ND to MLB: Billy Sullivan Jr.

I hadn't intended to go this long between my first and second post looking back at Notre Dame baseball players who reached the Majors, but other things -- other posts, other interests -- kept pushing it back. I do hope to take some time to work ahead on a few to have in written and in reserve to keep things fresh around here.

These "ND to MLB" posts won't have any particular order to them. I'll choose who to feature on a whim, or if something leads me to a certain player or inspires me. That's the case with Billy Sullivan -- actually, that would be Billy Sullivan Jr., as it turns out.

Somehow, when I first searched eBay for a Billy Sullivan item, I neglected to double-check the years involved. Most of the lots available are for the elder Sullivan, the catcher who made his name for the early-20th Century White Sox. So without cross-checking, I went ahead and bought a 1961 Fleer card showing Sullivan in a blue Chicago uniform, arms reaching out as if awaiting a hug, catcher's mitt on his left hand.

Somewhere along the line, though -- and after I'd received the Fleer card -- I realized that the famous Sullivan of the early 1900s was not the one who played at Notre Dame. Both played catcher, and both had stints with the White Sox, but the son debuted, with Chicago, in 1931, while his dad played his last game in 1916. Thankful that the Fleer card wasn't too expensive, I shrugged it off and came across a reasonably priced autographed index card to serve as my Billy Sullivan, ND '31, artifact. There was nearly another Sullivan for whom I would have had to track down a card or photo: Billy Jr.'s brother, Joseph (which is also the middle name of both Billy Sr. and Jr.), turned down a contract offer from the White Sox to pursue a law career (as noted in the penultimate paragraph of this bio).

Sullivan bounced around during his career, playing for the White Sox, Reds, Indians, Browns, Tigers, Dodgers and Pirates, with his longest stint the three years with Chicago to begin his career. With St. Louis in 1938, he had the lone hit (a bunt single, according to Cappy Gagnon in Notre Dame Baseball Greats) in the first of Bob Feller's 12 career one-hitters.

What prompted me to go with Sullivan now was a recent post on Seamheads discussing Sullivan Sr.'s curved bat, which had been passed down to Junior. It's a fascinating read, so I encourage you to check it out. I also learned from that post that the Sullivans were the first father-son duo to play in the World Series, Billy Sr. in 1906 with the White Sox, Junior in '40 with the Tigers. And because that bit of trivia couldn't happen until the offspring reached the Fall Classic, it was Billy Jr.'s accomplishment that established the precedent -- another notable Major League moment for a Notre Dame man.

Finally, just as I was finishing up this post, I went searching for a photo of Billy Jr. to include and came across an amazing collection of artifacts obtained at an estate sale after Sullivan's death in Sarasota, Fla. (scroll down below the photos or search for "Billy Sullivan Jr." for the beginning of the archive).

Among the highlights:

If I ever needed confirmation that the index card I bought was signed by Billy Sullivan Jr., I think this contract provides a pretty strong case.

Billy Jr. had a copy of the same Fleer card of his father that I bought.

A letter from Hank Greenberg.

A new phone number announcement from Hank Greenberg's wife, Caral (nee Gimbel, of the Gimbel's Department Store family).

There's so much more to look at it could take all afternoon. It's amazing, some of the things you can find when you're least expecting it.

Billy Sullivan, 1942, from Crosley-Field.com

Hitless, again

Another night, another no-hitter.

This time it was Matt Garza, finally putting the Rays on the right side of zero-hit history after four instances of being held without a hit -- three of them in the past year. Tampa Bay is the first team to experience both sides of a no-hitter in the same season since the Expos, Orioles and White Sox of 1991, the second successive year of a record seven no-hitters. The Rays are also the first club since the 1917 White Sox and Browns to be involved in three in the same season; incredibly, those two clubs both did it, against one another -- two no-nos for the Browns over the White Sox and one for Chicago over St. Louis.

The five no-hitters at this date in the season is the most since 1990, the first year of seven, when five were in the books by June 29, the day Dave Stewart and Fernando Valenzuela each pitched one. And that reminded me of this project:

That's a collage I made sometime during the 1990-91 offseason, using the two-page spread from (I believe) Beckett Baseball Card Monthly (hence the reference to a 660-card set) as the inspiration. The drawings are mine, with Nolan Ryan's taken from the game itself, after which his teammates carried him off the field.

Though the seven no-hitters have stood out in my mind this year as the record, until I went looking for this drawing, I'd forgotten that, at the time, 1990 actually saw nine no-hitters. Down there on the left are Andy Hawkins and Melido Perez, who were each credited with no-hitters that were later rescinded. Hawkins, of course, no-hit the White Sox in Chicago on July 1, but lost, 4-0, after a four-run eighth filled with walks and errors. And just 11 days later, Perez held the Yankees without a hit in a complete-game, 8-0 win at Yankee Stadium -- in a game called after six innings because of rain. The Yankees starter and losing pitcher? Hawkins, again. But after a 1991 rule change that required pitchers to throw at least nine innings to qualify for a no-hitter, Hawkins' and Perez's games were stricken from the records.

Here are close-ups of the rest of the individual drawings:

Mark Langston and Mike Witt, April 11. Angels 1, Mariners 0.

Randy Johnson, June 2. Mariners 2, Tigers 0.

Nolan Ryan, June 11. Rangers 5, A's 0.

Dave Stewart and Fernando Valenzuela, June 29. A's 5, Blue Jays 0 and Dodgers 6, Cardinals 0.

Terry Mulholland, August 15. Phillies 6, Giants 0.

Dave Stieb, September 2. Blue Jays 3, Indians 0.

