The Detroit Tigers' new right fielder recently told Kevin Baxter of the Los Angeles Times (for an article published Sunday) that an openly gay teammate would be divisive in the locker room. "For me, as a Christian... I will be uncomfortable because in all my teachings and all my learning, biblically, it's not right. It will be difficult and uncomfortable." I do not doubt that when (not if, because the day will come, sooner or later), for the first time, an active professional athlete in America comes out publicly, it will be divisive, but Hunter (and others who would side with him) should be taken to task for being on the wrong side of that divide.
Is Hunter entitled to his opinion? Yes, he is. Are all opinions created equal? No, they are not. The particular opinion he is espousing, entitled to it as he is, is morally repugnant and a mark against his character.
I find Hunter's use the Bible as a shield for his bigotry distasteful as well. Hunter plays on the sabbath, keeps a neatly trimmed beard, and wears clothing made from mixed fabrics. He has also fathered multiple children out of wedlock. All of those put him in contradiction with various passages from the bible. If having a gay teammate would make Hunter uncomfortable, does he feel equally uneasy around his tattooed teammates, or those who've eaten shellfish? Those men have broken the Bible's code as well. If you would laugh off talk of mixed fabrics and facial hair as lesser issues, The Bible also teaches that slavery is okay. Yet all truly righteous people know it to be and acknowledge it as an abomination against human decency.
If (like 99% of Christians) you pick and choose which of the Bible's myriad (and oftentimes contradictory) teachings to follow, you're acknowledging that in the hundreds and hundreds of years since it was written, the world has changed, and you're enlightened enough to make a few distinctions and acknowledge that the book doesn't have everything just right. Once you've taken that step, to use the Bible as your sole support for any stance is merely a shallow exercise in self-service. It seems to me that the book's more powerful message, the one given far more attention in the text, is to love your fellow human being, and be good to them.
Hunter has a reputation for being a locker room leader, well liked by his teammates*. I am certain there are, among those teammates, many who share Hunter's view on homosexuality. I am also sure there are others who do not agree with him. I hope those men will step forward and speak out in support of any teammates, past, present, or future, who might feel unwelcome in the wake of Hunter's comments.
* It is somewhat surprising that Hunter may be so popular, given that he has sparked controversy with comments about teammates before. In a 2010 USA Today interview he referred to dark-skinned Latino baseball players as "impostors" while discussing the changing demographics in baseball. "People see dark faces out there, and the perception is that they're African-American. They're not us. They're impostors."
A similar situation arose in the NFL, when former Minnesota Viking Matt Birkwrote wrote an op-ed attacking gay marriage. In that instance, Vikings' punter Chris Kluwe responded with his own op-ed published by the Twin Cities Pioneer Press, in which he respectfully disagreed with his former teammate. Earlier this year, Baltimore Raven Brendon Ayanbadejo voiced his support for gay marriage, only to have a Maryland state delegate write a letter to Ravens' ownership, asking that they "order" their players to remain silent. Ayanbadejo did not, and Kluwe again stepped forward, this time penning a letter to the critical politician.
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing. Hunter's teammates, especially star players like Miguel Cabrera, Prince Fielder, and Justin Verlander, have the largest platform from which to take a stand against hate. Tigers manager Jim Leyland and owner Mike Ilitch and star players on other teams too, I would hope that when they're inevitably asked about Hunter's comments, they speak out in support of the LGBT community and human rights for all humans.
These rights are coming, but just as they did for African-Americans and for women, they are coming too slowly. The more voices that speak out for what is right, the more swiftly what is right will be done.
Angry Birds - Permainan Menyimpan Burung
Save The Birds
Permainan Angry Birds kali ini yaitu Save The Birds. Permainan ini pasti sangat seru untuk dimainkan, dimana kita mengharuskan memberikan makanan yaitu berupa apel pada burung yang lagi bertengger ditiang-tiang kayu. Permainan ini akan semakin sulit dimainkan ketika levelnya naik. Bagi yang penasaran dengan permainan ini, langsung saja untuk mainkannya.
Cara Mainkannya
Untuk memainkannya cukup menggerakkan kursor pada mouse laptop maupun komputer Anda dan mengarahkan ke burung yang sedang bertengger ditiang kayu yang ingin diberi makan yaitu berupa apel. Mungkin awal-awalnya cukup sulit untuk mengarahkannya, tapi kalau sudah jago pasti akan dikuasai. Ketika burung itu sudah memakan apel yang kita sudah berikan, maka burung itu akan senang dan terbang tinggi meninggalkan tempat tenggernya ditiang kayu tersebut. Itu menandakan bahwa Anda berhasil dan lanjut ke level berikutnya.
Angry Birds Shoot
Angry Birds Shoot
Halo teman-teman, sudah pernah main game angry birds yang satu ini yaitu "Angry Birds Shoot". Saya yakin teman-teman pasti suka dan di jamin seru. Anda tinggal menembak sasaran yang menjadi target kita.
Cara Memainkan
Cara memainkan cukup mudah, gunakanlah mouse sebagai alat kontrol senjata Anda. Arahkan senjata anda tepat pada sasaran yang menjadi target. Tembaklah sebanyak mungkin burung yang lewat untuk mendapatkan skor yang tinggi. Selamat mencoba!!
Angry Birds - Permainan Penangkap
Angry Birds – Birds Catcher
Permainan satu ini tidak kalah seru dengan permainan angry bird lainnya. Dengan tampil beda, kalian harus menembaki jaring laba-laba ke arah burung-burung yang sedang berterbangan. Tidak sedikit orang juga menggemari permainan ini, entahkah ini permainan terlalu mudah atau sebaliknya. Tapi yang jelas permainan ini cukup seru untuk dimainkan.
Cara Memainkan
Cara memainkannya cukup mudah dan simple, Anda tinggal mengarahkan senjata dengan menggunakan mouse yang ada pada laptop maupun komputer Anda. Kemudian arahkan sasaran jaring laba-laba tepat pada burung yang sedang berterbangan. Semakin banyak burung yang Anda tembak atau tangkap maka point Anda akan bertambah pula.
Angry Birds Bomb
Angry Birds Bomb
Ayo teman-teman jangan sampai Anda lewatkan permainan angry birds yang satu ini "Angry Birds Bomb". Permainan satu ini sangat seru dan mengasyikkan. Anda harus menghancurkan babi dengan menggunakan Angry Birds Bomb.
Cara Memainkan
Dalam memainkan permainan ini sangat mudah sekali. Anda tinggal meletakkan angry birds bomb pada tempat sekitar babi sebanyak 3 buah. Lalu klik tombol TNT yang ada pojok kanan atas, maka bom akan meledak seketika. Apabila babi keluar dari arena maka Anda akan lanjut ke level berikutnya. Selamat Mencoba mainkan gamenya.
Angry Birds - Permainan Mencocokkan
Angry Birds Matching
Satu lagi games angry birds yang patut Anda mainkan. Permainan mencocokkan karakter burung yang sama, dan permainan ini banyak orang sukai. Saya sendiri sangat senang memainkan permainan ini karena terbilang rumit dan mengasah otak kita berpikir. Permainan ini cocok bagi anak-anak yang ingin meningkatkan daya otak berpikir pada anak. Dan saya yakin anak-anak pasti suka dengan permainan ini.
Cara Memainkan
Cara memainkan sangatlah mudah, Anda tinggal mencocokkan karakter burung yang sama dengan menggunakan mouse. Disini cukup anda perhatikan dengan teliti karakter burung yang ingin disamakan, karena banyak karakter-karakter burung yang hampir sama tapi tidak mirip, disinilah tingkat kesulitannya belum lagi dibatasi dengan waktu yang sudah ditentukan. Untuk mencocokkan karakter burung tersebut terdiri dari dua yakni horizontal dan vertikal.
Angry Birds - Halloween Games
Angry Birds Halloween
Dengan latar belakang menakutkan dan musik yang seram membuat game angry birds satu ini sangat seru untuk dimainkan. Versi permainan ini hampir sama dengan games angry birds lainnya, dimana babi sebagai musuh yang harus dilawan dan juga pumpkins yang harus dihancurkan guna mendapatkan point yang banyak.
Cara Memainkan
Untuk memainkan permainan ini cukup mudah, Anda tinggal menarik ketapel dengan menggunakan mouse yang ada pada laptop maupun komputer Anda. Lalu lemparkan ke arah musuh atau lawan kita tepat pada sasarannya. Jika Anda berhasil menghancurkan lawan atau musuh kalian, maka Anda berhasil dan lanjut ke level selanjutnya. Sangat serukan?!! Ayo tunggu apalagi, ayo cepat mainkan games yang satu ini.
Angry Birds - Eliminasi Games
Angry Birds – Eliminasi Games
Permainan ini merupakan permainan berupa tumpukan-tumpukan kotak angry birds. Games Angry Bird ini terbilang cukup mudah, namun tidak sedikit juga orang suka dengan permainan satu ini. Dengan tampilan yang simpel dan praktis membuat orang betah untuk memainkan permainan ini.
Cara Memainkan
Permainan ini sangat mudah dimainkan, Anda cuma menekan tumpukan-tumpukan kotak angry birds yang sama dengan menggunakan mouse sebagai alat kendali Anda. Jangan biarkan tumpukan-tumpukan tersebut naik dan bertambah tinggi, jika itu terjadi maka permainan akan berakhir atau selesai. Usahakan tumpukan tersebut tidak sampai ke atas, lakukan itu sampai Anda lanjut ke level selanjutnya, cukup mudahkan??!!
Angry Birds - Serangan Balik
Angry Birds Counter Attack
Coba Anda mainkan game angry bird satu ini dijamin seru. Banyak suka dengan permainan ini, mungkin karena terlalu gampang atau mudah. Angry Birds counter attack atau kalau diartikan dalam bahasa Indonesia serangan balik, sesuai dengan judulnya kita harus menyerang balik babi dan menghancurkan yang telah mencuri telur milik dari si burung.
Cara Memainkan
Cara memainkannya sangatlah mudah, hampir sama dengan versi sebelumnya Anda hanya menarik ketapel dan diarahkan pada lawan atau musuh kita. Tembakkan sebanyak mungkin sampai batas jumlah yang telah ditentukan. Jika berhasil maka anda akan loncat ke level selanjutnya. Selamat Mencoba!!
Angry Birds Connect
Angry Birds Connect
Permainan Angry Birds yang tak kalah serunya untuk dimainkan yakni Angry Birds Connect. Permainan cukup bagus karena mengasah otak kita untuk berpikir dan menemukan jalan titik temunya. Permainan ini hampir sama dengan permainan onet dan saya rasa semua pernah memainkan game tersebut.
Cara Memainkan
Untuk memainkannya sangat mudah, hubungkan karakter burung yang sama. Tapi ingat kita tidak hanya asal menghubungkan saja, tapi butuh ketelitian untuk menghubungkan. Cari jalan yang mudah ditemukan untuk menghubungkan karakter burung yang sama persis. Jika Anda berhasil menghubungkan semua, maka Anda lanjut level selanjutnya tentunya dengan tingkatan lebih sulit lagi
Angry Birds - Permainan Meriam
Angry Birds Cannon
Jangan lewatkan games angry birds yang satu ini yaitu Angry Birds Cannon. Permainan ini cukup seru untuk dimainkan, saya sendiri sangat senang memainkannya. Selain mudah untuk dimainkan, games ini loadingnya cepat jadi Anda tidak perlu menunggu lama untuk memainkan games ini.
