What I've told some Cubs fans about Joe Maddon

 As I was driving home from a Mavericks game, I realized that Joe Maddon could be the one person able to erase the misery of the last 106 years or so.

He could make the Cubs winners because that's what he did with the Rays. 

He didn't do it all by himself. He came along with a management that had a clue without thinking it knew everything. It was an enlightened management that realized you didn't have to give everyone the highest salary of anybody at his position if you treated the players well. 

With Maddon running the team, the Rays were able to find players who were better than even they knew. 

The last step was for Maddon to convince the players that they could win. It took a few years. 

The situation he'll have in Chicago isn't a whole lot different from what he had in the AL East. But the Cardinals and Pirates are hardly as entrenched as the Yankees and Red Sox, nor do they receive the benefits that the New York and Boston teams did from baseball's hierarchy and the media. 

So it might take Maddon two years to do what he did in three for the Rays. 

If he uses his tenure there as the template, he'll spend the first year convincing players it's possible for them to win as a group. He'll be firm but positive with the players. He'll get them working together without cliques in the locker room. 

In the second year, he'll take aim at the Cardinals. There will be a game when the Cardinals throw at a Cub, and the Chicago pitcher will come back to take out Yadier Molina or some other key player. Or maybe a minor character. With the Rays, he did it with utility infielder Elliot Johnson taking out Yankees catcher Francisco Cervelli. In spring training. The uproar at the time from New York was deafening. Who were they to do that to the Yankees? 

But at a time when another AL East manager told me his team was afraid of the Yankees -- and I observed that the Rangers seemed the same way -- the Rays had no fear of the Yanks. 

I heard Maddon in his farewell press conference saying how great a contribution Elliot Johnson made to the Rays' success. 

By the third year, here's how the Rays as a team showed me they were together from the top of the organization to the bottom. When they'd come to Texas in '09 or '10, it seemed that the music in the clubhouse was almost always a song called "Low" by Flo Rida. Kind of a hip hop song. The younger players -- most of them were young -- and the black players liked the music. But there in the clubhouse, singing along with the lyrics, would be 38-39-40-year-old Troy Percival. I never heard Maddon singing it, but I'm sure he approved.

Joe Maddon is my favorite major league manager to deal with. That's the case with most of the people who come in contact with him. He is one of the most genuinely interesting and interested people I've been around. He can carry on a conversation on just about any topic without coming across as a know-it-all. He knows what he doesn't know, and seems willing to listen to others who might have the answers. 

Managers have different reactions to their pre-game and post-game sessions with the media. Some treat it like a visit to the dentist, let's get it over with (Ryne Sandberg). Most tolerate it. Some can be prickly (Ned Yost). Maddon seems to embrace the time. He never seems rushed, he always allows enough time so he doesn't have to tell the writers and broadcasters it's time to go. It begins and ends on its own time, and it's a give and take.

Especially with Ozzie Guillen and Jim Leyland out of managing, Maddon has the most interesting media sessions.

I'm pretty sure he's the same with his players. Always having time and making time for them, and always hearing them out and learning from them.

A story. I was in one of Mike Scioscia's pre-game news gatherings in the dugout before a game a couple of years ago. I'd noticed in the media notes that a couple of players were nearly ready to come off the disabled list. He didn't say anything about them, so I asked about their status. He said something about one player, then he said that the other one, Sean Burnett, would be shut down and would undergo season-ending shoulder surgery. By that time, the clubhouse was closed to the media, but the Angels beat writers arranged to get an interview with Burnett outside the clubhouse. While we were waiting to talk to him, the Angels writers thanked me for asking. I said something about how I just figured it didn't hurt to ask. I don't think Scioscia neglected to tell us on purpose. But I told the writers that because I worked with a lot of visiting managers, there were managers who wouldn't tell you anything, some who would tell you just what they were supposed to say and others who would volunteer information. The writers didn't seem to believe it and asked, "Who volunteers information?" I said, "Maddon." Then they all nodded their heads and understood.

We need weekend postseason baseball

Not exactly a news flash: TV ratings for World Series games are down.

My hope is that baseball's new hierarchy under Rob Manfred will not make the mistake of the outgoing commissioner, who figured that what baseball needed to boost interest in the game was more Yankees and Red Sox.

