It was the last inning of the championship game. The Yankees had a sizable lead, but were struggling to get the final out. Their hated rivals were trying to put together one last miracle rally. Anything to tie the game.
With runners at first and second, the lead was looking to be in doubt. There were two strikes on the hitter, though, and the Yankees had their best pitcher out there. The catcher called for a meeting on the mound.
"Splitter," said the young catcher, and just like that, he had returned to home plate.
After a deep breath, the pitch came in. A splitter it surely was, only the hitter wasn't biting. The catcher wasn't much concerned with that, though, because the runners were going on the pitch. Out of the crouch, he fired a strike to third base. The third baseman applied the tag and waited for the call.
"He's out!" The umpire cried. The runner was out by a mile.
The celebration was on. There were hugs and cheers everywhere. Overwhelmed by the turn of events, the catcher launched his mask into the air wildly, almost knocking out a teammate. It didn't matter. They had won. After a long, grueling season in the hot sun, the Yankees had proven they were the best in baseball. Nothing in the world had ever been this sweet. They were champions.
. . .
The Royals lost another game tonight. More importantly, the Royals lost another winnable game tonight. This one hurt more than usual, though.* Maybe it was the fact that they made another handful of mistakes along the way, mistakes I'd expect most decent high school teams to avoid. Maybe it was that they had very good chances in the eighth and ninth to at least tie the game, and anytime you come that close to winning and don't, it's hard not to be upset.
*It seems every other loss hurts more than usual. Or maybe this team has been losing long enough now to the point where every loss hurts more than the one before. Or, it's possible this team has been losing long enough now to the point where I've become completely delusional.
More likely, though, it's because, like in most close games in any sport, the good teams find a way to win, and well, you know the rest. The Royals, of course, found a way to lose tonight, as they usually do. They always seem to be just good enough to lose. It's the one thing they never fail to do.
It's more frustrating because after winning three of their last four, including two of three from the Cardinals over the weekend, the Royals had a real chance put a dent in the Twins' lead in the division in the next few days. And yes, they still have that opportunity, but we all know what's more likely to happen. Just as they string together a few victories, the Royals, as they are accustomed to doing, will fall into a tailspin long enough to negate any progress they've made over the last week or so. The cycle will continue, as it has - give or take - for the last two decades, until the end of the season. The Royals will never get closer than arms length to first place, and will finish somewhere near the bottom of the division.
It's killing me. That may sound silly. It is silly, because it's not really killing me. With every loss, though, a part of me, at least the side of me that loves baseball, is dying. I know I can take it for awhile. I've proven that over the last twenty years. I do not know how much more I can take, though.
I sense that most people, after reading that last sentence, will laugh and assume I'm being overdramatic. While it is likely that I'd still watch another twenty years of losing Royals baseball without blinking, the thought is sincere. Really, at what point do we, as fans, finally say enough is enough, and save ourselves the hurt? Does that point ever come? I guess I really don't know.
Anyway, for whatever reason, tonight's game stuck with me for awhile. It wasn't this game in particular, obviously, but more of a cumulative frustration. It inspired some deep thought. After I got over the natural 'what could we have done to win' thoughts, I started thinking about my relationship with the Royals. Obviously, my affiliation with the Royals makes sense because I was born and raised in Kansas City. I love Kansas City. I wondered, though, do I love the Royals?
I think I've come to realize that my true love is with baseball, not the Royals. This is not to say that I don't love the Royals. That possibility is there. But without the Royals, we still have baseball. Without baseball, there are no Kansas City Royals.
And with every mental mistake a player makes, blown lead, star player traded and so on, it becomes even harder and harder and harder to love this team. What is Yuniesky Betancourt thinking when he botches a suicide squeeze with the game on the line? What's going through Billy Butler's mind when he fails to cover a base on a blooper? What exactly does David Glass think about the seventh consecutive team he's allowed represent his organization that has absolutely no chance of winning?
Does the thought in those men's minds have anything to do with their love for baseball? How about their respect for the sport? I seriously doubt it.
See, I played this sport once, too. I was the catcher on that Yankees team that won the championship. The hated rivals were the Vipers. It was South Suburban little league baseball in south Kansas City. It was one of the greatest moments of my life.
Some of my best memories were created on those Clark Ketterman ball fields. I discovered baseball there, and it's no wonder why I'll never forget the times I had. It was my first true love. I will always love this game.
It's no mystery why my mind drifted to our championship game victory while I reflected on the Royals tonight. It's possible it would take some similar soul searching - I mean truly searching for the reasons why - in order to revive this organization.
I hope it happens sooner rather than later. My love for the Royals may be running out. My love for baseball, on the other hand, will never fade.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Royals, Twins Walk Separate Paths
As a longtime Kansas City baseball fan, I can safely say I've seen just about anything and everything you could ever dream of seeing happen on a baseball diamond.
That is except, of course, winning baseball.
In this stupor that is the last two decades of losing baseball the Royals have subjected us to, as fans, we've kind of lost touch on what's really going on. That, and we're not really sure why we're still watching.*
*Every time I DVR a Royals game, two thoughts come to mind:
And the losses pile on - it's like this team has been losing forever - without any explanation.
It's time we explored one possible explanation: The walks.
I think it's only fair that we use the Minnesota Twins as a comparison. The Twins have been winning for a full decade now, and their rise from almost being contracted to model small-market franchise is something the Royals would love to replicate.
Also, it's important to note why the Twins are a relevant comparison. It's been said there is no other one thing that has more emphasis put on it in Minnesota than the importance of their pitchers throwing strikes. From day one in development all the way to the major league level, it's something their coaches preach. Walks are like sin in the organization, and their pitchers either catch on or hit the road.
So let's start with 2010. As you might expect, as of Tuesday, the Twins are first in the majors having only given up 146 bases on balls. What's more telling is the second place team has walked 31 more hitters. The Royals, of course, are in the bottom third of the league at 23rd, with 256 BBs. That's a mere 110 more, or 1.5 more per game, than Minnesota.*
*While looking at that stat I noticed the Royals and Twins have virtually the same innings pitched and batting avg. against this season, yet KC has given up a whopping 77 more earned runs so far. Ouch.
Since 2001, when the Twins began their dominance of the A.L. Central, the team has never finished worst than fourth in least walks allowed. In that same time frame, the Royals' average ranking is 20th, and they never finished higher than ninth.
What's most staggering is since 2003, the Twins have been best in the league in walks allowed three times, and either finished first or second every season in that time period.
Now, none of all this matters unless it equates to victories, and it surely does. From '01 on, the Twins have had only one losing season, and have won the division five times. And that includes some absolute dominance of our boys in blue that most of us would like to forget.
On the other hand, our walk-happy Royals club has had one winning season and four-100 loss seasons in the last decade to show for their ignorance to this obvious deficiency. It's embarrasing.
We know this isn't the only reason the Royals have been losing. It's certainly not the only reason the Twins are winning. They have a couple of young hitters named Mauer and Morneau that have played a pretty big role in the team's recent success.
Still, it's one thing the Royals have been bad at for awhile now. It's something they'll have to drastically improve upon as they try to progress and eventually become a winning team. And certainly it's something we can all think about come October, when the Twins are still playing baseball and the Royals are not.
Source: MLB.com
That is except, of course, winning baseball.
In this stupor that is the last two decades of losing baseball the Royals have subjected us to, as fans, we've kind of lost touch on what's really going on. That, and we're not really sure why we're still watching.*
*Every time I DVR a Royals game, two thoughts come to mind:
- I hope we win tonight.
