Bleacher Report - Articles by Jeremy Goldson

Tricky Baseball Gods Having a Field Day With Rockies-Giants

Jeremy Goldson — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:16:55 -0400

The baseball gods are clearly more of the naughty, mischievous type, than the austere and formal, everything-gets-done-in-six-days sort of gods.

How else would you explain the rapid turnaround in the NL Wild Card race?

On Monday night, the Colorado Rockies beat the San Francisco Giants on a thrilling 14th inning grand slam, and moved ahead of the Giants by four games. Colorado looked to have vanquished the Giants and to be in the driver’s seat by now.

Colorado then lost four of five and will play in San Francisco on Sunday afternoon with their Wild Card lead down to just one game.

These all-powerful gods of baseball must have a keen narrative sense, and were not prepared to surrender this particular story.

So what are we, mere mortals, to make of this yarn?

Only 120 hours ago, Colorado appeared to be the team of the moment. But a trip to San Francisco, where they are 1-4 this season, having scored just 10 runs, has diminished them.

And the Giants, who were overwhelmed by Colorado’s heroics last weekend, seem to have solved the Rockies bats. Plus, they don’t let the game get close into the late innings.

Much of the story has been written with pitching recently—great starting pitching from both teams, mostly the Giants, and some atrocious relief pitching from both teams...well, mostly the Giants.

San Francisco presents Matt Cain to the protagonist role tomorrow, and Cain, well, Cain dominates the Rockies.

He’s 2-1 this season, holding Colorado to a .177 batting average. However, he suffered his first loss of the season at AT&T Park to Colorado in May. He has beaten the Rockies twice since, with an ERA of 0.69 in those two games.

The Rockies will toss Jason Hammel to the Bayside mob, having already squandered their top two pitchers in their feeble previous games of this series. Hammel is the Rockies’ number five starter, but he has been plenty tough recently, going 3-1 in August and allowing only a 2.88 ERA on the road this season.

Perhaps the Rockies will seize upon the time-honored role of underdog, necessary in this genre. They have, after all, come from the depths of oblivion to be playing these important games and they do seem to do their best when they are less regarded.

They got a lot of attention very quickly this week, and it appears to have unhinged them.

This much is certain: tomorrow’s game is the latest “game of the season” for these teams. A Giants’ win and the heartache of last weekend is evaporated. A Rockies’ win and the Coloradoans can head into a ten-game home stand against three bottom dwellers (NY Mets, Cincinnati, and Arizona) with a two-game cushion.

Colorado’s schedule after Monday, aside from three games in San Francisco, is incredibly generous. It is easily possible to imagine the Rockies finishing the season with 91-92 wins.

Can the Giants get to that number? Their schedule is considerably tougher, with 10 of their final 32 games against the Los Angeles Dodgers and Philadelphia Phillies.

The baseball gods are clearly going to keep this thing close. Even though fans of both teams are burning up their keyboards writing about the perils of the pennant race, gnawing on their fingernails, the gods do not care.

That’s the thing, you see.

There will be more “games of the season” for these two teams. They are too talented, too incomplete, too exciting, too preposterously in the moment to make tomorrow’s game as decisive as it seems. Both Rockies’ and Giants’ fans are going to have to bear the white knuckling caused by the thrill of the pennant race for several more weeks.

Those gods are pretty stinkin’ crafty.

Opening Day As Deliverance

Jeremy Goldson — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 21:16:31 -0400

I can’t remember the specific moment when I became a sports fan. It’s as if a switch was flicked, and I was completely, irrevocably on. I know that it happened sometime in late 1984. I was nine years old. All of the sudden, I became hopelessly passionate about the sports landscape, and soon grew to love my hometown Denver Broncos and Nuggets. Soon, other teams entered the frame—the England soccer team, the Ray Bourque Boston Bruins, the Eddie Murray-led Baltimore Orioles.

Missing, obviously, is baseball, the sport that I have the strongest (perhaps romanticized) feelings for now. And with opening day around the corner, I have undertaken to explain one of the greatest sporting moments of my lifetime, and, certainly, the most memorable Opening Day that I have ever experienced.

