The Wall Street Journal: "politics cleaner than baseball"
From today's Wall Street Journal editorial page (no link 'cause I no longer have access to wsj.com...damn you, Wall St. Journal dot com!):
What an astounding series of assertions, even compared with the Journal's editorial page "record" of hyperbole, lies and distortion (Bill Clinton's presidency was "forever tainted" by the "murder" of Vincent Foster, too, I suppose).
"...Mr. Bonds will have an asterisk next to every hitting record he sets." Oh. I was unaware that in addition to its other duties, the Journal was now responsible for determining what baseball records are legitimate and under what context they will be added to the record books.
"...his record of 73 home runs in 2001 now looks to have been artificially enhanced." Huh? The record was enhanced? That's an amazing leap of cause and effect. One that assumes that Bonds's alleged steroid use (yes, alleged, according to our basic laws that require more than the hearsay testimony of a couple of hustlers), was the sole cause for his surge in home run hitting ability. Never mind the fact that steroids do not improve your ability to hit a baseball. Steroids are intended to allow you to recover more quickly from strenuous workouts -- to work harder, even as you age. Since when does the Journal condemn athletes for working harder? (By the way, I put human growth hormones in an entirely different category, but that's not what is at issue with this WSJ column.)
But even assuming that steroids played a part -- maybe a handful of balls that might have fallen short of the right field fence were muscled over by the Popeye-like forearms of Mr. Bonds -- the Journal nicely ignores a number of other causes that may have had an effect on his record-setting milestones. Oh, like the fact that throughout the major league, teams have been building smaller and smaller parks because fans dig the long ball. And it has paid off. The Giants, for instance. According to Mike's Rants, the team hit 17% more homers over league average after they moved into PacBell in 2000, and the team slugging average rose 8% over league average. That's something we know. Things we don't know, but can infer is that, yes, the baseball is different than it was in Ruth's day and even Aaron's day. Pitchers who have been around since the mid-nineties can attest to that. And yes, expansion has diluted the pitching pool far more significantly than it has diminished the hitting pool The fact that the Yankees are seriously thinking of giving Eric Milton a big time contract is testimony to that. And, yes, pitchers are unable to pitch Bonds inside -- whether because of his armor-plating or his intimidating glare or both -- giving him the opportunity to extend his arms on anything thrown over the plate.
If Ruth had been playing today, I shudder to think how many homeruns he and Gehrig would have hit. And you can bet that Ruth would have ingested more than hot dogs if given half a chance.
Ah, and "on present evidence politics is cleaner than baseball." Flbtdhsarghvargish! Please. Love him or hate him, when Barry Bonds hits one of these moon shots into the San Francisco Bay, it is a beautiful sight. I've seen the goddamn pitcher turn around and admire it.
Congressmen Tom Delay and Bob Ney? Not so beautiful.
Oh, and one last thing. I find it ironic that very little is being said in the press about another of Conte's assertions: that more than 80% of MLB players are taking some form of "stimulant" before games. Inarestin' that. Would that be because the press would have to come clean and admit that that's been going on in clubhouses for, I dunno, 40 years? Pretty much out in the open, at least in front of the sports writers who now gush over the purity of the game's past. Talk about an issue for which fans, "who have a special affinity for statistics that let them compare achievement across decades and eras" can ponder. As an exercise, let's compare Barry Bonds with his godfather, Willie Mays, under similar circumstances.
This is all just a long-winded way of saying: WSJ editors, please save your righteous indignation for the next time Democrats threaten a filibuster to block one of the nut job judicial nominees Bush sends up for confirmation.
The revelations about Mr. Bonds and other baseball hitmen have emerged from the federal probe into BALCO, a San Francisco drug lab that allegedly sold illegal steroids and other substances. Whatever the legal outcome, one consequence is that Mr. Bonds will have an asterisk next to every hitting record he sets. With 703 career home runs already, he is poised to pass Babe Ruth next season and eventually catch Hank Aaron's 755 homers for the all-time record. It's hard to see how that achievement won't be forever tainted, just as Mr. Bonds' [sic] single-season record of 73 home runs in 2001 now looks to have been artificially enhanced.