- We're not going to win tonight.
And the losses pile on - it's like this team has been losing forever - without any explanation.
It's time we explored one possible explanation: The walks.
I think it's only fair that we use the Minnesota Twins as a comparison. The Twins have been winning for a full decade now, and their rise from almost being contracted to model small-market franchise is something the Royals would love to replicate.
Also, it's important to note why the Twins are a relevant comparison. It's been said there is no other one thing that has more emphasis put on it in Minnesota than the importance of their pitchers throwing strikes. From day one in development all the way to the major league level, it's something their coaches preach. Walks are like sin in the organization, and their pitchers either catch on or hit the road.
So let's start with 2010. As you might expect, as of Tuesday, the Twins are first in the majors having only given up 146 bases on balls. What's more telling is the second place team has walked 31 more hitters. The Royals, of course, are in the bottom third of the league at 23rd, with 256 BBs. That's a mere 110 more, or 1.5 more per game, than Minnesota.*
*While looking at that stat I noticed the Royals and Twins have virtually the same innings pitched and batting avg. against this season, yet KC has given up a whopping 77 more earned runs so far. Ouch.
Since 2001, when the Twins began their dominance of the A.L. Central, the team has never finished worst than fourth in least walks allowed. In that same time frame, the Royals' average ranking is 20th, and they never finished higher than ninth.
What's most staggering is since 2003, the Twins have been best in the league in walks allowed three times, and either finished first or second every season in that time period.
Now, none of all this matters unless it equates to victories, and it surely does. From '01 on, the Twins have had only one losing season, and have won the division five times. And that includes some absolute dominance of our boys in blue that most of us would like to forget.
On the other hand, our walk-happy Royals club has had one winning season and four-100 loss seasons in the last decade to show for their ignorance to this obvious deficiency. It's embarrasing.
We know this isn't the only reason the Royals have been losing. It's certainly not the only reason the Twins are winning. They have a couple of young hitters named Mauer and Morneau that have played a pretty big role in the team's recent success.
Still, it's one thing the Royals have been bad at for awhile now. It's something they'll have to drastically improve upon as they try to progress and eventually become a winning team. And certainly it's something we can all think about come October, when the Twins are still playing baseball and the Royals are not.
Source: MLB.com
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Royals' Pick Shows Us How Bad (Or Good) It Could Be
There are two very contrasting conclusions one could draw from the Royals' first-round selection Monday in the 2010 MLB First-Year Player Draft.
The first is the negative, and it was (naturally) my original feeling in the moments following the organization's decision to make Cal State Fullerton shortstop Christian Colon the fourth overall selection in the draft.
In the days leading up to the first-round Monday, there was much speculation the Royals were already working out a deal to make University of Miami catcher Yasmani Grandal their selection. The only question was whether the temptation to take Chris Sale, a hard throwing left-handed pitcher from Florida Gulf Coast, would ultimately prove too great to pass on.
Then, of course, the news came. The Royals had selected Colon. Reports surfaced that the organization steered away from Grandal only after - you guessed it - negotiations on his potential signing bonus broke down.
My immediate thought there was obvious: It's impossible to believe this team has improved since the Herk Robinson and Allard Baird days if they're still drafting players based on signability. If the Royals believe Grandal will become a more productive big leaguer than Colon, and still selected Colon because of money issues, then, folks, we're dealing with the same set of issues that initially plagued the franchise in the mid-90s after founder Ewing Kauffman passed away.
It's also interesting, and hopefully just a coincidence, that Colon happens to play a position of need for the big league club. The Royals are starving for a major-league ready shortstop in their system, and they project Colon to be at that status quickly.
The problem there is that it's usually a mistake to draft for need. The consensus is, in almost any sport, it's a better strategy to draft the best overall players instead of reaching for a quick solution to fill holes on the roster. If a team tends to generally select the best overall players, by the time those players are ready to compete at a high level, trades and injuries help smooth things out and balance the roster.
Obviously it's easier said than done, but you get the idea. Drafting for need usually leads to having less overall talent on your roster in the future.
It's also very odd that GM Dayton Moore has completely flip-flopped on his initial draft strategy when he took over the Royals. He made it clear the emphasis would be on drafting high school players who are bigger projects but have much higher potential. He followed through on that in 2007 and 2008, making Mike Moustakas and Eric Hosmer, both power-hitting high school hitters at the time of their selections, the Royals' first-round picks in each of those drafts, respectively.
Then, last year, the philosophy seemed to change a bit, when the team chose Mizzou pitcher Aaron Crow with their first-round selection. Monday, of course, they chose Colon, making it two consecutive years their first pick was a college player.
What's more telling is that as of Tuesday evening, 24 of the Royals' 29 picks so far in this year's draft were college players.
The intention is clear. Moore's goal in this year's draft is to compliment the impressive wave of talent in the minor-league system, headed by Moustakas and Hosmer, in hopes that a mostly home-grown roster is on the field and winning games by 2013 or 2014.
I can't say it's healthy for Moore to be putting all his eggs in this talent-wave's basket, so to speak. He has preached that the goal is to have wave after wave of talent, each ready to replace the existing one in each level of the organization. He says it's the only proven way for a professional baseball team to compete and win for an extended period of time in a small market.
You have to wonder if Moore is sacrificing the team's long-term future to save his job in the very-near future.
Yet, still, it could work, and this is the positive conclusion one must ultimately form from the Royals' draft selection Monday. This team is slowly forming what might be one of the most impressive minor-league systems in all of baseball. With the drafting of Colon - and the team says they wanted Colon all along - there will potentially be one less glaring hole on a team three years down the line that should be winning.
The sudden emphasis on drafting college talent also shows how close the organization believes they are to winning. It is, finally, no longer a five-year (endless) plan of drafting and developing and eventually failing. The Royals want players who are close to being major-league ready because better days are coming, and they're closer than ever.
Both arguments certainly hold water. It's definitely easier to focus on the negative, given the painful mistakes the Royals' organization has made over the years. Of course, on the contrary, it didn't hurt that just a couple hours after the team drafted Colon, I flipped on the television just in time to see him go three for four with two doubles in support of a victory for his Titans in the College World Series.
If there ever comes a time Colon finds himself in a more impactful game with his new team, we'll know it was a good pick.
The first is the negative, and it was (naturally) my original feeling in the moments following the organization's decision to make Cal State Fullerton shortstop Christian Colon the fourth overall selection in the draft.
In the days leading up to the first-round Monday, there was much speculation the Royals were already working out a deal to make University of Miami catcher Yasmani Grandal their selection. The only question was whether the temptation to take Chris Sale, a hard throwing left-handed pitcher from Florida Gulf Coast, would ultimately prove too great to pass on.
Then, of course, the news came. The Royals had selected Colon. Reports surfaced that the organization steered away from Grandal only after - you guessed it - negotiations on his potential signing bonus broke down.
My immediate thought there was obvious: It's impossible to believe this team has improved since the Herk Robinson and Allard Baird days if they're still drafting players based on signability. If the Royals believe Grandal will become a more productive big leaguer than Colon, and still selected Colon because of money issues, then, folks, we're dealing with the same set of issues that initially plagued the franchise in the mid-90s after founder Ewing Kauffman passed away.
It's also interesting, and hopefully just a coincidence, that Colon happens to play a position of need for the big league club. The Royals are starving for a major-league ready shortstop in their system, and they project Colon to be at that status quickly.
