Just curious. Do other ZLCers share any of these feelings?

1. The disappointment in the level of play in these playoffs? There's already been more than enough footage for a Time-Life series of how not to instructional videos.

2. The disappointment that what should be a showcase for some of baseball's best talent is proving to be more a carnival sideshow?

3. The headaches from the cognitive disonance required to simultaneously root for a ZLC approved team like the Red Sox (in the absence of the A's) and be turned off by both their limitless boorishness and their deer-in-the-headlights manager?

4. Overall disappointment in Pedro Martinez (his head hunting, his taunting, his less than ideal handling of L'Affair Zimmer)? And worse, the disappointment of being disappointed in someone you'd really rather not be disappointed in? Wouldn't it be great to spend today revelling in Pedro's greatness after an incident-free 2-1 pitcher's duel? Wouldn't it be wonderful to celebrate the sport?

5. The difficulty of making Baker's Cubs the team to root for once the Evil Empire, Boston Boors and Loria's Antichrists have been disqualified from consideration? I mean, can you root for a team that elects to use Glanville as a pinch-hitter and then doesn't suffer the consequences? (Much like Shawon Dunston being written into the lineup as a DH and then hitting a homerun.) Can you root for a team that has Gonzalez and Gruidzalenek up the middle, Goodwin and Glanville on the roster, Randall Simon and Karros platooning at 1B? What a sabernightmare!

Chuck

Chuck,

I agree with points 2 and 4 completely. Point 1 has been mitigated by some amazing performances -- both pitching and hitting -- in high-leverage situations.

Point 3 is not so difficult to resolve. Toronto and Oakland are inspiring because of their ability to compete on the field despite an inability to compete for the highest-priced free agents. Sure, Boston has a GM who likes hitters who walk. But he's also spending well into the nine figures to assemble a team of moody miscreants. That's totally inconsistent with the Greg Myers/Chad Bradford saber-underdog spirit. Boston's conduct against Oakland and New York has made them villains, regardless of whether David Ortiz is patient at the plate.

For point 5 -- free your mind, dude! An understanding of what's undervalued and what's overvalued doesn't mean there's only one way to build a winner. The importance of on-base percentage is sinking in, and we don't need Jeremy Giambi to win a ring to prove it. I don't mind the likes of Glanville, Goodwin and Simon so much because if the Cubs want to overpay for back-of-the-bench guys, it's their prerogative. As long as they're not soaking up tons of at-bats, there's not much difference between them and the Juan Riveras/Lou Merlonis of the world.

There's even something to be said for speedy contact hitters late in the game against hard-throwing relievers: They're not much risk for striking out or hitting into double plays. You'd rather have better on-base guys in any situation, but these three are better than letting pitchers hit. The biggest problem, as I mentioned, is that their qualities are overvalued and therefore overpriced.

I had an argument the other day with someone who said that the Cubs don't deserve to be in the World Series "because they have Kenny Lofton starting for them."

Fine, he doesn't have 20 HRs or 100 walks. But he's a fiery team player, a smart hitter and a tremendously savvy baserunner (well above the magic 70% number). Leadership, intelligence, and since he's been on the Cubs, the ability to get on base like a mo-fo. Does he have to fit a rigid mould for us to cheer for him -- against the Yankees, no less?

Randall Simon is, of course, not a "speedy" contact hitter.

...disappointment in the level of play

It's been a compelling, exciting, spectacular postseason. Great theater, but it hasn't been great baseball. I'm partial to something like the 1991 World Series, which featured five one-run games (three of them in extra innings) or 1975, when a terrific Boston team pushed the Big Red Machine to the limit. Compared to those classics, these playoffs seem to be decided by who makes fewer mistakes.

...carnival sideshow

I still have a bitter taste in my mouth from yesterday. For me, Pedro Martinez has put himself on the same level as Roger Clemens -- great pitcher, impossible to like. I fear that the sideshow will turn even uglier if and when Martinez starts in New York.

...turned off by both their limitless boorishness and their deer-in-the-headlights manager

The boorishness is limited, Chuck -- guys like Garciaparra and Mueller play the game the right way, and Ned Flanders, I mean Trot Nixon, is certainly no instigator. Millar, who's been a great sport with the Rally Karaoke thing, is just being himself. Varitek could play for me any time.