Cara Memainkan
Arahkan burung Anda tepat pada sasaran tumpukan-tumpukan babi. Tembak terus sampai tumpukan babi tersebut habis. Anda bisa mengganti burung dengan burung lainnya, tinggal pilih burung apa yang diandalkan sebagai senjata dalam menghancurkan pasukan babi tersebut. Jadi tunggu apalagi, segera mainkan gamenya.
Angry Birds - Keseimbangan Permainan Bola
Angry Birds Balance Ball
Satu lagi game angry birds yang paling banyak orang sukai. Permainan ini namanya permainan keseimbangan dimana Anda harus menjaga keseimbangan supaya bebannya tidak terjatuh. Permainan ini cukup sulit dimainkan karena diperlukan ketelitian dalam menjaga keseimbangan. Jadi jangan sampai anda lewatkan permainan yang satu ini.
Cara Memainkan
Cara memainkannya gunakan mouse yang ada pada laptop maupun komputer Anda lalu klik benda-benda yang menjadi tumpuan. Disini diperlukan kelincahan jangan sampai beban yang berada diatas tumpuan terjatuh. Apabila itu terjadi maka permainan berakhir dan harus diulangi. Jika Anda berhasil, maka Anda akan lanjut pada level selanjutnya.
Angry Birds - Babi Keluar!!
Angry Birds Pigs Out
Ada yang berbeda dengan permainan angry bird satu ini. Permainan ini kembali mengajak kita untuk berpikir untuk bisa lanjut ke level berikutnya. Awal-awalnya memang mudah tapi lama kelamaan makin sulit. Anda akan diberikan contoh bagaimana cara memainkan game ini.
Cara Memainkan
Cara memainkannya Anda tinggal menggaris atau memotong benda yang menjadi tumpuan babi. Jika babi tersebut jatuh maka Anda akan lanjut ke level berikutnya. Intinya bagaimana kita harus menghancurkan atau mengeluarkan babi dari tempat tersebut. Terkadang juga secara bersamaan babi dan burung berada diatas tumpuan tersebut, tinggal pintar-pintarnya kita saja supaya burung tersebut tidak keluar, yang harus Anda keluarkan adalah babi.
Angry Birds - Bomber Games
Angry Birds Bomber
Games Angry Bird yang satu ini patut Anda mainkan juga. Didalam permainan ini, Anda harus menembak babi dengan menggunakan senjata meriam yang sudah disediakan. Permainan ini cukup seru juga untuk dimainkan, bagi yang penasaran segera mainkan gamenya.
Cara Memainkan
Untuk memainkan game ini, Anda akan menggunakan senjata meriam yang lalu kemudian digunakan untuk mengumpulkan point dan juga menembak babi yang lagi bertengger ketakutan. Apabila Anda berhasil mengalahkan babi maka akan lanjut level berikutnya. Permainan ini boleh dibilang sulit, karena kita harus mengarahkan betul-betul kesasaran dengan tepat, jadi perlu ketelitian lagi dalam memainkan game ini.
Angry Birds Es Krim
Angry Birds Es Krim
Permainan yang satu ini hampir mirip dengan angry birds counter attack. Yang membedakannya adalah objek atau lawan yang dihadapi. Dipermainan ini tidak musuh melainkan es krim yang menjadi sasaran objek para burung pemarah. Game angry bird ini cukup seru untuk Anda mainkan mengisi waktu kosong atau lagi ingin menghilangkan strees.
Cara Memainkan
Cara memainkannya tarik ketapel dengan menggunakan mouse yang ada pada laptop maupun komputer Anda. Arahkan dengan tepat, jika sudah terasa tepat selanjutnya lepaskan karet ketapel tersebut guna mendapatkan es krim sebanyak-banyaknya. Lakukan berulang-ulang sampai batas waktu yang telah ditentukan.
Angry Birds - Chicken House
Angry Birds - Chicken House
Satu lagi permainan angry birds yang menarik untuk kalian mainkan yakni Chicken House. Dalam permainan ini kalian akan diajak memecahkan teka-teki untuk menjatuhkan dan menghancurkan ayam yang lagi bertengger. Tidak hanya ayam saja yang berada disitu, kalian akan menemukan juga telur ayam yang kalian harus hancurkan.
Cara Memainkan
Gunakan mouse sebagai kapak atau alat kendali Anda dalam memotong dan menghancurkan benda-benda. Benda-benda yang dihancurkan seperti kaca dan kayu, lakukan sampai ayam atau telur ayam jadi hancur dan tidak tersisa sedikit pun. Jika sudah hancur semua, itu berarti anda berhasil dan lanjut ke level berikutnya.
Angry Birds - Samakan Burung
Angry Birds - Couple Birds
Di games angry birds berikutnya yaitu Couple Birds dibutuhkan kecepatan untuk mendapatkan hasil tertinggi. Permainan sangat seru dimainkan dan tidak sedikit juga orang menyukai permainan ini. Tidak hanya anak-anak saja menyukainya tapi orang dewasa pun suka dengan permainan ini.
Cara Memainkan
Cara memainkannya sangatlah mudah, Temukan dua burung yang sama, kemudian klik untuk menghapusnya, lakukan dengan cepat karena permainan ini dibatasi dengan waktu. Apabila waktunya habis maka permainan akan berakhir. Gunakan mouse yang ada pada laptop maupun komputer Anda sebagai alat kontrol untuk mencocokkan burung tersebut.
Angry Birds Bertahan
Angry Birds Rose Defender
Silahkan Anda coba game angry birds yang satu ini. Sekilas cerita permainan ini, dimana burung yang sudah menyiapkan 9999 bunga mawar untuk pacarnya, tapi tiba-tiba babi datang dan mengambil semua mawar tersebut. Akhirnya burung itu marah dan menghancurkan babi tersebut membabi buta.
Cara Memainkan
Gunakan tombol atas dan bawah yang ada pada keybord laptop maupun komputer Anda. Terus untuk menembak babi-babi tersebut gunakan tombol space. Jangan biarkan babi itu lolos dan mengambil bunga mawar itu pergi jauh.
Angry Birds - Play Tiny Birds
Angry Birds - Play Tiny Birds
Satu lagi permainan angry bird yang patut coba Anda mainkan yakni Tiny Birds. Permainan ini merupakan salah satu permainan favorit semua orang. Tiny Birds hampir sama dengan Angry Birds Matching, dimana Anda harus mencocokkan atau menyamakan karakter burung yang berbeda-beda.
Cara Memainkan
Sebagaimana dengan permainan Angry Birds Matching, Anda harus mencocokkan atau menyamakan karakter burung yang sama sebanyak 3 atau lebih, baik itu secara vertikal maupun diagonal. Cari sebanyak-banyaknya untuk mendapatkan skor tertinggi. Selamat Mencoba!!
Star Wars: What Happens Next?
Last Wednesday I got a text from my girlfriend, which is how I learned Disney has paid $4 billion for Lucasfilm and would begin production on Star Wars: Episode VII with the intention of releasing it in 2015, followed by sequels in 2017 and 2019. My reply text was a combination of shocked excitement and confused nonsense. I spent the rest of the day thinking about it, without ever quite figuring out quite how I felt. I'm still not sure, but I've at least had time to organize my thoughts into (semi) coherence. In Part I I wrote about the place the Star Wars galaxy has held in my life. Now I try to examine what the Disney deal means to me.
Because I know how immensely popular Star Wars remains (my job as an elementary school teacher makes that clear on a daily basis) , I know there's no chance I'll actually make it the rest of my life without seeing Episodes 1, 2, and 3 again, even though I'd prefer not to. Someday I'll have children, and while I like to imagine I can somehow keep the prequels a secret, their dopey friends and the world at large will make that impossible. I'll tell them the new ones aren't good and maybe buy myself a little extra time, but realistically, at some point I'm going to be sitting on the couch while Jar Jar Binks pontificates on the meaning of life to my kids.
I am sure this deal means we're going to see a lot of crossover between the Star Wars galaxy and the world of Disney. There's already an ad with Darth Vader visiting Disneyland and I imagine that's only the tip of the iceberg. I expect that before too long, Star Wars will have it's own theme park, much like The Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Orlando. I could do without seeing Chewbacca and Donald Duck in a screaming match over a heated game of Holochess or the Millennium Falcon in a race with Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, but as someone who's favorite commercial ever involves the use of Darth Vader to sell a car, I suppose I can't get too bent out of shape about this sort of thing. But I reserve the right to do just that once I see how bad it can get (and seriously, that VW ad is brilliant, a far better use of a young Darth Vader than Episodes I, II, and III).
One of my first reactions after hearing the news was to wonder what this means for future Blu-ray releases of the movie. George Lucas insists that the newer "Special Edition" of each film is the only real version that exists. That's a shame, because the "Special" versions are a major downgrade from the versions that existed throughout my childhood. Most infamously, Han Solo now only shoots Greedo after Greedo has shot at him first. This particular change caused such a stir that you can now find "Han Shot First" printed on any number of t-shirts and inked onto body parts. Is that an incredibly minor thing to quibble over? Not if you follow the thread of why such a choice would have been made by Lucas, and what it says about the character.
In addition, a horribly awkward scene featuring a poorly CGI-ed Jabba the Hutt is crammed into Star Wars as well. The changes to the other two films are less severe, but seemingly every other shot has had additional CGI work crammed into it, giving the movie a glossy, fake look. George Lucas seems to have little idea what made the originals so special, because every time he's gone back to fuss with them, he's taken away far more than he's added. I'm sure there are shots in Citizen Kane and The Godfather that didn't turn out exactly as Orson Welles and Francis Ford Coppala first imagined them, but the films are fantastic and there's no need to go back and mess with them.
Anyway, I hoped this news would mean Disney would want to rush its own DVD/Blu-rays out, to start profiting as soon as possible, but it turns out 20th Century Fox will retain the rights to the existing movies until 2020, and to Star Wars itself forever (unless of course it makes its own deal with the Mouse House). I suppose my best hope now is that no longer feeling the need to do as Lucas wishes, Fox releases the original version on Blu-Ray. I'm not buying the "Special Edition" set. Not now, not ever.
And what of the newly announced trilogy?
George Lucas is said to be handed over the reins now, meaning that the biggest problem in the prequels (far too much creative control in Lucas' own hands*) should be eliminated. A more nuanced storyteller can write the scripts, a superior director can coax better performances from the cast and rely less on CGI to tell the story. Someone who grew up with the originals and loves them the way I do can be in control of the important decisions.
* It should be noted that while creatively, I haven't been happy with Lucas, as a man, he's about to do a hell of a thing, donating the majority of the $4.05 billion from this sale to various children's charities around the globe. The world will be undeniably bettered by this massive act of generosity.
I would like to be excited about the prospect, but in the end, while I know I will go to see them all (and will probably have talked myself into being excited about them by then), I wish they weren't happening.