I particularly remember Stieb's happening because it's my birthday and we were at that day's Mets-Giants game at Shea Stadium -- where the teams combined for 20 hits. Either they announced it at Shea or we heard about it on the radio on the way home. I used to say I was at the ballpark the day Stieb threw his no-hitter. Not the same ballpark, but a Major League ballpark.

2008 preview: AL Central

DETROIT TIGERS

In general

This is probably the most-improved team in baseball; certainly in the American League. Not only did the Tigers add an ace-quality pitcher -- and a left-handed one at that (Dontrelle Willis, of course) -- but they also got one of the game's top young third basemen in the deal (Miguel Cabrera, natch), all without giving up anyone who would've been a key part of the Opening Day lineup. Add in the acquisitions of a superb defensive shortstop (Edgar Renteria) and more-than-capable left fielder (Jacque Jones), and you've got upgrades at four spots, plus a lineup that will bat a former MVP eighth or ninth (Ivan Rodriguez). The trade that brought in D-Train and Miggy C. may have cemented the Twins' decision to trade Johan Santana. Detroit won 88 games last year, though it was still eight games behind Cleveland. These moves could very well make up those eight games, but if not, they could surely secure a Wild Card spot, thereby potentially blocking the Yankees from the playoffs. Go Get 'Em, Tigers!

What I look forward to seeing

Can the Tigers score 1,000 runs? That seems to be the over/under everyone is setting for this latest Murderers Row. (Are we still allowed to say that? The PC police haven't come out against that yet, have they?) What will Justin Verlander do for an encore after his 18-6, 3.66 season? In a record seemingly created just for him, the young right-hander is the only pitcher in baseball history to throw a no-hitter, start a World Series game, be a Rookie of the Year and an All-Star in his first two seasons, according to The AP. Is Curtis Granderson the closest thing this generation has to Willie Mays? I mean, he did become the first player since Willie Mays to post 20 homers, 20 doubles, 20 triples and 20 stolen bases in the same season in 2007. Does he reach 30-30? Can he set a post-Dead Ball Era record with 27 triples? Not since Kiki Cuyler's 26 in 1925 has anyone hit that many, and all the higher figures came no later than 1912.

CLEVELAND INDIANS

In general

Ninety-six wins won the division last year, though 89 would've gotten it done. But it may take that 96 in 2008. The Indians lost little (Kenny Lofton and Trot Nixon), though they gained little (Masahide Kobayashi, Jamey Carroll and Jorge Julio). Provided everyone stays healthy, we should see more of the same from the Tribe in '08. Having Travis Hafner and David Dellucci fully healthy will be a bonus, and a full season of Franklin Gutierrez will push the aging Casey Blake down to the ninth spot in the batting order. Grady Sizemore sets the table once again, but Asdrubal Cabrera will occupy the No. 2 spot from the outset.

On the mound, Cy Young winner C.C. Sabathia will be pitching for a contract -- as we'll hear each and every time the Indians appear on national TV. Along with the contract Santana signed and what it could mean for C.C. But what will Fausto Carmona bring for an encore from his breakout season? Another 19-8 campaign would be a lot to ask for, so can he put up 14-15 wins? That would be a good mark to hit. But after those two, you have Jake Westbrook, who underwhelmed in 2007 with a 6-9 record; Paul Byrd, who somehow won 15 games without ever throwing a pitch faster than 78 mph; and young lefty Aaron Laffey, who made his debut last August. And therein I think lies the difference between the Tigers and Indians. Cleveland doesn't have the offense to match Detroit, and the Tribe's bottom three in the rotation don't make up the difference -- nor do they match up well with the Tigers' bottom three, whatever the combination of Kenny Rogers, Jeremy Bonderman, Willis and Nate Robertson it turns out to be.

What I look forward to seeing

Sizemore. I drafted the guy on my fantasy team in '06 and enjoyed the emergence, and I like what he brings to the game. He's fun to watch. There's Sabathia, too. How does he fare with the expectations and pressure of coming off a Cy Young Award and playing through the final year of his contract? That's a pretty hefty duo with which to deal. I'll also keep an eye out for the return of Shin-Soo Choo, who may have an even bigger assignment in his future. I'm also curious to see just how tight this AL Central race is, and whether the runner-up in the division has enough to beat out the AL East runner-up for the Wild Card. Last year, the Yankees beat out the Tigers for the extra spot -- and then lost to the Indians in the Division Series. This year, the Yankees could be fighting the Indians for that last spot in the American League playoff bracket.

CHICAGO WHITE SOX

In general

Getting through the middle of the White Sox lineup is going to be a chore this year, especially in Chicago. From Jim Thome at No. 3 to Paul Konerko to Jermaine Dye to Nick Swisher, you've got four likely 30-home run hitters (Thome and Konerko passed that mark last year, Dye hit 28 and Swisher hit 22 while playing half his games in power-sapping Oakland) who will make any at-bat with runners on base a scoring opportunity. And there's balance between left-handed hitters and right, so playing the matchups won't usually be an option. In front of Thome, you've got the still-developing Jerry Owens and the veteran Orlando Cabrera, who hit .301 and OPSed (is that a verb yet?) a decent .742 for a No. 2 hitter. In the potent Angels lineup, he scored 101 runs and drove in 86, which he could somewhat easily repeat here. The bottom third will snuff some rallies, though, with A.J. Pierzynski followed by either the back-from-injury Joe Crede or the up-and-coming Josh Fields and the yet-to-be-determined Danny Richar (or Jose Uribe, who will vie for the second-base gig now that Cabrera has subplanted him at shortstop).