I thought all along this team was great enough to win despite Grady Little, and they did against Oakland, but now I'm not so sure. In addition to his "visionary" strategy, he's allowing the brats to misbehave. "Cowboy up," which I didn't really mind, is rapidly becoming "Up yours, Cowboy."

...the disappointment of being disappointed

Well said, Chuck. If Roger had started the head-hunting, I would have been as furious as I was on opening day when he plunked Phelps. Pedro had a base open with nobody out, put Garcia on with a Don Drysdale special (the one-pitch intentional pass) and then got a double-play grounder. Although I wished his purpose pitch was two feet lower, it wasn't disappointing until he started taunting and threatening. I'm no lip reader, but it sure looks like he was saying "I'll hit you" while pointing at his head. Justified or not, intentional or not, the image of what he did to Zimmer will be indelible. I've lost a hero, and had to make room in my personal hall of shame.

...Baker's Cubs the team to root for

They are the least undesirable option right now. Loathsome Loria deserves much worse; I'm sorry he got three sellouts in this series. I still believe both ALCS teams can beat the Cubs, but I'm no longer sure I want to see it happen. Truth is, my "Go Cubbies" yesterday was half-hearted; I really don't care who wins. That's too bad, but since it hasn't been the case since 1997, I can't complain too much.

It's fashionable in some circles to dislike Dusty Baker. I think he's riding his starters too hard, and I don't like the same kinds of players he does, but I do respect Dusty's ability to lead a team. If the Cubs win it all, perhaps other teams will be scrambling to sign their own Glanvilles, Goodwins, Loftons and Simons this winter, a very good trend if you're a Jays fan. "Sabernightmares" are OK -- we don't want all the competition catching on too soon.

looks like this one is cancelled....

looks like this one is cancelled....

This is probably a good thing (unless you're a Fox executive with bonuses tied into ratings). Another 24 hours to let heated tempers simmer can't hurt.

The postponement is very good news for the Red Sox; it means they can skip John Burkett. Wakefield will pitch tomorrow, then Lowe, who is much better at Fenway than on the road, will get the start on Tuesday afternoon. MLB has confirmed a 4:00 EST start for that game (shadows again) so we'll see an interesting doubleheader.

Coach beat me to the punch ... I was checking in to note that the rainout was pretty much the ONLY way that Burkett could avoid being torched by the Yankees.

The disappointed about being disappointed thread reminds me ... can someone please tell me who was the first nominal expert to anoint this the greatest post-season ever played and tell me why virtually every mediamike has agreed?

Wow, great topic.

1 - Well, there have been errors, and though there are more errors all the time, there have been more mistakes than normal. But the quality of pitching has been extraordinarily high. And given the amount of run scoring, there's been a ton of good hitting (obviously) to counteract that.

2 - The Red Sox and Yankees are living up to the true meaning of their creed. I think Cubs/Marlins has been great... the whole NL playoffs has been wonderful.

3 - Rest assured, I do not approve of the Red Sox. I do not give a DAMN about what a general manager does, general managers don't build teams for me. The is a massive difference between Oakland, Toronto, and Boston despite what some will try to tell you.

Oakland sign Scott Hatteberg and Chris Singleton, and have the brilliant role model Miguel Tejada as the centerpiece of their team. They have some great iconoclasts (Barry Zito, anyone?) and win with tons of pitching and defense. It's exciting baseball and makes for tense games.

Toronto have three magnificent superstars who are terrific with the fans, and a bunch of "dirtbags" who play incredibly hard and pretty smart too. The entire team hustles from A to Z and are tons of fun to watch at the plate... and often painful to watch in the field, but they are stretching their abilities to the utmost.

Boston have one of the game's great players in Nomar Garciaparra, and choose to ignore that leadership potential. They look and act like the Broad Street Bullies and are spiritually led by a mercenary player with the personality of a street thug. Their best players are a spoiled infant (Manny Ramirez) and a professional asshole (Pedro Martinez) who are two of the ten best players in the game... and possibly the least pleasant of all those ten.

