Mark of Fridays: Dodgers fan at Wrigley

Mark got to a Cubs game for his 5th birthday! He liked Wrigley Field, but he still rooted for his favorite team, the Dodgers. For some reason, Matt was very suspicious of old Cubs players.

Mark of Fridays: Birthday party

Mark wanted a baseball birthday when he turned five. He required that everyone wear the uniform of their favorite player and play in a Whiffle ball game.
Mark, of course, was Jackie Robinson - his favorite player. And wouldn't you know it? He managed to drive in the winning run when he was called in to pinch hit in the bottom of the fourth.
A great time was had by all!

Mark of Fridays: Target Field

 Perhaps you recognize this young man from the All-Star Game? The Twins let him hang out on the field whenever he wants.

Mark of Fridays: Play Ball!

Matt and Mark, after their first-ever father-son game of catch.  Matt says in was one of his Top 5 Days, ever.  And that's despite the fact that the ball didn't land in Mark's glove even once.  But he did catch one with his chin.

Mark and Anne of Fridays: Pittsburgh!



A gallery of photos from our recent family trip to Pittsburgh, PA.  We went to the zoo, visited the dinosaurs at the Carnegie Natural History museum, rode the duck boats, and Mark went to a Pirates game. We also got to spend some QT with Dramma, Pap, the Aunties, Aunt Carol and Uncle Rick, and even Aunt Candy and Uncle Roger.  A good time was had by all!



How many dino digging pictures can we
snap of this kid?





Aunt Carol and Anne Carol

Quotation Mark Mondays: Catching up

Christmas, the end of the semester, and a whole bunch of other stuff have put us a bit behind lately. We promise to add some photos soon, but in the meantime enjoy Mark's latest quotable quotes.

This weekend, Mark got to meet Casey Crosby, a major league baseball player. Before Mark and Matt went up to Casey, Matt had prompted Mark to ask Casey about what team he played for and what position he played so they'd have something to talk about.
Mark: "What team do you play for?"
Casey: "The Tigers."
Mark: "What position do you play?"
Casey: "I'm a pitcher."
Mark: "What's your number?"
Casey: "I'm number 43."
Mark: "What street?"
Matt: "Um, I think he was telling you the number on his jersey, not his house."

(later)
Lynne: "Did you get to meet the baseball player?"
Mark: "Yeah. He doesn't know what street he lives on."

--------------

After Lynne and Matt were singing Santa Claus is coming to town.
"You only have to be good in the months that are close to Christmas, when Santa is really watching."

--------------

While in line to see Santa
Lady in line in front of us to her children: "It might snow this week."
Mark: "No, not until Dec. 21st."
(Because, as Mark pointed out, that's the official first day of winter. So no snow until then.)

--------------

Now, the sentimental one:
"I'm such a good boy because I have a good mommy and daddy."

Mark of Fridays: baseball cards

"Dad, can I hold your 1909 T206 Honus Wagner?"
"Um, why don't you hold this Mark Prior card instead..."

Baseball predictions

Since Matt's baseball playoff predictions are always so spot on, we don't want to deprive the world of them. No deep analysis this year; just winging it.

Rays vs. Rangers

Rooting for: Rays

Will win: Rays in five, 'cause Rangers pitching isn't good enough

Playoff intrigue rank: 1st (Most intriguing series. Pitching and destiny vs. experience and hitting.)

Tigers vs. Yankees

Rooting for: I really don't like either of these teams. Sabathia and Jeter seem like all right guys.

Will win: Tigers in four, 'cause Yankee pitching isn't good enough. Oh and Verlander is a God.

Playoff intrigue ranking: 2nd

Cardinals vs. Phillies

Rooting for: Cardinals (the only playoff team Matt saw in person this year)

Will win: Phils in four, 'cause their pitching is great

Playoff intrigue ranking: 3 (Can the Phillies be beat?)

Diamondbacks vs. Brewers

Rooting for: Brew Crew

Will win: Brewers in three, 'cause they're just too darn good

Playoff intrigue rank: 4 (No one thinks the DBacks have a chance, right?)

Stadium seeding: Great American Ballpark

The more stadium Matt visits, the more clear the lines between good stadiums and bad stadiums becomes. It's obvious which teams just put up a stadium, and which teams built a ballpark.

Thanks to the generosity of Lynne's Aunt Carol and Uncle Rick, Matt was able to attend two games last weekend at the Great American Ballpark. GAB was built in 2003 and named after an insurance company. Being able to walk through the stadium on back-to-back nights (awesome!) really redefined what baseball's average stadiums are missing.
Part of the difference is generational. The stadiums built in the 60s are missing all the little extras that make today's stadiums spectacular. Shea Stadium was basically a huge metroplex without a spot of character to it. Monument Park at Old Yankee Stadium was once considered novel, but now everyone has at least that. Once Camden Yards came along, the stadium game changed. Architecture got more interesting. Creativity was encouraged. It wasn't enough to provides fans with just a seat; you wanted them to have an experience.
Matt believes part of the divide might also be partially the fan base. The teams with fans that truly watch the game - Cardinals, Twins, for instance - tend to have stadiums that cater to their appreciation of the history of the team. (There are exceptions. Padres have a great stadium but not much of a fan base.) Then, there are the teams that just throw up a park and wait for the people show up. Matt loves the Mets, but Mets fans are not involved in the details of the game. They like looking around or yelling at someone. The same can be said of the Dodgers, Cubs or Brewers fans. (Not all of them, but you get the point.)

