I should first point out that I am not done with Danica Patrick, because I never started with her. I will put it succinctly right here: Danica Patrick is the most overrated "athlete" on the planet. I might previously have reserved this title for Michael Vick, but seeing as we won't be seeing him for a while, the torch is passed. Now, I say she is an "athlete" because I've never believed that drivers were athletes in the traditional sense. That might be a rant for another time, because right now, I want to focus on Danica.
Many people remember that Danica led some laps at the Indianapolis 500 a few years back, the first woman to ever do so. What most of those people don't seem to remember is that she did not win, and in fact, the eventual winner, Dan Wheldon, could have passed her any time he so desired. Regardless, it was still a good story, and she was a very intriguing figure - young, pretty, and doing well in a "man's sports". That is what unleashed Danica Mania (Danimania) on the world. At the time, it seemed harmless enough, it was a nice side story, and let's be honest, the Indy Car series was not exactly enthralling. So I understand why they pumped her up at every opportunity and tried to make her the face for the series.
Here is the problem(s): she's not that good, and she's a whiny little brat. In her Indy career, Danica has compiled a grand total of ONE win. Yes, infinitely times more Indy Car wins than I will ever have, but that's not the point. She is the ONLY driver to get any attention from the media, and she just isn't that good. Even her one win came at Twin Ring Motegi, which for those who don't know is a track in Japan. She was even racing against a smaller field that didn't have many of the best drivers in the series in it. So, to sum up, she won ONE race in a series that nobody cares about, against a weakened group of competition, in a country that is halfway around the world, in front of a TV audience of approximately 9 people (7 of whom were likely asleep on their couch anyway). Yet, I have heard people declare this the greatest accomplishment for women in sports in history.
Yes, that's right, a woman winning an essentially meaningless race in a meaningless series when nobody is watching is apparently the thing that will finally level the athletic playing field between men and women. Does that sound a little bit ridiculous to you too? Don't get me wrong, it's a nice accomplishment, it makes for a flashy headline, and it certainly doesn't really hurt female athletes (more on this in another post), but to declare it their greatest accomplishment ever? I think maybe we're going a tad overboard here.
The real problem here is that the ONLY reason anyone gives half a crap about Danica Patrick is because she's pretty. Make no doubt about it, there are many, many, many women out there who are much better at what they do than she is. But because she is young and pretty, she is the one who gets all the attention. Laurena Ochoa, for example, is likely going to wind up being the best female golfer ever, as she is essentially the Tiger of the women's tour, and she does not get nearly the exposure that Danica does, despite being so much better at her sport. Why? It's not because people care so much more about Indy Car, because they just don't. The only reason I can think of is that Danica is better looking. What does that really say about the state of women's athletics?
But even that isn't my biggest beef with Danica. What I dislike about her most is that she behaves like a whiny little baby all the time. She seems to think she is entitled to what she wants when she wants it, because she is the "darling" of the Indy Car Series (which I repeat - nobody cares about). And this usually lands with the men of the series being put between a rock and a hard place. People may not remember the race in Milwaukee, when after the race she approached a male driver and proceeded to start yelling at him and shoving him.
At that point, what can he do? He is basically forced to sit there and take it, because he surely couldn't shove her back. If he so much as raised a hand to her, even if it was just to keep her from shoving him more, he would be absolutely crucified by everyone, even though she was the aggressor. Basically, he has to stand there and take her crap for as long as she decides to give it, just because she is a woman and she is the only thing Indy Car seems to have going for it. I understand emotions run high and sports and tempers flare and occasionally a scuffle is bound to break out. But it's simply not fair to the male drivers that she has this sort of immunity just because she's a woman. If you're supposed to be this strong confident representative for the women's sports world, you can't be out there throwing temper tantrums like a 4 year old every time things don't go your way. And this is not an isolated incident - she has exhibited this behavior many times over her career and seems to be showing no sign of changing.