The problem there is that it's usually a mistake to draft for need. The consensus is, in almost any sport, it's a better strategy to draft the best overall players instead of reaching for a quick solution to fill holes on the roster. If a team tends to generally select the best overall players, by the time those players are ready to compete at a high level, trades and injuries help smooth things out and balance the roster.
Obviously it's easier said than done, but you get the idea. Drafting for need usually leads to having less overall talent on your roster in the future.
It's also very odd that GM Dayton Moore has completely flip-flopped on his initial draft strategy when he took over the Royals. He made it clear the emphasis would be on drafting high school players who are bigger projects but have much higher potential. He followed through on that in 2007 and 2008, making Mike Moustakas and Eric Hosmer, both power-hitting high school hitters at the time of their selections, the Royals' first-round picks in each of those drafts, respectively.
Then, last year, the philosophy seemed to change a bit, when the team chose Mizzou pitcher Aaron Crow with their first-round selection. Monday, of course, they chose Colon, making it two consecutive years their first pick was a college player.
What's more telling is that as of Tuesday evening, 24 of the Royals' 29 picks so far in this year's draft were college players.
The intention is clear. Moore's goal in this year's draft is to compliment the impressive wave of talent in the minor-league system, headed by Moustakas and Hosmer, in hopes that a mostly home-grown roster is on the field and winning games by 2013 or 2014.
I can't say it's healthy for Moore to be putting all his eggs in this talent-wave's basket, so to speak. He has preached that the goal is to have wave after wave of talent, each ready to replace the existing one in each level of the organization. He says it's the only proven way for a professional baseball team to compete and win for an extended period of time in a small market.
You have to wonder if Moore is sacrificing the team's long-term future to save his job in the very-near future.
Yet, still, it could work, and this is the positive conclusion one must ultimately form from the Royals' draft selection Monday. This team is slowly forming what might be one of the most impressive minor-league systems in all of baseball. With the drafting of Colon - and the team says they wanted Colon all along - there will potentially be one less glaring hole on a team three years down the line that should be winning.
The sudden emphasis on drafting college talent also shows how close the organization believes they are to winning. It is, finally, no longer a five-year (endless) plan of drafting and developing and eventually failing. The Royals want players who are close to being major-league ready because better days are coming, and they're closer than ever.
Both arguments certainly hold water. It's definitely easier to focus on the negative, given the painful mistakes the Royals' organization has made over the years. Of course, on the contrary, it didn't hurt that just a couple hours after the team drafted Colon, I flipped on the television just in time to see him go three for four with two doubles in support of a victory for his Titans in the College World Series.
If there ever comes a time Colon finds himself in a more impactful game with his new team, we'll know it was a good pick.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
The Perfect Call
In the aftermath of the biggest blown call by an umpire in Major League Baseball in over two decades, I can't help but wonder if Jim Joyce did Armando Galarraga and the rest of baseball a huge favor last night.
If you haven't already heard, Galarraga, pitching for the Detroit Tigers, had a perfect game going with two outs in the ninth inning when Cleveland Indians' shortstop Jason Donald hit a chopper to the right side. First baseman Miguel Cabrera moved to his right, fielded the ball, tossed it to first where Galarraga was covering for what should have been the 27th and final out of perfection.
Donald was out by almost a full step. Joyce, umpiring at first base, called him safe.
Cabrera put his hands on his head in disbelief. Tigers' manager Jim Leyland came out to argue the call. The Tigers' television announcers were so sure Donald was out, they didn't even bother to wait for Joyce's call before exclaiming, "He's out!"
Even Donald himself threw his hands on his head as if he couldn't believe it, either. It was almost as if he wanted to be out. He would later explain that he didn't know if he was out or not, but he was sure he would be called out given what was at stake.
And Galarraga? Well, he just smiled.
That's what got me. The guy was one out away from throwing a perfect game, loses it on a bad call, and all he does is smiles? I was thinking, as most of you probably were:
"If that were me, I would have gone ballistic. I mean, safe? Really? You just cost me a perfect game! Seriously?! I'm going George Brett pine-tar on this guy. You've got to be kidding!"
No, not Galarraga. He took a deep breath and retired the next hitter for a one-hit shutout. The damage had been done. After the game, Joyce apologized and admitted he was wrong.
"I thought he beat the throw. I was convinced he beat the throw, until I saw the replay," he said. "I just cost that kid a perfect game."
Joyce would later apologize directly to Galarraga. They hugged, with Joyce in tears.
Obviously the call and the game led to plenty of talk about expanding instant replay in baseball. Royals' catcher Jason Kendall said today that Joyce is the best umpire in baseball, and there's no room for replay, at least more replay, in the sport.
We live with bad calls and move on. It's baseball.
It also led to questions as to whether Commissioner Bud Selig would overturn the call so Galarraga could have his perfect game. Selig ruled against that idea today, and I think it was a good decision. Human error is a part of sports officiating, maybe moreso in baseball than any other sport. If we corrected every bad call in the previous 20 perfect games in MLB history, who knows if any or all of those would no longer be thought of as 'perfect'?
Most importantly, though, the call led to us finding something out about what it really means to be perfect. After the game, Galarraga talked about how sad it was for Joyce, that he really felt for him. You'd expect the feeling would be the other way around. Then today, Galarraga, smiles and all, presented the lineup card to a tearful Joyce, a job usually left for the manager or bench coach of the ball club.
Galarraga had been perfect, as a pitcher, for one night. Yet, he would not be remembered as perfect, at least baseball-wise. He did not let it phase him, though. He accepted it and moved on, as quick as that. There's something to be learned from his professional and forgiving attitude* immediately after the call all the way through today.
*NBA Finals participants, are you listening? One of the many reasons I think college basketball is much more entertaining than the pros is the way the pro players react when a foul is called. After every whistle, like clockwork, you have ten grown men whining and crying about an obvious foul call or travel or whatever. Give me a break, guys. This isn't street-ball. It's disgusting.
And in his response, Galarraga has made us not be able to forget him. Sure, we all would have remembered the call. But Galarraga has become more than his imperfect-perfect game. Joyce has played a role, too. Not every umpire would be willing to admit a mistake that large, and come back to the ballpark the next day ready to work.
It's really been something special. There have been two other perfect games in the last month. Had Joyce made the correct call at first last night, Armando Galarraga would have been a name remembered only for the next few days. Maybe even a month.
Now, though, this story has become so much more. It's bigger than baseball. We'll never forget Armando Galarraga, or the smile on his face after the call. We'll never forget Jim Joyce becoming so human after the worst call of his career.
It's funny, I'm not sure Galarraga knew the irony in his statement after the game to reporters, in which he summed up the call by Joyce.
"Nobody's perfect," he said.
In a weird way, it couldn't have been more perfect.
If you haven't already heard, Galarraga, pitching for the Detroit Tigers, had a perfect game going with two outs in the ninth inning when Cleveland Indians' shortstop Jason Donald hit a chopper to the right side. First baseman Miguel Cabrera moved to his right, fielded the ball, tossed it to first where Galarraga was covering for what should have been the 27th and final out of perfection.
Donald was out by almost a full step. Joyce, umpiring at first base, called him safe.
Cabrera put his hands on his head in disbelief. Tigers' manager Jim Leyland came out to argue the call. The Tigers' television announcers were so sure Donald was out, they didn't even bother to wait for Joyce's call before exclaiming, "He's out!"
Even Donald himself threw his hands on his head as if he couldn't believe it, either. It was almost as if he wanted to be out. He would later explain that he didn't know if he was out or not, but he was sure he would be called out given what was at stake.