That's a long lead-in to say that Great American Ballpark is certainly on the good side of this stadium divide. It does everything right.
Now, before Matt details the GAB highlights, one more aside about his general criteria. In a stadium, Matt is looking for: easy access, good seating, reasonable prices, an appreciation of baseball history, a unique experience, beauty, hometown flavor, good food, cool souvenirs and nice neighborhood. Is that so much to ask?

Great American Ballpark (June 15-16, 2011, vs. Cardinals)
Let's start with the field and the seating. In Game One, everyone was sitting behind third base, about six rows back, so part of Matt's reaction is because the seats were fantastic. But even from further back in the stadium, you feel very close at GAB. There's not a lot of foul territory. Also, the seats are angled so they're all facing home plate. It was such an absolutely brilliant concept. (Most stadiums have seats parallel to the foul lines.) Basically, GAB gives everyone an easy view of the game. No straining necks. Fantastic.

You could walk through the whole ballpark, which was great.(Not sure if it's the same for upper deck seats.) There was lots of places to look in on the field and get plenty of different perspectives. (In fact, you could look into the stadium when it was closed, which Matt did on his morning runs.) There was also a misting station in center field, which felt great on a sticky 97-degree day. Also, in centerfield, there was a scenic area that looked out on the Ohio River. (Bonus points because you can walk over the bridge to go back to your hotel after the game.)
Architecturally, the stadium is beautiful. There's a riverboat in centerfield which looked cool. It's apparently a restaurant or something, but Matt never got a chance to check that out. Also, inside the stadium, they've printed all these great baseball quotes in the concourse, which is a really cool touch. (Matt's fave, from Dave Bristol: “There’ll be two buses leaving the hotel for the park tomorrow. The two o’clock bus will be for those of you who need a little extra work. The empty bus will be leaving at five o’clock.”)

Outside, the stadium had some excellent statues. Ted Kluszewski was standing in the infield, wearing a bronze sleeveless shirt. Cool. Nearby, Joe Nuxhall was pitching to Frank Robinson with Ernie Lombardi catching. Those are cool statues. Obviously, you want to honor Babe Ruth if he played for your team. But the Joe Nuxhalls and Kent Hrbeks are for the real die-hards.
But what makes GAB stand apart from any other stadium is the museum. The Reds are the oldest team in baseball and they have a rich, rich history. The Reds museum ($8 admission) is absolutely wonderful. It appeals to the baseball nerds and the casual fans. You can get close the World Series trophies and pretend you're making a catch at the outfield wall. There is absolutely no reason all the league's older teams (Yankees, Dodgers, Cubs, White Sox, Cardinals, Red Sox) shouldn't have something similar. It's printing money. Last weekend, the Reds Hall was dominated by a Johnny Bench exhibit, which was fantastic. Between the first and third floors (for some reason, the Reds put their executive offices on the second floor), there are 4,526 baseball's screwed to the wall to represent each of Pete Rose's hits. It's incredible to look at. The museum takes off on the third floor. There's a Reds Hall of Fame. You can sit in a replica dugout with Sparky Anderson and Fred Hutchinson. When you pick up the bullpen phone, you can hear Sparky telling baseball stories. There's kids dugout with mini lockers and slide. There's a broadcast booth where you can make the call on great Reds' games. Rick, Barry and Matt wore their arms out pitching off a 60-foot-6-inch mound, trying to strike out the batter painted on the wall. (You got your speed and they called balls and strikes.) Plus, there's a leaderboard for all the major statistical categories, which is one of Matt's favorite features. They had the top 10 in each category, plus the active leader. Great stuff.
The Tigers are the only team that comes anywhere close to offering up this much history, but it's literally and figuratively not in the same ballpark.

Really, there were only three downsides to GAB: One, their scorecard policy is atrocious, down there with the Yankees, Dodgers and Red Sox. The only scorecard you could get was in a program. Bush league.
And, for some reason, the Reds have the cashiers also making drinks. This slowed down the concession lines considerably. The prices were reasonable and the dogs were great, but the lines were way too slow and you missed a lot of the game to get a drink on a hot day.
Finally, there was no penny smasher. C'mon! And they weren't selling a shirt with either of the old Reds' logos on them. That's just obvious.
Matt's kidding a bit there. (Except about the scorecard and concessions.)

The ballpark was great and the games themselves were entertaining.
Game One ended with Brandon Phillips hitting a walk-off home-run-or-go-home bomb, the first time Matt's seen one in person. The ending was spectacular after the Reds had fumbled a way a ton of chances earlier that night. Those blunders caught up to them in Game Two when three (three!) base runners got themselves stranded and Albert Pujols hit his 2-1/2 homer of the series.
One last aside: Joey Votto is absolutely amazing. He is a great ballplayer and a pleasure to watch.