However, with all of that, I still managed to pretty much not care less. It was watching the most recent ESPYs that really pushed me over the edge on Danica. She was nominated for a couple awards, best female athlete and best moment (her win @ Motegi). She did not win best female athlete, as that went to Candace Parker, who will wind up being the face of the WNBA for a decade and the best woman basketball player ever. The look on Danica's face when Parker was declared the winner, you would have thought she had just eaten six lemons. I understand that you want to win the award, but isn't it generally expected that if you don't, you carry yourself with a little bit of dignity? Look, I've seen people be disappointed when they don't win awards and I understand that, but they've always at least tried to show a little bit of class. But oh no, not Danica. She apparently doesn't have to.
But what really pushed me over the edge was her similar reaction to not winning the Best Moment award. Now, as mentioned previously, her win at Motegi was no doubt a nice moment. However, it wasn't even close to the moment that won (the two softball players carrying an opponent around the bases), and everyone knew it. There wasn't a person there (except her, apparently) that didn't know the softball players would win. There was a never a single shred of doubt there. But even knowing that she wasn't going to win, she still had the same sour puss look on her face when she wasn't given the award. Even giving some leeway on the previous award, where she may have had some chance (because she is overrated, remember), this was just inexcusable.
So, to make a long story short, Danica Patrick is the most overrated "athlete" in the world, and quite frankly I think she is the exact opposite of what we want the champion of women's sports to be.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Friday, July 11, 2008
Come Back, Barry!
I have to say, to anyone who is half as big a baseball fan as me, this is going to sound really weird: I want Barry Bonds to play this year. I know, you think I am crazy, but quite frankly, I just don't hate Barry Bonds the way everyone else in the world seems to.
Don't get me wrong - I DO think Barry Bonds was a juicer and I DO believe that he is probably a first class asshole. That doesn't change the fact that he is, by leaps and bounds, the greatest baseball player that I have ever seen. I can honestly say that I believe he is the best baseball player to have ever lived.
Now, at this point, I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that Bonds was using steroids. But my real question is: why shouldn't he have been using them? We can all get on our moral high horse and talk about the "sanctity of the game" and all of that garbage. But for all our blustering about that, we don't really seem to care that there were literally hundreds of other ballplayers using the juice. When Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa were bringing baseball back by chasing down Roger Marris' record, we all knew they were juiced - but nobody really seemed to care. In fact, I remember many people acknowledging that they were juicers with a smile on their face. Now, all of the sudden, Barry Bonds comes along and breaks the record and we're all outraged by his steroid use? It doesn't add up.
I don't believe it's a race issue, because people adored Sammy Sosa and he was not only a non-white, he was from another country and could barely speak English. I think the main reason is that people have a personal problem with Bonds. But that isn't the point. The comparison of baseball players should be done independently of whether or not you like them. We can act like we're all made of such strong moral fiber with how we condemn him for steroid use, but isn't that quite hypocritical of us when we consider all the other users we have let off the hook? Morality isn't meant to be applied selectively.
Many people will argue that it matters because he has broken records. They're wrong. That makes him no better or worse than any other player who used steroids. In a league that was filled to bursting with cheaters, we have placed all of our focus on that one guy.
Oh, sure, there were the guys in the Mitchell report who had to take some flak for their behavior, but it was nothing compared to what Bonds was subjected to. Perhaps the exception to that is Roger Clemens, but really, who can say that he didn't bring that all upon himself. Take a look at Andy Pettitte - he admitted to using steroids and not only is his pitching for the Yankees today, it is extraordinarily rare for him to even be brought up in a steroids conversation. Jason Giambi offered a clumsy fumbling apology for using without explicitly acknowledging what it was that he was actually apologizing for. Where is he now? Playing first base for the Yankees in a stadium full of people wearing fake mustaches in his honor. Even Eric Gagne, who set an incredible mark of converting 84 straight save opportunities (besting the 2nd longest streak by THIRTY saves), was outed as a user. Now, the man couldn't strike out a tee-baller, and nobody seems to care. Obviously, consecutive saves is not the same as the homerun record, but it's still an incredible record achieved through the wrong means, so why are we not outraged about it?
