by Gregg Pearlman
Saturday, September 25, 1999
Talk about getting back to one's roots. "EEEEEE! is chiefly a venting vehicle," I say on my home page. Or words to that effect. Well, by cracky, there's going to be a hell of a lot of venting in this here installment. We're one angry bunch of cowpokes, and we have every right to be.
In case you've been in a remote location and unable to receive Giants news of any kind until now, let me tell you that yet again we're in "Wait till next year!" mode. The Diamondbacks eliminated the Giants from the race with a 11-3 thrashing last night, and punctuated it with a 7-3 poke in the eye today.
Hey, fair and square. Of the two teams on the field, the Diamondbacks are the better one. They've outscored opponents by a ridiculous margin of approximately 1.5 runs a game. They have something like five players with 100 RBIs (yes, I know, but what that does point to is a hell of a lot of baserunners), plus Randy Johnson. Everything came together for them. Congratulations, Diamondbacks players.
To an extent, one can even congratulate the Diamondbacks' front office. And I guess there are some Phoenix-based fans who've yearned for major league baseball for years, and have -- over the two-year life of this team -- truly lived and died with the Diamondbacks, and would congratulate the Giants players for putting up a good fight. These fans are not the ones we see in the Giants newsgroup, as I've mentioned at length. And I'm going to do so again. Because frankly, a handful of Diamondbacks fans are chief contributors to just what has made this season so difficult for those of us who still hang out in the newsgroup.
The Giants, evidently figuring that it was too far gone to keep trying, stopped winning:
Those with something to say about it include Richard, Lady Buckeye, Philip, Francisco, Jesse V. Steven R., Seth, Woody, Mark V., JVV, Anson, Ron M., Paul L., George, David M., John B., Ken K., and Demian.
The sad fact about Usenet newsgroups is, they're not immune to unwanted intrusion. In the real world, if some disruptive twit crashed a party, he or she could be persuaded to leave, via fair means or foul. Not leaving would almost certainly bring consequences, ranging from simply being disliked to being, well, dismembered and sent to various relatives in Mason jars, C.O.D. In some real-world situations, security personnel would be deployed and those who were "not on the list" would not gain admittance.
In unmoderated Usenet newsgroups, none of this is true. Bile-spewing, rectum-breathed lunkheads can, will, and do show up, spew, and -- usually -- leave after getting a sufficient rise out of the rest of the group. Some stick around for more. Some leave, then resurface quite a bit later. Some never leave.
The Giants newsgroup has never been an exclusive body, at least not as long as I've been there. We very justifiably boast a collection of smart, funny, baseball-knowledgeable, passionate Giants fans. Generally speaking, the conversation is lively. We've had our share of bad eggs, including:
And now this new breed: The Diamondbacks Troll. To their credit, these are not unintelligent people. (Well, I still reserve judgment on that one.) However, they too refuse to take "go away" for an answer. Their level of discourse involves lots of schoolyard tactics -- taunting, attempts at bullying, the occasional unpleasant fact to throw in our faces, ignorance, and the inability to care that other people find them obnoxious, offensive, and in dire need of sudden existence failure. What they're good at -- two of them in particular (whose names, if we're to believe them, are exactly the types of names you'd give soap-opera lawyers, only one of whom wears three-piece suits with pocket watches jammed into vest pockets) -- is drawing others into battle. Really, you can say the same thing about all good trolls. But these two are especially good.
They're kind of the Joker and Penguin of the Giants newsgroup. Well, maybe better would be the Joker and one of his henchmen, played by former Dodgers outfielder Al Ferrara. (Look it up. Criminals in the old Batman TV series continually employed Dodgers as their henchmen. Often they wore shirts saying "HENCHMAN.") In other words, the master criminal sort of pretends to be civil, while the blunt-skulled henchman bops you over the head by, for instance, going to the trouble of theorizing that Dusty Baker is gay based on the fact that he manages a team based in San Francisco. We're talking, here, about a wit too dull even for Dusty's Trail.
The master criminal, however, isn't that much better -- just marginally smarter and more articulate... and yet still likely to brag about -- for instance; I'm not making this up, and that includes the part about bragging -- having only had to pay for sexual favors a few times, and that in his misspent youth while "serving" our country overseas in the armed forces and involving impoverished locals. I mean, this is the kind of mind we're dealing with here.
Some of us have entered verbal wars with these folks. I have not -- or at least had not, until today, and I certainly don't intend to stay in it long.
Now, first, let's start with what we know: We -- that is, most of us who hang out in the Giants newsgroup -- are pretty damn annoyed about the 1999 season. While it's true that, if the media knows anything, the Giants shouldn't have done nearly as well as they did, it's also true that there's no way in hell a second-year team -- even a second-year team consisting of the 1927 Yankees -- should be winning any kind of title. There's such a thing as paying one's dues. (In Baseball Today, however, I guess there's no such thing anymore, plus screw the teams stupid enough to have paid dues somewhere along the line.)
We're pretty damn annoyed that the Giants so typically tanked it after the All-Star Break. It's as annual an event as Yom Kippur, but only about half as much fun as fasting, sitting in services all day, repeating the same prayers over and over, standing up a lot, and just generally "atoning." This post-Break thing is beyond annoying, because of the anticipatory dread that comes with it.
We're really annoyed at Dusty Baker for persisting in making really foolish bullpen decisions, but that's not necessarily his fault so much as the fault of the actual horses for not producing. I mean, how many times must Robb Nen blow a save before you start to think, "Um... maybe I ought to rethink this 'closer mentality'"?
And let's admit it, we're annoyed with the Giants for failing to produce a single World Champion since 1954, over three years before their first game on Western soil. I daresay this is the very reason the Giants have lost some fans over the years.
So with this said, let me also say that it's hard as hell to be gracious in defeat these days. We've done that in the past, over and over.
Richard, I have no doubt, feels the same way. Now, I've known him reasonably well for a couple years now, and he's always presented himself as amiable and respectful, albeit certainly emotional. A great Giants fan, in my opinion. On the occasion of the Diamondbacks' clinching victory yesterday, though, he says, "Last year when the Padres won it, I think we all kind conceded we got beat by a better team. The whole thing was very gracious, and properly so. Hell, most of us were probably secretly even pulling for them in the playoffs."
"Eh, their 'gracious' fans didn't make up for nuthin' last year," says Seth. "I've lost no love for the Padres ever since they traded Fred McGriff to the Braves in '93 for a bag of stale Funyuns. And I was all about the Astros in the playoffs last year, so I got hosed yet again on that score."
"Well, this year, I feel a little differently," Richard says. "Pardon my language, but the Diamondbacks can go fuck themselves. Their fans, too. I hope they get pounded in the playoffs, and that Randy Johnson threw out his arm tonight."
The only part where I don't completely agree here is that it's more important for their fans to fuck themselves (at least the fans we've come to know) than for the players. It bothers me a lot that the Diamondbacks' front office made a whole bunch of moves that worked, despite there being no reason that they should have. It bothers me a lot that the whiny, arrogant Jerry Colangelo fancies himself the King of Baseball. But the Diamondbacks -- while they may have every right to feel proud of their season, have no reason to feel proud of their fans -- especially if the fans we've seen are representative of the breed as a whole. Even the most obnoxious Dodger fans, in the past, have shown more class than those of the Diamondbacks, with a few notable (and appreciated) exceptions. Even we Giants fans, in the throes of anger, frustration, annoyance, pain, and colorfully abusive language -- that is, even we Giants fans at our worst have shown more class than certain Diamondbacks fans at their best.