That feeling has led to adding an extra wild card (more chances that both the Yanks and Sox would get into the playoffs) and limiting the bonus money for off-shore player signings (because the teams making hay in Latin America and Asia were not the Yanks and Sox, who despite their millions lagged behind in international scouting).

Sure, Yankees-Red Sox games draw viewers in New England and the Tri-State area. But even -- maybe especially -- baseball fans in the other 90 per cent or so of the population are tired of seeing Yankees-Red Sox on Saturday afternoons, Sunday nights, Monday nights, Wednesday nights, on every network showing baseball.

There are plenty of other interesting teams and players. Hunter Pence and Lorenzo Cain shouldn't have to arrive in the World Series to be recognized more than Jackie Bradley Jr. and Francisco Cervelli.

Aided by a weekly thirst for gambling action, football has capitalized on making itself a national attraction without having to lean on one or two teams (the way baseball does) and a small group of players (see basketball and golf). NFL teams in places like Dallas, New Orleans and even Green Bay can gain a national following and recognition. And if the Chargers can cover against the Broncos, that can make bettors from coast to coast happy on any given Sunday (or Monday or Thursday).

Baseball's ratings problem isn't entirely that the games are on too long and too late, though those are factors. I watched just part of Game 4 Saturday -- the part that went something like this: pitching change, several minutes of commercials, another pitching change, several more minutes of commercials, another pitching change and I think more commercials. But even I had lost interest in the non-game by then.

It hasn't helped that all but one of the first six games has turned into a blowout.

The real problem has not been inaction during the games, but 1. inaction of any kind after the first rounds were sweeps or near-sweeps and 2. baseball's fear of going up against football.

Baseball has all but abdicated the weekend to pro football, college football and even high school football in some areas of the country.

Wouldn't it make sense to set up the World Series so there's at least the possibility so it could go over two weekends -- when more people could watch, or at least choose to watch either baseball or football? Or both, with a remote. Games could even be played -- God forbid! -- during the day so young, budding fans could watch. (Of course, today parents could record the night games so their children could watch while they're awake. I know, I know, advertisers. But for the future of baseball, what's more important: appeasing today's advertisers, or building a fan base that could attract even more advertisers in the future? I see the current approach as a result of the used-car-sale mentality of the recent regime.)

It didn't work so well this year to set up the schedule so there would be two weekends of League Championship Series. With each series ending early, there was no second weekend. And no baseball for so long that a pitcher who won the last game of a Championship Series could also start World Series Game 1.

The Chicago Tribune article linked above pointed out how bad the ratings were for Game 1.

Why wouldn't those have been bad? By the time baseball got around to playing again, on a Wednesday night, casual fans probably had forgotten there was even a baseball postseason still going.

Because of the lengthy delay between the two series, there was no baseball on Friday night (traditionally high school football night), Saturday (college football), Sunday (pro football), Monday (more pros).

Wouldn't it make more sense, if you're going to have a possible five-day layoff, to have that lag occur during the week rather than on a weekend abdicated to baseball's perceived enemy: football?

Schedule the Championship Series Games 6 and 7 for midweek, say Wednesday-Thursday. That way, if those series ended early, those games would be on a weekend. The more exciting Games 6 and 7, when at least one World Series competitor could be crowded, would generate more interest, especially as virtually the only games in town.

Those climactic games could create a couple of days of buzz for the World Series beginning Saturday. Because college and pro football go on all day on the weekend, it still would be possible to play one game each weekend during the day.

World Series Games 3, 4 and 5 -- two of which could be the final game -- on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday -- would keep baseball alive while football was dormant. And those baseball games could set the stage for weekend Games 6 and 7 on the weekend.

To Rob Manfred and baseball: Stop dodging football. Take it on during the time when more people can watch television.