Now, I am not trying to condone steroid use. I wish the steroid era never would have happened. I'm sick to death of hearing about it. But I just don't see how we can lay the blame on one man, just because he happened to be the best player of the era. Quite frankly, I think Major League Baseball should point the finger squarely in the mirror when it comes to placing blame. The steroid movement began to gain momentum back in the 1980s. And it was widely recognized by people at every level of MLB. But, it isn't until more than 20 years later that they really decided to crack down on it. I think if you knowingly let the situation develop for decades, it is at least a large part your own fault when it blows up. But instead, we let MLB play the victim.
I like to think that in that situation, I would not have used, but the fact is, I would have. And 99% of the people in the world would have. People say he was good enough that he didn't need them, and that's true - he was a Hall of Fame caliber player long before he was a juicer. But why should he sit idly by while everyone around him gains an unfair competitive advantage? Why would he sit around and watch as pitchers bring it at 101 mph because they're juiced like crazy? Would you sit around watching as everyone around you closed the gap using illicit means? I like to think I would, but I know that in the long run, I probably wouldn't.
He may be a jerk, but he is still the most dominant hitter that I (or anyone else on the planet for that matter) have ever seen at the Major League level. That's why I want to see him come back. And aren't people at least a little bit curious to see what he can do now that he has no chance to juice?
Don't get me wrong - I DO think Barry Bonds was a juicer and I DO believe that he is probably a first class asshole. That doesn't change the fact that he is, by leaps and bounds, the greatest baseball player that I have ever seen. I can honestly say that I believe he is the best baseball player to have ever lived.
Now, at this point, I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that Bonds was using steroids. But my real question is: why shouldn't he have been using them? We can all get on our moral high horse and talk about the "sanctity of the game" and all of that garbage. But for all our blustering about that, we don't really seem to care that there were literally hundreds of other ballplayers using the juice. When Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa were bringing baseball back by chasing down Roger Marris' record, we all knew they were juiced - but nobody really seemed to care. In fact, I remember many people acknowledging that they were juicers with a smile on their face. Now, all of the sudden, Barry Bonds comes along and breaks the record and we're all outraged by his steroid use? It doesn't add up.
I don't believe it's a race issue, because people adored Sammy Sosa and he was not only a non-white, he was from another country and could barely speak English. I think the main reason is that people have a personal problem with Bonds. But that isn't the point. The comparison of baseball players should be done independently of whether or not you like them. We can act like we're all made of such strong moral fiber with how we condemn him for steroid use, but isn't that quite hypocritical of us when we consider all the other users we have let off the hook? Morality isn't meant to be applied selectively.
Many people will argue that it matters because he has broken records. They're wrong. That makes him no better or worse than any other player who used steroids. In a league that was filled to bursting with cheaters, we have placed all of our focus on that one guy.
Oh, sure, there were the guys in the Mitchell report who had to take some flak for their behavior, but it was nothing compared to what Bonds was subjected to. Perhaps the exception to that is Roger Clemens, but really, who can say that he didn't bring that all upon himself. Take a look at Andy Pettitte - he admitted to using steroids and not only is his pitching for the Yankees today, it is extraordinarily rare for him to even be brought up in a steroids conversation. Jason Giambi offered a clumsy fumbling apology for using without explicitly acknowledging what it was that he was actually apologizing for. Where is he now? Playing first base for the Yankees in a stadium full of people wearing fake mustaches in his honor. Even Eric Gagne, who set an incredible mark of converting 84 straight save opportunities (besting the 2nd longest streak by THIRTY saves), was outed as a user. Now, the man couldn't strike out a tee-baller, and nobody seems to care. Obviously, consecutive saves is not the same as the homerun record, but it's still an incredible record achieved through the wrong means, so why are we not outraged about it?