The moral of this story is, that teams ain't defined by what their general managers read before bedtime. They are defined by their players. Some teams are worth cheering for, some are a great pleasure to cheer against.

The Yankees of the past five, six years have beem very trying for me because they have been the epitome of a class organization with great players who are also mindful of what they do (Paul O'Neill and Roger Clemens perhaps excepted). I have to cheer against them, because they are the Yankees and therefore a symbol of what's wrong with America. But they made it hard. How can you cheer against Derek Jeter? Derek Jeter never hurt anyone. I can't dislike a guy because he gets fawning press. Jorge Posada? How do you hope for Jorge Posada or Bernie Williams to fail? These guys are class.

But these Red Sox are the exact opposite. I've rarely encountered a team... maybe with the exception of the Toronto Maple Leafs... that are so easy to cheer against.

4 - The best pitcher I've ever seen, narrowly over Maddux when Maddux was Maddux. Dislike him intensely, but impossible not to be in awe of him. He deserved to lose Game 3, and I hope he loses Game 6 or 7 if it has to go that long.

5 - Who cares who the PHs are? The Cubs fans have been great, they beat the hated Braves, they have Sammy Sosa and Moises Alou, the best young pitcher since Bret Saberhagen, and we're seing a remarkable phoenix act by Kenny Lofton, a player I've always admired.

And I *like* the fact that the Cubs are proof that you don't win games on paper. That's great. I want baseball to constantly surprise me, to defy analysis and make me wonder at the miracle of players transcending themselves (Karros, Grudz, Simon...) and the year-in, year-out ability of Dusty Baker - one of the most infuriating managers I've ever seen - to coax great performances out of medicore players.

I never thought I'd wind up rooting for the Cubs, but they've forced it on me, and I love it.

I dislike Derek Jeter because, seemingly whenever he gets the chance, he mentions that Yankees fans are "the greatest fans in the world". Who's he kidding - how hard is it to cheer for the Yankees? These are the same fans who boo'ed Jason Giambi for two months last year chanting "Tino" whenever he came up. Their idea of tough times is going 10 years without winning a World Series.

Craig, have you forgotten David Wells? Jeff Nelson isn't exactly a peach. By many accounts, Mike Mussina is an ill-tempered guy. In the 2001 playoffs, Bernie Williams would constantly gripe and grimace about almost every called strike. Jorge Posada does a lot of the same thing. There's plenty to dislike about the Yankees players.

By many accounts, Mike Mussina is an ill-tempered guy

I realize it was 10 years ago, but I still haven't forgiven him for that All-Star game stunt! :-)

Every popular player in every sport in every city has called those specific fans "the greatest fans in the world." If we looked hard enough, we'd probably find Roger Clemens saying that about Boston in the late 1980's and Alex Johnson saying it about Angels fans in the early 1970's.

OK, not Alex.

It's NOT easy to root for the Yankees in part because everyone thinks it's easy to root for the Yankees, everyone assumes you're a bandwagon guy -- forgetting the forgettable Horace Clarke Era and the post Ken Phelps for Jay Buhner downslide -- AND it seems mostly everyone is rooting AGAINST the Yankees.

Whether the Yankee shortstop was Jim Mason or Bucky Dent, Bobby Meacham or Derek Jeter, Yankee fans, real Yankee fans, are cradle to grave. I root for the Blue Jays, but my grandfather rooted for the Yankees in the 1930's, and I can't prove it, but my great grandfather may well have had a swear word or six for that crazy Highlanders owner spending all that money to get the tubby lefty from Boston after the '19 season.

Toronto fans -- and y'all are as dedicated as any, anywhere -- can compare their history with their team to the relationship the United States has with Old Europe. Pretty good history, but check back in a few decades.

If you want to say it's easier to be a fair-weather Yankees fan than it is for other teams, I might buy that. But that's a different argument.

Think of what it's like to be a Tigers fan right now. There are probably scores of people in Detroit itself ridiculing Tigers fans about how pathetic they are. For Yankees fans, you know that you'll likely only have to put up with mediocrity for a little while and then it will be straight back to 90-105 wins a season.

