And now, BSD on The Curse…

Dear Cupped Candles,

“The Curse.”Ahhhh, two words I hope to never hear again by the end of this weekend.As to what it is, there’s really no official definition to what it.I know Sars already touched on it a bit, so I’ll just add a few comments.

Let me state up front for the record that I’ve never believed in it, so my answer to you will be vague.The actual terming of “The Curse of the Bambino” is attributed to a book of the same name written everyone’s favorite asshole from the Boston Globe, Dan Shaughnessy.He picked up on it after conversations with George Vecsey from the New York Times.As stated before, I’m not a big fan of Shaughnessy.You never see a writer jump on or off a bandwagon more quickly than he does.He likes to think of himself as a populist writer, whereas I see him more as an opportunist writer.He wrote this book with details of every Red Sox collapse that occurred since 1918 (SEE?I’m not even afraid to say it!It’s like Harry Potter not being afraid to speak of or say Voldemort!Yes, I am the wizard king.I can do anything.Heh).Since then, the term has been attributed to him and he’s relished it.Believe me, if the Sox were to win the Series and he were to write a book about it, there would be mass book-burning rallies.That’s how much he’s despised in Boston.[“Not just in Boston.Cram it with walnuts, Dan.” — Sars]

So, yeah, I really don’t have much to offer you in terms of what the curse is, again since I don’t believe in it, but that’s where the term came from.However, let me refer you to a very insightful article written recently by Glenn Stoudt, as a special to ESPN.He traces the history of “The Curse” back to its origins; the article will surprise you.

BSD

Hi Sars,

As a Mets fan I am obliged to hate the Yankees, but I do feel your pain, and I thank your team for their contribution to one of the most exciting weeks of baseball I have experienced in a while. (And thanks to Alex Rodriguez, I heard my husband use the term “chump” for the first time ever in our four years together).

Here’s my situation. I grew up in the greater Philadelphia area, and as such, was a born Phillies fan. I had a coworker at a summer job who actually cried when Mike Schmidt retired — and I felt it. Then I went to college in the early ’80s and hooked up with a bunch of Mets fans, and had a ball. (Mookie hit the dribbler through Buckner’s legs on my birthday). So, in any game involving the Phillies, I back the Phillies. Any game involving the Mets and a team other than the Phillies, I back the Mets. (You want baseball pain? I have backed two teams featuring Juan Samuel.)

So, the question is, am I trying to have it both ways? Am I a loser and a waffler and spineless? Or is it okay to have primary and secondary teams? If I have to I can pull back to Phillies only, but can I have my Phillies and Mets, too?

Yeah, I love Curt Schilling

Dear Yeah,

A former Phillie fan who loves Curt Schilling?Has anyone checked you for a pulse lately?

Just kidding.I don’t think it’s that big a deal to root for a local team when you move.Or when the team moves.My dad grew up a Philadelphia As fan, but he doesn’t root for Oakland or anything (or the KC version); it’s a bit much to expect people not to watch anything but their favorite team if their favorite team plays thousands of miles from where they live.Ask the old Dodgers fans; some of them followed the team after it moved to California, but most of them just rooted for the even-more-pathetic Mets instead.Love the one you’re with, you know?

Dear Sars,

First of all, word on the ball team staying the Expos. If they name them the
Senators, that’ll be two major-league sports teams with the name “Senators,”
and that’s just way too many. Even though I am a devoted Ottawa Senators fan, I
realize it’s a pretty crap name.

That being said, my problem is this: I’m a junior in high school, and I am
fairly interested in politics — I read the newspaper, I watched the debates (and
Face the Nation and C-SPAN), I listen to NPR. I am very liberal. My school,
though, is in the conservative Republican suburbs, and every time anyone brings
up anything related to the election and I say something, I nearly get shouted
down by a wave of “Support our troops! John Kerry kills babies and eats them!
John Edwards is an evil lawyer! Don’t you care about AMERICA, you godless
liberal?”

How do I combat this? Should I just stop trying, because no one is going to
change their views based on what I say? What about when people try to change my
mind based on random claptrap that appears in the mail boxes? Is there a
non-snotty way of saying “Well, actually you’re wrong, but…”

Godless Liberal Hockey Fan

Dear Godless,

Not really.You can try to explain calmly that you do support our troops, which is why you think Kerry would make a better president, and you can try to go into that in depth…but this is the foundation of the “don’t discuss politics at the dinner table” principle; most people don’t want to hear facts or arguments in opposition to their own, and you won’t change anyone’s mind.Your best bet is to shrug that it’s a free country and change the subject.

Ooh!Ooh!Question!(Sorry, I’m typing what’s running through my
head.)

Why won’t Don Mattingly ever make it into the Hall of Fame?Speaking
of Donnie Baseball, whose heads will roll at The Madness of King
George?They say Cashman is safe…for now.

Sincerely,
My Jersey Says 23

Dear Jersey,

Oh, the Mattingly argument.Hope you people packed a lunch.