This, interestingly, elicits a response from one of those fans, the Joker (I'm just calling him that; that's not his nom-de-Internet): "[The above paragraph] is ample evidence that you are wrong."
No. The fact that I'd pretty much held my tongue till now (at least in the newsgroup, if not in EEEEEE!), and the dozens of publicly accessible posts from this guy, are ample evidence that I'm right. The Joker's logic states that if he were to walk up to me and start beating me about the head and neck with a broken bottle, I'm the bad guy if I fight back at all, and he gets to play the victim. This is his M.O. in general, anyway -- in fact, I think he's one of those who has fought back with complaints about "ad hominem attacks."
I'm also admonished here, as are the rest of the Giants fans on the group, by Lady Buckeye, who says, "I have always had a great deal of respect for the Giants and their fans. As I was hoping that the Giants would fall apart so the Diamondbacks would win the division easily, the Giants kept playing great baseball as I expected a Dusty Baker team would do. After reading the comments from the Giants fans, I will have to admit I am surprised and shocked to read such nasty postings. They reek of poor sportsmanship and ignorance I would never have expected to read from any true baseball fans. No matter how much money is paid for the players, they still must play the 162-game season. The Diamondbacks withstood the challenge from the Giants and have won the division because they played better baseball over the course of the season. There is no need for a gracious concession but real Giants fans cannot be proud of poor sportsmanship in these postings."
First, I think she's not seeing just how much the negative comments are fueled by reaction to simply being eliminated. A bit (or even a lot) of initial anger and frustration does not signify "poor sportsmanship" to me; besides, she already said she doesn't expect a gracious concession. Second, no one is disputing that the Diamondbacks played better baseball; we don't happen to like it, but we're not denying it, we shall come to terms with it, and next year we shall hope anew that our team goes all the way; 1999 will be but a memory, if a bitter one.
But third, and mostly, I have to wonder if she's been reading this group long enough to see what we've been putting up with from her co-Diamondbacks supporters. What that means is, "poor sportsmanship" is also not signified by negative responses to the poor sportsmanship of others -- in this case, certain fans of your team who quite clearly intend to stir up angry responses. (That means they're trolls -- sadly effective ones.) Again, if you beat me up and I try to hit you back, I'm not the one spoiling the fun. You've already spoiled it.
What all of this boils down to is, is it wrong to try and wave off a mosquito or two, or even try and smack it so it'll stop biting you? Why is it poor sportsmanship for us to say "Fuck the Diamondbacks fans" out of acute, entirely understandable frustration with how the season has gone, but also in response to the ceaselessly moronic behavior from, minimally, two of the Diamondbacks' minions, and yet it's not poor sportsmanship for them to have descended upon the Giants newsgroup -- a body full of Giants fans who, for the most part, are nice folks who do not go out of their way to piss off other people -- and say, essentially, "Fuck you, Giants fans! In your faaayce!" over and over? I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, but anybody who can't understand a generally negative, hostile reaction to negative, hostile people hasn't been paying attention.
Richard wonders what Lady Buckeye's, doing in the Giants group in the first place. "This thread didn't get cross-posted to the Diamondbacks group (that sort of bad behavior is more the speed of your fellow Diamondbacks fans), so the only way it could be read by your sensitive and delicate eyes is if you were trolling here yourself, either looking for enjoyment in our sadness or hoping against hope that you could find some way to be insulted. So, since it was my original message that set you off, let me just say that my initial thought regarding Diamondback fans does indeed apply to you as well. Fully and directly. Let me know if I need to repost the exact words for you.
"I am sick to death of these people. You would think they are happier about our sadness and disappointment than their own team's accomplishments. Never have I been exposed to a group of people who made me feel less good about baseball or people in general."
This, clearly, is what they have set out to accomplish. The idea that calling them on this is "poor sportsmanship" is just, well, foolish. If Giants fans were visiting the Dodgers newsgroup and behaving the same way, I would be ashamed of them.
Why shouldn't we take personally what are obvious attempts to insult us personally? In other words, how come it's okay if your team's trolls do it, but wrong if we say we don't like it? This has gotten way beyond "My team's better than your team." As a direct result of the Diamondbacks fans in question, some very good people have left this group. If Lady Buckeye really thinks her co-fans' actions are defensible, and if she can't see where we're coming from, then she should understand that your "respect" for Giants fans isn't worth the paper it'd be printed on, if we bothered to print it.
"[The Diamondbacks fans'] smug self-appreciation and counterfeit 'intelligence' and 'sensibilities' makes me wonder if most people really are as inherently polite and honest as I tend to think. Maybe this is but a small subsection of humanity, but if it is anything approaching a meaningful sample, then I am very disappointed about a lot of things."
All we can do is hope that this is a small subsection of humanity.
It's a larger-than-necessary subsection, though, that would say in newsgroups things it would never have the courage to say to someone in person. And for "courage," substitute "lack of intelligence."
"I am so sick of these fans that I can't emotionally give their team any credit. They are such cretins that I keep feeling that their team must have cheated somehow, since that is what cretins do. An emotional overreaction, true, but I can't seem to shake it. I am really building up some very deep bad will, unlike anything I have ever felt about other team's fans before. Sorry you don't like it, Lady, but maybe you should be thinking about the behavior of people in your own house before getting your shorts in a bunch about the behavior in ours."
Richard's right. Any inability to see this should be seriously addressed.
But in an almost disappointingly dim display, Lady Buckeye says to Richard, "Well, I guess you have just proven my point."
Not really. It's more accurate to say that she's proven ours.
"I wrote that I admired the Giants and their fans but somehow I am not suppose to criticize."
No, the message she sent is that we're not supposed to criticize.
"I read many newsgroups because I love baseball and enjoy reading what other fans have to say. I have been a lifelong Cleveland Indians fan so I know a great deal about anger and frustration and losing. Since in America we still have freedom of speech, I guess that means I have the right to express myself and you have the right to disagree with me. Don't we live in a great country?"
That's fine. No one's disputing Lady Buckeye's right to disagree with us, any more than we'd dispute our right to disagree with her. What I'm disputing, however, is her knowledge of the situation here. Were Lady Buckeye to care to acquaint herself better with this group to see where we're coming from, well, that's her call. Me, I don't care.
The Joker himself chimes in: To my statement that our anger and frustration does not signify "poor sportsmanship" to me," he says, "Turning around and insulting the people who beat you is clearly poor sportsmanship."
Ludicrous. First, in what way does our reaction to your poor sportsmanship justify the Joker's poor sportsmanship? Second, he didn't "beat" us. The Arizona Diamondbacks beat the San Francisco Giants.
"I'd actually prefer," he says, "if you'd read my posts and not respond, if all you have to say is 'you're mean.'"
I'd actually prefer the Joker not posting at all. That would be fine. Shall we put it up for a vote?
Plus, why in the world would I continue to read his blathering? He's my first-ever killfile victim; the henchman's second.
In any case, I'm mystified at the Joker's position on this (but I don't care enough to hear him out anymore). I'm committing an offense by pointing out how offensive he's been, and that I won't tolerate it anymore? Would he feel the same way if the shoe were on the other foot? Would he say, "I guess I am a poor sport in telling you I won't tolerate your bullshit anymore." If he did, he'd have to be quite the unique moron. But I believe I'm giving him too much credit. He's nowt beyond a newsgroup troll.
"I've never trolled in my life," the Joker insists. "If I say something that stirs up anger, maybe you're just being angry, but more likely you're misunderstanding what I said, or unable to form a reasonable response."