Here's Matt's updated ratings of the fields he's visited, which has now reached half the major leagues:
First tier: Fenway Park (Boston Red Sox), Petco Park (San Diego Padres) and PNC Park (Pittsburgh Pirates)
Second tier, but close behind: Busch Stadium (St. Louis Cardinals), Comerica Park (Detroit Tigers),Camden Yards (Baltimore Orioles) Great American Ballpark (Cincinnati Reds), Target Field (current Minnesota Twins),
Third tier: Miller Park (Milwaukee Brewers), Wrigley Field (Chicago Cubs)
Fourth tier, and still nice stadiums: Coors Field (Colorado Rockies), Citi Field (Mets) and Dodger Stadium (Los Angeles Dodgers)
Fifth tier and so-so stadiums: Shea Stadium (old New York Mets), U.S. Cellular Field (Chicago White Sox), Yankee Stadium (old New York Stinkees)
Sixth and a very bad stadium: Metrodome (old Minnesota Twins).

You can read ESPN Page 2's review of all these stadiums right here, although it's getting a bit really dated!

Mark of Fridays: Cincinntucky!

We just returned (Sunday) from an absolutely wonderful trip to Cincinnati. We saw Aunt Carol, Uncle Rick, Aunt Candy and Uncle Roger. Oh yeah, we also saw a zoo, aquarium and two baseball games! 0
Uncle Rick got to hold a 2-year-old for the first time in 29 years. (The rust hardly showed.) The boys nearly caught a Pujols home run. Mark gave hugs and kisses to everyone, and showed off his baseball knowledge.
And Matt still didn't learn how to spell Cincinnati*, but he can say: 'Sinsuhnata.' * Corrected!
The visit to Cincinnati was a surprise trip organized by Carol and Rick. They did a great job. It was a perfect trip with perfect company. They even managed great weather.
We had lots of great photos and many, many more great memories. But here's a flavor of the journey.
(And, if all goes well, Matt will post his patented Baseball Stadium analysis this weekend. Sneak preview: the park was awesome.)

What would you ask for?

So, we're pretty sure you noticed that on Saturday the world - the entire world! - stopped when Derek Jeter hit a home run and recorded his 3,000 hit.

Matt, by virtue of his own fan heritage, is inclined to hate almost all things Yankee. They bring it on themselves.
However, some Yankeeisms transcend the hype. Yogi Berra. Joe D. The Babe. Gehrig. These are true legends.
Is Jeter a legend? Well...that's complicated. Joe Posanski probably said it best when he called Jeter one of the most overrated, and underrated players, ever. The die-hard Yankee fans think he's much better than he is. The people sick of seeing him on TV every half minute denigrate him far too much. Derek Jeter is a very, very good baseball player. He's a big step below those other Yankee legends (and the Mick, Ford and Dickey, too) but he's very, very good. And classy.
But that's not what this post is about. It's about stuff.

It has been reported that the fan who caught Derek Jeter's 3,000th hit (it happened to be a home run) asked, in exchange for the historic baseball, to meet Jeter and get an autographed baseball. In turn, the Yankees gave him a whole bunch of stuff: autographed bats, jerseys, signed balls and some suite tickets to every game the rest of the year.
Lots of people are debating if this guy is super classy or a big idiot. (The ball might be worth $150,000.)
Matt says classy. But that's still not the point of this post. This is about getting stuff.

It just so happens that Matt and Lynne have debated this very subject. Matt and Lynne were in the stands the day Jim Thome hit his 500th home run. (Matt nearly cried.) They weren't anywhere near the baseball, but Matt couldn't help but dream...what if?
So, after much too much debate, here's what Matt would ask for if he caught a landmark baseball:
1. Get to meet the player in-person to return the ball, and get a picture together.
2. A baseball signed: "Thanks for catching my 500th home run, Jim Thome."
3. A baseball signed to Mark.
4. A real jersey.
5. Two tickets if they make the playoffs.

It's pushing the line a little bit but, hey, at least it's not selling the ball. And if the player doesn't want it? College fund!

So....what would you ask for?

(By the way, the guy who caught the Thome's 500th, also gave it back and declined tickets because he was from out of town. Staying classy!)

Mark of Fridays: Baseball genius

So, on the way to Florida, the Hanleys stopped at the Louisville Slugger Bat Factory which, oddly enough, is in Louisville. The museum was plenty of fun for baseball fans.
Matt got to hold Mickey Mantle's real bat. Everyone got to see how a bat is made. And there was a kid's area where Matt gave Mark his first lesson in hitting off the tee. Mark was marginally interested in that. Plus, there was all sorts of Super Nerd Baseball Stuff, like statistics and stories and movies.
All in all, it was a pretty cool trip, although it was way over Mark's head.
OR WAS IT!!!

Consider: On one wall of museum they had thousands of wooden plaques representing all the players that have had contracts with Louisville Slugger.
On the upper left corner of the wall, it starts with Nap Lajoie, Honus Wagner, Eddie Collins and Ty Cobb - players from the early 1900s. Then it moves right and ends up with David Wright and other current players.
But the plaques are not just the great players who signed with Louisville: it's every scrub and nobody who ever got a contract. (And they make it clear that Louisville invites you to sign a contract - you can't request a contract with them.)
So, we're talking about a wall probably 40 feet long and 15 feet high. Each wooden plaque is about 2 inches across and an inch wide. Every column is filled with 48 plaques and there are hundreds of columns.
There are literally thousands and thousands of plaques, as you can see in the picture with Lynne on the right. You can only see a fraction of the wall in the picture.
Of course, this is all scene setter to prove that Mark is a baseball genius. We knew he was a genius in many things but not necessarily baseball.
So, Mark is walking down this wall past name after name, passing decades of baseball players. He doesn't seem to paying any more attention to one or the other.
And then: he stops.
And then: he points.
And he points at one specific wooden box.
And he won't stop pointing at it. He points at it over and over again, with both hands.
If he had been just a bit to the left, he would have been pointing at the immortal Clede Wilson, a man well known for being among the all-time top players named Clede.
If he had had been just a bit higher, he would have been fixated on Pap Williams, one of the few players named after his father's nickname.