Mark Buehrle leads the staff, but other than his no-hitter last year, he turned in a pedestrian 10-9 campaign with a respectable 3.63 ERA and parlayed that into a $50-million contract. It remains to be seen just whether that was a bargain or overpayment. Javier Vazquez rebounded a bit with a 15-8, 3.74 season, including 213 strikeouts in 216 innings. But then they're looking at John Danks, Jose Contreras and Gavin Floyd, who combined to go 17-35 in 2007, with each pitcher's ERA above 5.00. I'll always have a soft spot for Floyd, the former top pick of the Phillies who spent the 2002 season at Class A Lakewood, but this is the season in which he has to emerge as a middle-of-the-rotation starter, or he could be cemented as a bust. And to think that he was once looked at as a No. 1 or 2 starter, at worst.

What I look forward to seeing

Continuing with a theme, I do want to see what Floyd can do. This is the turning point for his career. We'll know what kind of pitcher he's going to be before 2008 is out. I want to see how Swisher does in a new environment, one that plays more to his strengths -- gap power, for one -- and puts him closer to his Ohio roots (with at least nine trips to his home state each season). He's also one of the remaining "stars" of Moneyball, along with Joe Blanton, whom the A's drafted that year. One of the signature draftees, catcher Jeremy Brown, announced his retirement recently, citing family reasons as much as his progress -- or lack thereof, save for five games in the bigs -- through the Oakland organization.

MINNESOTA TWINS

In general

With Johan gone, anyone want to guess Minnesota's Opening Day starter? No, they're not pushing Francisco Lirano back from Tommy John surgery to take the assignment. Scott Baker anyone? Yeah, it's him. Considering what the Tigers did to improve and what the Indians didn't do (take any significant steps backward) -- and that Minnesota finished 17 games behind Cleveland and nine behind Detroit in 2007 -- the Twins had to trade Santana. They weren't going to win with him this year, so they might as well set themselves up for the future. Outfielder Carlos Gomez is the most Major League ready, though right-hander Phil Humber could be close. Minor league pitchers Kevin Mulvey and Delois Guerra are tougher to peg. But then, when the Twins dealt Pierzynski to the Giants and got minor leaguers Lirano, Joe Nathan and Boof Bonser in return, everyone thought they were crazy for dealing an All-Star catcher for three unknown bush leaguers.

So the Twins enter 2008 with Gomez in a starting role for the first time, leading off with his career OBP -- albeit truncated, still-getting-started career -- a measley .288. But he's got plenty of speed (with the Mets, it was said he was faster than Jose Reyes) and can make contact. He'll run down everything in center field -- though whether he'll make Twins fans forget Torii Hunter is a longshot, because he won't be the run-producer at the plate that Hunter was -- and has a good arm. Once he makes consistent contact and finds the gaps with regularity, he could be a threat at the top of the order. Beyond Gomez, it's a formidible stretch of Joe Mauer, Delmon Young, Justin Morneau and Michael Cuddyer, plus Jason Kubel another year removed from knee surgery. The bottom third, however, leaves us with Brendan Harris, Mike Lamb and Adam Everett, then a return to Gomez. So Mauer may have to be a bit of a table-setter at times this year.

Beyond Baker, the Twins are looking at Bonser, Liriano, Livan Hernandez and Kevin Slowey, though he may have to win the fifth spot. I can't say there's anyone in that rotation that scares me, though I was hoping the Mets would sign Hernandez through much of the offseason -- until they landed Santana. He'll eat up innings, but he gives up a lot of hits, so he needs a good defense behind him. I'm not sure the Twins have that anymore, not without Hunter.

What I'm looking forward to seeing

Liriano is the big question. Is he back? Or when will he be? Though it probably won't happen this year, can he make Twins fans forget -- at least a little -- about Santana? Morneau and Cuddyer are secured with long-term contracts now, so their relationship in the lineup will be interesting to watch. They, along with Mauer, could be anchoring the Twins' lineup for the next decade. And then there's Delmon Young, a former overall No. 1 pick who gets a fresh start in Minnesota. He played well last year, but he may never have put his minor league transgressions behind him had he stayed in Tampa Bay.

KANSAS CITY ROYALS

In general

The Royals have a good young trio in Mark Teahen (a product of the three-way trade that sent Carlos Beltran to the Astros), Billy Butler and Alex Gordon. New Jersey-bred David DeJesus leads things off, but he'll never replace Beltran's production. He's just not that kind of player. Mark Grudzielanek bats second and provides the veteran leadership, because the other veteran in the lineup is Jose Guillen, and while he'll bat cleanup (after his 15-day suspension to start the season), provide power and be an anchor in the lineup, I'm not sure what kind of clubhouse leader or example he'll be for the young core.

On the mound, Gil Meche was signed last year for $55 million, and everybody laughed. But his 3.67 ERA should have been good for a 13-9 record, not the 9-13 he turned in. After one season, at least, it doesn't look like such a bad deal. We'll see what the next four bring. He's followed by 2007 Rookie of the Year contender Brian Bannister (who may have been the difference between an NL East title and The Collapse for the Mets last year had they not traded him) and former prospect Zack Greinke, who has returned to the rotation and seems to be realizing his potential after dealing with some personal issues. Brett Tomko and Jorge De La Rosa top off the rotation, but their 12-24 combined record in '07 gives you an idea of what to expect this year.

What I'm looking forward to seeing

I'm always watching the Jersey guys (and the Notre Dame guys), so I'll watch DeJesus closely. He's solid, Brett Butler type of player, I think. Gordon had a rough rookie campaign, hitting just .247 with 15 homers and 60 RBIs after many expected him to make it a close AL ROY race with Daisuke Matsuzaka, if not run away with it. And Teahen needs to bounce back after following his 2006 season of 18 homers and 69 RBIs with just seven and 60 in '07. And of course there's Guillen, who has made things interesting in several of his previous stops and who opened his Royals tenure with a wig earlier this week.

