So it has been a few days since my last entry. I apologize for the delay. I had prepared a lengthy analysis of the Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien fiasco on Tuesday, but the draft was erased accidentally -- not my finest moment. Either way, it is old news at this point and I think most of the world is in agreement that O'Brien is being screwed. Well, he's being screwed about as much as one could be when it is likely he will receive tens of millions of dollars when NBC buys out his contract. In terms of public opinion, Conan is looking great as he has made all the right moves in refusing to move "The Tonight Show" back 30 minutes in order to maintain the integrity of the show. With all the sympathy and added publicity he is getting, there is little doubt that Conan will land on his feet in whatever his next move turns out to be after NBC.
Anyway, the blog will be up and running with more consistent updates in the coming weeks. There are certainly plenty of things to ramble on about. A few examples:
1. Some goofball from ESPN Insider thinks that Derek Jeter is a better shortstop than Cal Ripken. With analysis like this, it makes me ask the question "Why am I paying for ESPN Insider?"
2. Right before I started this entry, I read that the Baltimore Orioles are going to start charging fans extra for purchasing tickets at the box office on the day of games. Apparently, the Orioles have shifted their focus from improving the team to infuriating the fan base.
3. I did some reading about the Colts move from Baltimore to Indianapolis. Since the move happened before I was born, I've never harbored much ill will towards the city of Indianapolis. In fact, I would consider the Colts to be my second favorite team in the NFL behind, of course, the Baltimore Ravens. That doesn't mean I don't sympathize with fans who are still bitter about the Colts leaving town almost 30 years ago. However, if what I am reading is true, it appears that Robert Irsay (Colt's owner at the time of the move) might not be the only villain in this story.
You can count on entries discussing these topics and more in the future.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Perhaps because Derek has been better hitter over his career (wince)? That said, Ripken's decline phase was long, and he was most likely a better defender in their primes. We'll have to see how Jeter's late 30s go. There's no question Cal was the superior power hitter and revolutionized the position, but it's not like there's not a conversation to be had. That's not being fair.
ReplyDeleteDespite my own personal allegiance to all things Orioles, I do agree that this is a conversation worth having. However, my question is: Is now the time? Ripken has been retired since 2001, while Jeter is still playing at the age of 35 with many more seasons ahead of him. Why not wait until after he has retired to start this conversation? At this point, I only see it as pandering to Jeter/Yankee fans by ESPN. Furthermore, I hate the constant attempts by sports analysts to rank one all-time great player versus another.
ReplyDeleteI'll be happy to add my own opinion to this debate (and I will, so stay tuned), but I will do so based on established facts and statistics.
I feel the need to jump in on this discussion since I was the one who sent the Jeter/Ripken article to Dan ...
ReplyDeleteThe problem I had with the article wasn't that the author stated that Jeter was a better hitter. The problem arises with the fact that he's using statistics and fielding metrics as a way to judge the two players ... and then at one point says, "if you believe you can fudge the numbers a bit, drop Ripken down 30 runs or so and raise Jeter 30 runs or so, then the two are now much closer in overall value."
Well what the heck?! Sure, if we fudge other numbers, we can prove that Jeter was the greatest ball player ever.
The other problem I had is that the article is titled "Derek Jeter second-greatest shortstop of all time" and the main headline of it is "Jeter better overall player than Ripken" - yet at the end of the article, after all his analysis says, "Look, Jeter still has some work to do to catch Ripken ... But if Jeter stays healthy, it's a worthy debate: Jeter or Ripken?"
How can a journalist say, on the one hand, that Jeter still has work to do to catch Ripken and yet still come to the conclusion that Jeter was better?! Just doesn't jive.
When will be discussing the ratio of Stanley Nickels to Schrute Bucks?
ReplyDeleteFair enough. I clearly didn't see the article and can't comment. Based on both of your reviews, I don't think I want to. Seeing Cal's last game at Fenway was one of the coolest baseball days of my life, but I'm always going to come out swinging for DJ. Until last year he was falling into the category of "so overrated he's now underrated," though his milestones this past season have probably turned that around.
ReplyDeleteYou certainly would like to see a prolonged excellence/graceful decline to put Jeter with Cal, and I think we will.