I came to the team in ’93 or ’94, so everything I’m about to say comes with the disclaimer that Mattingly’s best years were well behind him at that point, but even then, I was like, “That’s…it?This is the great Mattingly?I don’t get it.”And I have to tell you, I still don’t.It is my opinion that he’s tremendously overrated here in New York.

Your question implies that it’s received wisdom that he won’t get into the Hall, and I actually don’t know that that’s the case.I think most New Yorkers actually think it’s a foregone conclusion that he’ll get in, and I think it’ll happen eventually, probably via the Veterans’ Committee — and for the record, it’s not like I think he sucked.He had a few monster years in the mid-eighties, he won an MVP, he won the batting title once and came close a couple of other times, he led the league in slugging and total bases a few times, he won a lot of Gold Gloves — he was an outstanding player for a few years and a very good player for a few years.

But then he had five or six years where he just kind of…held the spot.I mean, he showed up to play every day and played as hard as he could.By all accounts, he’s a rad guy.But a few monster years don’t make a Hall of Fame career.

The other thing that I hesitate to point out, but will anyway, is that Mattingly teams did not win.They weren’t awful, but they didn’t win.The Yankees went to the postseason in ’81 (which, strike year, interpret that however you like).Mattingly came up in ’82.They didn’t make the postseason again until ’95.He retired after that season.The next year they won the Series.

Now, clearly Mattingly is not to blame for this, but a player’s Hall of Fame case is significantly affected by whether he played for championship teams.And…I believe they called Mattingly “the Franchise.”The problem with that is that said franchise kept finishing at .500.And again, this is by no means Donnie’s fault.You put Claudell Washington out in left with a walker, nothing good is going to happen with that.But I don’t think it’s entirely a coincidence, either.I think maybe a team got built around a guy who wasn’t producing nearly as much as he did in his peak years, and that was a tactical mistake by the GM.

I wanted to satisfy myself that my hunch is correct, so I broke it down via the Bill James point system delineated in Politics of Glory (p. 74 of the paperback edition).According to my math, Mattingly scores 33 out of a possible 100.Mays scores the highest of any player in James’s accounting with an 84.An “average” Hall of Famer pulls 45-50 points.James thinks candidates become “viable” at or above 35.

If Mattingly continues as a visible coach, and/or goes on to a managing career, he’ll surely get in; I think he’ll get in eventually anyway, as I said.But he didn’t play long enough, for well enough, on enough winning teams to make a strong candidate for the Hall.For a few years, he was the very best, but for rest of his career, people were looking at him through the lens of those great years.He did his best, he retired in a timely fashion (and I salute him for that), and if he did get elected to the Hall, I wouldn’t protest.But he’s not nearly as good as people remember.

As for firings…it’s the fashion in the post-millennial Bronx to quit before George has the chance to fire you (see: Zimmer), but I don’t know what’s going to happen over the winter.I think they find a way to dump Brown and Loaiza, but I don’t think any management heads roll.Yet.If it’s June of ’05 and the Yanks are in third, the beatings will then begin.

Dear Sars,

I love your site in general and your baseball-themed entries in particular, so it’s been great reading the recent Vines while the inevitable came to pass. If you can stand yet another baseball letter, I’ve got a question and comment.

First, the question. On YES’ postgame show after Game 7, Joe Girardi said he thought what the Yankees needed next year were a few “dirt-bags”: players who aren’t superstars, but play hard and aren’t afraid to get dirty. In your opinion, who do they already have who fits those criteria? Miguel Cairo comes to mind, and I think Alex Rodriguez tries sometimes, although it doesn’t come naturally to him. Also, can you think of anybody like that who’s available next year?

Now my comment. You talked about the Yankee-haters who come out of the woodwork this time of year and are now in their glory. I find those people much easier to deal with when they’re actually baseball fans. I chalk it up to jealousy and let it go. The ones who really get to me are the ones who couldn’t tell you how many bases there are if you put a gun to their heads. What gives you the right to give me shit when the only players you can name in all of baseball are Jeter, A-Rod, and “that guy in California who hits the home runs”? I shrug and walk away, but damn!

Signed,
Ha ha, NO, I did not punch a clubhouse wall, this wrist brace is for my carpal tunnel syndrome

Dear Brace,

I think Cairo is the only guy they have like that; maybe Bubba Crosby, but he got no playing time after Memorial Day and I’ll bet he gets traded.Brosius was like that, and I still miss Scotty Bro every day.

I agree with Girardi, but that isn’t the kind of player this front office arranges for, and the team is currently carrying a bunch of giant contracts that they can’t get out of — any “dirtbags” that come to the team over the winter will be bench guys.

Short form: Girardi’s right, but Girardi also knows full well that isn’t how Steinbrenner does things.There’s a reason Whitey Herzog doesn’t manage this team, you know what I mean?

[10/26/04]

Share!