Please. Once again, the common scenario rears its ulcerous face: an intelligent person who thinks that if he's so smart, everybody else must be dumb. I "misunderstand" him. Folks, please feel free to check out the last couple month's worth of the Giants newsgroup on deja.com. I won't divulge the Joker's name, because he doesn't rate, but you'll find him soon enough. A Power Search in the newsgroup on "Korean hookers" should help. And tell me just how misunderstood the Joker is. Why you'd want to go to the trouble, though, I don't know.
"This thread was started," he says, "by someone who took the defeat of his team as a personal affront, then struck back at the team that won the game, on the ownership of that team, on the fans of that team, and on those fans with whom he'd had an Internet acquaintance.
"So I guess it was the Giants who hit you, because they clearly refused to play baseball deserving of a title on Friday night, just as they have for much of this season."
Look, still, no one's disputing that the Diamondbacks played better. That, however, is not the issue. The Joker and his pal can't and won't see what the issue is, which is why I've killfiled 'em both.
Philip, a Diamondbacks fan, says, "Why are you so upset with the Diamondbacks? Is it a crime to want to win? And what about tradition? If the Giants were a new team and they won the NL West I would not be upset; isn't this what it's supposed to be about? I was a Dodgers fan and I never heard of a tradition where a team had to be in baseball for a long time before they won anything. Im sorry you hate us so much. If winning make us a villain, then so be it."
That's not what this is about. I would expect Diamondbacks fans to want their team to win, and -- money and longevity talk aside -- they did it, so congratulations.
Now, granted, one can expect a little hotheadedness and maybe some pouting on our part when it comes to the Diamondbacks winning -- regardless of "tradition" issues; we'd be at least as annoyed if the Dodgers had won it, because we wanted the Giants to win it. That part's easy to understand, right?
The main issue in this latest blow-up, though, is that a couple of Diamondbacks fans have attempted to dominate this group, turned the Diamondbacks-vs.-Giants thing into an "us against you, personally and in your face" affair, treated this group's posters like garbage from the beginning, and been amazingly rude and condescending. As a result, a number of good posters decided they'd had enough, and have taken a hike. Many others, including me, have killfiled them. Again, I'd never killfiled anybody before, and there've been some vile posters in the group; but I wouldn't be surprised if these particular Diamondbacks fans were proud of being killfiled.
It is true that even among ourselves, sometimes we Giants fans can get a little snitty to each other, and certainly argumentative sometimes, but for the most part, the people in this group are polite and, I think, fair. Basically we treat each other like people. I sure wouldn't hang out there otherwise.
Giants fans, even this one, will get over the team losing the division this year, even to the upstart Diamondbacks. It's a done deal, it's already happened, it's an "is," and there's nothing we can do to change it. Our heads will cool off, and we'll look forward to maybe winning it next year, just as you'll look forward, I assume, to the Diamondbacks defending whatever title they end up with.
In other words, we'll be fine; will the Diamondbacks fans who've generated so much anger become any easier to deal with? I'd like to believe so, against all available evidence. The thing is, we can't make them treat people with respect; we just have to hope they will. But what reason is there to trust them to do that?
But it shouldn't be hard to understand how easy it is for people exhibiting horrific behavior -- doesn't matter what team they're fans of -- can have a very negative effect on an otherwise excellent group.
"I agree," says Francisco. "I thought the talk of what happened to other newsgroup would never happen here. It's managed to weather hits from Dodger, Padres, and even the occasional Giants fan but for some reason, the Diamondbacks cross-posters seemed to have touched a nerve. I know for a fact it's only two people, and that I shouldn't judge the Diamondbacks by them, but it's hard. Also, I'd like to know for certain what kind of cross-posting went on in their group by Giants fans. But regardless, it's childish either way."
Jesse V. thinks that a rivalry between Giants and Diamondbacks fans "would help the Giants. It would make Diamondbacks games bring huge numbers of fans, like Dodgers games; and people are money, and money brings players, which brings better teams and a World Series win, which brings people... and it goes on and on."
"Won't happen," Steven R. says. "Reminds me of my sister-in-law. She wasn't much of a baseball fan before she married my brother. They got married back in the 1980s when we were having those great feuds with the St. Louis Cardinals. She started going to games, and decided the Giants' biggest rival was the Cards. And those were indeed some intense games back then... Candlestick fans are among the few to boo Ozzie Smith just because of those wars.
"But it wasn't the Dodgers. And my sister-in-law knows that now.
"This is what is annoying about our Killfiled Brethren who follow the Diamondbacks. The Diamondbacks can put together a winner in two years, and that's a great story, although you can't expect a Giants fan to fully appreciate it. But you can't build a rivalry in two years. And the Killfiled Fellows don't seem to understand this. They are justifiably proud of their team, and naturally they're very happy to have a major league franchise at last. But they don't just want a franchise, and they don't just want a winner. They want rivalries, they want all the stuff that comes with following a team for 40 years, they want the rivalries that span a century. And you can't do that in two years, and they don't get that, so they figure they'll annoy us into submission. But that ain't a rivalty, that's just being an asshole. One day, when Arizona has a real rivalry with some team, the Killfiled Crew will understand this, and they'll quit annoying us, because they will have someone they really hate."
"But it feels like hate right now," Richard protests. "Actually, you are right. It isn't hate, it's indignation at being treated shabbily that is so irking me. My gleeful happiness about the Dodger's bad season (about which I would never troll in their group, by the way) is something I will always be able to fall back on. If the Diamondbacks lay an egg next year, I will only be happy because it will disappoint the Killfiled Crew, not because I really care all that much about the DiamondBacks' demise.
"It has taken me a week to get over the frustration of how the season ended, but I am pretty much back into being unhappy with the Giants' performance this year and out of caring about Arizona. Other than rooting against Arizona in the playoffs, I just don't care about them.
"Gosh, if only Lady Blurgh (or whatever it was) could read me now. Maybe her poor opinion of me could be rehabilitated. Nah, probably not."
The Mets are the Dodgers with most of the Dodgers' talent.
"They still don't have any heart down the stretch, despite a strong desire on the part of the nation and New York media that it be different this year. I hope they miss the playoffs entirely."
Me too. How many of you really want to see Hershiser throwing to Piazza for a Big Postseason Victory, with the smug Valentine, perhaps in disguise, looking jolly in the dugout?
"And frankly, the Giants disgusted me [Friday]. What a weak performance. Even if they had already thrown in the towel, at least they could have held it together a little better than this."
I really had a struggle regarding whether even to watch the game. I did, however, watch Estes cough it up to the first four batters, at which point I opted to watch the episode of Voyager I'd taped on Wednesday (which is how you know things are bad... although, admittedly, I like full-body shots of Jeri Ryan more than ditto of Kirk Rueter). And then Chicago Hope. I did see Ellis Burks' three-run, first-inning dinger, but tragically, I watched the bottom of the ninth, too. I turned off the TV as the ball headed toward Matt Williams for the final out -- as I knew it would. How fitting.
You bet this season angers me, possibly more than any since 1988, when it was absolutely clear that the Giants had to, and would, go all the way... and refused for no apparent reason. (Four words: Alfredo Griffin hitting leadoff.)
I've mentioned this before, but EEEEEE! Contributing Editor David Beck says this to me every single time, without exception when I complain about the Giants lately: "I'm so so so so so so so glad I've decided to give up following professional sports, you can't know." Still, he reads EEEEEE! faithfully -- though he says it depresses him, and not just because I ran a Woody piece in it. But imagine being him: a rabid Giants fan -- I bet you could do that -- whose team refuses, annually, to allow you to feel the euphoria millions of other fans have felt over the last 40 years, and whose team refuses to overcome a second-year, money-built team... and whose very own mother, a perfectly nice woman who lives in the Phoenix area, calls him long distance to express her joy over the Arizona Diamondbacks. If I were him, I'd write myself out of her will.