The first date was April 5, 1993. I was a senior in high school. It was an overcast, but not cold day in Denver, but it didn’t matter because, after generations of hoping, Colorado had a major league franchise.

I had been a passionate Denver Zephyrs' fan, savoring their league championship title in 1991. I attended the expansion draft party thrown in downtown Denver in November, 1992, and cheered the drafting of Colorado’s opening day pitcher, David Neid.

I went to barnstorming events, I bought regalia, and I happily waited.

The first pitch was at about 12:15 p.m. Denver time. I was in Cheesman Park, in Denver, not at Shea Stadium where the Rockies were facing the Mets (ironically starring the same Eddie Murray that I had idolized as a kid). I was at Cheesman Park, not because I was auditioning for the annual Denver Public Schools Shakespeare Festival. I was playing King Lear in the mad scene with four of my friends.

But King Lear took a back seat. This day was all baseball. We would run through our scene, howling at the wind, and scurry back to a portable radio to listen to the game. I distinctly remember Rockies’ announcer Wayne Hagin describing leadoff man Eric Young, proudly wearing a road gray jersey that said “Colorado” on it, digging in against Dwight Gooden...Dwight Gooden!

Looking back at the box score, I don’t remember much else about the game. Not Andres Galarraga’s first-ever hit for the franchise, nor Young’s steal of second, or Bobby Bonilla’s home run in the fourth that put the Mets up 2-0.

Memory is tricky like that. It sometimes chooses between details and sensation. Sometimes the details are paramount, the facts transcendent. But in this instance, it was the sensation, the fulfillment of knowing the ultimate truth that I, a fanatical baseball fan, finally had a genuine personal stake in "The Game."

I realize now that that critical moment in the mythology of the Rockies will always be diminished. That though sensation of being a part of the institution of baseball has been perpetual since then, nothing will match the completion of Dwight Gooden throwing a pitch to one of our guys—a Colorado major leaguer.

Of course, I, and 80, 226 other delivered acolytes, watched Eric Young hit the sixth pitch ever thrown in a major league game in Denver into the left field bleachers at Mile High Stadium, igniting the most sincere and spectacular “there-is-no-way-THAT-just-happened” celebration in Opening Day history.

All of Colorado had been sparkling with the long-awaited deliverance of major league baseball. But to have the first ever batter hit a home run?

We had arrived. This wasn’t Iowa. This was heaven.

Despite FOX TV Groaning, This Will Be a Great World Series

Jeremy Goldson — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 17:24:13 -0400

The following is a transcript from a conversation deep in the offices of the FOX television network. The first speaker is a stodgy corporate type, the sort of guy who gets field boxes seats at Fenway Park and then complains about the poor view and food selection, and who is proud of having met Elisha Cuthbert. The second speaker is a baseball fan.

“Oh, this is the end of the world as we know it! We had a chance at that Man-Ram fellow taking on the defending world champs. And now we’ve got, what is this? Tampa? Are there any demographic groups worth advertising to in Tampa? And Philadelphia? Didn’t those people boo, I don’t know, who did they boo?”

“Santa Claus.”

“Who boos Santa Claus?”

“They are a very, uh, determined fanbase, sir.”

“Will there be enough of them to not send our ratings the way of the stock market?”

“Sir, I think that this World Series will be highly entertaining and will appeal to people who love baseball for the sanctity of the sport. People who root for the underdog, and who want to participate in history.”

“What are you talking about?”

“It’s an incredible matchup, sir. Two teams who have completely different approaches, two completely different fanbases. A great story no matter who wins.”

“A great story?”

“Well, the Rays are the worst team in baseball history. Now they are in the World Series. And, don’t interrupt, sir. And don’t bite that highball glass. As I was saying, the Phillies have won one World Championship in 126 years, so this is an event.”

“What the heck is a Phillie? And get me a drink so that I can drown the vanishing account income.”

“Sir, the Phillies are a really entertaining team, with what are called high character players. Ryan Howard, their gigantic, almost huggable first baseman, is the game's foremost home run hitter, capable of bashing balls into the stratosphere, and also capable of looking completely foolish striking out. Shane Victorino, the guy at the center of the brawl—“

“A good fight would get people’s attention.”