But, no. Out of hundreds of thousands of names Mark zeroed in on Mr. Ted Williams.

Teddy Ballgame. The Kid. The Splendid Splinter. 512 home runs, .406, War Hero.

Ted Williams.

This Mark kid - he's a genius. Must come from his Mom.

Baseball in December?!?

Well, with Bert Blyleven's election Wednesday to the Hall of Fame, Matt will have to go get his cards out of the commons bin. Apparently, he's a Hall of Famer, like Walter Johnson and Willie McCovey. Ahem.
Below is Matt's annual Hall of Fame votes, written before the results were announced.

It's time for Matt to turn in his 2011 Hall of Fame ballot. Turn it in to who? Well, to you, our faithful reader(s).
Yes, Matt once again feels compelled to spend his time dissecting the careers of men he's never met for the pleasure of no one besides himself, apparently. But, you know, it's funner than shoveling.
Here's Matt votes from two years ago. And here's last year's Matt ballot.
As you will notice, Matt is a notoriously tough grader. That's because he's been to the Hall. He's seen how small the room with the plaques is. It makes you want to keep to an elite few - the true greats.
However, Matt waivers from year to year as he continues to gather more information, cull different perspectives and radically change his mind. But this year, Matt will try to be a bit more analytical and bit less "this guy didn't write back to me when I was twelve."
To start, here are Matt's revised but not necessarily refined Hall of Fame criteria:
ONE, a player should have a decade of excellence. That means they should be among the best players in the game for a period of at least 10 years. During that time they should be among the two or three best players at their position.* **
*Exemptions for pitchers, because there are more of them.
** Exceptions can be made for particularly deep eras at certain positions, henceforth known as the Willie-Mickey-And-The-Duke Exception. ***
***Inversly, not every era has to have a Hall of Famer from every position. Certain eras had five great shortstops. Other eras had a lot of pretty good shortstops. Hence, the Alan Trammell Corollary.
TWO, the player should have some semblance of an all-around game. Hitters should be able to hit for power and average, run, throw and field. Pitchers should be durable, able to strike people out, flexible and able to field their position.*
*Of course, dominance in one area can lead to forgiveness in other areas. Henceforth known as the Harmon-Killebrew-Was-Slow Exception.
THREE, MVP awards, Cy Youngs, All-Star selections matter. They are not the be-all, end-all. But they are a reflection of how the player was viewed by his peers and the writers at the time they played, not through the prism of revisionist history and isn't he a nice guy. Henceforth, the Bert Blyleven Rule. (More later.)
FOUR, excellence in the post season counts. Clutch counts. Why shouldn't it? The World Series is the pinnacle of achievement so why not reward those that excelled there? It's not fair to keep out Ernie Banks because the Cubs are a hopeless franchise, but there's no reason to ignore what a borderline player did in the postseason. It's fair to consider whether any of the home runs, wins or saves the player earned mattered, even in the regular season. The Lee Smith Rule is instituted.
FIVE: No magic numbers. 500 homers is not a free pass. 300 wins is not automatic entry. They're great accomplishments that should be viewed in context of the era that they were achieved in. Mel Ott hit 511 homers, which, when he retired, was the most ever in the National League. It was an astounding accomplishment. Gary Sheffield hit 509 homers at a time when the home run was inflated and a half dozen guys passed the half-century mark. Not as impressive. Numbers are good things to consider, but they shouldn't be worshipped. They can be parsed in so many ways. Fred McGriff had more homers than Stan Musial. So, who would you vote for?
SIX, admitted steroid players should be held to a higher standard. It's impossible to keep them all out. Ridiculous to think someone won't get in - or hasn't already gotten in. So, if that's the case, why not just hold the cheaters to a higher standard? Barry Bonds was a hall of famer before he bulked up. Gary Sheffield wasn't.
SEVEN: Finding one hall of famer with worse statistics - or a worse statistic - doesn't mean Candidate X should be in. Sandy Koufax didn't get a ton of wins, but he should be in the Hall of Fame. Maybe some other guys shouldn't be. Mistakes of the past need not be compounded. Known as the Rick Ferrell Guideline, or the Sutton-Mazeroski-Hack Wilson False Equivalency Test.
EIGHT, and the least reliable. This one may actually have to be eliminated because it's so hard to defend. But there is a Smell Test to the Hall of Fame. Mickey Mantle was a hall of famer. Randy Johnson, Cal Ripken, Alber Pujols, Ichiro feel like hall of famers. They made/make you stop in your tracks when they take the mound or come to the plate. Anything is possible. Mark Teixeira doesn't have it. Mike Mussina didn't. Lee Smith not so much. It's so weak and subjective that Matt hates himself for writing it. Yet, it survives.