"Greenbacks fans have no concept of 'heartache' or 'history' or 'tradition,'" Seth says. "No small wonder their fans have acted like spoiled brats for the most part. I can't wait for their much-needed humility lesson to sink in when they realize their team is saddled with a bunch of over-the-hill veterans who all had their career years in 1999. Hell, even Randy Johnson himself admitted as such."
"I certainly hope I shall never be accused of being big and prone to talking the high road," says Woody, "but I simply refuse to confuse the [Diamondbacks] team with the extremely small number of coprophilic primates within their midst who have polluted our newsgroup. It'd be as unfair as deciding we're all as bad as Noah [the persistent Bonds-basher from months past]. Or that Tjames is a waste of life because he likes the Dodgers. Okay, scratch that last bit...."
That's just it. I'm not prepared to tar all Diamondbacks fans with the same brush. I have no doubt many of them are gracious, happy as hell, and without the desire to rub my face in their victory. Sadly, though, I have seen no evidence of this. But assuming all Diamondbacks are awful people is as fair as, say, assuming the same thing about all bosses just because, well, some of them are. So when we say "Diamondbacks fans are...," or "Diamondbacks fans always do...," we're talking about those particularly awful Diamondbacks fans who've chosen to make us aware of their hateful presence. What Woody says above is a hundred percent dead on.
He continues: "To be honest, as much as I dislike what the Diamondbacks have come to represent about baseball in general -- and not to mention a few idiot fans -- I really do think they deserved the division as much as San Diego last year. They played fucking amazing baseball, refused to lose at the right time (for us) once they got ahead, and despite the crappy consequences for us, simply dominated. Really. If they are playing over their heads, fine -- still, they've been playing over their heads consistently, and over a long period of time (roughly the second half). Even after we won it in 1997, people continued to say we didn't deserve it and had played over our heads. They won. They are playing great. I hope they stop that immediately and disappear for the winter."
Like the Giants did in '97.
But hey, I pretty much agree. I don't begrudge the players. They've pissed me off, but I don't begrudge 'em. They rose to the challenge; the Giants didn't. Money or no, they won.
"The Padres fans were much more gracious last year," says Mark V. "Padres fans know the frustrations of years without winning, and as so have become rather humble. Their posts were civil, done tastefully, and very polite (for the most part). The Dollarbucks fans, though... man, those imbeciles are some of the most pompous, arrogant, and mentally flatulent pieces of shit I have ever come across (with the exception of some of the Dodger classic crazies). They have no concept of what it's like to follow your team year upon year and generally have nothing to root for come October. Arizona represents everything that is wrong with baseball today (with the exception of Bud Selig, whom I think should be publicly flogged). Used to be that teams actually competed, but where's the competition when you can go out and just buy a contender? I have absolutely zero respect for the Slimebacks and their 'fans,' and believe it a travesty to the game that a second-year team was able to come out and win a division. Baseball gets less and less captivating every year for me.
"And yes, I actually was rooting for the Padres to do well in the postseason [last year]. I don't have the hate for them that I do for the Dodgers, Braves, and Yankees. I was thrilled when the Pads booted Turner and his 'America's Team' (what a bunch of horseshit that is) out, and was bummed when the Yanks won the title."
Woody says, "[What] the Diamondbacks fans not only don't get, but refuse to even consider, [is that] while they may have been born and exist in the thoroughly hateful world of 'baseball as money-gluttonous entertainment,' the historical aspect of the game thoroughly ridicules their end-of-season taunting, and even the idea that a single Series win would somehow make their two year organization better and 'more' than ours. Indeed, I think the fucking unbelievable price of entry for any new franchise has become so high -- and the prerequisite that new teams will be able to generate huge revenues so indisputable -- that any new team allowed in the bigs will by definition have the kind of finances to be able to buy itself into contention and/or a title within two years. I mean, basically you're now being allowed into a billionaire's club: it's assumed by that defining financial qualification that you'll be able to hit the ground able to keep up with the Joneses. Colorado won a wild card after three years (hey, it's postseason); Florida went all the way in five. We've all seen what Arizona is doing. I can't figure out why Tampa can't get the bean out of its butt.
"Course, Diamondbacks fans will retort -- and correctly -- that money is part of the game now, and the newly arrived 'have' teams shouldn't be looked down upon by the older, cash-limited 'have nots' for playing that game well. They are also correct in noting that money alone doesn't guarantee a winner (e.g., LA and Baltimore). Still, money does allow you to get the best players out there, and that clearly and vastly enhances your chances of fielding a winner. Point of all this being that your stats are, in my view, pregnant with significance for this era: it's one where these newly-cloned teams don't respect and don't want to hear about 100 years of baseball history. All they want is a team that wins; the ends therein justifying the absolutely vulgar, mercantile means. They are the way baseball is going, and the reason I'll probably be jumping ship in the not too distant future."
The Joker and his henchman are all too fond of reminding us about the Giants' futility in San Francisco, juxtaposed against the Diamondbacks' success after only two years. Hey, it's all true. But they also tend to make assumptions about the Giants that aren't, and when refuted with fact, JVV says that the Joker "had no response."
"You're lucky," Woody points out. "Usually when he realizes he's got nothing to say, he'll try to dazzle you with a recounting of how many blowjobs he got from Korean whores. Class all the way, our [Joker]."
JVV says, "[The henchman] said he didn't look up the Giants' San Francisco record and just assumed they had to be under .500 since they had been to the World Series twice in 40 years."
Woody replies, "I assume if [the henchman] palpates his forehead long enough, he'll feel the entry-wound scars from the clothes hanger his mother sought to abort him with in vain, and which left his frontal lobe in the gelatinous state it is."
Okay, so that's not the classiest response either, but it's funnier and certainly more shockingly inappropriate (hence its inclusion) than anything the henchman has ever said. And classier, too. That's the scary part.
"This," says JVV, "is the level of discussion and scrutiny the Snakes' bandwagoners bring to the table."
"Eh, phook 'em," offers Woody.
Leading up to much of this is the following statement from the henchman: "I sure wish the Giants would win some games. I want to clinch at home." He adds "Three scenarios, all with their bonus qualities," of which I include only the first: "1. D-Backs clinch before going to SF. Get to rub it in," etc. (I, of course, still won't call the team the "D-Backs," not until they start employing five-foot-nine men in football helmets who spend most of their day running backwards.)
"This phrase, all alone, belittles [the henchman's -- and for that matter, the Joker's] patrician-toned claims that he is not first and foremost a troll," says Woody, not even letting the henchman detail his other scenarios. "It fleshes out the chromosome-bloated nature of his forays here, and ridicules his comments that he's just a baseball fan talking about baseball, and that the fact that his team happens to be in the same division as ours, and happens to be on the verge of clinching it is part of baseball, necessitates his redundant, anal-retentive daily missives detailing how if one subtracts one game from yesterday's previously noted 'magic number,' one winds up with the number revealed today. All delivered with porcine squeals of delight that make Ned Beatty sound like Pope J.P. II. Good thing about the Giants' dismal play these days is that it's fueling Arizona even faster to its clinch, which -- with any luck -- might induce [the Joker] to take his textual mooning act to his next organizational rival. In any case, even if he continues to take his daily dump [in the Giants newsgroup], I'll be finally oblivious to it: his brand of lobotomized juvenility has finally compelled me to killfile him -- a move I'd always viewed as lame, but which in this case seems just the right sort of lameness to combat his particular brand of assholic retardatia. Thanks, [both Diamondbacks trolls]: you've help me pop my censorial cherry."
