Who, or What is Responsible for Tulo's Swollen Elbow?

Near the end of spring training this week, Indians Ubaldo Jimenez threw a pitch that struck Rockie Troy Tulowitzki in the elbow.  Rob Neyer recollects the incident and the developing suspicion that Jimenz intentionally struck Tulowitzki.  Now the question of who is responsible for this event has spun the media into chaos.  It is reported that everyone in attendance at the game "wasn't convinced that Jimenez's pitch just got away from him".  Colorado Rockies' manager Jim Tracy seemed especially appalled at the incident, referring to Jimenez's act as "gutless".  

The likeliness that Jimenez is to blame can also be traced back through his history with the Rockies.  Jimenez is open about his joy for playing for Cleveland, in comparison to the Rockies. There seems to be resentment towards Colorado. Troy Tulowitzki stated that Jimenez disliked  his time with Colorado and had an open desire to leave. This would suffice as reason for why Jimenez struck the Rockies' star player. 

But were the Rockies unappreciative of Jimenez's talents? This idea places at least some of the blame on Colorado.  Why did Jimenez not feel like the Rockies were a team he could succeed with?  Can we even prove that the pitch did not get away from Jimenez? 

So maybe Tulo has a swollen elbow because Jimenez was being a jerk, or maybe the Rockies really outcast Jimenez from the start.  There is, however, a potential third location to place blame- the ball.   This sport, and the rivalries that go along with it, would not exist if it was not for the ball that controls everything.  This idea of the ball as a deodand- the object responsible for the crime, makes sense.  It was after all, technically the ball that hurt Tulo's elbow, not Jimenez.  Jimenez could not have thrown the painful pitch if there was no ball.  Though this may seem like a silly culprit, it also seems highly logical. Like in Underworld, where Nick's ball is deemed a "murder weapon", could not this act be the objects fault? 

Personally, I place my blame on Jimenez.  I am a Rockies fan, and especially a Tulo fan, so my bias does come into play.  But in situations such as this, it is necessary to consider all the possibilities of who, or what is responsible.  This prevents us from  jumping to conclusions as the media so often does.  

The Underworld of Baseball and Braun's Secrets

Baseball has always been a primarily exclusive sport.  The MLB, team managers, coaches, scouts, and players have a complex understanding of the inter workings of the game, the decisions, and the controversies on which the media loves to feed. Although this privacy has probably decreased over the years with expanding media coverage and insiders,  the public will never be able to know all the secrets of this "Underworld".  Sports writers, announcers and the media love to front as if they know and understand the decisions being made, but the fact is that they don't. They often present this information as a single narrative or with a loud mouth opinion, but the secrecy of the organization remains.

The Ryan Braun controversy has been exhausted over the past few weeks.  Everyone has their beliefs and suspicions, and have found ample "evidence" to support their knowledge.  A recent comment by Braun's teammate, however, snaps us back to the realization that we don't know anything, and can't know everything about the people in the game.  As Neyer explains in his blog yesterday, it of course makes sense that Braun would share more information with his teammates than the public, but this nonetheless continues to frustrate everyone with the idea of more unknowns.  Lucroy said in the Times  earlier this week that " I am not going to get into details, but if you knew what we knew, people would be like 'Wow'".  Lucroy continues to say "And honestly, if some of the things came out, it would be a lot more negative than positive"  The ambiguity of Lucroy's comment creates a drive to know what Braun said in the locker room to his teammates, and a frustration in the fact that we don't have such access.  Neyer exhibits this limbo by stating " Braun can't have it both ways. Either his urine, fresh out of his penis, was loaded with ungodly amounts of testosterone, but there were good reasons for that, or his urine was perfectly fine until something strange happened to it".  He's right, there is one objective truth to what occurred, but Braun can have it both ways in terms of who he tells what.  


This secret knowledge of the people within this underworld, as highlighted in Dilillo's novel Underworld,  fuels the public's desire for knowledge, to find an "in" somehow.  By the recent comments by Braun's teammates remind the world that secrecy is yet another tradition of the sport, only those who have been accepted in the inner circles can understand what the media claims to know.  As much as we would all like to know what the hell exactly happened with Braun's steroid test, we don't get to know.  We just get to watch the game.  

A's New Stadium Conquest

The Oakland Athletics' desire to follow the people and money to a new stadium is proving to be a difficult task.  This week the A's were unable to secure a stadium in San Jose due to the Giants' territorial claim on the area.  Rob Neyer reports that the Yankees and Mets will further prevent the A's from settling anywhere near Brooklyn or New Jersey.  In pursuit of this new high tech stadium, A's managers Lew Wolff and John Fisher are being presented with obstacles of territory, tradition, fans, and money.  