“If you say so, sir. Well, Victorino is a battler, a pest, a fill-in-the-blank-expletive whatever you want to call him. But he is also highly watchable. He gives everything he has in the field, and he hits screaming line drives and runs the bases with complete fearlessness. And he makes for great lip-reading theatre on television.

"And then there is Chase Utley. He is the definitive Baseball Player in the entire major leagues right now. He is quiet off the field, and completely tenacious on it. He is an above-average fielder with good instincts and a terrific motor (see his diving play into the second base bag, paying little regard for his own body, against the Dodgers), and an outstanding hitter, especially as a power hitter, unusual for second basemen.

"Utley plays the game the way it is meant to be played, with vigor and selflessness, in this oh so self-indulgent game.”

“Self-indulgent?”

“Like the Oscars, sir. The game lends itself to the magnification of the individual personality, but, in the end, the best team that plays together and gets along wins.”

“Son, if you could get us the Oscars, I’d set you up with a supermodel for an entire weekend on the French Riviera.”

“Um. Thank you, sir?”

“You say that these ‘Phillies’ are entertaining. What about the, uh, what are they called?”

“The Rays, sir. Last year they were the Devil Rays.”

“Well, thank goodness they changed their name. Listen, this drink isn’t strong enough. This Philadelphia-Tampa thing is a disaster. Are there any superstars, like that A-Rod, in this series? Or a team with a hopeless nationwide following, like those Cubs?”

“Well, sir. I think that B.J. Upton and David Price will be superstars in a short time. And, sir, they are both homegrown African-American ballplayers, which are in serious short supply in baseball right now.”

“You aren’t doing something stupid like making a socio-political statement, are you?”

“No, sir. I wouldn’t dare. But, sir, there is so much to like about the Rays, as well. Their manager, Joe Maddon, is a legitimate intellectual and an eccentric personality.”

“Oh, come off it. There’s no such thing as intellect in baseball.”

“You are wrong, sir, this Maddon is both well-read and well-spoken. Besides, sir, there are other great stories on the Rays. Their heart-and-soul, outfielder Rocco Baldelli, is just coming back into the game after injuries and a mysterious, career-threatening illness.”

“Like steroids? See, I do pay attention.”

“No sir, it was an unknown illness that attacked his immune system and caused great fatigue and—“

“Enough, if I want to learn about medicine and mysteries, I’ll watch House. Which, by the way, I will not be able to watch next week because of this Philadelphia-Tampa nonsense. It would have been okay if we’d gotten that Man-Ram..."

“Sir, I think you just like saying Man-Ram.”

“Can you come up with some good names for Utley or, let me remember, Baldelli?”

“They don’t need nicknames, sir, they are incredible athletes who are complete ballplayers, unlike a certain you-know-who. And they are playing for the World Championship.”

“Okay, okay, you’ve got me listening. Now tell me about these two teams.”

“The Rays had one of the best pitching staffs in all of baseball this year, and the Phillies might have the most dangerous lineup in the game.

"And, well, the Phillies have the best bullpen in the playoffs. Their closer, Brad Lidge, has saved every chance he’s had this season. And he is also getting some redemption, because his career was on the rocks last year.

"Both of these teams hit home runs like the entire concept of a home run might get exported. The Phillies led the National League in home runs and the Rays have hit 22 of them in the 11 postseason games they’ve played.”

“That’s a lot of home runs. And do chicks still dig the long ball, son?”

“Sure, sir. But they also dig dirty uniforms, handsome chiseled faces, and charisma. And these teams have plenty of all of that.”

“Really?”

“Yes, sir, but I won’t elaborate. It’d upset my wife. And sir, both of these teams can pitch. The Rays have an ace who can dial up nearly 100 MPH, and two young guys named Shields and Garza who pitch with complete icy confidence. And the Phillies’ best pitcher, Cole Hamels has filthy stuff. He’s been nearly unhittable this postseason.”

“All right, all right, I’m intrigued. But I was intrigued last year when those guys from Colorado pulled off a miracle. And that Series was a dud.”

“It was sir, but the magic of Colorado’s run made the run up to that Series exciting. Here we have two evenly matched teams that have never been remotely near this place before.