(Basically I took my killfile cue from Woody.)
"Oh I hope not," adds Anson. "I've noticed that the two trolls have tried to win pissing matches with many Giants fans here but never did response to Woody's posts, even though Woody has repeatedly ridiculed them. Woody's the one guy they don't dare take on."
"And here I thought it was my breath," Woody says. "To be honest, I'd given [the Joker] a certain benefit of doubt just out of respect of a certain apparent level of intelligence he has -- to a certain degree, much as I did with Noah at first. I mean, in addition to all the mass of Turquoise and Purple weenie-rub he's posted, he's also made some fairly straightforward and nondivisive comments about baseball in general. Problem is, he's decided to put whatever intelligence he does command to the service of the kind of pesky, juvenile rectalia that is [The Henchman] Inc. I mean, the guy may be a sparrow, but he's decided to make like a fly and buzz us constantly in his turd-besplattered glory. Since I can't stop him, I figured it was just better to use the resources at hand to render him inexistent. And as that bitch beggin' for a slapping in the Pearl Drops ad used to say, 'It's a nice feeling.'"
I should point out that the Joker has since attempted to take on Woody. I don't have the text, so just take my word for it that he sounded like he always does: as though he knows he's been outthunk.
"On the bright side, some very positive things happened," says Mark:
"I find the Diamondbacks trolling kind of funny, actually," says Ron M., who probably has the best attitude about the whole situation. "I mean, they talk as if they've been lifelong supporters of this team, but it hasn't been around. It's one thing for, say, a Red Sox fan to get excited about his team making the playoffs, but when a Diamondbacker does, you want to call him a bandwagoneer."
That's among the things I want to call them.
"Because, let's face it, all Diamondbacks fans are fair-weather fans. They're making a lot of noise, but until they've supported a team which wasn't any good, their smack-talk is pretty empty. Everybody knows that the fans who are the loudest when a team wins are often the first to vanish when their record drops below .500. (Couldn't happen to you, [Joker] and [henchman]? Two words: Baltimore Orioles.)
"I don't hate the Diamondbacks, myself. I don't particularly care for them, but I'm always happy to see Matt Williams do well.
"Comparisons to other expansion teams fail simply because of the vast changes in the free agent rules. Had the Mets been able to sign free agents, it might not have taken them eight years to make the playoffs. As far as I'm concerned, you earn the right to celebrate victory by enduring defeat. The Diamondbacker trolls can jump up and down when they win, but for them to pretend that they have any emotional investment in the team is just silly."
"So what's happened?" the column begins. "Why has Magowan gone from being one of the first to openly campaign for and welcome the Diamondbacks into the National League West to a one-man lobbying firm wanting to push them out?
"The answer, quite simply, may be jealousy. No doubt, Magowan looks at the NL West standings and sees that his Giants would be in first place and heading to the playoffs if the Diamondbacks weren't around."
And here's how the column ends:
"Make no mistake, the single biggest reason Magowan wants Arizona out is a not-so-secret disdain for the Diamondbacks and their deeper pockets. Magowan and Colangelo have been feuding for years.
"This will probably come down to which owner, Colangelo or Magowan, has more allies. Using history as a barometer, don't bet against the man from Arizona."
I'm starting to believe that this guy is either one of the aforementioned trolls, but no matter: Who's to say he's wrong?
Or is it possible that Magowan doesn't care for the way Colangelo has (a) been given weight to throw around, and (b) thrown it around?
"The conversation should be interesting when Giants managing general partner Peter Magowan hosts Arizona Diamondbacks owner Peter Colangelo on a tour of Pacific Bell Park this weekend," writes Henry Schulman in the San Francisco Chronicle.
Woody speculates on the content of that conversation: "'Look, less go inna dugout, kay? I mean, you keep rollin' of this goddamn mound, and I'm gettin all kinsa terrible dirt stains on my knees. Maybe we kin finda pillow or sumpin inna dugout....'" Schulman says, "Colangelo was unhappy [Filthy rich," Woody interjects. "About to win the pennant. May well go all the way. In his second year. What's there not to be unhappy about?] about Magowan's comments Monday that the Diamondbacks almost certainly will be moved to the American League in 2001.
"'I didn't realize Peter spoke for the league,' Colangelo told the Mesa (Ariz.) Tribune yesterday. 'I still thought we had a commissioner. His name is Bud Selig.' [Woody says, "Ooooh. Cruisin' for a bruisin', our Petie. Bud usually gets pretty mean if his name isn't preceded by 'Dear Father and Great Leader.'"] And that's who I'm in communication with regularly on a lot of issues, not the least of which is our status.'"
Okay, quick: give me a break.
From the moment he set foot in Major League Baseball, Colangelo has attempted to speak for the league.
Says Woody, "Since no one bothered to respond to the dismally brilliant and incisive [observation] I made yesterday regarding how the bar for new clubs has been raised so high that new clubs, just to be new clubs, must have the kind of finances to become division winner within a couple of years (not that I'm bitter about continued lack of recognition. No. Really. Go die, everyone), let me just note here a corollary detail: What ever happened to those days when new owners came into the majors, hat in hand, knowing there were dues to pay, lessons to learn, and rules to obey? It's as if expansion club owners come into meetings threatening, 'Now, if you shmoes don't do exactly as we say, we ain't opening shop, see? And you wouldn't want that, wouldja?.' God, next time an Arizona or Tampa Bay starts dictating just where they are gonna play and who with before they've even played their first game, I hope the Mafiosi with tenure respond, 'Tell you what. Play with yourself. Fuck you. You're out. Let's call Memphis and tell them to start building the park.'"
Perhaps Magowan is a jerk, a bozo, a patsy, a naïf, I dunno, but what Colangelo said quite typical of the lack of respect Magowan seems to get.
"Logical," suggests Woody: "Remember what Major League Baseball Team he's president of. How could it be otherwise?"
The main example I'm thinking of is his protest against the idea of the Giants being stuck in the same division as the A's -- one of those "Who does he think he is?" things. Magowan had said that the league charter would've prohibited such an alignment; however, the Giants would've been forced into it, while (if I remember right) the New York, Chicago, and LA-area teams wouldn't have.
The other bit is, there are a whole bunch of other owners about whom Colangelo would not have made that comment ("Turner and Murdoch, for two," says Woody. "I mean, Colangelo knows if he screws with them, they'll both interrupt broadcasts on all TV outlets they own and start running 'Let's Talk About What An Anus Wrinkle Peter Colangelo Is' reports. Magowan has gotta buy himself a network, dammit."), and, I bet, a whole bunch of other owners who would make that comment about Colangelo.
"If someone would just make me an owner, I would!" Woody assures us.
Schulman says, "Colangelo said 85 percent of Arizona's fans prefer -- "
Woody interrupts: "'Even in maggot form, fully 90% of flies said they actually preferred fresh poop to dried.' That is, consider the source."
" -- to stay in the National League, information he has conveyed to Selig. Still, the Diamondbacks' franchise agreement allows owners to move them after this season. 'He doesn't have the excuse of history or tradition,' Magowan said, 'and he did agree to this. I don't see how he can complain about this.'"
To which Colangelo's comeback would be...?
"'Oh yeah?" guesses Woody.
I too love this "85 percent" crap. Thanks to the current existence of interleague play, Bud Selig has shown me just how much we can trust these little "polls."
Incidentally, I think I'm with Richard on this: I don't want to see the Diamondbacks leave, much as I justifiably despise them. I don't want to see any other teams change leagues. Milwaukee was bad enough.