It has not yet been announced if the new movies will take place shortly after the events of The Return of the Jedi, with a new cast playing familiar characters, or if the story will jump further ahead and center around new characters. If it's the latter, what's the point? If we're going to be introduced to an entirely new story with new characters, what exactly makes it Star Wars? The Force? Lightsabers? Space battles? If the new trilogy is so far removed from what's come before, the connection merely a tenuous thread such as the existence of Jedi and Wookies, then it's little more than product branding, a cash grab, "call it Star Wars because it will sell better." It seems to be the only creatively worthwhile endeavor is to attempt to pick up the story where it left off (in 1983). But I don't love that idea either. The most obvious fear in that scenario might be that I don't want to see anyone but Harrison Ford play Han Solo, etc. But potential casting fears are of less concern to me than this: If the question is, "What happened next?" there is no answer I will really be happy with.
There are two possibilities for what happened when the Rebel Alliance's celebration with the Ewoks finally died down: Either some other danger quickly revealed itself, or everyone got on with a fairly normal life. There would be a lot bureaucratic type stuff to be taken care of. Han and Chewie would sit in on committee meetings while the Millennium Falcon was put on display at the Smithsonian of Coruscant. Lando would face the crushing debts caused by the disastrous end to things on Cloud City. Luke would be forced to confront a family secret more troubling than his father's turn to the dark side: the fact that the only young and attractive woman in the galaxy is his sister.
I love the Harry Potter series, but I hate the epilogue that was needlessly tacked on at the end of the final bookI don't want to picture the heroes in everyday, ho-hum lives. I don't want to see them after they've packed on some pounds, found boring jobs, and taken up smoking, just another mom and dad picking the kids up from daycare. In real life, heroes coming home and finding normalcy is a wonderful thing, but in my imagination, such normalcy is dull, drab, and depressing.
Of course, if the new trilogy picks up after Jedi, it won't be because things have gotten boring. It will mean there were other Sith lords in hiding and despite the destruction of the new Death Star and death of the Emperor, the struggle continues. So, what then, everything the Rebels have done was for nothing, or merely the build up to some greater evil? NO! That's garbage! I don't want anything that diminishes the importance of what happened in the originals trilogy. That's why I didn't mind when Peter Jackson left out the Scouring of the Shire when he adapted The Lord of the Rings. I understand why Tolkien included those scenes, but realistically, after The Battle of the Black Gate and the destruction on Sauron, it's a little hard to get too worked up about smaller skirmishes that may have followed.
Logically, I know something must have happened after the Ewoks could sing no more and the Rebels left Endor, but I don't need to know what. So long as I don't, my imagination can choose whatever it wants, even if I don't quite know that this is. The second it's turned into something concrete, it'll be something I'm not happy with.
I understand this is as it must be. There's too much money out there for everyone to simply leave it on the table. So, like millions of others, I'll keep an eye out for tidbits of information over the next couple years, I'll download the trailer and watch it a dozen times, and come opening weekend, 2015, I'll be there. I won't be able to stay away from it, but I wish it just wouldn't be there at all.
Because I know how immensely popular Star Wars remains (my job as an elementary school teacher makes that clear on a daily basis) , I know there's no chance I'll actually make it the rest of my life without seeing Episodes 1, 2, and 3 again, even though I'd prefer not to. Someday I'll have children, and while I like to imagine I can somehow keep the prequels a secret, their dopey friends and the world at large will make that impossible. I'll tell them the new ones aren't good and maybe buy myself a little extra time, but realistically, at some point I'm going to be sitting on the couch while Jar Jar Binks pontificates on the meaning of life to my kids.
I am sure this deal means we're going to see a lot of crossover between the Star Wars galaxy and the world of Disney. There's already an ad with Darth Vader visiting Disneyland and I imagine that's only the tip of the iceberg. I expect that before too long, Star Wars will have it's own theme park, much like The Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Orlando. I could do without seeing Chewbacca and Donald Duck in a screaming match over a heated game of Holochess or the Millennium Falcon in a race with Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, but as someone who's favorite commercial ever involves the use of Darth Vader to sell a car, I suppose I can't get too bent out of shape about this sort of thing. But I reserve the right to do just that once I see how bad it can get (and seriously, that VW ad is brilliant, a far better use of a young Darth Vader than Episodes I, II, and III).
One of my first reactions after hearing the news was to wonder what this means for future Blu-ray releases of the movie. George Lucas insists that the newer "Special Edition" of each film is the only real version that exists. That's a shame, because the "Special" versions are a major downgrade from the versions that existed throughout my childhood. Most infamously, Han Solo now only shoots Greedo after Greedo has shot at him first. This particular change caused such a stir that you can now find "Han Shot First" printed on any number of t-shirts and inked onto body parts. Is that an incredibly minor thing to quibble over? Not if you follow the thread of why such a choice would have been made by Lucas, and what it says about the character.
In addition, a horribly awkward scene featuring a poorly CGI-ed Jabba the Hutt is crammed into Star Wars as well. The changes to the other two films are less severe, but seemingly every other shot has had additional CGI work crammed into it, giving the movie a glossy, fake look. George Lucas seems to have little idea what made the originals so special, because every time he's gone back to fuss with them, he's taken away far more than he's added. I'm sure there are shots in Citizen Kane and The Godfather that didn't turn out exactly as Orson Welles and Francis Ford Coppala first imagined them, but the films are fantastic and there's no need to go back and mess with them.
Anyway, I hoped this news would mean Disney would want to rush its own DVD/Blu-rays out, to start profiting as soon as possible, but it turns out 20th Century Fox will retain the rights to the existing movies until 2020, and to Star Wars itself forever (unless of course it makes its own deal with the Mouse House). I suppose my best hope now is that no longer feeling the need to do as Lucas wishes, Fox releases the original version on Blu-Ray. I'm not buying the "Special Edition" set. Not now, not ever.
And what of the newly announced trilogy?
George Lucas is said to be handed over the reins now, meaning that the biggest problem in the prequels (far too much creative control in Lucas' own hands*) should be eliminated. A more nuanced storyteller can write the scripts, a superior director can coax better performances from the cast and rely less on CGI to tell the story. Someone who grew up with the originals and loves them the way I do can be in control of the important decisions.
* It should be noted that while creatively, I haven't been happy with Lucas, as a man, he's about to do a hell of a thing, donating the majority of the $4.05 billion from this sale to various children's charities around the globe. The world will be undeniably bettered by this massive act of generosity.
I would like to be excited about the prospect, but in the end, while I know I will go to see them all (and will probably have talked myself into being excited about them by then), I wish they weren't happening.
It has not yet been announced if the new movies will take place shortly after the events of The Return of the Jedi, with a new cast playing familiar characters, or if the story will jump further ahead and center around new characters. If it's the latter, what's the point? If we're going to be introduced to an entirely new story with new characters, what exactly makes it Star Wars? The Force? Lightsabers? Space battles? If the new trilogy is so far removed from what's come before, the connection merely a tenuous thread such as the existence of Jedi and Wookies, then it's little more than product branding, a cash grab, "call it Star Wars because it will sell better." It seems to be the only creatively worthwhile endeavor is to attempt to pick up the story where it left off (in 1983). But I don't love that idea either. The most obvious fear in that scenario might be that I don't want to see anyone but Harrison Ford play Han Solo, etc. But potential casting fears are of less concern to me than this: If the question is, "What happened next?" there is no answer I will really be happy with.
There are two possibilities for what happened when the Rebel Alliance's celebration with the Ewoks finally died down: Either some other danger quickly revealed itself, or everyone got on with a fairly normal life. There would be a lot bureaucratic type stuff to be taken care of. Han and Chewie would sit in on committee meetings while the Millennium Falcon was put on display at the Smithsonian of Coruscant. Lando would face the crushing debts caused by the disastrous end to things on Cloud City. Luke would be forced to confront a family secret more troubling than his father's turn to the dark side: the fact that the only young and attractive woman in the galaxy is his sister.
I love the Harry Potter series, but I hate the epilogue that was needlessly tacked on at the end of the final bookI don't want to picture the heroes in everyday, ho-hum lives. I don't want to see them after they've packed on some pounds, found boring jobs, and taken up smoking, just another mom and dad picking the kids up from daycare. In real life, heroes coming home and finding normalcy is a wonderful thing, but in my imagination, such normalcy is dull, drab, and depressing.
Of course, if the new trilogy picks up after Jedi, it won't be because things have gotten boring. It will mean there were other Sith lords in hiding and despite the destruction of the new Death Star and death of the Emperor, the struggle continues. So, what then, everything the Rebels have done was for nothing, or merely the build up to some greater evil? NO! That's garbage! I don't want anything that diminishes the importance of what happened in the originals trilogy. That's why I didn't mind when Peter Jackson left out the Scouring of the Shire when he adapted The Lord of the Rings. I understand why Tolkien included those scenes, but realistically, after The Battle of the Black Gate and the destruction on Sauron, it's a little hard to get too worked up about smaller skirmishes that may have followed.
Logically, I know something must have happened after the Ewoks could sing no more and the Rebels left Endor, but I don't need to know what. So long as I don't, my imagination can choose whatever it wants, even if I don't quite know that this is. The second it's turned into something concrete, it'll be something I'm not happy with.
I understand this is as it must be. There's too much money out there for everyone to simply leave it on the table. So, like millions of others, I'll keep an eye out for tidbits of information over the next couple years, I'll download the trailer and watch it a dozen times, and come opening weekend, 2015, I'll be there. I won't be able to stay away from it, but I wish it just wouldn't be there at all.
Star Wars: My Life Far, Far Away
Last Wednesday I learned about Disney's deal to buy LucasFilm from George Lucas for $4 billion and their announcement of a new trilogy to begin production soon, sending a new Star Wars movie into theaters in 2015. It was huge news for anyone (like me) who has loved the Star Wars galaxy for years. First, I want to share a bit about how Star Wars has fit into my life, ever since before I can even remember. These stories are probably similar to those of many others my age. In Part II I'll try to sort out and make sense of my reactions to the Disney news.
Like many boys (and girls too) born into middle class America in the 70's or early 80's, I grew up a huge Star Wars fan. I would love to have experienced the shock of learning that Darth Vader was Luke Skywalker's father, but I simply can't remember a time in my life when I didn't know that fact. I slept with my Luke and Han Solo action figures, til the paint had largely worn from their faces. I had the TIE Fighter where you could press a weapon and make its wings pop off. I had the tauntaun with the open stomach you could put Luke's frozen body into, I had an awesome red Boba Fett iron on t-shirt that I would probably trade one of my suits to have back today. I read books that told new adventures in the lives of Luke, Leia, Han, and the gang. On and on I could go.
It wasn't just the stuff though, Star Wars became the prism through which I imagined the bigger world. I'm not crediting Star Wars with "making me the man I am today" or anything, but I would be different without its influence. To this day, if you put me in a desert or on a rocky ledge, I'm taken to Tatoonine, where Luke grew up and later struggled to save his friends from Jabba the Hutt. If I'm walking through the woods, I'm on Endor, and the shield generator must be nearby. Two years ago Chicago was hit by a massive snowstorm. I woke up the next morning and made my way around the neighborhood, surveying the damage, and you'd better believe I kept my eye out for any wampa in the area. I'm not sure what it says that my mind still goes there as an adult, but... well, there you have it.