With that embedded in your memory banks, consider who Matt'd vote for and let him know how he got it wrong. (* indicates new to the ballot)

The No Way These Guys Should Get Even One Vote:
Bret Boone*, Kevin Brown*, Marquis Grissom*, Carlos Baerga*, Charles Johnson*, Lenny Harris*, Bobby Higginson*, Al Leiter* Kirk Rueter*, Benito Santiago*, B.J. Surhoff*, Tino Martinez*.
Probably all great guys who loved their mothers, but not one deserves to eat a Baby Ruth, much less have a plaque in the same room as Babe Ruth. Higginson and Rueter apparently played for more than a decade, completely undetected by fans.

Really Nice Careers, But Simply Not Hall of Famers
Juan Gonzalez: Two MVPs should really merit him more consideration. For a very brief time, he was great. But there's some obvious steroid questions here and he wasn't good for very long. And he couldn't run or field a lick.
John Olerud: Olerud was an excellent fielder and fantastic contact hitter. And he rode public transportation to work, which is good for the environment. But he was never great.
Harold Baines: Great? Not really. A lot like Olerud, but couldn't field.
John Franco: Another former Met and good guy. He amassed a lot of saves. Not a hall of famer.

They were very good players and you might have liked to have them on your team but they aren't Hall of Famers:
Barry Larkin: See the Alan Trammell Corollary for the 1995 MVP. A 12-time All-Star, although his last appearance was literally a mercy pick. .295 lifetime average, 198 homers and 379 steals. He does not compare to other great shortstops, even those that played in the same era. This is not the Hall of Very Good.
Alan Trammell: Well, the AT Corallary isn't named after him for nothing. Yep, he was probably the best shortstop of his era. He made the all-star team a lot. Somebody had to.
Edgar Martinez: 300 homers, .312 average, two batting titles, twice in the top 10 for MVP. Couldn't field, couldn't run, couldn't throw. Again, nowhere close to as good as Will Clark, who couldn't even get 5 percent to stay on the ballot.
Don Mattingly: Last year, Matt said Donny Ballgame would be the next Dodgers manager. Just wanted to point out how smart Matt is. So, he must be right when he say Mattingly was excellent, but not for long enough.
Lee Smith: See the Lee Smith Rule. What's the big save you remember Lee Smith getting? When did he carry his team for a season or even into a pennant run? What's your Lee Smith memory?
Fred McGriff: He's listed after Lee Smith for a reason. Was Fred McGriff ever a dominant player? Or was he occasionally a pretty good player? A nice piece on your team, but never the centerpiece.
Dave Parker: Some spectacular years. A lot of below average ones.
Tim Raines: Somehow, Raines seems less than the sum of his statistics. However, Matt vows to take a closer look at this case in the off season. Matt realizes now that in the past he has fallen into the standard media trap of overlooking people who played for the Expos, Astros, Royals, etc. It's wrong. Rock could run, although not much after 30. He didn't hit for power, was only in the MVP talk once and never won a Gold Glove. Oh forget it...Matt knows that Raines isn't a Hall of Famer. No off season studies required.
Larry Walker.* See the Lee Smith rule. And consider the Colorado factor. He was an excellent player for a while, someone you stopped to watch. But his career totals aren't overwhelming (383 homers, .313 average) and he didn't dazzle (or fizzle) in the postseason to give him that edge. He really wasn't a much better player than Darryl Strawberry who, again, nobody's making a case for. He was half as dominant as Albert Belle, who fell off the ballot.

Almost but not quite:
Dale Murphy: For a while, he did it all: Hit for power. Won Gold Gloves as a converted catcher. Two MVPs to show for it. But then, at 32 years old, he was done. Without any postseason, there's just not enough there.
Bert Blyleven: Matt has to be careful here. There's this odd groundswell of support to get Blyleven into the Hall, as if he was Tom Seaver. People who support him take it personally when you don't vote for him. Why do you want to keep Bert out?, they shout. But where were these people when he was playing? He never won a Cy Young - never finished in the top two. He made three all star games in 22 seasons. Back then, he wasn't considered dominant. Statistically, he never lead the league in wins or ERA. He won 20 once, 19 once. He led the league in strikeouts once. He was incredibly durable. And he's a fantastically funny, insightful and engaging broadcaster, which might have something to do with why he's sudden a hall of fame player. Maybe it should be called the Ron Santo Trap. A lovable broadcaster who retroactively becomes a legendary player.
Mark McGwire: This is where Matt flip flops most often. But, when measured against his era and what he has admitted to doing, Matt doesn't think McGwire's credentials stand up. After you deflate the home run numbers, you're left with a guy who couldn't run, field or hit for average. Disappeared in the postseason. But, undoubtedly, he was a brilliant power hitter and someone you stopped to watch hit. A borderline, hesitant, no.
Rafael Palmeiro* Ah, Matt's been waiting for Palmeiro to come up. Matt does not like Raffy. Nothing personal. He was a really good player who could hit for power and average. But he was vastly, vastly overrated. He got all the magic numbers but never made any of them magic. He had the perfect swing, but never got the crucial hit. Admit it, he never captured your imagination. He was hardly ever the best player on his team and he wasn't batting behind Lou Gehrig. He was dwarfed by Rusty Greer. Even with the steroids confirmation, Raffy was never a Hall of Famer.
Jeff Bagwell* Another gut check. It's tempting to blow off Bagwell because he played for the Astros. His excellence was relatively brief, but it was great while it lasted. He won an MVP and could run for a while. He never did much in the postseason. He is a player that merits further study. For now, no.