"Plus, the more porous and pliable the leagues become, the easier it'll be for Bud and The Blackshirts to announce 'No more leagues. Just one. I mean, look, the division had become so meaningless anyway,'" Woody says.
Which reminds me: How does Milwaukee manage to be off the short list of teams that might go away, Selig fans?
"Because all the announcers like those knackwurst ground cow-vagina dogs they serve," Woody suggests.
Schulman continues quoting Magowan: "'Maybe if his ballclub wins the World Series it will be easier to express what he wants to do.'"
This statement just smacks of the fertilizer we're being handed lately with the idea of X number of teams being deep-sixed for just not being successful enough, or whatever.
"Plus," Woody says, "it empties the debate of any qualitative content -- i.e., what would be right and best for everyone. I mean, this is tantamount to Roosevelt gloating as Berlin fell: 'Well, the day Adolf dominates the world under Nazism, then maybe we can talk about his ideas being the most credible.'"
It's just so unbelievably short-sighted to think it would be impossible for, say, Montreal or the A's -- especially the A's -- to get it together and play great for years, and ergo they should just go away in favor of the nouveau riche... especially the extraordinarily riche nouveau riche.
"Plus -- show of hands here? -- as much as we all dislike the A's, and probably have no great love for Montreal, how many people here would rather see them go than, say, a Tampa Bay or Arizona?" says Woody. "I mean, shit, as a fan of baseball and its history (i.e., in addition to a certain franchise), I'd much rather see a poor-bastard team like Montreal get knocked around for years and years, then go absolutely bonkers when it puts together a World Series season. Despite not caring about the Expos, that scenario would constitute a dramatic baseball moment. Watching a second-year team with endless cash and a wading pool in the bleachers go all the way? I don't think so."
Remember when so many of us bitched about the idea of a Canadian -- i.e., not American -- team going all the way? Those were the days.
"Oh, other thing lost in this 'the weak must go' argument: the Pet Rock made tons of money," Woody says. "I'm not sure it was a credible argument for why the family dog should have been put to sleep immediately."
"And we know what happened to Pet Rocks shortly thereafter," says Richard. "I'm telling you (well, not you Woody, because you never listen to me anyway, other than to continually look for a moment to interject another phallically oriented comment into the fray), the fall this team takes in the next year or so is going to be very rewarding to watch. I can hardly wait to see the panic that starts to set in when, for instance, Jay Bell doesn't hit 40 home runs again next year even though Jerry wants him to."
"Oh, I oh so hope it happens," Woody says. "But it'll be next year. All I am saying is that this year, if they indeed played over their heads, they did so consistently, and thus made that level of play their norm. I don't like it, but I'm not going to deny it. I will deny, however, I'm taking advantage of my wife being gone this weekend by wearing her clothes. Particularly not her really delicious Christian Lacroix ensemble that go with my eyes so well, even if it does tend to make my butt look big."
"Well, I'm sure there are at least four concepts included in that paragraph that I don't completely understand and am somewhat afraid to try to," says Richard.
"See, comments like [Richard's, about the Diamondbacks' fall] make me worry," says Paul L., failing to note that comments like Woody's should really make him worry. "I spent most of August holding my breath and assuming that the bottom would fall out of [The Diamondbacks'] offense Any Day Now. And, much to my distress, it didn't. This may mean that the Baseball Gods may allow them to defy gravity, just like the Roadrunner, for another year or so, until Colangelo is happy with the pretty pennants hanging on his wall, while we, the Wile E. Coyote of the NL West, will be unable to defy gravity."
"On Monday," Schulman writes, "Magowan credited Arizona for what it has done on the field, but added, 'It's still not in the best interest of baseball to have a huge differential in payrolls. It's hard to compete when some teams spend $25 million to $30 million more than we can. But that's where we are.'"
While true, this does have an unpleasant air of sour grapes.
Quick question: Just what the hell are the best interests of baseball?
"Before or after the advent of Baseball-as-Titanic thinking?" says Woody. "Either set a salary limit for clubs -- which should be easy enough, since the owners do whatever they like as a rule -- or stop bitching. As sad as it is to admit, the Giants would be pulling the same retarded shit as Murdoch or Steinbrenner if they had the means to do it."
"Like that would bother me," says Richard. "I hope to see that happen just once before I die. And maybe they should speed it up a bit."
"They'll get there," Woody assures us. "Problem is, all the big spenders of today will have jacked up their budgets proportionally in the meantime. We're us. Never forget that."
"Perhaps Magowan and Colangelo can discuss the parity issue further this weekend," concludes Schulman.
Referee: Gentlemen, choose your weapons.
Magowan: I'll take the pistol. You can have the feather-duster.
"Problem is," Woody says, "Colangelo knows he's got the money to hire a stand in. Once Magowan has emptied the clip into the double's lifeless body, Colangelo will Ty Cobb-stomp Magowan into a grease stain."
"I think I would have been happier if it were the Dodgers who won," says Richard. "Or maybe I'm just still in the throes of sour grapes."
"Or maybe," offers Woody, "you're just looking for a reason to scour the sandy rivages of Ocean Beach for signs of seal torso remnants from shark attacks so you can do horrid sexual things to it and shout at infuriated passersby "Hey! He's dead. He don't know nothing about dignity!' There were a handful of Diamondbutt jerkoffs who Chernobyled our newsgroup. We all hate seeing the dictum 'Money talks' in baseball. Still: how would life have been better if the Dodgers -- this year's Dodgers, to boot -- had won? Shit, as it is, this is the second straight year running I've called us finishing ahead of LA to Gregg, and he still insists on retorting 'You'd be right, only there's next year to worry about....' Let's just agree that it sucks to lose, and that it's been particularly horrid this year because we've been inundated by messages from Tweedledee and Tweedlefuckingbeyondretarded dickwipes from the Arizona Nether Spheres. Don't make me use the cheeseburger and truncheon on you."
"Take it from Peter Magowan.
"'The team would've been put up for sale and sold,' Magowan said, 'and the buyer would've been from out of the area and National League baseball would've disappeared forever.'"
"And yet," says Richard," I'll bet there are still politicians in San Francisco who think Candlestick is a fine place for baseball, and all that (private) money should instead be sunk into the black hole of the homeless problem or something."
Well, we know this is true, since another Examiner column has George Christopher, the long-ago, somehow-still-alive San Francisco mayor whose buddy built the Giants' ballpark in the worst possible place, saying that all that stuff about the wind is overrated.
"They also want to make sure they get their comp tickets for Opening Day in the new park, of course," Richard says.
Shea says, "Magowan is the managing general partner of the ownership group that saved the Giants by buying the team from Bob Lurie, who saved the Giants by buying the team from Horace Stoneham, who stuck the Giants at Candlestick in the first place."
"Horace's stupidity and blurry eyes, I tell you," Richard insists.
"What Lurie couldn't do, and Stoneham wouldn't do, Magowan did," says Shea. "He is building a replacement for the 'Stick near downtown, alongside a stretch of water, with sweeping views of the Bay, sailboats and a bridge -- and, the team is confident, fewer weather problems."
"What irritates me about all this is that Bob Lurie was a real estate developer, but he couldn't do what a supermarket exec did get done," Richard says.
"In any conversation, Magowan plugs Pac Bell Park," Shea says, "so he added, 'Uniqueness is what makes a great ballpark, and our new ballpark will have a lot of things that will be very special.'"
"Face it," says Richard: "No other park will have the combined ambiance of a view of the bay and a view of a giant Coke bottle."