Are there more mature sources of inspiration for one's imagination? Sure. And Star Wars isn't my only source, but it was my springboard. Star Wars made me want to visit far off places and meet strange creatures. When I realized I couldn't go off and do those things (yet), I turned to books, where I could at least read about them and then imagine myself any place I wanted.
Back then kids didn't always own their favorite movies, home video existed but was not yet what it would become. When I was 11 years old or so The Return of the Jedi was on network TV one night, only the set at my mom's apartment wasn't working very well and the picture wouldn't come in right. My mom, top notch woman that she was (and is!), went out and rented it, so that I could watch it anyway. I watched it again the next day too, then a third time for good measure. I realized that if I had my own copies, I could watch them whenever I wanted, and so I saved $60 and bought whatever boxed set existed on VHS in those days. I don't know how many times I've seen each of the originals, over one hundred times apiece, I'm sure.
Like most Star Wars fan not yet old enough to be wary, I was overjoyed when it was announced that there would be a trilogy of prequels, that would tell the tale of how Anakin became Vader, Luke and Leia were separated, and... who knew what else?!
On the night the trailer for The Phantom Menace was released (not the actual movie, the TRAILER), I stood in line to get tickets to... whatever movie they were showing the trailer on. For some reason, that movie was "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer." After a couple other previews had played, the Fox and Lucasfilm logos came up, and some guy in the front screamed, "Everyone shut the fuck up!" Everyone did. I remember the first shot, a strange creature walking through the mist, I remember the music kicking in, and I remember a crazy looking guy with a double-lightsaber. Ten people got up and left when the trailer ended, having seen what they had come for, they wanted nothing more (if only I had been so lucky, the feature that followed was merely two hours of my life I would never get back). Like most Star Wars fans not yet old enough to be honest about it, when The Phantom Menace was finally released, I convinced myself that it was well done.
Attack of the Clones was released on the weekend I graduated from the University of Iowa, so my dad had driven over from our home outside Chicago and my mom and sister were in from California. Basking in the glow of my new diploma and the strange, but pleasant sensation of sitting in a movie theater with my sister and both of our parents for the first time in at least fourteen years, I watched Yoda turn back-flips and wield a tiny lightsaber. This was not the Yoda my mom had fallen in love with on Dagobah the year I was born.
By the time Revenge of the Sith was released, I'd confessed to myself that the first two hadn't been very good, but I was still really excited. After all, this was the end, it would connect the remaining dots, complete the story line, and maybe even give me a glimpse of a young Luke and Leia. I was with two of my closest friends, on a road trip from Portland to Las Vegas. We''d spent some quality time in California's National Parks, and could have spent more, but instead we stopped in Barstow, California on the film's opening day. I almost got thrown out of the theater before the movie started, for having smuggled in some Red Vines, but like Han Solo, I talked myself out of it (I didn't even have to shoot first). It was better than the previous two installments, but even in its best moments, it was a hollow shell of the originals.
As an elementary school teacher, I consider myself highly qualified to say that the Star Wars galaxy remains wildly popular with kids. Every day there are kids wearing t-shirts, carry lunch boxes and backpacks. On Halloween Star Wars themed costumes were probably second to only The Avengers. Many of the most popular items at my school's recent book fair were Star Wars related, far more popular than Harry Potter at this point. The originals are popular, but so too are the prequels, and the Clone Wars cartoon too. Because of their popularity among kids, I know there's no chance I'll make it the rest of my life without seeing the prequels again. Someday I'll have children, and while I like to imagine I can somehow keep them a secret, their dopey friends and the world at large will make that impossible. I'll tell them the new ones aren't good and maybe buy myself a little extra time, but realistically, at some point I'm going to be sitting on the couch while Jar Jar Binks pontificates on the meaning of life to my kids.
I understand that a massive part of the original trilogy's appeal to me is nostalgia. I grew up with them, and it's hard for anything to mean as much to an adult as our favorite things mean to us as children. If Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and The Return of the Jedi didn't exist, but then they came out in the next few years, they wouldn't lead me to put toys up in my apartment or salivate over goofy looking shoes and jackets.
At the same time, objectively, I think the originals are great films (especially the first two, both of which were nominated for Best Picture). They tell a great story and tell it with great heart. The characters you're supposed to cheer for are authentically likable, the characters you're meant to fear are scary, the characters you're supposed to learn from are wise, and Boba Fett is stone cold cool.
I'm in my thirties now, but the franchise still has a hold on me. The Star Wars poster I've had since I was a teen still hangs on my wall. There is a Slave I (Boba Fett's ship, obviously) made of Legos on the bookshelf in my room, along with a bunch of figures I got at Burger King when the last movie came out (I ate a LOT of Rodeo Cheeseburgers that summer). I don't have much of an interest in shoes or clothing, but if I was rich, I can guarantee you I'd own a whole bunch of the items from Adidas' Star Wars line (like the awesome limited edition Han Solo Carbonite sneakers, too bad their $250). Man, if I had those shoes, I would be so cool.
Anyway, the Disney announcement means that whatever small chance there was Star Wars would gradually fade from the American pop-consciousness is gone now. There will be continue to be more and more of it (and more and more) for years to come... for better or for worse.
World Series Game 4: The End
Tonight, for the first time in this World Series, we got some action throughout the game and drama at the end, an extra inning's worth, even. Each league's probable MVP hit a home run, while another star continued to have one of the worst World Series I can remember. San Francisco struck first, as they have all series, but Detroit managed to fight back and take the lead for the first time all series. Of course, they didn't keep it. And with the Giants winning 4-3 in the 10th though, there's now no baseball for months... So many months... Too many months... I guess I'll have plenty of time to brood about that later, for now let's just look back at Game 4 and the 2012 World Series.
The first inning was uneventful. Miguel Cabrera walked, but Prince Fielder struck out. Fielder had probably the worst World Series by anyone since at least 2008 (when Tampa Bay's Evan Longoria had his own nightmare series), going just 1 for 14, with 4 strikeouts, 2 double plays. He reached base just twice (on a single and a HBP), and after the HBP he wound up getting thrown out at the plate when he slid to the wrong side of the plate.
In the second inning the Giants got a ground rule double from Hunter Pence, followed by a triple from Brandon Belt, and took the lead. In the third they threatened again, putting two runners on, but didn't score. In the bottom of the inning, Detroit's Austin Jackson drew a walk, then Miguel Cabrera hit a high fly ball to right field. There was just enough oomph and just enough wind to carry it over the wall. Detroit had its first lead of the series.
The fourth and fifth innings passed without incident, but in the top of the sixth Buster Posey gave the lead back to San Francisco with a two-run homer of his own. Delmon Young didn't want to let GOOD players have all the fun though, so he hit a home run of his own a few minutes later and the game was again tied. Young now has 8 postseason home runs for Detroit, a franchise record. That's somewhat due to the extra rounds that Tiger greats like Hank Greenberg didn't have, but even so, Delmon clearly made some sort of deal at the crossroads.
The seventh, eighth, and ninth innings were quiet, aside from a bunch of strikeouts. By game's end, there'd been a combined 25 strikeouts, tying the World Series record (also held by the 1963 Dodgers and Yankees, the 1973 A's and Mets, the 2000 Yankees and Mets, and the 2005 White Sox and Astros).
After nine innings it remained unclear whether there'd be another ballgame or not this year, but there would be at least one more inning. Actually, exactly one more inning.
Unlikely designated hitter Ryan Theriot led the tenth off with a single, was bunted over the 2nd, and scored on a single by NLCS hero Marco Scutaro. In the bottom half of the tenth, San Francisco's closer, Sergio Romo didn't mess around. He struck out Austin Jackson swinging, struck out Don Kelly swinging (no, I don't know why Don Kelly was batting with the season on the line either), and finally, struck out Miguel Cabrera looking.
(I wonder if Tigers fans will block out everything else he's done for them team and focus on that, the way many Mets fans have with Carlos Beltran's watched strike three that ended the 2006 NLCS... I'm guessing they won't, because they're not New Yorkers)
With that, it was over, a 4-3 victory for the Giants. Sergio Romo and Buster Posey celebrated and were soon joined by their teammates near the mound. San Francisco has now won two of the last three World Series. Since the introduction of wildcards into the playoffs in 1995, the Yankees are the only other team to win multiple championships so close together.
In my Game 3 recap, I wrote about Detroit's scoring futility. They managed to score three runs in tonight's finale, but still finished with just six total. That's the fewest by any World Series team in 46 years.
Here is a reprint of the list I researched and put together, updated to include this year's Tigers:
#8. 8 runs - 1990 Oakland Athletics (lost 4-0)
#8. 8 runs - 1976 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#8. 8 runs - 1939 Cincinnati Reds (lost 4-0)
#8. 8 runs - 1922 New York Yankees (lost 4-0*)
#8. 8 runs - 1920 Brooklyn Robins (lost 5-2**)
#6. 6 runs - 2012 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0)
#6. 6 runs - 1914 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-0)
#5. 5 runs - 1950 Philadelphia Phillies (lost 4-0)
#3. 4 runs - 1963 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#2. 3 runs - 1907 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0*)
#2. 3 runs - 1905 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-1)
#1. 2 runs - 1966 Los Angeles Dodgers (lost 4-0)
* - Both the 1907 and 1922 World Series featured a game that ended in a 3-3 tie which was replayed entirely from the start, nullifying those three runs for each team.
** - The World Series was played as a best of 9 from 1919 to 1921. Scoring just 8 runs over seven games probably means that Brooklyn team (not yet known as the Dodgers) probably rates 3rd "best" on a more subjective look at the weakest scoring World Series teams.
Two other quick notes:
- Those 1905 Philadelphia Athletics are the only team in history to be shutout four times in the World Series.
- The 1918 Boston Red Sox hold the record for fewest runs by the WINNING team, having scored just 9 in their four games to two win over the Chicago Cubs that season.
The 2012 World Series will not go down in history is a very good one. Pablo Sandoval's three home runs in Game 1 were certainly the most memorable element of the series, and were plenty good enough to win him the World Series MVP Award. Beyond that, I'm not sure what will stick with me when I think back to this series. Detroit's inability to score, I suppose, and Fielder's special role in that ineptitude. Barry Zito getting a touch of redemption after many rocky years with the Giants is a nice story, especially as it came at the expense of baseball's best pitcher. Verlander's quest for his own postseason redemption will certainly be a popular story line the next time he finds himself in the playoffs.
Baseball's off-season brings its own interests and excitements, but none of it is the same as an actual game. I congratulate the San Francisco Giants on a tremendous season. Coming back from down 3-1 against St. Louis and then dominating Detroit the way they did, it's one hell of an accomplishment. At the same time, I'm reminded of something Hall of Famer Rogers Hornsby once said: "People ask me what I do in the winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."
If you need me, you can find me at the window.
The first inning was uneventful. Miguel Cabrera walked, but Prince Fielder struck out. Fielder had probably the worst World Series by anyone since at least 2008 (when Tampa Bay's Evan Longoria had his own nightmare series), going just 1 for 14, with 4 strikeouts, 2 double plays. He reached base just twice (on a single and a HBP), and after the HBP he wound up getting thrown out at the plate when he slid to the wrong side of the plate.