Hawk and Jackson are just gone

In watching baseball at work, I have the privilege -- or the chore -- of listening to all of the various broadcasting teams around the country. The Dodgers' Vin Scully remains the cream of the crop and the last of the legends. There will never be another like him. Ever. Scully continues to fly solo, calling the game as a one-way conversation with the fans, no partner necessary.

Others I am fond of for their alertness and knowledge (the Mets' team of Gary Cohen and Ron Darling) or their wackiness and insanity, at least in blowouts (Boston's Don Orsillo and Jerry Remy). WGN's Len Kasper and Bob Brenly are solid, though not spectacular, and Arizona's Daron Sutton and Mark Grace are just nuts.

But the ones I can't stand are the extreme homers, the announcers who bleed the team's colors and make no effort to be impartial. Actually, forget impartial, because these days, fans want their announcers to be favorable toward their teams, and it's not all that bad if they skew a little toward the home team. Honesty would be nice, though. What I can't stand are the broadcast teams that argue on the air that a close play that went against their team should have gone in favor of it, but then when replays clearly show the call to be correct, they make no effort to correct themselves and basically ignore the video evidence in front of them -- and in front of the millions of fans watching.

Among those that are tough to listen to, in ascending order of pain are the Marlins' Rich Waltz and Tommy Hutton, the Nationals' Bob Carpenter and Don Sutton and the White Sox duo of Ken "Hawk" Harrelson and Darrin Jackson.

Harrelson and Jackson clinched the title on Sunday.

Check out the video clip "Guillen gets ejected" at the top of the White Sox game story. It's four minutes and 20 seconds long, but in the first 10 seconds or so, you can see the play develop and understand what is going to happen and what the call should be. Feel free to watch it yourself before reading further. See if you can spot what Harrelson and Jackson refused to see.

In the final four minutes of the clip, Harrelson and Jackson don't even come close to grasping what has happened, don't notice through their black-and-white rage that the umpires are correct, or make an effort to glance at their replay monitors which, if the guys in the truck were doing their jobs, would show them the play over again. Though Comcast SportsNet shows several replays during the clip, none of them show the runner rounding second. Had they done that, perhaps the announcers -- OK, at least the fans -- would've seen the play and understood why there was a reversal.

At the 8- or 9-second mark, you can see the Cubs runner rounding second, Angel Pagan, come in contact with the White Sox shortstop, Juan Uribe. The umpire in the foreground, the third-base ump, raises his arms and points toward second base. He's calling obstruction on Uribe. Perhaps he should have been more forceful with his call, making more noise and stopping the play dead. Instead, the White Sox play it out, the Cubs get caught in several rundowns -- "pickles" as Harrelson insists on calling them, like he's watching a bunch of 8-year-olds in Lincoln Park -- and two outs are made. Or seem to be made.

Immediately after the play is over, crew chief Joe West, the second-base umpire, calls the umpires together to discuss what happened. When they start putting Cubs back on the bases, Harrelson and Jackson begin to grow outraged. It's hilarious, really. Harrelson calls it "B.S." several times; Jackson tries to say the umpires didn't adhere to their individual responsibilities and someone missed the call. The whole time, like in a movie, those of us who noticed the obstruction can only laugh at their homerism or frown at their stupidity.

The Chicago Tribune's Teddy Greenstein was on top of it, too. In fact, at the end of the column, Greenstein quotes Harrelson after he'd finally noticed a replay, a comment that came after the clip on MLB.com ended: "Anytime I've ever seen an obstruction play, they call a dead ball. A dead ball means that everything stops right there." That may be true, Hawk, and that may be on the fault of the third-base umpire for not screaming the play dead immediately. And it may be in part because Pagan and Felix Pie, who was tagged out at home, are rookies and likely more prone to running the play out without a more forceful call from the men in blue.

At the 2:28 mark, Jackson says that if there was ever a case for instant replay in baseball, this play would be a good example of the need for it. Unfortunately for them and other White Sox fans, in this case, instant replay would've showed the umpires got it right in the end, which should be all that matters, no?

At the end of the clip, Jackson says, "I just don't know what they could have been looking at. It was really a straightfoward, simple play."

It certainly was -- and you guys got it wrong.

On draft picks and jerseys

Updated...

Some quick hits, because I suck at consistency and I'll be away for a few days:

This is what you get when Darryl Strawberry* is making your picks at the draft: You end up with Guillaume Leduc, a pitcher out of Montreal, who should be rushed to the Majors this season so that he -- Leduc -- can relieve El Duque and pitch to Paul Lo Duca. But maybe he'll pitch at Brooklyn this summer and take a toss from Lucas Duda while covering first base.

*OK, I know, he's not really making the picks, but still.


But then there's the Yankees. They strengthened their frontcourt with their first pick -- a 6-foot-10 hurler with elbow issues, Andrew Brackman out of North Carolina State. I guess with so many pitching injuries this season, they thought that was how pitchers are supposed to look.

Later, they took a hurler out of the Savannah (Ga.) College of Art and Design. Seriously. He comes with upside, though: He's really good at painting the corners and should be able to help decorate the new clubhouses at the new Yankee Stadium. I just hope his first words at orientation in Tampa aren't, "These uniforms are so 1920s."


I have to side with those who find the Pirates' Friday-night red-based ensemble a bit hideous. At first, I thought the jerseys looked sharp, but that was with Adam LaRoche in jeans. (Nice artistic reference by Uniwatch when it was announced.) Now, I do find them over the top, mainly because with the black undershirt, red sleeveless jersey and white pants, it's too much. It's like a flag, an XFL uniform or, even worse, one of those hideous "futuristic" designs teams wore several years ago.