Sure everyone else roots against you, and you may feel bad when you don't do well in the playoffs (1997, 2002), but then you get to rub it in everyone's face when you do win the World Series.

It's never easy to root for a team during tough times, but there are 29 clubs in baseball that are harder to root for because those tough times are deeper and longer for them.

I used to actively root against teams, once upon a time. I hated the Miami Dolphins for any number of reasons, mostly dating back to the 1983 Super Bowl, when they beat (in quick succession) my favourites the Patriots, Chargers and Jets on their way to the big game, though there was nothing otherwise offensive about them. I loathed the Raiders because, well, that's what they were there for, even though they won partly by the now-blessed sabrmetric approach of finding freely available talent. From 1985 onwards, I hated the Royals, even while recognizing that theirs was a model franchise worthy of emulation (yes, there was a time). I couldn't stand the Lakers because they'd invariably take out my beloved Celtics in the NBA Finals. In hockey ... well, I was an Oilers fan, so in the '80s everyone hated my team.

But anyway, you can see the pattern. I hated the teams that invariably were very good and defeated my teams. After a while, that gets tired, partly because you end up gnashing your teeth so often following losses to the great teams that being a fan of the sport loses its enjoyment; and partly because you slowly realize that maybe these hated teams are great for a reason: they're smart, talented and/or hard-working. I finally forced myself to ask whether my hatred for these teams really sprang from a dislike for the big, bad, swaggering champions who always beat up my teams, or whether it was simple jealousy. I began to conclude it was most often the latter, and that changed my perspective on the whole thing.

What the Yankees (and Braves) have taught me, in part, is that whether I root against them or I don't, they're going to win anyway -- so I could either be continually frustrated or I could lighten up a little. Now I most always root for a team that either has a model I admire (Oakland) or has resliency I like (the Twins), or has players whom I've always liked and want to see get a championship. If a World Series has neither of those teams (the nadir was '97, the arrogant Indians and the store-bought Marlins), I'll simply tune out. Life's too short to endure the angst of hoping the best team doesn't win, and heckling against someone as opposed to cheering for him.

I also dislike both the Red Sox and the Yankees; before this ALCS, I was hoping Boston would advance, for any number of reasons: I was tired of seeing the Yankees in the finals (and this is not, as Robert has noted, the same team you grudgingly found yourself admiring in the '90s), I was hoping for an historic Cubs-Red Sox finals, and mostly, I wanted to see the franchise and its fans finally lose this obsessive, self-pitying, "Yankees Suck," "Curse of the Bambino" mentality. But instead of wishing them both ill and rooting for the NL opponent no matter what, I'll continue to support the Cubbies' run, for the reasons Craig has stated eloquently. And if it turns out to be a Marlins-Red Sox final, well, my fantasy football team needs extra attention anyway.

Craig:
Great post ( with Robert parenthesis even greater ).
At least you are pushing Barry to number three as hatred great.
I enjoyed the Baker part very much. A manager is not succesful by chance, there are zillions of decisions that will take you out of a pennant race if not carefully chosen and implemented, in a very clear way the splendid Red Sox line up is sucking with gradys to the point of elimination, the bright Macha and my revered Felipe were not up to the challenge, there is a sensation that something else could be made...

Jordan, being anti yankee it is not only being jealous of the good team, it is being against the team(s) that are in another league ( like Real Madrid in soccer ) the "Dream team " in basketball olympics, etc.
If the Yankees are not winning it all this year is just because they failed to land a better pitcher with the Weaver, Contreras, Hitchock etc gambles...

I want baseball to constantly surprise me, to defy analysis and make me wonder at the miracle of players transcending themselves...

Right on, Craig. I love miracles, and I've used that word before to describe Dusty's ability to make the whole exceed the sum of the parts. However, in addition to the players who are transcending themselves, there's a flip side. I believe it was the late Heywood Hale Broun who first said "sports don't build character, they reveal it."

He wasn't talking about Pedro, but if the shoe fits...

Craig, that's a brilliant post. I agree with everything except, perhaps, the Red Sox vs. Leafs question...but then again, I am permanently cursed with the tragic affliction of Leafs fandom.