In the second inning the Giants got a ground rule double from Hunter Pence, followed by a triple from Brandon Belt, and took the lead. In the third they threatened again, putting two runners on, but didn't score. In the bottom of the inning, Detroit's Austin Jackson drew a walk, then Miguel Cabrera hit a high fly ball to right field. There was just enough oomph and just enough wind to carry it over the wall. Detroit had its first lead of the series.
The fourth and fifth innings passed without incident, but in the top of the sixth Buster Posey gave the lead back to San Francisco with a two-run homer of his own. Delmon Young didn't want to let GOOD players have all the fun though, so he hit a home run of his own a few minutes later and the game was again tied. Young now has 8 postseason home runs for Detroit, a franchise record. That's somewhat due to the extra rounds that Tiger greats like Hank Greenberg didn't have, but even so, Delmon clearly made some sort of deal at the crossroads.
The seventh, eighth, and ninth innings were quiet, aside from a bunch of strikeouts. By game's end, there'd been a combined 25 strikeouts, tying the World Series record (also held by the 1963 Dodgers and Yankees, the 1973 A's and Mets, the 2000 Yankees and Mets, and the 2005 White Sox and Astros).
After nine innings it remained unclear whether there'd be another ballgame or not this year, but there would be at least one more inning. Actually, exactly one more inning.
Unlikely designated hitter Ryan Theriot led the tenth off with a single, was bunted over the 2nd, and scored on a single by NLCS hero Marco Scutaro. In the bottom half of the tenth, San Francisco's closer, Sergio Romo didn't mess around. He struck out Austin Jackson swinging, struck out Don Kelly swinging (no, I don't know why Don Kelly was batting with the season on the line either), and finally, struck out Miguel Cabrera looking.
(I wonder if Tigers fans will block out everything else he's done for them team and focus on that, the way many Mets fans have with Carlos Beltran's watched strike three that ended the 2006 NLCS... I'm guessing they won't, because they're not New Yorkers)
With that, it was over, a 4-3 victory for the Giants. Sergio Romo and Buster Posey celebrated and were soon joined by their teammates near the mound. San Francisco has now won two of the last three World Series. Since the introduction of wildcards into the playoffs in 1995, the Yankees are the only other team to win multiple championships so close together.
In my Game 3 recap, I wrote about Detroit's scoring futility. They managed to score three runs in tonight's finale, but still finished with just six total. That's the fewest by any World Series team in 46 years.
Here is a reprint of the list I researched and put together, updated to include this year's Tigers:
#8. 8 runs - 1990 Oakland Athletics (lost 4-0)
#8. 8 runs - 1976 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#8. 8 runs - 1939 Cincinnati Reds (lost 4-0)
#8. 8 runs - 1922 New York Yankees (lost 4-0*)
#8. 8 runs - 1920 Brooklyn Robins (lost 5-2**)
#6. 6 runs - 2012 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0)
#6. 6 runs - 1914 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-0)
#5. 5 runs - 1950 Philadelphia Phillies (lost 4-0)
#3. 4 runs - 1963 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#2. 3 runs - 1907 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0*)
#2. 3 runs - 1905 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-1)
#1. 2 runs - 1966 Los Angeles Dodgers (lost 4-0)
* - Both the 1907 and 1922 World Series featured a game that ended in a 3-3 tie which was replayed entirely from the start, nullifying those three runs for each team.
** - The World Series was played as a best of 9 from 1919 to 1921. Scoring just 8 runs over seven games probably means that Brooklyn team (not yet known as the Dodgers) probably rates 3rd "best" on a more subjective look at the weakest scoring World Series teams.
Two other quick notes:
- Those 1905 Philadelphia Athletics are the only team in history to be shutout four times in the World Series.
- The 1918 Boston Red Sox hold the record for fewest runs by the WINNING team, having scored just 9 in their four games to two win over the Chicago Cubs that season.
The 2012 World Series will not go down in history is a very good one. Pablo Sandoval's three home runs in Game 1 were certainly the most memorable element of the series, and were plenty good enough to win him the World Series MVP Award. Beyond that, I'm not sure what will stick with me when I think back to this series. Detroit's inability to score, I suppose, and Fielder's special role in that ineptitude. Barry Zito getting a touch of redemption after many rocky years with the Giants is a nice story, especially as it came at the expense of baseball's best pitcher. Verlander's quest for his own postseason redemption will certainly be a popular story line the next time he finds himself in the playoffs.
Baseball's off-season brings its own interests and excitements, but none of it is the same as an actual game. I congratulate the San Francisco Giants on a tremendous season. Coming back from down 3-1 against St. Louis and then dominating Detroit the way they did, it's one hell of an accomplishment. At the same time, I'm reminded of something Hall of Famer Rogers Hornsby once said: "People ask me what I do in the winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring."
If you need me, you can find me at the window.
World Series Game 3: Futile Resistance
Not all World Series are created equal. In 2011 we were treated to close games, including an all-time classic in Game 6, while the 2012 edition is ready to go down as a clunker. San Francisco's 2-0 win last night leaves them one win away from a sweep, great news for Giants fans, but not so exciting for the rest of us. In the 2004 ALCS, the Red Sox proved that a team CAN come back from down three games to none, but that's the lone example in baseball history. In fact, of the twenty three World Series that have begun 3-0, twenty ended in a sweep and none went farther than a fifth game. The Giants are on the verge of their second championship in three years, and the Tigers don't seem interested in doing much about it.
In my Game 2 recap, I mentioned how much I enjoy a good pitching performance. Game 3 served as a good reminder that not every low scoring game is the result of strong pitching though. The Giants managed a second consecutive shutout, making them the first team since the 1966 Orioles to pull that off (more on those Orioles in a minute), but it wasn't because their starting pitcher was tremendous, or even particularly good. Ryan Vogelsong didn't allow a run, but he allowed multiple base runners in three of the first five innings, and didn't make it through his sixth.
In the 1st inning the Tigers had runners on first and second with one out, but Prince Fielder rolled into an easy double play. In the last two games, Fielder is 0 for 6 with 2 strikeouts, 2 double plays, and 1 horrible slide at the plate. That's about as bad as it gets, without having a ball bounce off your head to become a home run or something.
In the 3rd inning Detroit again had two runners on with one out, and again they hit into a double play (Quintin Berry this time). Then in the 5th, the Tigers managed to load the bases with only one out, but Berry struck out and then soon to be A.L. MVP Miguel Cabrea hit a weak infield fly to end the inning.
This wasn't a good pitching performance by Vogelsong, it was an escape act, aided by a complete inability to take advantage of numerous chances on Detroit's part.
The Tigers' Anibal Sanchez was arguably the better pitcher, despite taking the loss. He had a rough 2nd inning, allowing a walk, a wild pitch, a ball that was crushed to deep right-center field for a triple, and in the end, two runs. But in his six other innings, he allowed just four singles. The best pitching of the night came from San Francisco's bullpen, with Tim Lincecum dominating for multiple innings for the second time this series, and closer Sergio Romo making quick work of the 9th to end things. Neither of them allowed a hit.
The Tigers have now scored just three runs in the first three games of this series. I found myself wondering where that ranks, in terms of scoring futility in a World Series. I dug around and discovered that the last team to finish a a World Series with fewer than ten runs was the 1999 Atlanta Braves, who scored just nine while being swept by the Yankees. The Tigers could certainly score seven runs tonight (or win a game or two) and avoid that fate, but if tonight is anything like the first three games, Detroit is going to join this list:
FEWEST RUNS IN A WORLD SERIES:
#7. 8 runs - 1990 Oakland Athletics (lost 4-0)
#7. 8 runs - 1976 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#7. 8 runs - 1939 Cincinnati Reds (lost 4-0)
#7. 8 runs - 1922 New York Yankees (lost 4-0*)
#7. 8 runs - 1920 Brooklyn Robins (lost 5-2**)
#6. 6 runs - 1914 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-0)
#5. 5 runs - 1950 Philadelphia Phillies (lost 4-0)
#3. 4 runs - 1963 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#2. 3 runs - 1907 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0*)
#2. 3 runs - 1905 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-1)
#1. 2 runs - 1966 Los Angeles Dodgers (lost 4-0)
* - Both the 1907 and 1922 World Series featured a game that ended in a 3-3 tie which was replayed entirely from the start, nullifying those three runs for each team.
** - The World Series was played as a best of 9 from 1919 to 1921. Scoring just 8 runs over seven games probably means that Brooklyn team (not yet known as the Dodgers) probably rates 3rd "best" on a more subjective look at the weakest scoring World Series teams.
Two other random notes:
- That 1905 Philadelphia team was shutout in all four of their losses, which is a record.
- The 1918 Boston Red Sox hold the record for fewest runs scored by a WINNING team, having scored just 9 when they beat the Cubs in six games that year.
Unless the Tigers manage at least five runs between now and whenever the World Series ends, they're going to have scored the fewest runs in a World Series in 46 years. Almost any chance of winning the World Series is now gone for them, what remains to be seen is if they lose it in historically inept fashion.
In my Game 2 recap, I mentioned how much I enjoy a good pitching performance. Game 3 served as a good reminder that not every low scoring game is the result of strong pitching though. The Giants managed a second consecutive shutout, making them the first team since the 1966 Orioles to pull that off (more on those Orioles in a minute), but it wasn't because their starting pitcher was tremendous, or even particularly good. Ryan Vogelsong didn't allow a run, but he allowed multiple base runners in three of the first five innings, and didn't make it through his sixth.
In the 1st inning the Tigers had runners on first and second with one out, but Prince Fielder rolled into an easy double play. In the last two games, Fielder is 0 for 6 with 2 strikeouts, 2 double plays, and 1 horrible slide at the plate. That's about as bad as it gets, without having a ball bounce off your head to become a home run or something.
In the 3rd inning Detroit again had two runners on with one out, and again they hit into a double play (Quintin Berry this time). Then in the 5th, the Tigers managed to load the bases with only one out, but Berry struck out and then soon to be A.L. MVP Miguel Cabrea hit a weak infield fly to end the inning.
This wasn't a good pitching performance by Vogelsong, it was an escape act, aided by a complete inability to take advantage of numerous chances on Detroit's part.
The Tigers' Anibal Sanchez was arguably the better pitcher, despite taking the loss. He had a rough 2nd inning, allowing a walk, a wild pitch, a ball that was crushed to deep right-center field for a triple, and in the end, two runs. But in his six other innings, he allowed just four singles. The best pitching of the night came from San Francisco's bullpen, with Tim Lincecum dominating for multiple innings for the second time this series, and closer Sergio Romo making quick work of the 9th to end things. Neither of them allowed a hit.