The Pirates used to have red in their uniforms -- but then again, they also once had pockets. I'm pretty sure that design's not coming back anytime soon.


OK, this isn't good. The Mets are on a four-game losing streak -- the first time all season they've lost more than two straight -- and they now enter a stretch of six straight series against six different playoff teams from 2006. They'll become the first team in baseball history to do that against six different teams. (Two teams previously have played six straight series against playoff clubs, but some of those have included repeat teams.) And because they play the Padres by virtue of being in the National League, the Mets will become the first team in baseball to play the seven other postseason participants from the previous year. Good luck to the team that, some year, has to face all eight of the previous season's playoff clubs.

In other scheduling quirkiness this weekend, the Astros will become the first team to play both Chicago teams on the same trip to the city when they spend the weekend at Comiskey Park and head to the North Side on Monday. And the Pirates return to the Bronx 80 years after their 1927 World Series showdown.


It turns out that the winningest pitcher in the illustrious nine-plus-year history of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays is none other than Victor Zambrano. Scott Kazmir is nine back, which means -- with that team -- he could pass Zambrano in April 2008. But Zambrano's stature prompted one coworker to remark, "There are some relievers with 35 wins. Scot Shields gets like six a year."

As of today, Shields indeed has 35 career wins. Funny how that works. (It's not as fun when you break down their stats and see that Shields got some of those as a starter, but Zambrano got some of his as a reliever.)


Missed this the other day, but David Wright cashed in on Coca-Cola's buyout of Vitamin Water's parent company.

That's almost as sweet a deal as the owners of the Spirits of St. Louis negotiated with the NBA.

Counting down to pitchers and catchers

I know I've got a lot to catch up on. I still haven't finished the attendance comparison between the Nationals and Orioles and I have yet to go through my preseason predictions for each division to hold myself accountable for my rights and wrongs. That will come. For now, a few thoughts on the end of the season. And yes, the Yankees are still the last AL team to lose to an NL team in a game that "counts."

I hate Fox. I always will. They can give us crappy pregame blather, start the games at 8:30 and refuse to move up weekend games any earlier than 8 p.m. (after the pregame) and then they can take their horrendous ratings and deal with them. Fox has dumbed down baseball and it hasn't worked to draw in the viewers. Don't insult us with Scooter and over-the-top graphics and shameless promos of your own TV shows through the use of pointing out which stars who have no interest in the game were given prime seats and told to be in them in the fourth inning for the on-air shot and then allowed to go back to their hotels. It's bad enough that the network killed off the true game of the week and forces us to watch our own hometown teams on Saturday afternoons when we'd otherwise be able to do so when, sometimes, I'd just rather see Oakland and Anaheim rather than the Yankees and Blue Jays.


Bobby Valentine has a point, and I think it would drum up a lot of worldwide interest to see the champions of the two major international leagues face off in a true world series. I'd certainly watch, and I'd probably have more interest in seeing the White Sox and Marines than I did in seeing the White Sox and Astros in Games 3 and 4. A game between the Marines and White Sox that had more meaning than the untelevised exhibitions played by the Yankees and Mets on their respective trips to open the season in Japan recently would be more interesting than seeing the Mets and Cubs or Yankees and Devil Rays play games that count in the standings under the Tokyo Dome. Bob Klapisch is for it too, and he correctly posits that Bud Selig won't make an effort to at least explore the possibility. And yet, they think everyone wants to see a World Classic. It might be interesting, and I'll probably tune in, but if you were to give me the choice between an international competition every four years and a face-off between the champions of two nations every fall, I'd take the annual showdown.


Speaking of Selig, was there anything more revolting than seeing Jerry Reinsdorf fauning over his "Buddy" (Reinsdorf's term, not mine) after taking the World Series trophy during the awards presentation? Reinsdorf spewed some drivel about "the game" or whatever, and Selig stood there extending his lower lip over his upper, hands clasped behind his back, rocking on his no-doubt tassled loafers. (Speaking of the way this guy dresses, does he ever wear a suit, or does he always go with the khakis and contrasting sportcoat? No commissioner of the four major sports -- and I'm even including Gary Bettman here -- would present the championship trophy in anything other than a fine tailored suit, or at least something that looks like one.)

The owners put one of their own, Selig, into the commissioner's office the way George Bush nominates his cronies for political appointments. It's amazing how Bush runs the country so similarly to the way Selig runs baseball. Both chiefs come from the rich elite, protect their own, care more about the bottom line for themselves and their friends than the health and safety of the masses, and try their best to rule as a monarchy instead of a democracy. Between Fox and Selig, watching the All-Star Game and World Series can be as grating as it is enjoyable.


The free agents have begun to file. It's sad to see Mike Piazza on his way out of New York, but it's for the best. He was good, and maybe he'll do one of those one-day contracts, so popular in the NFL, to retire as a Met in a year or two.

Some random and not-so-thought-out predictions for free agent and other movements we'll see between now and late February:

Paul Konerko:Angels
Billy Wagner: Phillies (though I'd love to see him in blue and orange)
A.J. Burnett: Orioles (imagine him with Leo Mazzone?)
Jim Thome: Trade to White Sox
Ramon Hernandez: Mets
Manny Ramirez: Trade to Mets (something just tells me this one's going to happen this time)
B.J. Ryan: Mets or Phillies, depending on where Wagner ends up (I think he wants to close, not take closer money from the Yankees to set up Rivera)

Maybe I'll throw out more later.

Sox it to me

So my postseason predictions were dead on ... until the end of each league's championship series. So much for the Angels and Cardinals.

I had picked the Cards in six, but we're now at seven straight World Series losses by the National League. (If you want to believe the All-Star Game counts for something, that's nine straight AL victories that don't count in the standings.) The last time an NL team won a game against the AL with postseason implications was the Marlins' Game 6 victory in 2003.