"They both play incredibly hard and with style, and they will both absolutely leave it all on the field. It’s history, sir. It’s legends being made. It’s baseball at its absolute best.”

“Let’s turn that into a promo, son. I’ll see you first thing in the morning.”

“Thank you, sir.”

Colorado Rockies' Moment of Truth

Jeremy Goldson — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 13:05:40 -0400

In Denver, the beginning of September is a ritualistic transition from non-Broncos season to Broncos season.

But, in 2007, there was an interloper on this generation-old trend. The Rockies made an improbable and incredible run to the World Series.

Amidst all of the "Rockies fever" was the gentle sensation from many Denver baseball lovers that it was about time that this city recaptured its baseball glory and reasserted the national pastime at the core of Denver’s sports culture.

Though the Rockies lost the Series, the effects of their run lasted into the winter, sometimes even competing with the Broncos for attention on the sports pages.

The 2008 baseball season started with an unusual amount of excitement, as many national publications had the Rockies pegged to return to the playoffs or even win the division. Players like Troy Tulowitzki and Matt Holliday were seen as potential national superstars. ESPN even scheduled the Rockies for a Sunday Night Baseball appearance.

And they flopped.

They squeezed the bats too tight. The young pitchers failed spectacularly. Tulowitzki, then Holliday, and then team leader Todd Helton got hurt. The Rockies fell to 18-games below .500 at one point.

But the rest of the division wasn’t any better, which kept them within dreaming distance of the playoffs and kept people talking about them in Denver and, inexplicably, around the country.

Baseball people realized that the Rockies were a good team, a disappointing and underachieving team, but one with talent at numerous positions, a deep farm system, and one that should be competitive. Even at Coors Field.

Which means that the Rockies had better understand what the rest of the baseball America is also sensing. Whether they make the playoffs or not in 2008, it is now their moment of truth.

Do they become a competitor, a team that can vie for the playoffs more often than once-in-a-miracle, or do they fade into the pseudo-minor-league irrelevance and exist as merely a summer diversion for Broncos’ Country?

The Colorado media has been floating Matt Holliday and Garrett Atkins trade rumors for months now. This is a precarious position. Holliday makes $9.5 million this year, with $10 million in 2009, and Atkins makes almost $4.4 million and will be a free agent at the end of the year.

Holliday is in the league’s highest echelon of stars and will command a deal around $120 million, starting in 2010. Atkins has been one of the league’s finest third basemen for the past few years, and he will likely lead the 2008 Rockies in RBI. He has also done a fine job of filling in for injured Todd Helton at first base.

Ironically, his fill-in at third, rookie Ian Stewart, has played so well that talk of Atkins’ departure has accelerated. Trading Atkins seems like a reasonable idea; Stewart is making the league minimum.

Colorado owners Charlie and Dick Monfort consider the team a small-market one and operate with that assumption. They are 20th in payroll this year, 13th in total attendance, and, according to Forbes magazine, are ranked 21st in total value as a franchise, despite ranking eighth in operating income.

So they fit the mold of a small-market team.

But who really wants to be a small-market team? Who wants to compete for the playoffs every decade or so? And the idea of Colorado fans filling Coors Field all summer long is not a pipe dream. They want something to root for.

Colorado has to decide what sort of team they want to field. In Stewart, Ubaldo Jimenez, Jeff Francis, Manny Corpas, Holliday, and Tulowitzki, they have an enviable base of talent. But they have to keep it together. Though this franchise is gun-shy after having pulled the trigger on huge, and ultimately wasteful, deals for Mike Hampton, Denny Neagle, and Helton, they need to take the plunge with Holliday.

Yes, he is a better player at Coors Field than on the road, but the Rockies play 81 games there, so that works out well for them. Yes, he is represented by Scott Boras and would take up a huge hunk of payroll, a luxury that the Rockies feel they can’t afford because of Helton (he is due for $75 million over the next four seasons).

But, in the battle for legitimacy—and the Denver sports fans’ heart—the Rockies need to keep Holliday. He has dropped hints that he loves Denver and the clubhouse and would like to stay, so perhaps he’ll sign for only $120 million.