The Tigers have now scored just three runs in the first three games of this series. I found myself wondering where that ranks, in terms of scoring futility in a World Series. I dug around and discovered that the last team to finish a a World Series with fewer than ten runs was the 1999 Atlanta Braves, who scored just nine while being swept by the Yankees. The Tigers could certainly score seven runs tonight (or win a game or two) and avoid that fate, but if tonight is anything like the first three games, Detroit is going to join this list:
FEWEST RUNS IN A WORLD SERIES:
#7. 8 runs - 1990 Oakland Athletics (lost 4-0)
#7. 8 runs - 1976 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#7. 8 runs - 1939 Cincinnati Reds (lost 4-0)
#7. 8 runs - 1922 New York Yankees (lost 4-0*)
#7. 8 runs - 1920 Brooklyn Robins (lost 5-2**)
#6. 6 runs - 1914 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-0)
#5. 5 runs - 1950 Philadelphia Phillies (lost 4-0)
#3. 4 runs - 1963 New York Yankees (lost 4-0)
#2. 3 runs - 1907 Detroit Tigers (lost 4-0*)
#2. 3 runs - 1905 Philadelphia Athletics (lost 4-1)
#1. 2 runs - 1966 Los Angeles Dodgers (lost 4-0)
* - Both the 1907 and 1922 World Series featured a game that ended in a 3-3 tie which was replayed entirely from the start, nullifying those three runs for each team.
** - The World Series was played as a best of 9 from 1919 to 1921. Scoring just 8 runs over seven games probably means that Brooklyn team (not yet known as the Dodgers) probably rates 3rd "best" on a more subjective look at the weakest scoring World Series teams.
Two other random notes:
- That 1905 Philadelphia team was shutout in all four of their losses, which is a record.
- The 1918 Boston Red Sox hold the record for fewest runs scored by a WINNING team, having scored just 9 when they beat the Cubs in six games that year.
Unless the Tigers manage at least five runs between now and whenever the World Series ends, they're going to have scored the fewest runs in a World Series in 46 years. Almost any chance of winning the World Series is now gone for them, what remains to be seen is if they lose it in historically inept fashion.
World Series Game 2: Running to Defeat
I know from dozens of trips to ball games, and from watching on TV with countless people over the years, that the vast majority of baseball viewers want to see a whole lot of scoring. Home runs are preferable, but in their absence, ground rule doubles, bloop singles, or horrific defense will all suffice. Whatever gets someone across home plate. I have a confession... I prefer pitching duels. That isn't to say I don't enjoy a good slug fest, but the games that make me happiest are the ones when both starting pitchers it going and the late innings approach with a sense that the first side to break will be going home empty-handed.
In Game 2, San Francisco's Madison Bumgarner (or "Mad Bum," as FOX's Tim McCarver kept pretending was a thing) and Detroit's Doug Fister traded zeros for most of the night. Bumgarner). For different reasons, neither of them could go the distance last night, but they both pitched wonderfully* and I enjoyed it a great deal. Frankly, a high scoring game would have been just fine too, I just wanted competitive baseball. Game 1 wasn't close, and neither were the last few games of the LCS round. The last time the score had been withing three runs in the 7th inning or later was last Wednesday, in Game 3 of the NLCS. Hooray for a little drama!
* In my Game 1 recap, I talked about the insistence by so many of forcing narratives onto events after they've happened. One such narrative was that Verlander didn't pitch well because he was rusty after a long layoff, but Fister and Bumgarner were both on the shelf longer than Verlander, so how were they able to succeed??? It's almost like a long layoff DOESN'T necessarily mean anything for a pitcher, and sometimes shit just happen...
Fister exited with no outs in the 7th, having thrown 114 pitches and walked the lead off man. That Fister was able to last til the 7th, much less pitch as well as he did, is somewhat shocking, given what happened to him the the 2nd. San Francisco's Gregor Blanco hit a screaming line drive back up the middle, and while McCarver initially said it had deflected off Fister's glove into center field, it was soon clear the ball had actually struck Fister's head. Fister never dropped to the ground, or seemed to be in much pain, but that sort of thing is awfully scary. Given how hard it is to gauge the severity of head injuries without serious tests though, I question whether it was an appropriate decision. Oakland's Brandon McCarthy was similarly struck by a line drive recently, and hours later they discovered he needed emergency brain surgery. Thankfully, Fister seems okay.
After Fister was pulled with no outs and a runner on 1st in the 7th, the Giants worked a walk and then got a great (lucky) bunt from Blanco that loaded the bases with nobody out. Brandon Crawford hit into a double play next, but the game's first run still scored, and it was the kind of night where one run seemed likely to be enough.
Why? Because after a couple shaky starts in the postseason and a poor last few weeks of the regular season, San Francisco's Madison Bumgarner pitched his best game since August. Only once all night did a Detroit get a serious scoring opportunity. It was the 2nd inning and Bumgarner had started things off by hitting Detroit's Prince Fielder with a pitch. The next batter, Delmon Young lined a double down the left field line, putting runners on 2nd and 3rd with nobody out. At least that's what WOULD have happened, if Tigers third-base coach Gene Lamont weren't out of his mind!
One of the cardinal rules of baseball is "Don't make the first out of an inning at home plate." Why? Because there are plenty of chances to get the runner in from third. Yet Gene Lamont chose to send Prince Fielder, nobody's idea of fast, instead of relying on one of the next three batters to collect a hit, or hit a long fly ball, or a slow grounder... It took a great throw, a wonderful play by catcher Buster Posey, and a horrible slide from Fielder, but he was correctly called out at the play. Detroit never got another runner to second base all night. Heck, they only got three runners as far as first after that.
Omar Infante reached in the 4th inning, but got himself picked off, Austin Jackson got there in the 6th inning but was stranded, and Miguel Cabrera got there in the 7th inning, but was immediately wiped away when Fielder hit into a double play (not his best night).
Detroit is not hitting the ball well right now, but they made matters even worse by shooting themselves in the foot in Game 2. Lamont sending Fielder in that situation was an awful decision (one Lamont said he "regretted" after the game). Fielder would have been safe at home though, if he'd been smart enough to slide to the proper side of the plate, away from Posey. Infante getting picked off was careless, but he would have been safe at second after the pick off throw to first with a better slide. Would Young have come through with another hit to drive him in? There's no way to know, but when you're getting so few opportunities, squandering them in such senseless fashion is a crime.
Bumgarner left after pitching seven scoreless frames, when he was pinch hit for in the bottom of that inning. It's possible Bruce Bochy would have gone to the bullpen for the last two innings anyway, but Bumgarner had thrown just 86 pitches and still looked strong (to my eyes, anyway). I would love to have seen him go back out for the 8th and 9th. It's one of the reasons that after holding an anti-DH stance for many years, I've come to prefer the American League's way of doing things. As I said, Bochy may have gone to the pen anyway, certainly Bumgarner would have been lifted if anyone reached base, but if there'd been a designated hitter in play, Bumgarner might have had the chance to go for the shutout, which is my favorite thing to see in a ballgame.
Alas...
As it was, two San Francisco relievers instead made quick work of the 8th and 9th and the Giants took a commanding 2-0 lead. Without any real rooting interest between these two teams, I'm just hoping for close games and a long series. If the Tigers are to have any chance of making that happen, they're going to have to wake up their bats and clear the cobwebs from their heads as Halloween approaches and the series moves to the Motor City.
In Game 2, San Francisco's Madison Bumgarner (or "Mad Bum," as FOX's Tim McCarver kept pretending was a thing) and Detroit's Doug Fister traded zeros for most of the night. Bumgarner). For different reasons, neither of them could go the distance last night, but they both pitched wonderfully* and I enjoyed it a great deal. Frankly, a high scoring game would have been just fine too, I just wanted competitive baseball. Game 1 wasn't close, and neither were the last few games of the LCS round. The last time the score had been withing three runs in the 7th inning or later was last Wednesday, in Game 3 of the NLCS. Hooray for a little drama!
* In my Game 1 recap, I talked about the insistence by so many of forcing narratives onto events after they've happened. One such narrative was that Verlander didn't pitch well because he was rusty after a long layoff, but Fister and Bumgarner were both on the shelf longer than Verlander, so how were they able to succeed??? It's almost like a long layoff DOESN'T necessarily mean anything for a pitcher, and sometimes shit just happen...
Fister exited with no outs in the 7th, having thrown 114 pitches and walked the lead off man. That Fister was able to last til the 7th, much less pitch as well as he did, is somewhat shocking, given what happened to him the the 2nd. San Francisco's Gregor Blanco hit a screaming line drive back up the middle, and while McCarver initially said it had deflected off Fister's glove into center field, it was soon clear the ball had actually struck Fister's head. Fister never dropped to the ground, or seemed to be in much pain, but that sort of thing is awfully scary. Given how hard it is to gauge the severity of head injuries without serious tests though, I question whether it was an appropriate decision. Oakland's Brandon McCarthy was similarly struck by a line drive recently, and hours later they discovered he needed emergency brain surgery. Thankfully, Fister seems okay.
After Fister was pulled with no outs and a runner on 1st in the 7th, the Giants worked a walk and then got a great (lucky) bunt from Blanco that loaded the bases with nobody out. Brandon Crawford hit into a double play next, but the game's first run still scored, and it was the kind of night where one run seemed likely to be enough.
Why? Because after a couple shaky starts in the postseason and a poor last few weeks of the regular season, San Francisco's Madison Bumgarner pitched his best game since August. Only once all night did a Detroit get a serious scoring opportunity. It was the 2nd inning and Bumgarner had started things off by hitting Detroit's Prince Fielder with a pitch. The next batter, Delmon Young lined a double down the left field line, putting runners on 2nd and 3rd with nobody out. At least that's what WOULD have happened, if Tigers third-base coach Gene Lamont weren't out of his mind!
One of the cardinal rules of baseball is "Don't make the first out of an inning at home plate." Why? Because there are plenty of chances to get the runner in from third. Yet Gene Lamont chose to send Prince Fielder, nobody's idea of fast, instead of relying on one of the next three batters to collect a hit, or hit a long fly ball, or a slow grounder... It took a great throw, a wonderful play by catcher Buster Posey, and a horrible slide from Fielder, but he was correctly called out at the play. Detroit never got another runner to second base all night. Heck, they only got three runners as far as first after that.
Omar Infante reached in the 4th inning, but got himself picked off, Austin Jackson got there in the 6th inning but was stranded, and Miguel Cabrera got there in the 7th inning, but was immediately wiped away when Fielder hit into a double play (not his best night).
Detroit is not hitting the ball well right now, but they made matters even worse by shooting themselves in the foot in Game 2. Lamont sending Fielder in that situation was an awful decision (one Lamont said he "regretted" after the game). Fielder would have been safe at home though, if he'd been smart enough to slide to the proper side of the plate, away from Posey. Infante getting picked off was careless, but he would have been safe at second after the pick off throw to first with a better slide. Would Young have come through with another hit to drive him in? There's no way to know, but when you're getting so few opportunities, squandering them in such senseless fashion is a crime.
Bumgarner left after pitching seven scoreless frames, when he was pinch hit for in the bottom of that inning. It's possible Bruce Bochy would have gone to the bullpen for the last two innings anyway, but Bumgarner had thrown just 86 pitches and still looked strong (to my eyes, anyway). I would love to have seen him go back out for the 8th and 9th. It's one of the reasons that after holding an anti-DH stance for many years, I've come to prefer the American League's way of doing things. As I said, Bochy may have gone to the pen anyway, certainly Bumgarner would have been lifted if anyone reached base, but if there'd been a designated hitter in play, Bumgarner might have had the chance to go for the shutout, which is my favorite thing to see in a ballgame.