Yes, they should be in, but it's not a walk off:
Roberto Alomar.* Matt does not like Roberto Alomar. He's a jerk who did bad things and dropped off dramatically, fast. But, for 10 years Alomar could do it all at second base: field beautifully (10 Gold Gloves), steal bases and hit for average as well as power. Plus, he came up big when it counted. A hesitant yes, worthy of further study.
Jack Morris: Morris has an ugly ERA (3.90), 254 wins and 2,400+ strike outs. And he was a workhorse and straight money in the big games. He goes in on postseason excellence.

Absolutely, no doubt:
Nobody

To see all the players stats, go here.
For more interesting reads, check out Joe Posnanski's choices, even though some of his selections are quite clearly insane.

Upcoming ballots
2012: Jeromy Burnitz and Bernie Williams.
2013: Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Craig Biggio, Curt Schilling, Sammy Sosa, Mike Piazza, Kenny Lofton.
2014: Tom Glavine, Jeff Kent, Greg Maddux, Mike Mussina, Frank Thomas
2015: Randy Johnson, John Smoltz, Pedro Martinez, Carlos Delgado, Nomar Garciaparra, Joe Crede

Baseball playoffs 2010: Round II

Well, in the Division Series, Matt got two of four right. He had the Yankees and the Phillies, but got stung by the Rangers and Giants. The Rays bats never really came to life (which was a surprise) and the Giants pitching was better than just fine (not surprising). The first round was full of great, great games.

So what's ahead in the League Championship round?

On paper: even better match ups. And much more difficult to predict.

AMERICAN LEAGUE

New York Yankees vs. Texas Rangers

Matt's prediction: Yankees in five.

Predictable story lines: Experience of the Yankees vs. winning-is-new Rangers. Will Josh Hamilton and Ron Washington's sponsors get good seats? Is Cliff Lee going to throw six complete games or seven? Yankee tradition of excellence, blah, blah, blah.

Comment: Really? One of these teams will be playing in the World Series? It's hard to believe these are the two best teams in the American League. But they certainly were the best in the first round. Despite the prediction of a five-game series, these teams are actually pretty evenly matched. Both have one dominant pitcher followed by a question-mark rotation. Both have big offenses. These could all be great, 12-11 games. The Yankees are going to win because they have a great offense and Mariano Rivera. He's still the best. Plus, the Rangers are really hurt by Cliff Lee not being able to pitch game one. He may only get one game.

NATIONAL LEAGUE

San Francisco Giants vs. Philadelphia Phillies

Matt's prediction: Giants in seven.
Predictable story lines: Experience of the Phillies vs. the Giants youth. Will Halladay and Lincecum throw perfect games against each other? The over/under on total runs scored is 8.

Comment: Let's go with the upset. Experience is often overrated. In the first round, the Giants proved they weren't intimidated by the big stage. And the Giants have Lincecum and Cain going at least four games. This has all the makings of a monster, classic series. So why the Giants? Brian Wilson, Cain and Bumgarner. (Lincecum and Halladay are a wash?)

So, Yankees and Giants in the Series, just like 1962. Somebody get Ralph Terry, Stretch McCovet and Bobby Richardson on the phone.

And while Matt was only correct on half the first-round series, it should be noted: that's much better than last year and .500 would have led either league in batting.

Can't-miss picks

Last year, Matt watched a ton of baseball games on TV, so his picks for the playoffs were right on: he got two series right.
The year before that, Matt went to a bunch of baseball games and saw almost all the playoff teams in person. And his picks were even worse.
So, this year - when Matt watched less baseball than he has in ages -his picks are sure to be a little more right. It only follows.
Here be Matt's Playoff Picks Sure To Go Wrong.

AMERICAN LEAGUE
Minnesota Twins vs. New York Yankees
Matt's prediction: Yankees in four
Predictable storylines: Big market vs. small market; Twins can't win in postseason; Yankees playing with heavy hearts after Steinbrenner and Sheppard die; Will games be snowed out?
Comment: With all his heart, Matt will be rooting for the Twins. And they actually have a decent match-up. The Yankees are a very good (, very evil) team. But, as everyone is saying, their pitching is suspect past C.C. Sabathia. So, the key for the Twins might be game one. Beat Sabathia there and they may just have a shot at this thing. But, realistically, Hughes and Pettitte are still pretty good pitchers and the Twins aren't exactly throwing Santana and Blyleven out there. (That's the best Twins pitchers I could think of.) The Twins just need too many people to have career series to beat the All That Is Evils. Without Morneau...head trumps heart.

Texas Rangers vs. Tampa Bay Devil Rays
Matt's prediction: Rays is four
Predictable storylines: No one comes to Rays games so they might move; Cliff Lee likes to throw complete games; Rangers re-birth; Should Nolan Ryan pitch game two?; If Rangers win, will Josh Hamilton have to babysit Ron Washington?
Comment: On paper, this is a really intriguing series. It's tempting to say that Cliff Lee will be the tipping point for this series. Theoretically, this guy can just throw five complete games, if necessary. Josh Hamilton is back and the Rangers are an extremely potent lineup. But, David Price is awesome and so is Even Longoria, even on 12 days rest. Let's go with Joe Maddon and experience.

