want to antagonize. Something my parents approve of (with my mom's side, I'm not allowed to talk politics, with my dad's, I just bite my tongue about stuff like this, and change subjects). I always feel just a little dirty about it, though.

The other problem is that St. Pete is quickly becoming too expensive to support itself. Having limited area to work with, what with being surrounded on three sides with water, there's no place to build out. And the underlying bedrock only supports so much building up. So what happens is that prices go up. And up. And up. Until there's now the big question about where the health care people will live. Where will the nurses afford homes to go to after a day of taking care of the eldery St. Pete population. Where will the waiters go, the waitresses, anyone in the service industry who cannot afford price tags that are just soaring. It's becoming too affluent for its own good. Eventually this will all crumble in on itself, and St. Pete will find itself full of people who need services, and devoid of people to perform these services, something that worries quite a few residents. But not nearly enough of them, as is evidenced by nothing happening to correct the problem.

And so it is that I flew out of Tampa on Wednesday, unsure if I would ever return, or under what circumstances I would if I did. St. Pete. I will miss your food. I will not miss your weather. I wish you luck.