Alas...
As it was, two San Francisco relievers instead made quick work of the 8th and 9th and the Giants took a commanding 2-0 lead. Without any real rooting interest between these two teams, I'm just hoping for close games and a long series. If the Tigers are to have any chance of making that happen, they're going to have to wake up their bats and clear the cobwebs from their heads as Halloween approaches and the series moves to the Motor City.
World Series Game 1: When Pandas Attack
Babe Ruth and Albert Pujols, two of the greatest players in history, each of them hit three home runs in a single World Series game (Ruth did it twice, in fact). Most famously, Reggie Jackson did it too. He got his nickname on account of that accomplishment. Pablo Sandoval got his nickname from a cartoon panda bear. But last night, in Game 1 of the 2012 World Series, Sandoval became the fourth member of this exclusive club. It's been said before and it will be said again: You can't predict baseball.
Because baseball cannot be predicted, but people have an innate need to find order in the world and love a good story, there is a strong tendency to look at events, after they've happened, and attempt create a narrative that explains why they happened, even though there is often so little rhyme or reason (this is true not just of baseball, but life in general).
A player who by appearances is less talented finds success, and we are told it is because they have such heart and an incredible work ethic, as if the majority of Major League players got there through indifference and sloth. A star player strikes outs in a key moment or has a bad showing in a big game, and we are told it is because they cannot handle the pressure, as though somehow their prior achievements all came when there was nothing on the line.
If a team filled with what seems to be a collection of oddballs and pranksters wins, it is because they were loose, relaxed, carefree. If a team filled with that seems to be a collection of oddballs and pranksters loses, it is because they weren't focused and didn't care enough. The cart is put before the horse, because many people have such a hard time accepting randomness, luck, and coincidence.
Justin Verlander is the best pitcher on the planet, so who could have predicted that he would last just four innings in Game 1, in a pitchers' park no less, against a lineup with a reputation for mediocrity? Certainly not me. Yet, there it was, happening before our very eyes. Quickly, there was talk online about how Verlander isn't a good big game pitcher, after all, he didn't pitch well in Game 1 of the 2006 World Series, was only so so in the 2011 playoffs (after having one of the best regular seasons by a pitcher in recent memory that year), and he got shelled in the All-Star Game this summer. Gee, that's a mountain of evidence, I guess it's true, he doesn't pitch well in big games.
Except, with the Tigers trailing Chicago almost the entire year, just about every start he made in the season's last three weeks was a big one and he went 4-0 with a 0.64 ERA. And oh yeah, he gave up just 1 run while striking out 11 in Game 1 against Oakland then pitched a complete game shutout against them in the do-or-die Game 5 five days later, then gave up just one run against the Yankees last week.
Perhaps Verlander, like just about every pitcher in just about every start, missed his spot a few times, and this time the other team put good swings on those pitches. Maybe the Giants offense has actually been a lot better this season than in recent years and maybe they've been especially effective after acquiring new players at the trade deadline. Maybe sometimes shit just happens!
On the opposite of things, was a pitcher no one would have been surprised to see last just four innings, San Francisco's Barry Zito. Zito signed a huge contract with the Giants before the 2007 season, and has been almost completely a bust for them since then, average in his best seasons, among the least effective starters in baseball in his worst. He wasn't even included on the team's playoff roster in 2010, when the Giants won the World Series.
Last night's contest was billed by FOX as a duel between Cy Young winners (Zito took home the award in 2002, while with the A's). but knowledgeable baseball fans had to laugh, knowing there are probably not two Cy Young winners in baseball who were further apart in 2011 and 2012 than Verlander and Zito. So, to further prove you can't predict baseball, Zito allowed just one run while lasting 5.2 innings, and left to a roar of applause from the San Francisco faithful.
When Zito exited, he was replaced by another former Cy Young winner, Tim Lincecum (who won the award in both 2008 and 2009). Lincecum had a rough season and has been pitching mostly out of the bullpen during these playoffs. He's been successful in that role, and last night was no different. He pitched 2.1 shutout innings and looked great. I wonder though, was it wise to use their potentially most dominating reliever in a game they were already leading by five runs? Perhaps a bird in the hand is worth two and the bush, and it was better to lock down Game 1 than to worry about the future, but if San Francisco's Game 2 starter Madison Bumgarner struggles tonight (as he has recently), the Giants may regret not having Lincecum available.
You know who else won't be available? Detroit's Jose Valverde. Valverde was a great success in 2011, collecting 49 saves without blowing a single opportunity. He was far shakier in 2012 and in the playoffs he's been an utter disaster. Against Oakland he came apart in the 9th inning of Game 4, costing the Tigers the game (and putting their season in jeopardy, saved only by the grace of infamous playoff hack, Justin Verlander's complete game shutout in Game 5). In Game 1 of the ALCS against the Yankees, Valverde let a 4-run lead get away in the 9th, giving up home runs to noted titans of power, Ichiro Suzuki and Raul Ibanez.
He hadn't pitched since then, as Detroit skipper Jim Leyland felt he needed some time off to get his head and mechanics in better shape. Last night, with the Tigers already down five runs and likely behind to stay, was seen as an opportunity to let him build his confidence back up, so that he could be used in important situations later in the series. Instead, after striking out Lincecum, Valverde gave up four consecutive hits, allowing another two runs to score, and was pulled. Valverde is completely lost at the moment, his velocity and control both a mess. The next time he pitches in a Major League game had better be next spring, or Leyland should be drawn and quartered.
The ups and downs of various pitchers are important story lines to keep an eye on during the rest of the series, but Pablo Sandoval, the King Fu Panda, is the big story for now. His was probably the most unlikely 3 HR game in playoff history, when you consider that Sandoval hit just 12 home runs all season, there'd only been one 3 HR game in AT&T Park history (way back in 2000), and the home runs came against Verlander and Al Alburquerque (who hadn't allowed a home run in 56.2 innings over the last two years).
He had the best game of his life on the biggest stage there is. His name goes into the record books and he will now be mentioned with those of Ruth, Jackson, and Pujols, every time a player hits two home runs in a World Series game and steps to the plate, looking for a third. A performance like that (his third home run was a real "no effing way!" moment) is part of what makes baseball such a great game to follow.
Game 2 is tonight. Doug Fister will look to keep the Kung Fu Panda at bay, but the Tigers' bats are going to have to wake up if they're going to head back to Detroit with a win.
Because baseball cannot be predicted, but people have an innate need to find order in the world and love a good story, there is a strong tendency to look at events, after they've happened, and attempt create a narrative that explains why they happened, even though there is often so little rhyme or reason (this is true not just of baseball, but life in general).
A player who by appearances is less talented finds success, and we are told it is because they have such heart and an incredible work ethic, as if the majority of Major League players got there through indifference and sloth. A star player strikes outs in a key moment or has a bad showing in a big game, and we are told it is because they cannot handle the pressure, as though somehow their prior achievements all came when there was nothing on the line.
If a team filled with what seems to be a collection of oddballs and pranksters wins, it is because they were loose, relaxed, carefree. If a team filled with that seems to be a collection of oddballs and pranksters loses, it is because they weren't focused and didn't care enough. The cart is put before the horse, because many people have such a hard time accepting randomness, luck, and coincidence.
Justin Verlander is the best pitcher on the planet, so who could have predicted that he would last just four innings in Game 1, in a pitchers' park no less, against a lineup with a reputation for mediocrity? Certainly not me. Yet, there it was, happening before our very eyes. Quickly, there was talk online about how Verlander isn't a good big game pitcher, after all, he didn't pitch well in Game 1 of the 2006 World Series, was only so so in the 2011 playoffs (after having one of the best regular seasons by a pitcher in recent memory that year), and he got shelled in the All-Star Game this summer. Gee, that's a mountain of evidence, I guess it's true, he doesn't pitch well in big games.
Except, with the Tigers trailing Chicago almost the entire year, just about every start he made in the season's last three weeks was a big one and he went 4-0 with a 0.64 ERA. And oh yeah, he gave up just 1 run while striking out 11 in Game 1 against Oakland then pitched a complete game shutout against them in the do-or-die Game 5 five days later, then gave up just one run against the Yankees last week.
Perhaps Verlander, like just about every pitcher in just about every start, missed his spot a few times, and this time the other team put good swings on those pitches. Maybe the Giants offense has actually been a lot better this season than in recent years and maybe they've been especially effective after acquiring new players at the trade deadline. Maybe sometimes shit just happens!
On the opposite of things, was a pitcher no one would have been surprised to see last just four innings, San Francisco's Barry Zito. Zito signed a huge contract with the Giants before the 2007 season, and has been almost completely a bust for them since then, average in his best seasons, among the least effective starters in baseball in his worst. He wasn't even included on the team's playoff roster in 2010, when the Giants won the World Series.
Last night's contest was billed by FOX as a duel between Cy Young winners (Zito took home the award in 2002, while with the A's). but knowledgeable baseball fans had to laugh, knowing there are probably not two Cy Young winners in baseball who were further apart in 2011 and 2012 than Verlander and Zito. So, to further prove you can't predict baseball, Zito allowed just one run while lasting 5.2 innings, and left to a roar of applause from the San Francisco faithful.
When Zito exited, he was replaced by another former Cy Young winner, Tim Lincecum (who won the award in both 2008 and 2009). Lincecum had a rough season and has been pitching mostly out of the bullpen during these playoffs. He's been successful in that role, and last night was no different. He pitched 2.1 shutout innings and looked great. I wonder though, was it wise to use their potentially most dominating reliever in a game they were already leading by five runs? Perhaps a bird in the hand is worth two and the bush, and it was better to lock down Game 1 than to worry about the future, but if San Francisco's Game 2 starter Madison Bumgarner struggles tonight (as he has recently), the Giants may regret not having Lincecum available.
You know who else won't be available? Detroit's Jose Valverde. Valverde was a great success in 2011, collecting 49 saves without blowing a single opportunity. He was far shakier in 2012 and in the playoffs he's been an utter disaster. Against Oakland he came apart in the 9th inning of Game 4, costing the Tigers the game (and putting their season in jeopardy, saved only by the grace of infamous playoff hack, Justin Verlander's complete game shutout in Game 5). In Game 1 of the ALCS against the Yankees, Valverde let a 4-run lead get away in the 9th, giving up home runs to noted titans of power, Ichiro Suzuki and Raul Ibanez.
He hadn't pitched since then, as Detroit skipper Jim Leyland felt he needed some time off to get his head and mechanics in better shape. Last night, with the Tigers already down five runs and likely behind to stay, was seen as an opportunity to let him build his confidence back up, so that he could be used in important situations later in the series. Instead, after striking out Lincecum, Valverde gave up four consecutive hits, allowing another two runs to score, and was pulled. Valverde is completely lost at the moment, his velocity and control both a mess. The next time he pitches in a Major League game had better be next spring, or Leyland should be drawn and quartered.