Says Shea, "He vividly recalls the Candlestick opening in 1960, after the Giants played two seasons at Seals Stadium, and remembers the infamous line of Vice President Richard Nixon, who attended the opener: 'San Francisco can say this is the finest ballpark in America.'
"Magowan said he 'never felt when Candlestick was built that it was what it was described by Nixon and other people.'"
"What did people expect of Nixon?" says Richard. "He was a politician. They are supposed to lie."
"Still," Shea says, "it was new and state of the art. Just as Pac Bell will be. Which leads to this thought: Will Pac Bell stand the test of time? Will owners be lobbying for a new facility in 2040 to replace antiquated Pac Bell Park?
"'No, it'll be a ballpark people will want to come to in 30, 40 years,' Magowan said. 'It'll provide security that the Giants never really enjoyed since the Bay Area became a two-team market. We almost moved twice, in 1976 and 1992, and the A's almost moved at least twice. People can now fall in love with the Giants because they're going to be here for the long term, and that's a statement we couldn't make in the past.'
"In the Magowan era, the Giants have been mostly competitive despite playing at Candlestick. In 1993, his first year, they owned the second-best record in baseball (but also the second best in their own division). They were in contention in 1994 before the players' strike. They won a division title in 1997 and contended into September in 1998 and 1999. They're on the verge of winning the most games in any three-year period by the Giants since the late '60s.
"But things are different now because Pac Bell Park has put Magowan and Co. in extreme debt. The ballpark's privately financed effort required a $170 million bank loan. The team still owes $25 million on the 1992 purchase and the new debt service obligation is $20 million a year for 20 years.
"To help pay for the $300 million ballpark, the team will receive $115 million from charter seats and corporate sponsorships, including naming rights, and $15 million in tax increment financing from The City's Redevelopment Agency."
"Funny, I thought they were getting more out of the charter seats, somehow," Richard says. "They got $50 mil from Pac Bell, right? And I assumed Coke threw something in there. Maybe that is more of a year-to-year thing, though, based on what is written below."
Which is this: "Considering their $20 million annual payment, how can the Giants continue competing in a division of big-time spenders, including Los Angeles, Arizona and Colorado? Two of the teams -- the Diamondbacks and Rockies -- received sweetheart, publicly financed ballpark deals.
"'If we can compete at Candlestick, how the hell can we not compete at the new ballpark?' Magowan said.
"To offset the debt, Magowan said, the Giants will benefit by increased income in four major areas:
"Advertising. 'We'll have more in-stadium advertising sponsorship revenue than any team in baseball,' he said."
"This is okay with me," Richard says. "I can always not look at it, so who cares?"
Shea continues: "Concessions. Magowan said food and drink income will triple next year."
"This sounds ominous, somehow," says Richard.
Shea again: "'With in-stadium advertising and concession income, that's more than enough, with those two items alone, to offset the debt service,' he said."
"Wow," says Richard. "This says that they are going to generate an additional $20 million just from these two things. I really find that hard to believe."
Shea: "Attendance. The Giants expect 3 million customers next season, a jump of 1 million from this year. 'If the average ticket price is 15 bucks, and with 1 million more tickets, that's $15 million right there,' Magowan said."
Richard says, "And I assume that the average is way up over this year, as well. If it goes up $3 per ticket (probably low), you can also add $3 x 2,000,000 fans compared to this year, or another $6 million."
Shea: "Suites. A total of 65. 'Where we made $100,000 a year in the old stadium, we'll make more than $3 million in the new stadium,' Magowan said."
"Wow, $100,000 for the whole year?" says Richard. "That is just remarkably horrible. Actually, it's embarrassing. However, I have been in them a few times, and they really aren't all that great, so I guess I can actually understand why nobody would want to pay big bucks for one. They aren't even all that warm.
"Anyway, I guess if you add all that up, it is implied that the increase in revenue would be:
Ads and concessions $20 million (which is really hard to believe) Additional ticket revenue: $15+6 = $21 million Additional luxury boxes $3 million Total $42 million"Plus, of course, whatever they are being fleeced for rent at the 'Stick, since they won't have to pay that anymore. If that's $3 million, that means they would have about $25 million extra next year after the debt service (but have I mentioned that the $20 million number for ads and concessions just seems really high?), and if the stadium holds up, things get rosier after the debt is paid off.
"Sign Ken Griffey Jr.!"
"Through it all," says Shea, "the co-owner said he's had few regrets. 'Candlestick has been my home, and it'll be sad when we leave,' Magowan said. 'But I know more than most people what we have ahead, and I believe we will provide fans with the best ballpark in the country. People will know when they watch the game that they can only be in San Francisco.'"
"I have lots of regrets," says Richard. "Candlestick is the primary culprit for 40 years of mediocre baseball in San Francisco."
[Way more. If I recall correctly, he bought the Giants for $8 million and sold them for $105 million. -- GP]
"All of these are great points," says Richard. "Lurie certainly did save the Giants before turning into a quisling, but as an offerer of entertainment, he was really poor. One got the sense that the fans really did not enter into the equation with him at all.
"I know exactly what you meant about the tickets; I used to be in a panic as opening day approached. I'm sure I called every year. Why do that to people who have shelled out hundreds or thousands of dollars (in advance) for your product?"
"Under Lurie," says George, "the Giants pulled off the rare stunt of having attendance go down the year after a World Series appearance.
"After the '89 season they decided to cancel the weekend plan for upper boxes. They had nonrefundable deposits from frontrunning fans who had paid the money to assure tickets for the postseason. Lurie and his geniuses figured that the fans who left would be replaced by new blood. What happened was that many of us did not or could not upgrade to 81 games and the yuppie frontrunners vanished after the '90 season.
"I tried to buy a 40-game plan in 1990 with all my seats being in Section 9 but was told that the section had been set aside for full-season ticket holders and players' families. My two partners convinced me to upgrade to the full plan. On Opening Night (by the way, thanks to Magowan for again making it Opening Day) we were surrounded by 20-game plan and individual ticket holders. After writing letters to the Giants mentioning 'fraud and misrepresentation' I was given the chance to cash in any tickets that I did not want.
"In contrast I had weekend seats with the A's during this same period which were field level behind the plate. The A's assured us that even if our section was ever set aside for full season plans we would never be forced to upgrade.
"As long as I am on this rant let me recall another great move in 1990. Due to the lockout the season was delayed by 10 days with the first set of games moved to the end of the season. Both teams gave us the option of going to the rescheduled games, trading for other games or getting a refund. The A's gave me cash but the Giants made me fill out a form and wait three weeks for a check because 'the computer can not process this.'"
"You don't know the half of it, pal," says David M. "I checked. The last time Nen went three-up, three-down was August 28, in a non-save situation versus Pittsburgh. [David said this before his three-up, three-down save in LA this week. -- GP] Then I dug a little deeper.
"Nen, in 70 appearances, has had exactly four three-up three-down innings this season. Three of them were, as with the Pirate game noted above, non-save situations.
"Robb Nen, in 1999, has saved exactly one game in which he neither allowed a runner to reach base nor allowed an inherited runner to score. The magic moment came back on April 27 in Montreal -- in the tenth inning.
"There you have it: Robb Nen has not pitched a single three-up three-down ninth inning in a save situation at any time this season."
Great balls of ire.
Even now, as I dry my eyes, I think that Dusty Baker -- who may be the worst "pitching manager" on Planet Earth, which is easy for me to say, being so cheesed off at the Giants these days -- is going to have to start blazing a trail, stop thinking in terms of the "closer mentality," and start using the right man for the right job, whatever job that is, when it's needed.