I choose to look at it as the last AL team to lose to the National League in a game of postseason importance was the Yankees. And now, four starting pitchers who have worn pinstripes within the last three seasons are playing for either Houston or Chicago in this year's World Series.

Brilliant.

Anyway, I'd meant to write up a new World Series preview (since my teams weren't in it and therefore my previous "prediction" was obsolete), but after thinking about it a little last Thursday, the next time it occurred to me was Saturday night as I watched Jermaine Dye take Clemens deep and I didn't have a good feeling about it.

I suppose I was pulling a little more for the Astros, for the National League allegiance and the Roger Clemens factor too. I go back and forth on liking Clemens. He's been nice enough to me in the couple of brief encounters we've had. We've never talked or anything, but I've gotten a nod and a kind look.

[A brief sidebar, as Phil Garner just left Mike Lamb in to face Neil Cotts -- again. What is it with managers who get their team to the World Series, then, inexplicably, go against what got them there? I mean, it's not like they throw everything out the window, but why would you leave Lamb in to face a left-hander? At least he got a walk tonight. I remember the same thing happening in 2000 when Bobby Valentine said Al Leiter would be starting Game 1 of the Series against the Yankees, even though Mike Hampton had a full four days rest after the complete-game clincher in the NLCS because the Mets won in five. Valentine's reasoning was that Leiter had followed Hampton all year and he wasn't going to change that now. Well, start Hampton in Game 1 and Leiter in Game 2. My argument for Hampton in Game 1 was that he would come back to pitch Game 5 at Shea Stadium, where he'd hit and give the Mets an advantage over the Yankees.]

So no Series preview, but I don't know if I would've foreseen the White Sox' momentum continuing to this extent. Last year, you just had a feeling that the Red Sox would win those last four games after they'd finally slain the Yankees. This year, I know at least I wondered if there could be two such Cinderella stories in consecutive years. Two teams named for their hosiery doing away with their curses of 80-plus years in successive autumns.

Maybe it can all be attributed to Chicago's recent addition to the overhead compartment. The White Sox have taken to bringing a "Play Like A Champion Today" sign with them on the road. No wonder they're winning. The signs aren't hard to find: They sell posters at the bookstore on campus and the J.C. Penney at the mall. Still, the Sox got theirs from the home office.

On to the postseason

I guess in my dreams, I'm a real baseball writer. Check that -- I am a real baseball writer, in that I write about the sport here; plus I have written about it in a professional outlet regularly before, have done so on occasion since, and figure I probably will again. So as "real" baseball writers do, I feel compelled to reveal my postseason predictions.

I did this last year too, though I never went back to see how my predictions matched up with the actual outcomes. Since we have at least one team in each series returning to the postseason again this year (and six out of eight overall, in fact), I'll address last year's results this year.

With the postseason starting today, I had to get this post up first. By tomorrow, I'll go back and look at my preseason predictions for this season and see how they came out, plus I'll figure out what I think about the individual awards -- MVP, Cy Young, ROY -- for this recently completed season. It's the Cy Young races that have me stumped.

This is the first postseason since 2001 (Mariners, Indians, Yankees, A's, Braves, Astros, Diamondbacks, Cardinals) in which all the games will be played on natural grass. Without going back to figure out which games in Seattle and Houston that year (and in Seattle in 2000) were played with the roofs open, I can't say the last time all postseason games were truly played outdoors. But I can tell you that 1996 was the last time -- and the only time in the wild card era -- that all eight participants had open-air stadiums (Orioles, Indians, Yankees, Rangers, Braves, Dodgers, Cardinals, Padres).

Red Sox vs. White Sox
Do either of these teams feel good heading into the postseason? This is probably the best matchup for both, perhaps not in pitching vs. lineups, but at least as far as momentum and recent play go. Neither team finished the season on an up note. Sure, the Red Sox took two of three from the Yankees and, technically, tied for the AL East division crown, but they had a 3 1/2-game lead midway through September and couldn't close it out. And we all know about Chicago -- 15 games up in the beginning of August, down to as little as a game and a half a week before the season ended. They never relinquished first place, but they had to wait until the final series of the season to pop the champagne rather than putting away the division in mid-September.

Everyone says pitching wins in a short series, so while the BoSox are banged up, the Pale Hose will have Jose Contreras (15-7), Mark Buehrle (16-8) and Jon Garland (18-10) going in the first three games. Plus, Chicago's bullpen is in better shape. Will it be enough to shut down Johnny Damon, Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz when it matters? I think so.

Last year, I had Boston downing Anaheim in four games; instead they swept. This year, I don't know if the idiots have the mojo. Pick: White Sox in five.

Yankees vs. Angels
These two met in the Division Series in 2002 and the Angels, of course, pulled off the upset on their way to their first world championship. With the Yankees' two best pitchers down the stretch -- Randy Johnson and Shawn Chacon -- not starting until Games 3 and 4, I'm not so sure an Angels victory this time would be an upset. Anaheim's got their rotation set up with Bartolo Colon, John Lackey and Jarrod Washburn in that order and has a lineup that feels more cohesive to me through the bottom half.

Of course, the Yankees have the firepower, but the successful Bombers of recent years have had a solid, set lineup that's not usually this fluid. For tonight's opener, Robinson Cano has been moved up to sixth in the order, Bubba Crosby is in center and Bernie Williams is DHing. And that means Jason Giambi has to play first base. Yikes. I'm sure New York will slug one or two out, but they're going to have to do it against Colon, Lackey or Washburn, because the Angels' bullpen is the best among the four AL postseason teams and might just be the best of the remaining eight contenders.