NATIONAL LEAGUE
Philadelphia Phillies vs. Cincinnati Reds
Matt's prediction: Phillies in three
Predictable storylines: Roy Halladay is finally in the postseason; Upstart Reds vs. veteran Phillies; Aroldis Chapman may kill a player with a thrown ball; Who will run into Darren Baker?
Comment: OK, nobody's picking the Reds. How could you? If you had a confidence pool the Phillies would have to be your top pick to advance. The Reds don't really have an ace and the Phillies might have three. The Reds have a bunch of young overachievers who are thrilled to be in the playoffs and the Phillies expect to go to the World Series. The Reds have Dusty Baker, the Phils have Roy Halladay. Sorry, Reds.

San Francisco Giants vs. Atlanta Braves
Matt's prediction: Braves in five
Predictable storylines: Two favorites for Rookie of the Year go head to head (Heyward and Posey); Lincecum is a freak; Chipper Jones wishes he could play in this series; Will Bobby Cox will be ejected from his last game?
Comment: Nobody's picking the Braves, either. Again, with good reason. The Braves basically snuck into the playoffs, barely losing less games than the Padres did down the stretch. Chipper Jones is out and Jason Heyward is struggling. The Giants have three or four aces. But...the Giants haven't been to the playoffs lately. And if Tim Lincecum gets blown up (which has happened this season) when the lights go on, things might get interesting. Here's betting Bobby Cox has one last trick up his sleeve.

Things to root for:
- If the Giants and Phillies do get through, that will be a heck of a pitching match up in the NLDS.
- Mike Sweeney, Roy Halladay and Michael Young are all making the first playoff appearances. Always nice to see veterans get a taste. Someone like that always seems to make a key play or have a huge series.
- Twins and Giants in the Series. Interesting.
- Always root for Jim Thome/Buzz Lightyear.

Things to root against:
- If the announcers start saying the Yankees are winning despite heavy hearts (because of Steinbrenner dying), that series has full barf potential.
- Yankees and Phillies in the Series. Blah.

Stadium seating: Target Field

If you've read Matt's previous baseball-stadium rankings, then you know that the worst stadium Matt has ever been to is the Metrodome. It wasn't even close.
The fans there were great - perhaps the best in baseball - but that was the only thing that horrific stadium had going for it. Because it was really a football stadium (the Vikings still play there), it was an unnatural place to watch a game. The sight lines were horrible and the field itself was worse. The outfield wall was a Hefty bag. Seriously.
But this season, the Twins moved to a new ballpark, Target Field. Matt had heard rave reviews and then Lynne - the greatest wife ever - got him tickets to a July 1 game as a birthday gift. Is she the best or what?
So, Matt headed for the Rays game, joined by college friends, Luke and Eric.
Let's start here: Target Field is very, very nice. It lived up the advanced billing. And while it's not on Matt's all-time top tier of stadiums, it's not far off, either. The park is picturesque and has a nice blend of history and modern features. And you can tell they put thought into how the park can be uniquely Minnesota-n, if that's a word.
We'll begin with parking, which was easy to get to and reasonably priced, especially since Eric paid. (If you go, try to arrange that.) The stadium is in downtown Minneapolis and easy to access from public transportation.
Outside, there's statues of some of the Twins greats, including Kirby Puckett, Rod Carew and Harmon Killebrew. Alas, no Hrbek. And the members of the Twins Hall of Fame are pictured on a bridge near the stadium. These are the kind of features that Matt believes start to separate good parks from great parks. You need to tell visitors the story of the team. (Ahem, Cubs.)
No one does it better than the Tigers, but the Twins have a nice start. The Kirby Puckett statue is particularly well done in that respect because it shows him running the bases after hitting a home run to win Game 6 of the 1991 World Series. That image immediately evokes memories and inspires shared stories. Those stories create lifelong fans.
A little more history would have been even better. There was precious little about two World Series championship teams. Matt never understands why teams don't give fans more access to the trophies or other relics. Fans worship the players on those teams. Let's see something from it. (And while you're at it, add a Penny Smasher, Twins! C'mon!)
We'll transition into one of Matt's few dislikes about the park - albeit one that comes with a caveat. The concourse around the park was really crowded. There wasn't much space between the seats and the concession stands so it felt hectic and distracted from enjoying the amenities. The caveat is that the stadium is still new. A lot of people arrive early and wander around, just like Matt. So, this may ease up as the novelty wears off.
As for the park: wow. The field is beautiful. The scoreboard includes the largest, crispest TV screen Matt's ever seen. And the Twins - Paul and Minnie - from the team's old logo shake hands when someone hits a home run. Unique and cool.
There's also plenty of little nooks that make the park pure Minnesota, which is what the best stadiums get right. The team's organist sits in the middle of a heated bar where you can eat sandwiches and chat with her. Nice. Matt got a picture with her, but it didn't turn out. Electrical engineers don't know how to work flashes, apparently.
Matt also had the Tony Olivia Cuban sandwich and, after peeling off the pickles, enjoyed it very much. Plus, the pregame show takes place in the outfield so you can watch Ron Coomer and Roy Smalley break it all down. The hosts took pictures and chatted with fans who must have felt like they were part of the "Twins family."
Matt, Luke and Eric's seats - bought off stubhub because everything is sold out - were in the next to last row, just to the third base side of home plate. The view was fantastic and unobstructed.
Overall, a wonderful place to watch Joe Mauer play baseball. (Which is not something to take for granted.)
Oh, and the game? Well, the Twins managed to pull a full Cubbie. Even Luke - a Cubs fan - described it as such. They went from up one with two outs, two strikes and nobody on in the ninth to losing in 10. Ah, well.
In interest of full nerd disclosure, it should be noted that Matt, Luke and Eric spent at least an hour discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the Twins' scorecards. Three grown men, sitting next to each other, scoring the same game, critiquing the number of lines available to write in pitching changes. (Got have a souvenir!)
It will be interesting to see how the new stadium changes the crowd. It got loud in the Metrodome a lot and at the right times. The fans knew their baseball and didn't wait until the ninth to stand up. They knew a hit-and-run situation in the sixth could be key and got appropriately excited. As Luke pointed out, those fans had to like baseball because there was no other reason to go to the Metrodump. Now, this new stadium is attracting an extra 12,000 people and some of them are stadium-gazers. They're at the game because it's the cool thing to do. Nothing wrong with that, but it changes the dynamic a bit. For instance: a lot of people left with the team up one run in the ninth.
In summary, this is a beautiful stadium. If you asked Matt what stadiums you had to see, Target Field might not be first on the list. But if you were going to Minnesota, Matt would strongly suggest a trip to Target.
Last note: it's still fair to question the wisdom of building an outdoor stadium in Minneapolis, but it won't matter because the White Sox are going to keep the Twinkies out of the playoffs anyhow. Oh yeah, we said it.