Expendable, sadly, is Atkins (one of Holliday’s best friends). Colorado should be able get a capable No. 2 or No. 3 starter for him. A team like division-rival San Francisco or Seattle or even the Minnesota Twins would be well improved with Atkins, and they may have the pitcher that Colorado is looking for.

Even Boston or Tampa Bay should take a long look at Atkins (as a first baseman for the Rays). The Rockies should also move OF Willy Taveras, who leads the majors in stolen bases. The team has plenty of depth in the outfield and have super-prospect Dexter Fowler in the wings.

C Yorvit Torrealba ($3 million) also could net a respectable prospect. One of the big questions is closer Brian Fuentes, whose $5 million salary ends this season, and he will be a free agent.

Unsaid, but clearly something that the Rockies have talked about behind closed doors is the option of trading Helton. His salary and production are two reasons why he is a really rough trade. But he is also the clear leader, the heart of the clubhouse. And that may offset much of his lackluster statistics.

And, still, the team cannot reasonably afford to pay him $75 million more at this sort of production. Furthermore, his balky back has likely finished him for 2008, and he will enter Spring Training a question mark (again). Helton's salary is such a drain on the payroll, that, if they could trade him, they would probably keep Atkins and Holliday.

The Rockies have an enviable farm system and a nice stash of prospects. But they also need to channel some of those excess prospects into more pitching help. Though Ubaldo Jimenez and Aaron Cook have both had solid seasons, and Francis seems to be rebounding from an awful start, the Rockies’ rotation is missing a fearsome pitcher.

Every other team in the division has one (or two), and Colorado must catch up. The team seriously considered trading for Rich Harden last offseason and should not pass up a similar player in 2008.

With the Dodgers perhaps reaching their immense potential, and the Diamondbacks continuing to look dangerous on paper, it is going to take a serious commitment from Colorado to prevent themselves from shrinking back into an afterthought.

GM Dan O’Dowd has already strongly hinted that this winter will be more tumultuous than last years. Let’s hope that he makes the right choices.

The Folly of the Olympic Medal Count: Athletes, Audiences Deserve Better

Jeremy Goldson — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 09:57:13 -0400

It’s time to get rid of the “Olympic Medal Count.” I am referring to the running tables that compare each country’s “haul” during an Olympic Games. There was a time when this statistical comparison was an important part of our national self-esteem, was a propaganda weapon, and was even part of our international policy.

During the Cold War, especially, when there was genuine concern in the United States about which type of society would survive, each Olympic Games was a safe way of comparing freedom with totalitarianism. It was much better than nuclear warfare, and was, therefore, a decent indicator of superior national prowess.

When the U.S. Hockey team defeated the Soviets in Lake Placid in 1980, their victory seemed like a victory against all totalitarian communisms. And there was no notable mention that the victory would register in the medal count.

Today, in a “flattened,” post-Cold War world, the medal count is overkill. It diminishes each remarkable achievement of winning an Olympic medal, and it smacks of gloating. It is perfectly obvious which countries will win the most medals—the ones that spend the most money and commit the most resources to athletics.

There are other issues with the Olympic medal count. For one thing, it presumes that each country’s athletes are all “in it together,” and that the swimmers, basketball players, and equestrian riders are all part of a team that is competing on the same playing field with the others. The only truths in this are the uniforms that they wear and the flag under which they march into the stadium.

No other athletes competing make the sort of money that the NBA players do. While Jason Kidd can relax with his $16 million salary, other U.S. Olympians supplement their training with jobs at Home Depot.

Yes, Michael Phelps will earn over $1 million in endorsements this year, but the same cannot be said for most of his swimming competitors. While Denver resident Carmelo Anthony struggles with the burdens of freedom and a titillating nightlife, Dremiel Byers, his Olympic “teammate” sixty miles to the south, in Colorado Springs, will be competing for a Greco-Roman wrestling medal while serving as a member of the military. The playing field is not level.

In addition, medal counting nationalizes and makes over-competitive the optimistic and peaceful idea of different countries coming together for two weeks of athletic events. There is certainly competition, but it is based on the principle that bringing these countries together for sport for two weeks, hoping to minimize political and military conflicts, will make the world a better place.