Here's a question: If it's the fourth inning and the other team has the bases loaded and no outs in a 4-4 game, why not bring in your 100-mile-an-hour guy then, when you need at least one strikeout? Criminy, it's possible that he'd throw nine pitches, all swung at and missed. It's also possible that the batter goes deep... but you're not out of the game in the fourth inning.
Just a thought -- I mean, the idea is, when you really need outs, why not bring in your supposedly best reliever?
"I think there is a prevailing attitude in baseball, one that has not bypassed the Giants' dugout, which goes something like, 'Screw the statistics, I know this doggone game,'" David says. "In practice, that usually comes out as, 'I'm gonna do whatever made (insert successful team name here) so cotton-pickin' successful.'"
It's the Insider Mentality. That's why Bill Mueller bunts with Marvin Benard on second and nobody out in the first.
"Back around 1981, somebody started propagating the 'amazing' statistic that the New York Yankees were, like, 51-2 in games they led after eight innings. This was supposed to be a indicator of the Yanks' phenomenal bullpen. They had that famous one-two punch of Ron Davis and Goose Gossage, the prototypes for today's setup/closer combo.
"While lots of baseball men like to disdain statistics and praise the 'intangibles,' every now and then a sexy stat -- like this one -- takes hold in everyone's mind. Two things then happen. First, everyone and his brother breaks open the piggy bank to go get a setup/closer combo. Second, once this conventional wisdom takes root, stats which might disprove it will be ignored, ridiculed, or both.
"And there's plenty of evidence that a strong closer doesn't necessarily make you a winner. Bill James studied all the other teams in the AL that same year, and found that most of them had similar records after eight innings, big-time closer or no. (When you think about it, ninth-inning comebacks are extremely rare. Even the '97 Giants, who probably led the league in late-inning comebacks, couldn't have had more than a dozen or so.) It's not at all clear to me that a big-time closer will win you the pennant. For every Eckersley or Rollie Fingers, there's a Bruce Sutter or a Bobby Thigpen.
"It's great to have a closer, don't get me wrong. But I'd rather have a strong rotation and a balanced bullpen. If you don't have those, the closer won't help much. And Dusty's bullpen is a mess.
"It might not be a bad idea to bring in your best reliever in the fourth inning of a 4-4 game, but it's a innovative idea. And Dusty Baker will never be accused of being innovative. He's as traditional as Bobby Cox -- though you'll notice Cox has managed the greatest team of the past 20 years without relying on a big-time closer."
But Dusty he plays some pretty whacko hunches, like putting up two straight lefty pinch-hitters against Franco or something. Have you ever seen a bigger hunch manager than Dusty?
Another problem with bringing in your best reliever early in the game -- the whole purpose of which would be to minimize or douse some early flames, catch your breath, and go from there -- has to do with egos and money. First, "We're not paying Nen to pitch in the fourth inning." Second, "Nobody gives a damn about guys who pitch the fourth inning. Put me in in the ninth, when I can get the glory stats." All as opposed to, "Use me however you see fit. I wanna do what's best for the team." (Not that my scenario necessarily is best for the team; just a theory.)
John B. refutes David's claim about Nen, somewhat: Far be it from me to rise to the defense of Robb Nen, but he's actually had four three-up-three down 'save situation' innings this year. Make that five after Wednesday:
"The point still remains that Nen has been utterly pukey this year."
"Pretty bad, but it's not as terrible as it looks," says Ken K. "If you use an OBP of .300, someone should get on base about 65% of the time. I don't know the league OBP off hand, but I bet it's higher than .300.
"I'd expect Nen to have 15 to 25 one-two-three innings out of 70. Four is pretty bad."
"Well, he's made 70 appearances," says Demian, "which have not all necessarily been full innings, so according to your calculations he should've had about 12 (and I'm just guessing) one-two-three innings.
"Nen's performance this year has still been pretty terrible, but I'm willing to cut the guy some slack... does anyone here remember how unhittable this guy was last year? He was a major contributor to last year's stretch run. For what it's worth, in my Rotisserie league Nen had the best numbers of any pitcher (starter or reliever) in the second half of the year. That's pretty impressive. Also, he has a history of having a bad year after a good year, so I'm looking forward to having the old Nen in 2000. Not a typewriter My only concern is that Dusty has made him pitch his arm off (70 appearances is unreal for a closer), but that's a whole different discussion."
Another factor is, just how healthy is the guy?
Things started to go downhill early in the Saturday game, when with two on, Diamondbacks starter Todd Stottlemyre was ejected after throwing three straight pitches at Bonds' head. When Bonds hit reliever Greg Swindell's first pitch off the Schwab sign above the football seats in right, Showalter again had to be physically restrained en route to his own ejection. The Giants romped.
Bonds, in another fabulous display of stretch baseball, spurred the Giants on to an inspiring 14-0 Sunday victory with three home runs and nine RBIs. The three-game sweep of the Dodgers to close out the Giants' occupancy of Candlestick Park was led by Bonds' seven home runs and supported by outstanding pitching. Meanwhile, the Diamondbacks, unable to buy a victory, held merely a three-game lead going into the final weekend.
Amazingly, the Giants swept the Rockies, with Bonds, Kent, Burks, and Snow all going off like cannons. The haunted Diamondbacks, sadly for them, fell flat, losing all three games, but ensuring that tie. Bonds' solo home run in the twelfth inning of the playoff seals a 1-0 victory and buries the Diamondbacks, finally.
Bonds' performance in the Division Series, the NLCS, and the World Series finally lays to rest those persistent comments about what a hopeless choker he is when it counts. The San Francisco Giants are, finally, the World Champions.
And hey, if you told me I'd have to wait till next year for this... I'd take it.
I actually regret getting involved in the verbal war with the Joker -- not because I have any sympathy, respect, or regard for him as a human being; not because I feel the remotest guilt about making my opinion on the matter heard; not because I somehow fear him and his infantile, insecure, indefatigable ilk; and not because it makes me feel better in anyway, by getting some negative stuff off my chest.
I regret it because of something my friend Bruce Piper has said to me, at least once a year, since we were in eighth grade: "You can't argue with an idiot." That's practically one of my watchwords now, but I tend to forget it until I'm embroiled in such an argument -- at which time those words start ringing in my ears like the tintinabulation of the bells bells bells bells bells bells bells bells bells.
I regret it because it just helps the cause of the Joker and his henchman, and even, possibly, Lady Buckeye and the other marginally less offensive Diamondbacks fans who've made their presence known to us. That cause is to disrupt a group of intelligent, interesting, funny people, and to induce some of us to leave and others of us to fight among ourselves. I regret it because rationally I know, and always have, that people like the Joker and his henchman are not worth the effort. There's no point responding -- you can't argue with an idiot. There's no point insulting them -- they'll just attempt to turn it around. There's no point telling them the truth -- they'll just attempt to turn it around. You can't even ignore them, because they won't take being ignored. They're a lot like my first boss in my last job: nothing works with them.
The good news, though, is that like that boss, these trolls are substantially the losers in the big war. To paraphrase Red Dwarf, what they are guilty of is being who they are. That is their crime. It is also their punishment.
Meanwhile, I thank you for letting me, and the other Giants fans in the Giants newsgroup, vent here. Maybe this wasn't the most fun, readable installment, but sometimes stuff just needs to be said.
And to those of you, excluding the Killfile Crew, who might have felt uncomfortable with the tone of this installment, please bear with me. My hope is that a fairly involved season "postmortem" series will wing your way around World Series time, maybe after.
Copyright ©1999 by Gregg Pearlman
Last updated 9/28/99 Gregg Pearlman, gregg@EEEEEEgp.com