Now, I am not trying to condone steroid use. I wish the steroid era never would have happened. I'm sick to death of hearing about it. But I just don't see how we can lay the blame on one man, just because he happened to be the best player of the era. Quite frankly, I think Major League Baseball should point the finger squarely in the mirror when it comes to placing blame. The steroid movement began to gain momentum back in the 1980s. And it was widely recognized by people at every level of MLB. But, it isn't until more than 20 years later that they really decided to crack down on it. I think if you knowingly let the situation develop for decades, it is at least a large part your own fault when it blows up. But instead, we let MLB play the victim.
I like to think that in that situation, I would not have used, but the fact is, I would have. And 99% of the people in the world would have. People say he was good enough that he didn't need them, and that's true - he was a Hall of Fame caliber player long before he was a juicer. But why should he sit idly by while everyone around him gains an unfair competitive advantage? Why would he sit around and watch as pitchers bring it at 101 mph because they're juiced like crazy? Would you sit around watching as everyone around you closed the gap using illicit means? I like to think I would, but I know that in the long run, I probably wouldn't.
He may be a jerk, but he is still the most dominant hitter that I (or anyone else on the planet for that matter) have ever seen at the Major League level. That's why I want to see him come back. And aren't people at least a little bit curious to see what he can do now that he has no chance to juice?
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Off The Wagon / On The Trolley
Well, courtesy of a little "shove" from Basillisk (Dave), I am either back Off The Wagon of NOT playing Final Fantasy XI, or back On The Trolley of playing Final Fantasy XI. I suppose it is more than likely a little bit of both. This is a somewhat slippery slope, however.
I want to keep this casual as best I can. But I also know that it can be very difficult to play this game in a casual manner. Looking back, I am forced to admit that at one time I was absolutely addicted to this game. I mean, it could always have been worse, I could have been addicted to crack, but, I cannot afford to get addicted to this game again.
Simply put, I am not at a point in my life where I can dedicate 20+ hours a week to a video game. I'm not in college anymore, I can't stay up until 3 AM playing because I can sleep 'til noon and still make my first class. I am also pretty sure that Leesa would be far from OK with me spending 6 nights a week deeply rooted in Vana'Diel.
To add even more interest to this story, yesterday evening Leesa and I signed up for gym memberships at the Ideal Fitness down the street from our apartment. If a gym membership and a Final Fantasy XI membership aren't a conflict of interest, I don't know what is.
If this winds up destroying my life, I blame Dave entirely, and I plan on bringing him down with me.
I want to keep this casual as best I can. But I also know that it can be very difficult to play this game in a casual manner. Looking back, I am forced to admit that at one time I was absolutely addicted to this game. I mean, it could always have been worse, I could have been addicted to crack, but, I cannot afford to get addicted to this game again.
Simply put, I am not at a point in my life where I can dedicate 20+ hours a week to a video game. I'm not in college anymore, I can't stay up until 3 AM playing because I can sleep 'til noon and still make my first class. I am also pretty sure that Leesa would be far from OK with me spending 6 nights a week deeply rooted in Vana'Diel.
To add even more interest to this story, yesterday evening Leesa and I signed up for gym memberships at the Ideal Fitness down the street from our apartment. If a gym membership and a Final Fantasy XI membership aren't a conflict of interest, I don't know what is.
If this winds up destroying my life, I blame Dave entirely, and I plan on bringing him down with me.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Re-Installing XP - Shoot Me In The Face
So, finally, roughly 2.5 years after his birth, I decided it was time for Megaman to get a clean install of Windows XP. The malignant applications and such had been slowly building and I figured that I might as well get it over with.