The MH stadium count remains at 14, since the goal is to see every team's park, not every stadium ever.

Here's Matt's updated ratings of the fields he's visited:
First tier: Fenway Park (Boston Red Sox), Comerica Park (Detroit Tigers), Petco Park (San Diego Padres) and PNC Park (Pittsburgh Pirates)
Second tier, but still close behind: Busch Stadium (St. Louis Cardinals), Camden Yards (Baltimore Orioles)
Third tier, and still close behind: Target Field (current Minnesota Twins), Miller Park (Milwaukee Brewers), Wrigley Field (Chicago Cubs)
Fourth tier, and still nice stadiums: Coors Field (Colorado Rockies), Citi Field (Mets) and Dodger Stadium (Los Angeles Dodgers)
Fourth tier and not-so-great stadiums: Shea Stadium (old New York Mets), U.S. Cellular Field (Chicago White Sox), Yankee Stadium (old New York Stinkees)
Sixth and a very bad stadium: Metrodome (old Minnesota Twins).

You can read ESPN Page 2's review of all these stadiums right here, although it's getting a bit really dated!

More non-baseball Minnesota pictures to follow!

Mark of Fridays: Touch 'em all!

Father's Day had a ballfield flavor to it.

From left to right, that's Tom Seaver, Paul Konerko, David Wright and Mark Buehrle - otherwise known as Big Mark, Little Mark, Matt and Barry.

Obviously, it's no coincidence that both the Mets (8-2 in their last 10 games) and the White Sox (nine straight as of this writing) have been on fire since this picture was snapped.

It's Grandpa Power!

He was out! But he wasn't.

OK, everyone is talking about the blown call that took away the perfect game. And you want to know what Matt thinks?
Thanks for asking. Finally.

Every emotional part of Matt wants to overturn the call. After, it's important to get it right. That seems like a fundamental part of baseball, part of umpiring.
Matt watched the play happen live and couldn’t tell if the runner was out or safe. As soon as they showed the replay, it was clear that it was the wrong call. It hurt to see it. Matt was hurting for the pitcher, for his teammates and for the ump.
Armando Galarraga did pitch a perfect game, after all. It ended with an imperfect call. But you can't change the call.
Overturning it causes too many problems.
What if it was the same play but on the last day of the season with a guy batting .4001? Or what if a guy just got thrown out at first (incorrectly) when he had 2,999 hits? (Then he dies in a plane crash so he can never get that last hit or something.) How far do you want to go with this? Should we review the whole game to make sure there were no pitches that were called strikes that should have been balls? If they blew a call with three balls then we can take away the perfect game again.

It stinks, but it was done by the rules on the field at the time. If you want to change the rules going forward (one replay per game?) then go ahead. But changing history seems silly.
Matt might have let it go if they had immediately consulted the replay on the field. (Even though that's not allowed.) But the game ended. The next batter grounded out. Everyone went home. Game over.
The bottom line is that people want to change this to add a statistical anomaly (one that's been in the air lately). The call was not significant to the fairness of the game as a whole or the competitive balance of the teams.
Matt's buddy Mark made a good comparison about Barry Bonds. For many (most?) people, it feels wrong that he has the record, but it is what it is. It also feels wrong that Rutherford B. Hayes won the popular election, but lost the electoral vote. We haven’t gone back and fixed that one!

Other, random thoughts on the not-perfect game:
- It would have been funny if the official scorer had rule an error (maybe on Cabrera's deliberate throw - so Galarraga could still get the no hitter. That would have been creative. And wrong.
- It would also be great is if Jason Donald - the batter - finishes his career with exactly 3,000 hits. Just to stir it up.
- The way the ump and Galarraga handled this? We could all something.
- Finally, what if this this situation had been the same, but it was game 7 of the World Series in a one-run game? You have to use the replay, even it wasn’t in the rulebook, right?