And Galarraga? Well, he just smiled.
That's what got me. The guy was one out away from throwing a perfect game, loses it on a bad call, and all he does is smiles? I was thinking, as most of you probably were:
"If that were me, I would have gone ballistic. I mean, safe? Really? You just cost me a perfect game! Seriously?! I'm going George Brett pine-tar on this guy. You've got to be kidding!"
No, not Galarraga. He took a deep breath and retired the next hitter for a one-hit shutout. The damage had been done. After the game, Joyce apologized and admitted he was wrong.
"I thought he beat the throw. I was convinced he beat the throw, until I saw the replay," he said. "I just cost that kid a perfect game."
Joyce would later apologize directly to Galarraga. They hugged, with Joyce in tears.
Obviously the call and the game led to plenty of talk about expanding instant replay in baseball. Royals' catcher Jason Kendall said today that Joyce is the best umpire in baseball, and there's no room for replay, at least more replay, in the sport.
We live with bad calls and move on. It's baseball.
It also led to questions as to whether Commissioner Bud Selig would overturn the call so Galarraga could have his perfect game. Selig ruled against that idea today, and I think it was a good decision. Human error is a part of sports officiating, maybe moreso in baseball than any other sport. If we corrected every bad call in the previous 20 perfect games in MLB history, who knows if any or all of those would no longer be thought of as 'perfect'?
Most importantly, though, the call led to us finding something out about what it really means to be perfect. After the game, Galarraga talked about how sad it was for Joyce, that he really felt for him. You'd expect the feeling would be the other way around. Then today, Galarraga, smiles and all, presented the lineup card to a tearful Joyce, a job usually left for the manager or bench coach of the ball club.
Galarraga had been perfect, as a pitcher, for one night. Yet, he would not be remembered as perfect, at least baseball-wise. He did not let it phase him, though. He accepted it and moved on, as quick as that. There's something to be learned from his professional and forgiving attitude* immediately after the call all the way through today.
*NBA Finals participants, are you listening? One of the many reasons I think college basketball is much more entertaining than the pros is the way the pro players react when a foul is called. After every whistle, like clockwork, you have ten grown men whining and crying about an obvious foul call or travel or whatever. Give me a break, guys. This isn't street-ball. It's disgusting.
And in his response, Galarraga has made us not be able to forget him. Sure, we all would have remembered the call. But Galarraga has become more than his imperfect-perfect game. Joyce has played a role, too. Not every umpire would be willing to admit a mistake that large, and come back to the ballpark the next day ready to work.
It's really been something special. There have been two other perfect games in the last month. Had Joyce made the correct call at first last night, Armando Galarraga would have been a name remembered only for the next few days. Maybe even a month.
Now, though, this story has become so much more. It's bigger than baseball. We'll never forget Armando Galarraga, or the smile on his face after the call. We'll never forget Jim Joyce becoming so human after the worst call of his career.
It's funny, I'm not sure Galarraga knew the irony in his statement after the game to reporters, in which he summed up the call by Joyce.
"Nobody's perfect," he said.
In a weird way, it couldn't have been more perfect.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Super Bowl In KC: Don't Count On It
In November of 2005, then-NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue announced that Kansas City would be awarded a Super Bowl between 2012 and 2021, contigent upon Arrowhead Stadium being a climate-controlled facility by that time. It was later stated that 2015 was the likely year KC would get the big game.
As most of us remember, the rolling roof proposal on the April 2006 ballot was rejected by Jackson County, Missouri voters, who may have been negatively swayed by the mostly confusing details in the measure, the mere thought of raising taxes for one game, and the fear of the roof being overused during the regular season. The Chiefs later withdrew their request for the game after the proposal failed to even make it on the ballot the following November.
As most of you have heard by now, Tuesday, current NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell announced the league has awarded the 2014 Super Bowl to the New Meadowlands Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. It will be the first Super Bowl played outdoors in a cold weather region.*
*While risky, I think the cold-weather Super Bowl idea is a good move by the league. I don't think it should be held in a cold weather region every year, though. Goodell should implement a Super Bowl rotation including, but not limited to all cities with NFL teams that are capable of hosting and based upon stadium upkeep and attendance during the season. From the preseason on through the playoffs, every game played outdoors has the possibilty of the elements coming into play, and the Super Bowl should be no different.
Because of the obvious precedent being set here, there has been a buzz among Kansas City fans and talk-show hosts that the city should be reconsidered for the 2015 game, or sometime soon after.
I completely agree. I'm also sure it won't happen.
First of all, after the original announcement, Goodell made it clear that a precedent was not being set, instead citing the uniqueness of the New York/New Jersey area combined with the chance at making history. While the translation of that is not completely known, we are fairly certain it has something to do with the health of his bank account.
Since then, though, Goodell seemed more open to the idea of other cold weather cities hosting the game, saying it would depend on the success of the game in New York. While that makes plenty of sense, it would surely delay any chance for the game to be held in KC until, at the very earliest, 2018, because of the voting process taking place several years in advance.
If Goodell does get serious about allowing more cold weather cities to host, KC faces another series of obstacles. The promise was made to the late Lamar Hunt, and the Chiefs are now run by his son, Clark. There has been no definite indication of whether Clark would even be on board for a Super Bowl in KC, other than his natural support of his father's push for the rolling roof measure to pass in 2006.
Also, when the league promised KC the game, Tagliabue was running things. Goodell has no obligation to follow through on any promises made by the former commissioner, especially considering varying circumstances are involved.
So, naturally there will be plenty of campaiging by some of the other teams and owners for the game to come to their respective cities. Dan Snyder, owner of the Washington Redskins, has already made it clear he would love for the game to come to the D.C. area.
ESPN Radio host and Sportscenter anchor Mike Greenberg has already suggested, "...the one place they have to play the Super Bowl (is) Lambeau Field."
While you may agree with Greenberg's thoughts on Lambeau, his opinion means little alone. However, as a whole, ESPN has much more influence than anyone east of here would like to admit. The network, with its studios located in Bristol, Connecticut, might as well have been campaigning for the Super Bowl to come to New York, and still hasn't ended its week-long celebration for their wish coming true.*
*There is speculation that the letters E-S-P-N actually stand for Eastcoast Sports Programming Network.
Anyway, with that thought in mind, what makes Kansas Citians believe their city would be considered before Washington, Philadelphia, or even Baltimore? How about Gillette Stadium in New England? Patriots' owner Robert Kraft is a longtime friend of Goodell, and Gillette Stadium is less than ten years old.
The point is, there will be plenty of discussion and persuasion as to where the Super Bowl should go next, and why it makes perfect sense for certain cities. I'm not sure KC would get much support in these such talks, at least among national media outlets.
Really, the timing of the renovations for Arrowhead, which passed on the same ballot the rolling roof question appeared on, could not have been worse for supporters of a KC Super Bowl. The NFL tends to reward teams who renovate or build new stadiums with the game. The original promise by Tagliabue was with the thought of a renovated Arrowhead in mind.
If this trend continues and is combined with the league's openness to cold weather sites, my prediction is KC will be passed up by other cities. The Arrowhead renovations will be more or less forgotten by the league, and bigger cities - located on the east coast or not - with new stadiums will make a better case to the league and its owners.
Invesco Field at Mile High in Denver is less than ten years old. The Broncos have had much more success than the Chiefs in recent years, resulting in a greater league-wide popularity and following for the Donkeys. Also, Denver is more populous than KC. I can't think of one reason why the owners would find KC a better fit for the big game than Denver.