So, I dug out the old Windows XP Professional SP2 disc, snagged my backup drive from work, backed up all my music/movies/TV shows and documents, and started fresh. Of course, the SP2 disc that I have wouldn't boot properly - no big deal, I had prepared for this by bringing home my XP disc from work. I figured I would just install using the other disc and then use the activation code from my old installation.
Well, apparently, it doesn't work that way, or at least it doesn't work that way for me. Everything ran and installed fine, but then when it came time to activate, the original code I had used when I built the CPU the first time didn't work. I figured I would give the other activation code from the disc I used a try - no dice.
Not the end of the world, right? I called the number on the activation splash and was promptly given a series of 54 numbers as an ID. After reading all 9 6-number groups to an automated system, I was told they couldn't validate it, and they would put me on with customer service. After speaking with the first guy from customer service, he told me he would transfer me to someone who could give me a new activation code. After speaking with that woman for about 10 minutes (about 8 of which were on hold), I was given a new Activation code for my XP. All set, right?
Wrong! Naturally, this code didn't work either. When I informed her of this, she told me that she would have to put me on with technical support. So she transferred me to them, but naturally, their hours don't start until 6 AM Pacific - so I will be at work at that time, which isn't the end of the world, but means I have to call after work, when call volume is the highest. In their defense, every person I talked to was very pleasant and friendly, so even though they didn't solve my problem, at least they weren't jerks.
I am pretty sure I have a valid installation of XP - I mean, I have used it before, why wouldn't I be able to reinstall with it? But I am really worried I am going to go through this run around on the phone only to finally be told, "Sorry, you have to go buy a new copy of XP." I really hope this isn't the case. Wish me luck.
So, I dug out the old Windows XP Professional SP2 disc, snagged my backup drive from work, backed up all my music/movies/TV shows and documents, and started fresh. Of course, the SP2 disc that I have wouldn't boot properly - no big deal, I had prepared for this by bringing home my XP disc from work. I figured I would just install using the other disc and then use the activation code from my old installation.
Well, apparently, it doesn't work that way, or at least it doesn't work that way for me. Everything ran and installed fine, but then when it came time to activate, the original code I had used when I built the CPU the first time didn't work. I figured I would give the other activation code from the disc I used a try - no dice.
Not the end of the world, right? I called the number on the activation splash and was promptly given a series of 54 numbers as an ID. After reading all 9 6-number groups to an automated system, I was told they couldn't validate it, and they would put me on with customer service. After speaking with the first guy from customer service, he told me he would transfer me to someone who could give me a new activation code. After speaking with that woman for about 10 minutes (about 8 of which were on hold), I was given a new Activation code for my XP. All set, right?
Wrong! Naturally, this code didn't work either. When I informed her of this, she told me that she would have to put me on with technical support. So she transferred me to them, but naturally, their hours don't start until 6 AM Pacific - so I will be at work at that time, which isn't the end of the world, but means I have to call after work, when call volume is the highest. In their defense, every person I talked to was very pleasant and friendly, so even though they didn't solve my problem, at least they weren't jerks.
I am pretty sure I have a valid installation of XP - I mean, I have used it before, why wouldn't I be able to reinstall with it? But I am really worried I am going to go through this run around on the phone only to finally be told, "Sorry, you have to go buy a new copy of XP." I really hope this isn't the case. Wish me luck.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
I'm Sorry, Chipper and Josh
I'm sorry, Chipper and Josh. You're both playing very well, but it's not going to happen.
Chipper Jones will NOT hit .400 this season. He just won't. Many people can tell you that the last man to hit .400 for a season was Ted Williams. Ted hit .406 in 1941. In the 60+ years since, nobody has equaled the accomplishment, though many guys have come close. Tony Gwynn was hitting .393 when the strike hit in '94. In 1980, George Brett hit .389. Currently, Chipper Jones is sitting at the .394 mark, having spent the vast majority of the season over the .400 plateau.