 

Stadiums are considered the "home" of a particular baseball team.  The surrounding city  further aligns itself with a particular team, making the idea of a new stadium in the area seem like a slap to the traditions of the currently residing team.  Fans enjoy the feeling of being in the team's home stadium, and home city. Home games instill a sense of pride, come with unique traditions, and increase the fans faith that their team can win.  The A's search for a new location seems primarily a business move, yet the obstacles preventing this new "home" seem largely based on tradition.  There is however, the economical and business issues in rising a new stadium.  Although with time new fans could become accustomed to a new team and stadium, it would take years to build such a  new tradition.  As Neyer points out, even if there is no strong territorial claim by a particular team, there are certain areas where a baseball stadiums would simply not be lucrative or successful, as in Portland or Las Vegas.  

Roth's Great American Novel displays the similar struggles that the Rupert Mundays face in not having a home stadium. Because their stadium was taken to use in the war effort, the Mundays struggle with identity as who they are as a team.  No matter how statistically good a team may be, there is still some necessity to the traditional aspect of their own stadium, the need for The Game not just the game.  

Like the Mundays, the A's desire to revolutionize their team in the traditional and business aspect is exhibited in their quest for a new stadium.  The current out of date and run down stadium in Oakland will no longer suffice as a traditional home or beneficial business location.  

Blog Post 2-

Tejada’s Arrival Time

Rob Neyer’s post “Terry Collins Disappointment by Rubin Tejada’s On-Time Arrival” discusses the unrealistic discontent of Tejada’s manager regarding the player’s arrival time to spring training.  Tejada is 22 years old and the up-and-coming shortstop for the New York Mets.  Times reports “Collins was disappointed this week because Tejada, who became the Mets’ starting shortstop this winter, had not arrived early to camp. He said Friday that he would meet with Tejada when he arrived — not to chide or embarrass him, but to let him know that more eyes are on you when you are the starter” (Neyer, 2012). 

Collins’ disappointment seems to me, highly unwarranted.  Tejada did not arrive at training late, but on time.  The young player’s home, and presumably most of his family, is in Panama.  Even though Tejada has stepped into a spotlight starting position in the MLB, expecting him to arrive early is the equivalent of expecting any professional to show up hours early for work, or shave off vacation time simply out of passion for their career. Baseball players already spend an abnormally large amount of time training, traveling, and being away from family.  This on time arrival in should not imply that Tejada is not dedicated to his profession or grateful for his position on the Mets.  As Neyer points out, Tejada may very well have been training and working in Panama.  Whether he was relaxing, or training, it is his own personal time and right to do as he pleases.  

Like Collins, all too often, the public places unrealistic expectations on baseball players.  As highlighted in Ball Four discussed in The Cambridge Companion to Baseball, there is a misconception that all players are “Boy Scouts”, who play because they love the game, and should perhpas even play the sport without pay.  Ball Four exposed baseball players as normal, if not corrupt human beings (Cassuto & Partridge, 2011). While a simple love of the game may motivate a small number of players, (Luke Gafannon in the Great American Novel) the fact is that professional baseball is a job. 

Although showing up early for spring training may have made Collins, and the public, “like” Tejada as a player more, showing up on time should not be anything people make judgments about.  Above being a baseball player, Tejada is a human.  

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2012/2/24/2822436/terry-collins-ruben-tejada-spring-training

Not Past Their Prime

Blog Post 1-

Not Past Their Prime

Joe Posnanski’s article “Aging (with chart!)” examines the ages at which MVPs and MVP candidates had their “good seasons”. Posnanski’s chart and research certify that most players’ great seasons occur when they are in their mid-to-late 20s, however Posnanski argues further that although many great players peak at this age they then maintain the gained skill level for some years after. From Posnanski’s attempt at a chart, it can even be noted that more players had their best seasons at age 36 than at age 20. Joe Morgan, for example had his best years at age 31 and 32, even though he was considered a failure briefly at age 25 for hitting .236.    

This article presents the overlaying question of “How smart is it to sign a player for big money into his mid-to-upper 30s?” (Posnanski, 2012).  Just as Billy Beane observed the scouts of the Oakland A’s and scouts of the entire league putting unreasonable faith into young high school players, similarly “old” players are unreasonably stigmatized as past their peak and no longer as valuable after a certain age. In Michael Lewis’ Moneyball, Billy Beane is able to gain unimagined success by utilizing the evident skills rather than rely on potential skills that young players may develop.  The appeal of the young players is their potential to improve, and of course the innocent and promising good looks.  Once a player has reached his peak, the thrill of the prospect is lost and thus the high value that has been earned is often forgotten.

Billy Beane uses statistics to choose his favorite players, regardless of age, yet Henry J. Waugh of Coover’s The Universal Baseball Association buys into the myth.  Waugh is deeply disturbed by the death of young Damon Rutherford.  The freak accident that killed this fantasy player particularly upsets Waugh because Damon showed so much promise.  Would this accident have bothered Waugh as much if it had been a 31 year old star that was killed? 

Like body type, arm movement, facial features, and eating habits, age should not be such a determining factor in a player’s value.   Although Joe Pasnanski’s chart shows a definite peak in player ability in the mid 20s, this ability does not immediately disappear once it is mastered. 

 Source- joeposnanski.si.com/2012/02/10/aging-with-chart/