The Vikings are ready to build a new stadium in Minneapolis. All the same reasons apply here as for the Denver comparison. KC is outmatched.
It's also likely that many owners with outdated stadiums will use the New York example to lure their cities' residents into helping pay for new stadiums. The competition for KC would grow even greater, and the likelihood of the Super Bowl happening at Arrowhead would go from somewhat of a longshot to an absolute miracle.
It's ironic, really, that the Super Bowl in New York news is what led to the KC Super Bowl discussions being rehashed, but after looking deeper, it's likely the breakthrough vote has all but killed KC's chances of getting the game.
The odds just don't seem to be in KC's favor, and it's really a shame. The city and its extremely loyal fans have been long-starved of any great news on the professional sports front, and the opportunity to host the Super Bowl could have been the perfect remedy.
As most of us remember, the rolling roof proposal on the April 2006 ballot was rejected by Jackson County, Missouri voters, who may have been negatively swayed by the mostly confusing details in the measure, the mere thought of raising taxes for one game, and the fear of the roof being overused during the regular season. The Chiefs later withdrew their request for the game after the proposal failed to even make it on the ballot the following November.
As most of you have heard by now, Tuesday, current NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell announced the league has awarded the 2014 Super Bowl to the New Meadowlands Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. It will be the first Super Bowl played outdoors in a cold weather region.*
*While risky, I think the cold-weather Super Bowl idea is a good move by the league. I don't think it should be held in a cold weather region every year, though. Goodell should implement a Super Bowl rotation including, but not limited to all cities with NFL teams that are capable of hosting and based upon stadium upkeep and attendance during the season. From the preseason on through the playoffs, every game played outdoors has the possibilty of the elements coming into play, and the Super Bowl should be no different.
Because of the obvious precedent being set here, there has been a buzz among Kansas City fans and talk-show hosts that the city should be reconsidered for the 2015 game, or sometime soon after.
I completely agree. I'm also sure it won't happen.
First of all, after the original announcement, Goodell made it clear that a precedent was not being set, instead citing the uniqueness of the New York/New Jersey area combined with the chance at making history. While the translation of that is not completely known, we are fairly certain it has something to do with the health of his bank account.
Since then, though, Goodell seemed more open to the idea of other cold weather cities hosting the game, saying it would depend on the success of the game in New York. While that makes plenty of sense, it would surely delay any chance for the game to be held in KC until, at the very earliest, 2018, because of the voting process taking place several years in advance.
If Goodell does get serious about allowing more cold weather cities to host, KC faces another series of obstacles. The promise was made to the late Lamar Hunt, and the Chiefs are now run by his son, Clark. There has been no definite indication of whether Clark would even be on board for a Super Bowl in KC, other than his natural support of his father's push for the rolling roof measure to pass in 2006.
Also, when the league promised KC the game, Tagliabue was running things. Goodell has no obligation to follow through on any promises made by the former commissioner, especially considering varying circumstances are involved.
So, naturally there will be plenty of campaiging by some of the other teams and owners for the game to come to their respective cities. Dan Snyder, owner of the Washington Redskins, has already made it clear he would love for the game to come to the D.C. area.
ESPN Radio host and Sportscenter anchor Mike Greenberg has already suggested, "...the one place they have to play the Super Bowl (is) Lambeau Field."
While you may agree with Greenberg's thoughts on Lambeau, his opinion means little alone. However, as a whole, ESPN has much more influence than anyone east of here would like to admit. The network, with its studios located in Bristol, Connecticut, might as well have been campaigning for the Super Bowl to come to New York, and still hasn't ended its week-long celebration for their wish coming true.*
*There is speculation that the letters E-S-P-N actually stand for Eastcoast Sports Programming Network.
Anyway, with that thought in mind, what makes Kansas Citians believe their city would be considered before Washington, Philadelphia, or even Baltimore? How about Gillette Stadium in New England? Patriots' owner Robert Kraft is a longtime friend of Goodell, and Gillette Stadium is less than ten years old.
The point is, there will be plenty of discussion and persuasion as to where the Super Bowl should go next, and why it makes perfect sense for certain cities. I'm not sure KC would get much support in these such talks, at least among national media outlets.
Really, the timing of the renovations for Arrowhead, which passed on the same ballot the rolling roof question appeared on, could not have been worse for supporters of a KC Super Bowl. The NFL tends to reward teams who renovate or build new stadiums with the game. The original promise by Tagliabue was with the thought of a renovated Arrowhead in mind.
If this trend continues and is combined with the league's openness to cold weather sites, my prediction is KC will be passed up by other cities. The Arrowhead renovations will be more or less forgotten by the league, and bigger cities - located on the east coast or not - with new stadiums will make a better case to the league and its owners.
Invesco Field at Mile High in Denver is less than ten years old. The Broncos have had much more success than the Chiefs in recent years, resulting in a greater league-wide popularity and following for the Donkeys. Also, Denver is more populous than KC. I can't think of one reason why the owners would find KC a better fit for the big game than Denver.
The Vikings are ready to build a new stadium in Minneapolis. All the same reasons apply here as for the Denver comparison. KC is outmatched.
It's also likely that many owners with outdated stadiums will use the New York example to lure their cities' residents into helping pay for new stadiums. The competition for KC would grow even greater, and the likelihood of the Super Bowl happening at Arrowhead would go from somewhat of a longshot to an absolute miracle.
It's ironic, really, that the Super Bowl in New York news is what led to the KC Super Bowl discussions being rehashed, but after looking deeper, it's likely the breakthrough vote has all but killed KC's chances of getting the game.
The odds just don't seem to be in KC's favor, and it's really a shame. The city and its extremely loyal fans have been long-starved of any great news on the professional sports front, and the opportunity to host the Super Bowl could have been the perfect remedy.
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Yost Can't Hide Team's Flaws Forever
As it turns out, there is one thing new Royals' manager Ned Yost has in common with his predecessor, Trey Hillman. That, of course, is the inability to win with the best pitcher in baseball on the mound.
After putting together easily their best stretch of baseball this season thus far, having won seven of nine, the Royals dropped their last two to the Colorado Rockies over the weekend, including an 11-7 loss on Sunday with Zack Greinke on the mound.
If you knew before the day began the Royals would score seven runs with their ace on the mound, you'd have felt pretty confident in their chances for victory. Instead, Greinke gave up eight runs, seven of them earned, and couldn't get out of the fourth inning. It was just the second time all season he's allowed more than three earned runs in a start.*
The worst part is that Greinke is 1-5 now, and the Royals are 2-8 in his starts this season. Not good.
*Not that it applied today, but the Royals' usual failure to give Greinke run support is staggering. In eight of his ten starts, he's given up three runs or less. If you concede that he deserved to lose the other two games, and that about one in every eight times a pitcher gives up three runs or less he should still lose, then you'd conclude the Royals should be 7-3 in his starts. And the timing of the Royals finally giving him decent run support on the day of his worst outing of the season is impeccable. It's creative losing, sure, but it's losing baseball, nonetheless.
. . .
There wasn't much to speak of in Saturday's game. The Royals were shutout 3-0 in just the second start of the season for Rockies' lefty Jeff Francis.
Francis still proved to be effective even after coming off shoulder surgery that sidelined him for all of last season. He was a big part of the Rockies' improbable run to the World Series in 2007, winning 17 games that year. He's lost some velocity on his pitches, though that may have helped him Saturday. Ever since I can remember, the Royals have always struggled mightily against soft-tossing south paws, and that again reigned true against Francis.*
*Jamie Moyer comes to mind here. He's probably the most famous finesse lefty of our era, or the era before ours - he's 47 - and he seems to always dominate the Royals. He has a 14-9 career record against KC, and three of his ten career complete-game shutouts are against the Royals.