The fact that the United States, Burundi, the Cayman Islands, and Papua New Guinea are all competing together under the same torch is simple and wonderful enough. We will be watching and reading about the victories themselves—drawing to obvious attention the fact that some countries are larger, wealthier, and better at sports than others is excessive.

Speaking of money, the urge to win medals is having negative effects on national economies around the world. Hua Ming, for the Epoch Times, writes that China, while “around 100th in the world for GDP per person [believes it] can win over the U.S.—ranking in the top 10 countries for GDP—to become the top sports nation in gold metal totals.

Especially for a country that still has more than 200 million living below the poverty line; some believe China’s anticipated high medal ranking represents a poor allocation of resources.” China has spent nearly $730 million per year since 2004 to try to win the most medals in Beijing.

Among the other major “contenders” for high medal totals, Australia’s 2007 national sports budget was over $300 million (U.S.). UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown has repeatedly had to answer criticism, sometimes with national speeches, about the United Kingdom’s plan to spend nearly $600 million dollars to spur improved performance at the 2012 London Games.

The USOC’s operating budget has hovered between $100-$180 million dollars per year this decade, pretty impressive considering that it is a non-profit organization not funded by the federal government. Of course, it is almost impossible to calculate an American “national sports budget.” Our financial system doesn’t work that way and capitalism doesn’t play out in this country in a way to encourage vast national subsidies.

As an important furthermore, let us all remember that the Olympics strive for an ideal of athletic purity is greatly bolstered by the massive television coverage. There is an immense amount of money spent on broadcasting rights, money that goes directly to the IOC—traditionally one of the most corrupt and wealthy organizations in the world.

NBC will pay $894 million to televise the Olympics this summer—and they expect to make a profit. That sort of money goes a long way to overrunning athletic “purity.”

This “medal count” is unequally spread throughout the sports, as well, making the statistical measure insufficient. One hundred and nineteen (119 out of 956 total) medals are given in the sports of swimming, rowing, sailing, canoe/kayak, and track and field. These are sports that Americans are, traditionally, good at.

The Chinese are so determined to “catch” the United States that they created a program called Project 119 in 2001 to boost their medals in those sports. China is, perhaps, more wrapped up in this silliness than any other country. Of course, the Chinese may have more to gain in world standing and national self-esteem than any other country.

Whatever happened to the strong tradition of rooting for the underdog in this country? From last year’s New York Giants to the ’88 Dodgers to the 1980 Hockey team? That trend does not extend to the Olympics right now.

Yes, there are those occasional prime time looks at athletes from underprivileged countries that are meant to stir the heart (see the Eel, Eric, 2000 Summer Olympics) but also to subconsciously remind Americans of their overall preeminence.

With that being said, we don’t root for athletes from other countries against our own juggernaut. We have come to expect American athletes to break world records and win medals.

Besides, all of the medal winning is a poor substitute for making an effective, meaningful impact on an international level. Nothing Phelps accomplishes is going to help this country win back international esteem and goodwill. Or help with the genocide in Darfur, the starvation in Bangladesh, or the political crisis in Zimbabwe.

Here’s the crux, I think: the individual achievements of the American swimmers, the U.S. Softball team, the gymnasts, the track team, and so many more are truly remarkable and commendable—as athletic achievements. But not as evidence of American superiority. There are an almost infinite number of things that make this country great—starting with the Bill of Rights and Freedom of Expression, but we take our athletic dominance for granted.

I will be parked in front of the television next weekend rooting with vigor as Phelps, Katie Hoff, and Natalie Coughlin take to that fantastic luminescent bubble in downtown Beijing. But not solely because they are Americans. And not at all because it will prove that Americans are better than other nationalities.

I will be rooting for the athlete, for the achievement. For the fact that Taylor Phinney can ride his bike over twenty miles per hour. For the fact that Jeremy Wariner runs the 400 meters in under 45 seconds (I could do it in, two-and-a-half minutes), and for Jenn Stuczynski to literally fly in the pole vault. I’ll be keeping my patriotism in perspective. Saving it for a truly transcendent moment. Like peace.