Something tells me that, after this amazing run through September throughout baseball, we're not going to be treated to yet another Yankees-Red Sox thriller. (Frankly, my own personal allegiances would prefer no matchup than a Yankee-dominated one.)

A year ago, when the Yanks played Minnesota, I expected two strong starts from Johan Santana, which they got, but he only went five innings in Game 4 (allowing one run) after a stellar Game 1 win and Minnesota lost in 11 innings to end its season. "[T]he bullpen will probably blow one, and it could be the clincher," I said, and it was. Santana left with a 3-1 lead but Juan Rincon gave up four in the eighth and Kyle Lohse took the loss in extras. This time around ... we don't get that New York-Boston re-rematch. Pick: Angels in five.

Padres vs. Cardinals
At least the Padres saved face by finishing the season with a winning record. It was in the best interests of the game. The Phillies would have been able to give any of the three teams a better series than the Padres will give St. Louis.

Do I even need to go into further analysis? Even a weaker Cardinals lineup without Scott Rolen and a banged-up, aged Larry Walker will outperform the likes of Ryan Klesko, Dave Roberts and Xavier Nady. They still have Albert Pujols, who may end up having a Carlos Beltran-like postseason. For one series at least, Pujols should allow the St. Louis pitching staff to sort itself out -- i.e., how will Chris Carpenter perform in the spotlight, which Jason Marquis and Matt Morris will show up? Will Mark Mulder prove to be the missing piece? Can the bullpen patch the hole left by Al Reyes' absense?

I gave the Dodgers -- who hadn't won a playoff game since 1988 -- one win last year and picked the winner of the Los Angeles-St. Louis matchup to go on to the World Series. Both happened then, and I think both can happen this time around too -- so long as the winner of this series is St. Louis. With Jake Peavy, San Diego can take one game. Pick: Cardinals in four.

Astros vs. Braves
The only rematch from 2004 in the Division Series. Not too much has changed in Houston, with the exception of Carlos Beltran and Jeff Kent leaving. But in their steads, Willy Taveras has played a solid centerfield and become an adept leadoff hitter while Craig Biggio moved to second base and Jason Lane picked up the offensive slack in the outfield. A lot has been made of the Astros' rebound from 15-30 to win the wild card, but half of those first 45 games were played without Lance Berkman and the rest were played with a still-recovering slugger. The switch hitter was batting just .179 at that point, through which the Astros were 2-20 on the road. They won the final game in Chicago, starting a seven-game stretch in which Houston went 5-2 and Berkman hit .375 with two doubles and a homer. They also won two of three in Milwaukee and went 34-25 on the road the rest of the way.

I'm convinced the Astros we saw during the last two months is a more accurate indication of what this team is than the Astros we saw during the first two. I think their veteran experience will trump Atlanta's youthfulness -- Andruw Jones notwithstanding -- and their bullpen will give them an edge on the mound. The first two pitching matchups -- Tim Hudson vs. Andy Pettitte and John Smoltz vs. Roger Clemens -- are a wash, and should be two stellar defensive battles. (I'm thinking 2-1 and 3-2 games.) But then the Braves have to turn to Jorge Sosa for Game 3 in Houston while the Astros get to throw Roy Oswalt out there. Neither team has revealed a tentative Game 4 starter because you figure the one that's down 2-1 will go back to the Game 1 guy. If the Astros are up 2-1, they may still go with Pettitte to avoid a return to Atlanta for Game 5.

Last fall, I noted that Houston's best weapon might have been its momentum, which was enough to carry it all the way to a Game 7 with St. Louis. (Well, momentum and Beltran.) This year, the only team that can match the Astros' roll is the Angels. Both teams had to battle through September and managed to do so cooly and confidently and win going away. (In Houston's case, it wasn't "going away" in the sense that the team won the wild card by a comfortable four or five games, but it had to fight off the Phillies, who kept winning, and did so.) Last year, I tabbed Houston in three and it took five with each team winning alternate games. I think Andruw and either Hudson or Smoltz will be enough for Atlanta to win one ... but that's it. Pick: Astros in four.

White Sox vs. Angels
I could have picked both LCS to be a rematch of the 2004 contests, but I just don't have a good feeling about the Red Sox and Yankees. I'm not sure where this series will go, but I do wonder if Chicago's near-collapse will be a harbinger of things to come or a wake-up call. The White Sox could have coasted into the playoffs and gone soft; maybe the battle for the AL Central with the upstart Indians will prove to be a spark. I think the advantage in a Chicago-Anaheim series will go to the team that has an easier time in its Division Series victory, but since I pick both of those to go five games, both of which would be played on Sunday, the advantage might be to Chicago, which would get to stay at home awaiting the Angels' flight. But since I'm picking through the postseason from the start, I've got to make a decision now. The edge, at this point, goes to experience.

In the 2004 ALCS, I said the Red Sox needed two wins from either Pedro or Schilling, one from the other, and one from Wakefield. They got one each from Wakefield and Schilling, plus one from Derek Lowe and reliever Curt Leskanic. I also said they needed a win against the Yankees' bullpen and, well, Dave Roberts anyone? Only I had Yankees in seven. This time? Pick: Angels in six.

Astros vs. Cardinals
2004 redux. I like the Astros more this year, but the same goes for the Cardinals. Perhaps I'm putting too much stock in Chris Carpenter's ability to pitch this postseason, but there were signs and predictions of an emergence -- if not a breakout -- last season. An arm injury kept him out of any postseason games and he then went through this year living up to the potential that many seemed to expect to see this season. I think he continues that roll and if St. Louis can get by using him only once vs. San Diego, he'll be in line to make two starts and perhaps an emergency Game 7 appearance against Houston. It'll be another heartbreaking end to the season for the Astros, but if they can't put the Braves away as easily as the Cardinals do the Padres, Houston will again have to take its pitchers as they come in the NLCS. St. Louis won last year with inferior starters to Houston's top three, and even with a rejuvenated Andy Pettitte on the Astros, the Cardinals can counter with their Cy Young candidate.