Of course, having two runners picked-off on the base paths doesn't help a lineup already filled with holes, nor does it help the effort to prove to the fans that the team is improving in the post-Hillman era. Sunday's game gave us more to think about, though.
. . .
With the team having the day off on Monday, I was a bit surprised to see Yost sit two of his regular starters Sunday. Mike Aviles and Scott Podsednik were given the day off, with Chris Getz and Willie Bloomquist replacing them, respectively.
Now, theoretically, it didn't hurt the team, with the Royals posting seven runs in the game. I don't see the logic, though. It's getaway day, so if anyone needs a day off, they'll get one tomorrow. There's a chance to win another series. Your best pitcher is on the mound, and you can't seem to ever win when he pitches. Wouldn't you want to be at full strength for this one?
Come to think of it, unless there was something life-threatening going on, if you were manager of the Royals, wouldn't you want your lineup to be at full strength... every day?*
*Before I go on, I want to point out that I don't mean to knock Bloomquist. I like Willie Bloomquist. And as the great Joe Posnanski once said, after stating, 'I like so and so,' what almost always follows are negative statements about so and so.
I do think there is a place for players like Bloomquist on good baseball teams. Therein lies the problem, though. The Royals are not good. Season after season, they fail to field a solid starting group, and are forced to play utility-types like Bloomquist all too often.
Naturally, the fan reaction toward the player is mostly negative, though it's to no fault of the player. Bloomquist was signed to be a guy who can help off the bench in a pinch. That was his role during his time in Seattle. When forced out of that role, his weaknesses are more obvious and exposed.
Because of their misuse of him, Bloomquist has been mostly unpopular so far in Kansas City after being one of the most popular players in Seattle. Anyway, the Royals are 1-10 now when Bloomquist starts, and I don't think that's just a coincidence.
So after two virtually clean innings, Greinke gave up a two-out, three-run home run in the third to former A.L. MVP and steroid user Jason Giambi, which seemed to set the tone. The Rockies were right back at it in the fourth, and after just 65 pitches, Greinke's day was over.
One of the runs did come unearned thanks to Yuniesky Betancourt. The frustration with Betancourt from fans and people within the organization has been well documented. He has limitless potential, and shows us that with flashes of greatness from time to time.
He just refuses to be a consistent team player, though, as he showed us Sunday with his weekly "Why do we love Yuni?" reminder in the fourth inning. On a tailor made double play grounder, instead of tossing the ball to Getz covering second, Betancourt decided to roll the ball to him. No outs were recorded on the play and it was ruled an error. Two more runs scored in the inning, and Greinke was done soon after.
I was somewhat surprised of how short of a leash Yost had on Greinke today. I know he struggled, but Greinke exited after giving up seven runs. The Royals eventually clawed back into the game, scoring seven runs themselves, but the bullpen allowed four more to cross the plate over the next five plus innings, and the Royals comeback fell short.
Yost seemed determined to give his relievers some work with the day off Monday, and I get that. It would have been interesting to see the game play out had Greinke been allowed to pitch his way through the fourth inning, though.
The game certainly had plenty of entertainment value with a couple of rarities occuring. Jose Guillen and Alberto Callaspo led off the bottom of the seventh with back-to-back triples. The question there had to be which is less likely - a team starting an inning with back-to-back triples, or the fact that one of the triples was legged out by Jose Guillen?
Guillen has to be one of the two or three slowest players in baseball. What's more absurd was, judging by the replay, Guillen was trotting to first base because he thought he had a home run. To think, with a little more hustle, we could have been talking about an inside-the-park home run by Guillen. Scary stuff.
Also, on the play, Rockies' center fieler Dexter Fowler lost his glove over the wall trying to catch Guillen's blast. No one on the Royals' ground crew or security staff seemed interested in helping Fowler fetch his glove, so he eventually jumped the fence and got it himself.
When watching the Royals, specifically when they're losing (so most of the time), it's refreshing to have things happen during the game that you don't see every day. The suspense in waiting for Fowler to reappear after he hopped the center field wall was possibly the highlight of the game.
. . .
The Royals have shown us just how easily it is to fall back into the vicious cycle that is bad baseball these last couple of games. In the ninth, new Royals' third base coach Eddie Rodriguez decided to honor the legacy of recently fired third base coach Dave Owen by getting baserunner Mitch Maier thrown out at home in a four-run game.
No matter how you look at it, if the Royals were to come back from the four-run deficit, Maier would have scored, anyway. I could see the value in the risk earlier in the game, where you don't necessarily need all the runs in one inning. But in the ninth, down four runs, with the alternative to sending Maier being having runners at second and third with one out, you have to wonder what Rodriguez was thinking.
It's probably best that these mistakes and deficiencies show their ugly faces now rather than later. Yost has to understand it's impossible to win consistently with guys like Bloomquist, Betancourt, and Getz in the starting lineup. He must demand that ownership give him more talent to work with next season, and refuse to accept a long-term position as manager if it doesn't come.
Any victories in the meantime will just disguise the embarrasing reality of how bad things still remain with the Royals.
*I was saddened by the news this morning of former big league pitcher Jose Lima's passing. I was at Kauffman Stadium for Lima's first game with the Royals in 2003. The Royals started that season 16-3, but hit a slump and fell below .500 coming into that Sunday afternoon game. Lima led the Royals to victory that day over Barry Bonds' Giants, and would go on to string seven consecutive victories together, helping the team build a seven-game lead in the division by the All-Star break. He was a fun player to watch, and apparently was a great teammate. I wish there were more players like him on the diamond today. He was 37.
After putting together easily their best stretch of baseball this season thus far, having won seven of nine, the Royals dropped their last two to the Colorado Rockies over the weekend, including an 11-7 loss on Sunday with Zack Greinke on the mound.
If you knew before the day began the Royals would score seven runs with their ace on the mound, you'd have felt pretty confident in their chances for victory. Instead, Greinke gave up eight runs, seven of them earned, and couldn't get out of the fourth inning. It was just the second time all season he's allowed more than three earned runs in a start.*
The worst part is that Greinke is 1-5 now, and the Royals are 2-8 in his starts this season. Not good.
*Not that it applied today, but the Royals' usual failure to give Greinke run support is staggering. In eight of his ten starts, he's given up three runs or less. If you concede that he deserved to lose the other two games, and that about one in every eight times a pitcher gives up three runs or less he should still lose, then you'd conclude the Royals should be 7-3 in his starts. And the timing of the Royals finally giving him decent run support on the day of his worst outing of the season is impeccable. It's creative losing, sure, but it's losing baseball, nonetheless.
. . .
There wasn't much to speak of in Saturday's game. The Royals were shutout 3-0 in just the second start of the season for Rockies' lefty Jeff Francis.
Francis still proved to be effective even after coming off shoulder surgery that sidelined him for all of last season. He was a big part of the Rockies' improbable run to the World Series in 2007, winning 17 games that year. He's lost some velocity on his pitches, though that may have helped him Saturday. Ever since I can remember, the Royals have always struggled mightily against soft-tossing south paws, and that again reigned true against Francis.*
*Jamie Moyer comes to mind here. He's probably the most famous finesse lefty of our era, or the era before ours - he's 47 - and he seems to always dominate the Royals. He has a 14-9 career record against KC, and three of his ten career complete-game shutouts are against the Royals.