But it's not going to happen. Right now, Chipper has every possible advantage going for him. He has a potent hitter behind him (Mark Teixeira), and he is injured (hang with me on this one). He is currently likely headed to the Disabled List to re-hab this ailing thigh. Normally, I don't think an injury seems an advantage, but for a guy who is historically injury prone, it offers Chipper a break right in the middle of the season. He will be better rested for a second-half push, and it is likely not so serious an injury that he will miss enough time to not qualify (by having the minimum number of at-bats to win a batting title). Also, it lends Chipper a perfect excuse to take it easy when he isn't 'feeling it', and this can help him avoid longer slumps. His team is 4 games out of first place, and 3 games under .500, and with their injuries, they can't win the division and have no shot at the wild-card. So, why not try to go for personal accomplishments? There will be no better time than now.
That being said, with those things going his way, it's simply not going to happen. Chipper is a career .310 hitter - a fantastic career number for a man who is a lock for the Hall of Fame. But before this season, his highest BA for a season has been .337, in 2007. Tony Gywnn, on the other hand, posted SEVEN seasons hitting .350 or better (counting his .394 season), and hit over .370 for a season thrice. If Tony Gwynn couldn't do it, then Chipper won't either. Chipper has 254 ABs on the year, so it is still easy enough for him to raise his average (a 3 for 3 game would put him back to .400), but as the season goes on, it will become more and more difficult for him to catch up the .400 mark once he is below it. In the long run, as much as it seems like he is impossible to get out this season, Chipper still won't hit .400.
And Josh Hamilton, I'm sorry, but you're not going to win the Triple Crown. The last man to win a triple crown in either league was Carl Yastrzemski, for the Boston Red Sox in 1967. So, that's over 40 years since we have last seen a Triple Crown winner. That year, he hit .326, with 44 HRs and 121 RBIs. Last year, in the AL, the Triple Crown leaders hit .360 (Magglio Ordonez), with 54 HRs (A-Rod) and 156 RBIs (A-Rod). In the National League, it was .340 (Matt Holliday), 50 (Prince Fielder), and 137 (Matt Holliday).
It would seem that with 2 of the 3 categories being won by the same guy last year, a Triple Crown isn't so unrealistic. But, A-Rod finished 49 points behind Magglio in BA, and Holliday hit 14 fewer Homeruns than Prince. Simply put, it is too difficult to be the best at all three of those things. In this day and age in baseball, there are just too many guys good at too many different things for one man to take the crown in all of them. The real dividing line is homeruns and batting average. It is just too difficult to lead the league in both of those, because there is either going to be a Magglio who hit .360, or a Ryan Howard or Prince Fielder who has 50+ jacks.
Currently, there are only 2 guys in all of MLB that I consider legitimate Triple Crown contenders. Alex Rodriguez and Albert Pujols. Both are capable of putting up monster HR and RBI numbers, and are such great hitters, they can go through a season hitting .340. Of course, that still means there can't be that guy having a career year to hit .355, or the one guy who plays great and hits 55 homeruns. Plus, to lead the league in RBIs, you have to play on a solid team and get a lot of at-bats in RBI situations. Both A-Rod and Pujols have been injured this year, and while A-Rod is in striking distance on BA and HRs, he is too far out of the RBI race for this year. And Pujols is too hurt and also too far out of the RBI race for the season (plus, Lance Berkman is on fire this season).
So, this adds up to another season without a .400 batting average and without a Triple Crown winner. I hesitate to say these feats will NEVER be accomplished, because you never know what to expect with baseball. But you can mark is guaranteed that this is not the year.
I am sorry for the overly sports-nature of this post. Also, it required so much number reference it took too long to write. Next time, I'll try to keep it shorter, simpler, sweeter.
Chipper Jones will NOT hit .400 this season. He just won't. Many people can tell you that the last man to hit .400 for a season was Ted Williams. Ted hit .406 in 1941. In the 60+ years since, nobody has equaled the accomplishment, though many guys have come close. Tony Gwynn was hitting .393 when the strike hit in '94. In 1980, George Brett hit .389. Currently, Chipper Jones is sitting at the .394 mark, having spent the vast majority of the season over the .400 plateau.