Last time, I took the Cards in six, but it went the distance. I expect a repeat. Pick: Cardinals in seven.

Angels vs. Cardinals
I'll be rooting for whoever comes out of the NL -- with the exception of the Braves -- but I think this would be a stellar Series. Albert Pujols and Vladimir Guerrero in the same World Series? Could they each win a game with a walk-off? Mike Scioscia vs. Tony LaRussa? Those two chess masters wouldn't need Fox's drawn-out intros and extended commercial breaks to make a baseball game take four hours to play, so if we get a St. Louis-Anaheim Fall Classic, I expect at least one nine-inning game to end after 12:30 p.m. on the East Coast. The Cardinals looked listless in last season's sweep to the idiots of destiny, but LaRussa has had faux-dynasties in the past (see Oakland, 1988-1992). He's made four of the past five postseasons and could get there -- and to the Series -- again in 2006. So let's say he wins this one.

In picking St. Louis in six last year, I noted that since the wild card came along in 1995, only the 1998 Yankees have compiled the best record in baseball through the regular season and went on to win the World Series. I expected last year's Cardinals to become the second. Not so. This year, because of the freefall in Chicago, the Cards' 100-62 record was one better than the White Sox' 99-63. So maybe I haven't learned. Pick: Cardinals in six.

Black jersey plague

I have always abhored the alternate jersey phenomenon that has overrun Major League Baseball in the past six or seven years. While I've acquiesed and come to understand that it is, above all, a business, and alternate jerseys -- particularly black ones -- sell well, and these teams all need as much money as they can get.

I'll admit that, at first, it didn't bother me, but that was back when only the Orioles and the White Sox did it. They were the first. Sometime back around 1996, you started seeing highlights and pictures of the White Sox in a black jerseys with a classic "Sox" over the heart. And the Orioles had a policy in which that day's starting pitcher chose whether the team wore the home white or road gray jersey, or the alternate black. But the thing with both of these teams is that black is one of their core colors. The White Sox are black and white; the Orioles black and orange. A black jersey wasn't that much of a stretch, nor was it something new since both teams -- I believe -- wore black for batting practice. If that's not the case, then I admit I was misled in my beliefs on the origin of their alternate jerseys.

But then the other teams caught on, and it got out of hand. The A's started wearing their green jerseys (also an homage to their green and yellow tops of the 70s) and other teams followed suit, with a few holdouts. The Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, Giants, Braves, Marlins and Rockies never stooped to such gimmicks. Shortly after the Dodgers were sold to Fox, they wore their blue batting practice jerseys for games, and it looked ridiculous -- and many commentators and others said so. The following season, they had an alternate blue jersey made for the team, but they never reappeared after that campaign. Wonder why?

The Marlins, Rockies and -- alas -- the Red Sox have since relented, but to Boston's credit, they went with red.

What really gets me, though, is the teams that suddenly made black one of their official colors. The Mets were the worst offenders, I thought. They've always been blue and orange -- a nod to the Dodgers and Giants, who left New York without National League baseball in 1957. Then, in 1998, they decided to get into the ridiculous uniform game. If they did it, I'd hoped that they'd go with the classic blue batting practice duds they wore then. Instead, they sold out and added black to the mix.

It sure seems permanent now. In hindsight, I should've seen it coming with the ridiculous changes in 1997 -- ridiculous mainly because of the white cap they added. (Check out the Mets' uniform history here.)

The Mets hurt the most, but I cringed when the A's, for one year, didn't think green was good enough and made a ridiculous black jersey with "Athletics" written out in green script. The Royals did the same -- again, what's wrong with blue ones? -- and then teams like Texas and Seattle added black either in jerseys or, stupid Texas, in an ugly black bill to an otherwise blue cap.

The idiocy of it all became apparent on Sunday, when Mets catcher Tom Wilson wore the wrong one in Yankee Stadium. The Mets' road black jersey says "New York" across the front. The home one says "Mets." He packed the wrong one for the bus ride to Shea and didn't realize it until, apparently, a reporter pointed it out.

None of this would happen if the Mets would just get rid of the black jersey plague. I've come to terms with the white uniforms without the pinstripes, and I've always loved the road grays that have the city written out in a classic font as it was on the original Mets uniforms in the 60s. They'll still occassionaly don the pinstripes for random home games, but not nearly enough of them. And, as far as I can tell, there's no rhyme or reason to the Mets' uniform choices on a given day. Home day, night, weekend or holiday could be plain white, pinstripes or black tops. It could also be either white jersey with the black hat with blue brim, or the white jerseys with the classic (and best) all-blue hat. On the road, it's either gray or black jerseys, but always the black hat with blue brim. (However, all black jersey games feature the all-black hat.)

For those of you keeping score at home, that's five different jerseys and three different hats for a total of seven previously used and accepted combinations (all-black hat only goes with black jerseys, etc.):

1. Plain white/black & blue hat
2. Plain white/blue hat
3. Pinstripe white/black & blue hat
4. Pinstripe white/blue hat
5. Home black/black hat
6. Road gray/black & blue hat
7. Road black/black hat

Ridiculous. The Mets' colors are blue and orange. Their uniforms have pinstripes. Their hats are blue, all blue. The road uniforms are gray. That's the way it should be.

But until gangs go away, until teenage hoodlums stop thinking black clothes every day is the way to go, teams are going to bring out the alternate jerseys to make a buck -- tradition and color scheme be damned.