This is all depressing news for baseball fans, who have a special affinity for statistics that let them compare achievement across decades and eras. It's also a black eye for the players' union, which has long resisted aggressive drug testing. Most amazing of all, and we hate to say this, but on present evidence politics is cleaner than baseball [all emphasis mine].
What an astounding series of assertions, even compared with the Journal's editorial page "record" of hyperbole, lies and distortion (Bill Clinton's presidency was "forever tainted" by the "murder" of Vincent Foster, too, I suppose).
"...Mr. Bonds will have an asterisk next to every hitting record he sets." Oh. I was unaware that in addition to its other duties, the Journal was now responsible for determining what baseball records are legitimate and under what context they will be added to the record books.
"...his record of 73 home runs in 2001 now looks to have been artificially enhanced." Huh? The record was enhanced? That's an amazing leap of cause and effect. One that assumes that Bonds's alleged steroid use (yes, alleged, according to our basic laws that require more than the hearsay testimony of a couple of hustlers), was the sole cause for his surge in home run hitting ability. Never mind the fact that steroids do not improve your ability to hit a baseball. Steroids are intended to allow you to recover more quickly from strenuous workouts -- to work harder, even as you age. Since when does the Journal condemn athletes for working harder? (By the way, I put human growth hormones in an entirely different category, but that's not what is at issue with this WSJ column.)
But even assuming that steroids played a part -- maybe a handful of balls that might have fallen short of the right field fence were muscled over by the Popeye-like forearms of Mr. Bonds -- the Journal nicely ignores a number of other causes that may have had an effect on his record-setting milestones. Oh, like the fact that throughout the major league, teams have been building smaller and smaller parks because fans dig the long ball. And it has paid off. The Giants, for instance. According to Mike's Rants, the team hit 17% more homers over league average after they moved into PacBell in 2000, and the team slugging average rose 8% over league average. That's something we know. Things we don't know, but can infer is that, yes, the baseball is different than it was in Ruth's day and even Aaron's day. Pitchers who have been around since the mid-nineties can attest to that. And yes, expansion has diluted the pitching pool far more significantly than it has diminished the hitting pool The fact that the Yankees are seriously thinking of giving Eric Milton a big time contract is testimony to that. And, yes, pitchers are unable to pitch Bonds inside -- whether because of his armor-plating or his intimidating glare or both -- giving him the opportunity to extend his arms on anything thrown over the plate.
If Ruth had been playing today, I shudder to think how many homeruns he and Gehrig would have hit. And you can bet that Ruth would have ingested more than hot dogs if given half a chance.
Ah, and "on present evidence politics is cleaner than baseball." Flbtdhsarghvargish! Please. Love him or hate him, when Barry Bonds hits one of these moon shots into the San Francisco Bay, it is a beautiful sight. I've seen the goddamn pitcher turn around and admire it.
Congressmen Tom Delay and Bob Ney? Not so beautiful.
Oh, and one last thing. I find it ironic that very little is being said in the press about another of Conte's assertions: that more than 80% of MLB players are taking some form of "stimulant" before games. Inarestin' that. Would that be because the press would have to come clean and admit that that's been going on in clubhouses for, I dunno, 40 years? Pretty much out in the open, at least in front of the sports writers who now gush over the purity of the game's past. Talk about an issue for which fans, "who have a special affinity for statistics that let them compare achievement across decades and eras" can ponder. As an exercise, let's compare Barry Bonds with his godfather, Willie Mays, under similar circumstances.
This is all just a long-winded way of saying: WSJ editors, please save your righteous indignation for the next time Democrats threaten a filibuster to block one of the nut job judicial nominees Bush sends up for confirmation.
posted by John at 5:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home