But it's not going to happen. Right now, Chipper has every possible advantage going for him. He has a potent hitter behind him (Mark Teixeira), and he is injured (hang with me on this one). He is currently likely headed to the Disabled List to re-hab this ailing thigh. Normally, I don't think an injury seems an advantage, but for a guy who is historically injury prone, it offers Chipper a break right in the middle of the season. He will be better rested for a second-half push, and it is likely not so serious an injury that he will miss enough time to not qualify (by having the minimum number of at-bats to win a batting title). Also, it lends Chipper a perfect excuse to take it easy when he isn't 'feeling it', and this can help him avoid longer slumps. His team is 4 games out of first place, and 3 games under .500, and with their injuries, they can't win the division and have no shot at the wild-card. So, why not try to go for personal accomplishments? There will be no better time than now.
That being said, with those things going his way, it's simply not going to happen. Chipper is a career .310 hitter - a fantastic career number for a man who is a lock for the Hall of Fame. But before this season, his highest BA for a season has been .337, in 2007. Tony Gywnn, on the other hand, posted SEVEN seasons hitting .350 or better (counting his .394 season), and hit over .370 for a season thrice. If Tony Gwynn couldn't do it, then Chipper won't either. Chipper has 254 ABs on the year, so it is still easy enough for him to raise his average (a 3 for 3 game would put him back to .400), but as the season goes on, it will become more and more difficult for him to catch up the .400 mark once he is below it. In the long run, as much as it seems like he is impossible to get out this season, Chipper still won't hit .400.
And Josh Hamilton, I'm sorry, but you're not going to win the Triple Crown. The last man to win a triple crown in either league was Carl Yastrzemski, for the Boston Red Sox in 1967. So, that's over 40 years since we have last seen a Triple Crown winner. That year, he hit .326, with 44 HRs and 121 RBIs. Last year, in the AL, the Triple Crown leaders hit .360 (Magglio Ordonez), with 54 HRs (A-Rod) and 156 RBIs (A-Rod). In the National League, it was .340 (Matt Holliday), 50 (Prince Fielder), and 137 (Matt Holliday).
It would seem that with 2 of the 3 categories being won by the same guy last year, a Triple Crown isn't so unrealistic. But, A-Rod finished 49 points behind Magglio in BA, and Holliday hit 14 fewer Homeruns than Prince. Simply put, it is too difficult to be the best at all three of those things. In this day and age in baseball, there are just too many guys good at too many different things for one man to take the crown in all of them. The real dividing line is homeruns and batting average. It is just too difficult to lead the league in both of those, because there is either going to be a Magglio who hit .360, or a Ryan Howard or Prince Fielder who has 50+ jacks.
Currently, there are only 2 guys in all of MLB that I consider legitimate Triple Crown contenders. Alex Rodriguez and Albert Pujols. Both are capable of putting up monster HR and RBI numbers, and are such great hitters, they can go through a season hitting .340. Of course, that still means there can't be that guy having a career year to hit .355, or the one guy who plays great and hits 55 homeruns. Plus, to lead the league in RBIs, you have to play on a solid team and get a lot of at-bats in RBI situations. Both A-Rod and Pujols have been injured this year, and while A-Rod is in striking distance on BA and HRs, he is too far out of the RBI race for this year. And Pujols is too hurt and also too far out of the RBI race for the season (plus, Lance Berkman is on fire this season).
So, this adds up to another season without a .400 batting average and without a Triple Crown winner. I hesitate to say these feats will NEVER be accomplished, because you never know what to expect with baseball. But you can mark is guaranteed that this is not the year.
I am sorry for the overly sports-nature of this post. Also, it required so much number reference it took too long to write. Next time, I'll try to keep it shorter, simpler, sweeter.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