Of course, having two runners picked-off on the base paths doesn't help a lineup already filled with holes, nor does it help the effort to prove to the fans that the team is improving in the post-Hillman era. Sunday's game gave us more to think about, though.
. . .
With the team having the day off on Monday, I was a bit surprised to see Yost sit two of his regular starters Sunday. Mike Aviles and Scott Podsednik were given the day off, with Chris Getz and Willie Bloomquist replacing them, respectively.
Now, theoretically, it didn't hurt the team, with the Royals posting seven runs in the game. I don't see the logic, though. It's getaway day, so if anyone needs a day off, they'll get one tomorrow. There's a chance to win another series. Your best pitcher is on the mound, and you can't seem to ever win when he pitches. Wouldn't you want to be at full strength for this one?
Come to think of it, unless there was something life-threatening going on, if you were manager of the Royals, wouldn't you want your lineup to be at full strength... every day?*
*Before I go on, I want to point out that I don't mean to knock Bloomquist. I like Willie Bloomquist. And as the great Joe Posnanski once said, after stating, 'I like so and so,' what almost always follows are negative statements about so and so.
I do think there is a place for players like Bloomquist on good baseball teams. Therein lies the problem, though. The Royals are not good. Season after season, they fail to field a solid starting group, and are forced to play utility-types like Bloomquist all too often.
Naturally, the fan reaction toward the player is mostly negative, though it's to no fault of the player. Bloomquist was signed to be a guy who can help off the bench in a pinch. That was his role during his time in Seattle. When forced out of that role, his weaknesses are more obvious and exposed.
Because of their misuse of him, Bloomquist has been mostly unpopular so far in Kansas City after being one of the most popular players in Seattle. Anyway, the Royals are 1-10 now when Bloomquist starts, and I don't think that's just a coincidence.
So after two virtually clean innings, Greinke gave up a two-out, three-run home run in the third to former A.L. MVP and steroid user Jason Giambi, which seemed to set the tone. The Rockies were right back at it in the fourth, and after just 65 pitches, Greinke's day was over.
One of the runs did come unearned thanks to Yuniesky Betancourt. The frustration with Betancourt from fans and people within the organization has been well documented. He has limitless potential, and shows us that with flashes of greatness from time to time.
He just refuses to be a consistent team player, though, as he showed us Sunday with his weekly "Why do we love Yuni?" reminder in the fourth inning. On a tailor made double play grounder, instead of tossing the ball to Getz covering second, Betancourt decided to roll the ball to him. No outs were recorded on the play and it was ruled an error. Two more runs scored in the inning, and Greinke was done soon after.
I was somewhat surprised of how short of a leash Yost had on Greinke today. I know he struggled, but Greinke exited after giving up seven runs. The Royals eventually clawed back into the game, scoring seven runs themselves, but the bullpen allowed four more to cross the plate over the next five plus innings, and the Royals comeback fell short.
Yost seemed determined to give his relievers some work with the day off Monday, and I get that. It would have been interesting to see the game play out had Greinke been allowed to pitch his way through the fourth inning, though.
The game certainly had plenty of entertainment value with a couple of rarities occuring. Jose Guillen and Alberto Callaspo led off the bottom of the seventh with back-to-back triples. The question there had to be which is less likely - a team starting an inning with back-to-back triples, or the fact that one of the triples was legged out by Jose Guillen?
Guillen has to be one of the two or three slowest players in baseball. What's more absurd was, judging by the replay, Guillen was trotting to first base because he thought he had a home run. To think, with a little more hustle, we could have been talking about an inside-the-park home run by Guillen. Scary stuff.
Also, on the play, Rockies' center fieler Dexter Fowler lost his glove over the wall trying to catch Guillen's blast. No one on the Royals' ground crew or security staff seemed interested in helping Fowler fetch his glove, so he eventually jumped the fence and got it himself.
When watching the Royals, specifically when they're losing (so most of the time), it's refreshing to have things happen during the game that you don't see every day. The suspense in waiting for Fowler to reappear after he hopped the center field wall was possibly the highlight of the game.
. . .
The Royals have shown us just how easily it is to fall back into the vicious cycle that is bad baseball these last couple of games. In the ninth, new Royals' third base coach Eddie Rodriguez decided to honor the legacy of recently fired third base coach Dave Owen by getting baserunner Mitch Maier thrown out at home in a four-run game.
No matter how you look at it, if the Royals were to come back from the four-run deficit, Maier would have scored, anyway. I could see the value in the risk earlier in the game, where you don't necessarily need all the runs in one inning. But in the ninth, down four runs, with the alternative to sending Maier being having runners at second and third with one out, you have to wonder what Rodriguez was thinking.
It's probably best that these mistakes and deficiencies show their ugly faces now rather than later. Yost has to understand it's impossible to win consistently with guys like Bloomquist, Betancourt, and Getz in the starting lineup. He must demand that ownership give him more talent to work with next season, and refuse to accept a long-term position as manager if it doesn't come.
Any victories in the meantime will just disguise the embarrasing reality of how bad things still remain with the Royals.
*I was saddened by the news this morning of former big league pitcher Jose Lima's passing. I was at Kauffman Stadium for Lima's first game with the Royals in 2003. The Royals started that season 16-3, but hit a slump and fell below .500 coming into that Sunday afternoon game. Lima led the Royals to victory that day over Barry Bonds' Giants, and would go on to string seven consecutive victories together, helping the team build a seven-game lead in the division by the All-Star break. He was a fun player to watch, and apparently was a great teammate. I wish there were more players like him on the diamond today. He was 37.
Thanks to razzball.com for the image.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Hillman Exits With Class
The detachment between professional athletes and coaches and their fans is greater than ever. The players are making gobs of money that most of us could only ever dream about. In the youtube and twitter era we've fallen into, coaches and players have become extremely robotic and predictable in their choice of words to the fans and media in fear of the negative backlash their honesty could result in.
In turn, we've somewhat become trained to view them as if they're actually robots. When Peyton Manning throws an interception or LeBron James misses a shot, it's completely unacceptable. The cheers turn to boos in no time, and happy fans turn into savage, bloodthirsty monsters whose hunger can only be satisfied by more victories and championships. We're relentless.
As fans, we forget that the people we're bashing and criticizing are fathers and mothers and daughters and sons and so on. Really, we forget they are human beings.
Every once in awhile as fans, we're put in awkward positions because of this. The human being inside an athlete or coach will show for a moment. Sometimes a player will cry after winning it all. A coach will cuss out a reporter after a tough game. And sadly, there are times when a player or coach becomes ill and has to leave the sport, possibly for good.
When this happens, as fans, we come to an odd realization. Things are put in perspective. It's almost a feeling of guilt. Or shame.
I found myself feeling that way today while watching Trey Hillman's final press conference as manager of the Kansas City Royals.
This was obviously a tough decision for General Manager Dayton Moore.* When he made the initial announcement, he was choking up and had to stop at one point to collect himself. Moore handpicked Hillman from Japan where he had much success, and promised Royals fans that the two together would be the key to the organization finally turning the corner.
*This decision may not have been Moore's at all. My guess was Moore prefered to let Hillman's contract run out at the end of this year, and then not retain him. There's a lot of speculation as to whether or not the manager's firing came straight from the top. While some may see this as a good sign, possibly that owner David Glass is showing he won't tolerate losing, I see it differently. If Glass wants to show us he wants to win, it's time to open up the checkbook and raise the payroll. Stepping on Moore's toes and trying to do his job for him only shows that Glass has no clue how to run a successful operation. Of course, we already have Wal-Mart as evidence of that.
