Well following up on Hart's expert analysis of the AL Central, I thought it would be appropriate to take a step back and look at both Centrals, using Aristotelean analysis. What is Aristotelean analysis, you ask? Webster defines it as: Of or relating to Aristotle or to his philosophy. I hope that clears things up. Nonetheless here's a few reasons why I'm centering on the Centrals
1. They have fans that have highest rate of ugliness and stupidity. Unfortunately its mainly because Chicago White Sox fans skew the distribution.
2. They have the Stadium that not only has the highest homicide rate but also the most number of Domino pizzas per Capita. This is of course Detroit. I'm not sure if there's a causal story like people that kill other people tend to eat Dominos Pizza afterwards but its something worth investigating.
3. I see all of my baseball in the Centrals. When you think of baseball, obviously you think of me, Michael Cohen. However due to my Midwest Heritage and current location most of my viewing of baseball happens here, in the Midwest. As such by definition interest: love of baseball centers on the Centrals.
4. Radio Announcers. Baseball remains best when listened to via the radio. The Centrals have long and pantheon like list of famous radio announcers. From Jack Buck to Harry Carey to Herb Score to Bob Uecker. Today's generation of announcers are no less accredited from Tom Hamilton in Cleveland to Tony Danza in Chicago to Mr. Met in Pittsburgh (it was part of a trade).
Nonetheless given why the Centrals obviously are more interesting than the other division here's my Aristotelean analysis
Worst Off Season Ever
Houston - You can't lose Beltran, Kent and Berkman (for part of the year) and think your going to be ok. This is an old team that got another year older and a little bit thinner (paging Seattle) Maybe Pettite will be healthy the whole year, maybe Clemens will have another Cy Young performance but the margin of error is awfully thin for this team.
Addition by Subtraction
Also known as the "Ewing Effect" or I suppose in baseball the "A-Rod Effect". Get rid of a marque player(s) and re-tool the team. Both Chicago teams did that this season. ChiSox let big bombers Lee and Ordonez go (see Hart's recent post) and the Cubbies got rid of the middle of their line-up "hit home runs but strike out a lot" Alou and Sosa. Both teams are refocusing on consistent hitting and a bit more speed. Should be interesting albeit gaps in both bullpens could be their achilles heel.
KC Possibility?
This is not a reference to Kansas City this year. They blow. Big time. So does Pittsburgh. As such I'm not going to talk about them Anyway KC possibility means a small market team that if everything goes their way could be contenders until the last months of the season when they implode. This is Detroit, Milwaukee and Cinci. They got nice additions (Ordonez and Percival for Detroit, Lee in Milwaukee and Cinci got Honus Wagner). They also have a lot of potential (and probability) for serious injuries hamstringing their season. But if they can stay healthy, they can stay in the race.
Some of you I know, some of you I'm meeting for the first time
This relates to Minnesota, Cleveland and St.Louis. Really Minnesota and St. Louis but I didn't want Cleveland in its own category. These teams did a little reshuffling of their line-ups (in all three cases centered on their middle infield and pitching staffs). All are going to weigh heavily on some free agents (except Minnesota which apparently grows all their farm kids in some sort of super formula). The margin of error for the former champs is going to be a lot smaller this year and there is high hopes (like Dave Chapelle high in Half-Baked ) in Cleveland.
In conclusion all I have to say is that I saw your wife last night. Great little dancer. That guy she was with? I'm sure he's a close personal friend, but tell me, what was he doing with her panties on his head?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Dearest Michael,
I've known you for a long time but I have not known you in your current incarnation as blogger "Mighty Mike" C. I guess I'm full of rage today because, in reading your most recent post, I realized that I need to put a certain fallacious theory to rest.
Bill Simmons, aka Sports Guy, a funny gentleman on most other days, coined the "Ewing Theory." I must say, I still don't see how it works. The Knicks were without Patrick Ewing's services for all but 26 games during the 1997-1998 season and proceeded to drop from 57 wins and a 3-seed in the playoffs in the previous season to 43 wins and an 8-seed in the playoffs. When Ewing was again injured, this time in the 2nd round of the playoffs in 1999, the Knicks made a fluke run to the NBA Finals. Thus the genesis of the Ewing Theory. Interestingly enough, the Knicks only made it out of the 1st round of those playoffs thanks to Ewing's consistent 20 point/10 rebound efforts against the younger and stronger Alonzo Mourning and the luckiest of bounces on a last-second shot by Allan Houston.
Since Ewing's departure from the Knicks shortly before the 2001-2002 season, the team's record is a cumulative 154-174 (.469). For the 15 seasons he was a Knickerbocker, the team's record was 668-573 (.538). Care to explain to me how the Knicks were better off sans #33?
The joys of being a blogger or I suppose a sports writer is never ever using facts. While I don't necessarily buy Simmons Knicks better without Ewing, his classification scheme (ie Aristotelean analysis) is applicable in this case. I think both ChiSox and Cubbies think they will be better if they change their style of play and remove certain marque players similiar to what the Knicks logic was (ie moving to a transition team). Whether it turns out to be a succesful strategy is a enitrely different thing, altogether (its an entirely different thing)
But isn't the ultimate "Ewing Theory" moment when Keith Van Horn went pro, and then, miraculously, Utah made the championship game the year after w/o him in 1998?
AAARGH! Call it the Van Horn Theory then, or the Bledsoe Theory, since Drew got knocked out of Week 4 in 2001 and the Pats have won 3 Super Bowls since the day Drew lost his starting job. Whatever you do, don't call it the Ewing Theory or else I'll have to set fire to something!
Post a Comment