The ups and downs of various pitchers are important story lines to keep an eye on during the rest of the series, but Pablo Sandoval, the King Fu Panda, is the big story for now. His was probably the most unlikely 3 HR game in playoff history, when you consider that Sandoval hit just 12 home runs all season, there'd only been one 3 HR game in AT&T Park history (way back in 2000), and the home runs came against Verlander and Al Alburquerque (who hadn't allowed a home run in 56.2 innings over the last two years).
He had the best game of his life on the biggest stage there is. His name goes into the record books and he will now be mentioned with those of Ruth, Jackson, and Pujols, every time a player hits two home runs in a World Series game and steps to the plate, looking for a third. A performance like that (his third home run was a real "no effing way!" moment) is part of what makes baseball such a great game to follow.
Game 2 is tonight. Doug Fister will look to keep the Kung Fu Panda at bay, but the Tigers' bats are going to have to wake up if they're going to head back to Detroit with a win.
Angry Birds Space Xmas
Angry Birds Space Xmas
Games angry bird yang satu ini merupakan permainan yang asyik untuk Anda mainkan. Inti dari permainan ini, bagaimana Anda menjatuhkan atau merobohkan susunan kotak yang merupakan jadi sasaran target kita. Bagi yang suka dengan permainan ini, ayo langsung saja kita mainkan gamenya.
Cara Memainkan
Permainan ini terdiri dari 18 tingkatan, dimana kalian harus merobohkan susunan kotak dengan burung yang telah tersedia sebagai peluru senjata Anda. Gunakan mouse yang ada pada laptop kalian. Tekan mousenya lalu tarik ketapelnya lalu lepaskan, usahakan tepat pada sasaran. Jika kalian berhasil menjatuhkan semua kotak tersebut, maka kalian lanjut ke level berikutnya. Selamat Mencoba!!
Alex Rodriguez in the Playoffs
I did not expect to find myself in the position of standing up for one of my least favorite players, but that's what it's come to. I'm basking in the glow of the Yankees being swept in a best-of-seven series for the first time since I was born, but the amount of blame being sent Rodriguez' way is far out of proportion and the way his entire career has been downgraded by some in the last few days is ridiculous. Rodriguez is one of the twenty or so best players in MLB history and during his time with the Yankees he's been the best player in the American League. He's had some bad postseason series, but so has just about everyone who's played in more than a handful of them.
Rodriguez has played in 75 postseason games in his career and has an .833 OPS over those games. That's not as good as his regular season figure of .945, but playoff games generally come against better teams, with better pitching, so it should be no surprise that the vast majority of players have lower offensive numbers in the playoffs.
Rodriguez is constantly being compared to Derek Jeter, whose postseason reputation is sterling, yet Jeter's postseason OPS is .838, almost identical to Rodriguez's. I certainly understand why Jeter is far more revered by Yankee fans, because he's played his entire career for them, has accomplished more in a Yankees uniform, and has been a key member of five World Series winning teams (compared to just one for Rodriguez). Still, the notion that Jeter has been an incredible playoff performer while Rodriguez has been a donkey is simply inaccurate.
Rodriguez's figure includes postseason appearances with the Mariners, and his OPS does drop to .807 if you only look at his time with the Yankees, but it's still not a dramatic difference. The Yankees of course have played in far more playoff games than any other team, there are 16 different players who've gotten at least 100 PA in the postseason with the Yankees in the last twenty years. Here they are, ranked by their postseason OPS:
Among the 50 best single postseason games for the Yankees since they returned to consistent success in 1995, Alex Rodriguez has five of them, the most of any player. Bernie Williams has four of them. Derek Jeter has three (as do Tino Martinez and Ruben Sierra). Keep in mind, Jeter has played in far more playoff games as a Yankee, yet Rodriguez has had more of the "best" games.
Here are the top ten WPA scores by a Yankee in a playoff game since 1995:
1) .828 - Raul Ibanez - Game 3, 2012 ALDS (home run to tie it in the 9th, another to win in the 12th)
2) .684 - Alex Rodriguez - Game 2, 2004 ALDS (4 hits, including a HR and game-tying double in the 12th)
3) .624 - Scott Brosius - Game 3, 1998 World Series (3 hits, including 2 home runs)
4) .614 - Alex Rodriguez - Game 4, 2004 ALDS (2 doubles, stole third and scored winning run in the 9th)
5) .587 - Jose Vizcaino - Game 1, 2000 World Series (4 hits, including game-winning single in the 12th)
6) .578 - Alex Rodriguez - Game 2, 2009 ALDS (2 hits, including game-tying home run in the 9th)
7) .567 - Raul Ibanez - Game 1, 2012 ALCS (2 hits, including game-tying home run in the 9th)
8) .530 - Tino Martinez - Game 4, 2001 World Series (game-tying home run with two outs in the 9th)
9) .505 - Bernie Williams - Game 1, 1996 ALCS (2 hits, including game-winning home run in the 9th)
10) .444 - Luis Sojo - Game 5, 2000 World Series (pinch-hit single in the 9th that scored the winning run)
Also, no Yankee during these last eighteen years has had as good a postseason as Rodriguez did in 2009. The Yankees' only championship in the last twelve years owes more to Rodriguez than any other player.
None of this is meant to degrade Jeter's postseason performance. He's been a very good player over his postseason career and has had some huge games in the playoffs over the year. Rodriguez has too though. If you're looking for someone to blame for the Yankees being swept from the ALCS, you need to widen your search and accept that there's plenty of blame to go around.
Ruth and Gehrig both had great World Series numbers. Joe DiMaggio did not. Carlos Beltran and Albert Pujols have been incredible in their postseason careers. George Brett and Paul Molitor were too. Mike Schmidt, Joe Morgan, and Ted Williams all did poorly. Rodriguez is comfortably in the middle, fairly average numbers among great players. All of these figures come in small samples, they matter more to us because the playoffs matter more, but they shouldn't be viewed as some sort of definitive statement on any particular player.
Rodriguez was awful this October, and I enjoyed the heck out of it. He's had other bad playoff runs too. Just like Jeter, just like Bernie Williams, just like just about every player lucky enough to play in more than one or two postseasons. He's had good runs too.
I've spent a lot of years rooting against Rodriguez now, but give the man his due, he's been a tremendous player.
Rodriguez has played in 75 postseason games in his career and has an .833 OPS over those games. That's not as good as his regular season figure of .945, but playoff games generally come against better teams, with better pitching, so it should be no surprise that the vast majority of players have lower offensive numbers in the playoffs.
Rodriguez is constantly being compared to Derek Jeter, whose postseason reputation is sterling, yet Jeter's postseason OPS is .838, almost identical to Rodriguez's. I certainly understand why Jeter is far more revered by Yankee fans, because he's played his entire career for them, has accomplished more in a Yankees uniform, and has been a key member of five World Series winning teams (compared to just one for Rodriguez). Still, the notion that Jeter has been an incredible playoff performer while Rodriguez has been a donkey is simply inaccurate.
Rodriguez's figure includes postseason appearances with the Mariners, and his OPS does drop to .807 if you only look at his time with the Yankees, but it's still not a dramatic difference. The Yankees of course have played in far more playoff games than any other team, there are 16 different players who've gotten at least 100 PA in the postseason with the Yankees in the last twenty years. Here they are, ranked by their postseason OPS:
- Hideki Matsui .933
- Jason Giambi .919
- Bernie Williams .850
- Derek Jeter .838
- Paul O'Neill .815
- Alex Rodriguez .807
- Johnny Damon .775
- Jorge Posada .745
- David Justice .721
- Tino Martinez .698
- Scott Brosius .696
- Robinson Cano .686
- Chuck Knoblauch .631
- Alfonso Soriano .622
- Mark Teixeira .617
- Nick Swisher .559
Cano is the Yankees' best player now, and has been for at least a couple years. Mark Teixeira has a massive contract. Why aren't they vilified the way Rodriguez is, when they've been far worse? Why is Tino Martinez held up as a "true" Yankee, when his postseason resume is so weak?
It has often been said that Rodriguez only plays well when the pressure is off, his home runs come late in blowouts, while he strikes out when the game is on the line. WPA (win probability added) is a statistic that measures the impact of every plate appearance and determines how much it increased or decreased a team's chances of winning. A home run hit when a team is already ahead by 8 runs adds very little, but a home run late in a close game has a big impact. A strikeout late in a close game has a big impact too, in the opposite direction. A player with a WPA of .20 for a game can be said to have added 20% of a win for that game. The higher a player's WPA, the more he's done to improve his team's chances of winning that game.
Among the 50 best single postseason games for the Yankees since they returned to consistent success in 1995, Alex Rodriguez has five of them, the most of any player. Bernie Williams has four of them. Derek Jeter has three (as do Tino Martinez and Ruben Sierra). Keep in mind, Jeter has played in far more playoff games as a Yankee, yet Rodriguez has had more of the "best" games.
Here are the top ten WPA scores by a Yankee in a playoff game since 1995:
1) .828 - Raul Ibanez - Game 3, 2012 ALDS (home run to tie it in the 9th, another to win in the 12th)
2) .684 - Alex Rodriguez - Game 2, 2004 ALDS (4 hits, including a HR and game-tying double in the 12th)
3) .624 - Scott Brosius - Game 3, 1998 World Series (3 hits, including 2 home runs)
4) .614 - Alex Rodriguez - Game 4, 2004 ALDS (2 doubles, stole third and scored winning run in the 9th)
5) .587 - Jose Vizcaino - Game 1, 2000 World Series (4 hits, including game-winning single in the 12th)
6) .578 - Alex Rodriguez - Game 2, 2009 ALDS (2 hits, including game-tying home run in the 9th)
7) .567 - Raul Ibanez - Game 1, 2012 ALCS (2 hits, including game-tying home run in the 9th)
8) .530 - Tino Martinez - Game 4, 2001 World Series (game-tying home run with two outs in the 9th)
9) .505 - Bernie Williams - Game 1, 1996 ALCS (2 hits, including game-winning home run in the 9th)
10) .444 - Luis Sojo - Game 5, 2000 World Series (pinch-hit single in the 9th that scored the winning run)
Also, no Yankee during these last eighteen years has had as good a postseason as Rodriguez did in 2009. The Yankees' only championship in the last twelve years owes more to Rodriguez than any other player.
None of this is meant to degrade Jeter's postseason performance. He's been a very good player over his postseason career and has had some huge games in the playoffs over the year. Rodriguez has too though. If you're looking for someone to blame for the Yankees being swept from the ALCS, you need to widen your search and accept that there's plenty of blame to go around.
Ruth and Gehrig both had great World Series numbers. Joe DiMaggio did not. Carlos Beltran and Albert Pujols have been incredible in their postseason careers. George Brett and Paul Molitor were too. Mike Schmidt, Joe Morgan, and Ted Williams all did poorly. Rodriguez is comfortably in the middle, fairly average numbers among great players. All of these figures come in small samples, they matter more to us because the playoffs matter more, but they shouldn't be viewed as some sort of definitive statement on any particular player.
Rodriguez was awful this October, and I enjoyed the heck out of it. He's had other bad playoff runs too. Just like Jeter, just like Bernie Williams, just like just about every player lucky enough to play in more than one or two postseasons. He's had good runs too.
I've spent a lot of years rooting against Rodriguez now, but give the man his due, he's been a tremendous player.