This was Moore's first hire, let's not forget. The tears in his eyes were mostly because he had to fire someone who had become his friend, but also because today was the official public admission that his first major organizational decision was a mistake. Hiring and firing managers is something only unsuccessful general managers get in a habit of doing. By firing Hillman, Moore has put the pressure and potential blame solely on himself, at least in the eyes of ownership. If the tide doesn't turn soon, he'll surely be next.
It was surreal watching Hillman address the Kansas City media for the last time. I mean, we all knew this day would come, but few of us thought it would be this quick.
His eyes were watery and his voice scratchy, but his head was held high. The manager whose job we've been calling for since mid-last season finally opened up to us. He told us how he and Moore had talked late last night, after a shutout loss to the Indians and the Royals' seventh in a row, about how it was probably time for a change. He spoke of going out on top, so after the official decision was made this morning, he vowed to manage his last game today in hopes of leaving with a victory.
He also talked about how new manager (at least for the rest of this season) Ned Yost will have a clean slate to work with; Hillman didn't want any of the ex-manager's stuff sitting around the office for Yost to work around, and he was hoping to get started cleaning his things out right after the press conference.
He thanked many people, mostly insiders and coaches within the organization and around the league. Somewhat surprisingly, he thanked the media, too. You could really feel that the man just had the weight of the world taken off his shoulders. Hillman never spoke with such freedom in his pre- and post-game interviews, and maybe that's part of why things went south.
He made it clear he felt better days would come for the Royals, sooner rather than later. He so desperately wanted to be the man to turn the Royals around, and probably put too much pressure on himself in the process.
Anyway, though, Hillman left the Royals today with class.
The guilt I felt today was not because of my or anyone else's criticism of the manager. He was deserving of most-to-all of it.
The guilt stems from the shock I felt when Hillman spoke today. I saw a person and not a machine. He spoke differently. He was unrecognizable. It was almost eerie. I had forgotten that beyond the uniform and the manager and the baseball machine was just a man. No longer having to choose his words carefully, he was refreshingly honest. It's something that doesn't happen very often, and as a fan, you really have to appreciate and savor it.
After the meeting with Moore this morning, Hillman told only his wife of the bad news. The other coaches and players had no idea what was about to happen. Somehow though, they played like they knew.
Down three runs with another wasted Zack Greinke start looming, the Royals stormed back for a 6-4 victory. Greinke picked up his first win of the year. The team seemed to be playing with a little heart - it was weird. There were smiles all around, and there were no sacrifice bunts to be seen. Even Hillman was smiling more than usual. We should have sensed the end was near.
It seems only fitting everything would come together in the last game for a manager who saw things almost never play out the way he wanted. Now, Hillman has plenty of time to reflect on the majority of the other 300 or so games that didn't go well as he says goodbye and good luck to a team and city that could certainly use some.
In turn, we've somewhat become trained to view them as if they're actually robots. When Peyton Manning throws an interception or LeBron James misses a shot, it's completely unacceptable. The cheers turn to boos in no time, and happy fans turn into savage, bloodthirsty monsters whose hunger can only be satisfied by more victories and championships. We're relentless.
As fans, we forget that the people we're bashing and criticizing are fathers and mothers and daughters and sons and so on. Really, we forget they are human beings.
Every once in awhile as fans, we're put in awkward positions because of this. The human being inside an athlete or coach will show for a moment. Sometimes a player will cry after winning it all. A coach will cuss out a reporter after a tough game. And sadly, there are times when a player or coach becomes ill and has to leave the sport, possibly for good.
When this happens, as fans, we come to an odd realization. Things are put in perspective. It's almost a feeling of guilt. Or shame.
I found myself feeling that way today while watching Trey Hillman's final press conference as manager of the Kansas City Royals.
This was obviously a tough decision for General Manager Dayton Moore.* When he made the initial announcement, he was choking up and had to stop at one point to collect himself. Moore handpicked Hillman from Japan where he had much success, and promised Royals fans that the two together would be the key to the organization finally turning the corner.
*This decision may not have been Moore's at all. My guess was Moore prefered to let Hillman's contract run out at the end of this year, and then not retain him. There's a lot of speculation as to whether or not the manager's firing came straight from the top. While some may see this as a good sign, possibly that owner David Glass is showing he won't tolerate losing, I see it differently. If Glass wants to show us he wants to win, it's time to open up the checkbook and raise the payroll. Stepping on Moore's toes and trying to do his job for him only shows that Glass has no clue how to run a successful operation. Of course, we already have Wal-Mart as evidence of that.
This was Moore's first hire, let's not forget. The tears in his eyes were mostly because he had to fire someone who had become his friend, but also because today was the official public admission that his first major organizational decision was a mistake. Hiring and firing managers is something only unsuccessful general managers get in a habit of doing. By firing Hillman, Moore has put the pressure and potential blame solely on himself, at least in the eyes of ownership. If the tide doesn't turn soon, he'll surely be next.
It was surreal watching Hillman address the Kansas City media for the last time. I mean, we all knew this day would come, but few of us thought it would be this quick.
His eyes were watery and his voice scratchy, but his head was held high. The manager whose job we've been calling for since mid-last season finally opened up to us. He told us how he and Moore had talked late last night, after a shutout loss to the Indians and the Royals' seventh in a row, about how it was probably time for a change. He spoke of going out on top, so after the official decision was made this morning, he vowed to manage his last game today in hopes of leaving with a victory.
He also talked about how new manager (at least for the rest of this season) Ned Yost will have a clean slate to work with; Hillman didn't want any of the ex-manager's stuff sitting around the office for Yost to work around, and he was hoping to get started cleaning his things out right after the press conference.
He thanked many people, mostly insiders and coaches within the organization and around the league. Somewhat surprisingly, he thanked the media, too. You could really feel that the man just had the weight of the world taken off his shoulders. Hillman never spoke with such freedom in his pre- and post-game interviews, and maybe that's part of why things went south.
He made it clear he felt better days would come for the Royals, sooner rather than later. He so desperately wanted to be the man to turn the Royals around, and probably put too much pressure on himself in the process.
Anyway, though, Hillman left the Royals today with class.
The guilt I felt today was not because of my or anyone else's criticism of the manager. He was deserving of most-to-all of it.
The guilt stems from the shock I felt when Hillman spoke today. I saw a person and not a machine. He spoke differently. He was unrecognizable. It was almost eerie. I had forgotten that beyond the uniform and the manager and the baseball machine was just a man. No longer having to choose his words carefully, he was refreshingly honest. It's something that doesn't happen very often, and as a fan, you really have to appreciate and savor it.
After the meeting with Moore this morning, Hillman told only his wife of the bad news. The other coaches and players had no idea what was about to happen. Somehow though, they played like they knew.
Down three runs with another wasted Zack Greinke start looming, the Royals stormed back for a 6-4 victory. Greinke picked up his first win of the year. The team seemed to be playing with a little heart - it was weird. There were smiles all around, and there were no sacrifice bunts to be seen. Even Hillman was smiling more than usual. We should have sensed the end was near.
It seems only fitting everything would come together in the last game for a manager who saw things almost never play out the way he wanted. Now, Hillman has plenty of time to reflect on the majority of the other 300 or so games that didn't go well as he says goodbye and good luck to a team and city that could certainly use some.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)