Thoughts after Series Game 1.05

I didn't get to watch the first game of the World Series because I was covering the Stars and Canucks. Here's the edited version of what I wrote.
From time to time, I did peek at the Gameday. First, I saw that the Giants had scored three runs in the first inning and Hunter Pence had scored a run and driven in two. That made me think he had hit a home run (I couldn't scroll down as far as HR on the new-fangled version of Gameday). And that made   me think that if I had survived the Championship Series in either Inner League, I would have received credit at least for that run and the one he scored later.
Everyone on the panel for Fox's pregame show Wednesday picked the Royals to win Game 2.
That wouldn't square with the idea that this year's Royals are the 2007 Rockies reincarnated.
I would have thought at least one person would have favored the Giants, but I guess most if not all of them had been caught up in Rockies -- I mean Royals -- fever and picked KC to win the Series.
Here are a few reasons I think the Giants can win tonight (the leadoff batter currently has a 2-2 count in the top of the first).
Rookie RHP Yordano Ventura is pitching for the Royals.
Pence
Pablo Sandoval and his World Series history (remember his three-homer game)
Well, it's now 1-0, courtesy of Gregor Blanco, so the Giants may be making this too easy.
Buster Posey
2010 and 2012
I'm not really sold on San Francisco RHP Jake Peavy, but I believe he should receive enough help, or Bruce Bochy will know not to leave him in too long, for the Giants to be able to win in any case.
Hey! I remembered which other World Series this one brings to mind. Of course! The 1980 Dickie Noles and Willie May Aikens Series. I'll tell you why in a later post. I want to send this one before you begin to think I wrote it after the fact. All I know is it's 1-0 going to the bottom of the first.

Root canals get a bad name

You've probably heard someone say sarcastically, "That was as much fun as a root canal," or about their day, more seriously, "It wasn't as bad as a root canal."
That's the kind of day I had today. I had a root canal.
I was eating some popcorn at Tuesday night's Dallas Stars game when I crunched down on something hard and felt a quick, jarring pain in the upper right of my mouth.
"I might have broken a tooth on a kernel," I thought.
Then I spat out two small, hard things on to a napkin. One was a hard kernel. The other, about as big around but a bit longer, was part of a bicuspid.
So today when I went to the dentist, I found that I would need a temporary crown. And a root canal.
I'd had both before, sometimes when dentistry was less high-tech than it is now.
For example, McKinney Dentist has flat-screen TVs above every chair. When the dentist wasn't showing me the holes, decay and nerve in the affected today, the flat screen showed what looked like a tropical island, with rocky cliffs on either side of a sandy beach. That, I figured, was where the dentist will be going with the money I'll be paying for today.
That's not the first time I've thought that. A couple of decades ago, when my dentist gave me a partial bridge to replace one that had been there since I had parts of three teeth knocked out while playing hockey, he actually was going on a vacation to Jamaica or some other Caribbean island soon after.
Today's root canal really wasn't bad.
My greatest realization was that my mouth is like a TARDIS, bigger on the inside than it is on the outside. Here's why I know that. How else could the dentist fit in my mouth an instrument in each hand, along with something to prop my mouth open, some other rubber thingies to surround the tooth in question, as well as having his assistant rooting around in there with the hose, the leaf blower or the vacuum cleaner, whichever was needed at the time?
Ask yourself this, too. If you have a missing tooth, or a hole in a tooth, and you run your tongue over it,  doesn't that feel about the size of a pothole that could swallow a Buick Enclave?
When the dental team started loading things into my pinhole, the dentist said to let him know if there was any problem. How could I possibly do that? I wondered from underneath the gas mask and hoses stretched across my cheeks.
My greatest concern was that I would forget some of these pithy observations that came to me while I was high on nitrous oxide.
I probably have, but that concern is why I'm writing all of this and not yet about baseball and my fantasy teams.
Back to the dentist and the tropical island. I had been feeling pretty good because two checks came in the mail today. That was before a woman from the business office brought me my bill. It was for nearly 10 times the total of the two checks. And I'd worked about three half-days for those; the dentist worked on me for barely two hours today.
Anyway, my time with the dentist, the anesthetic and the nitrous oxide was kind of a seehearsmelltouchtaste one, two, three, four, five senses working OverrTIME.
Well, the see and touch parts not so much. I could see past the stuff stuffed into my mouth, and I still can't feel anything on the right side of my face.
The hear part wasn't so good, because I could hear the drill grinding my tooth to dust even if I couldn't feel that. I could hear the dentist asking the assistant for various drill bits. The 19 and 20 didn't sound too bad. I wasn't sure about the 30, but I survived it.
The taste was worse. Even if it had tasted good, I still would have thought about how it was equal parts water from the hose, those specks of tooth dust and drippings of Novocaine or whatever anesthetic had been injected.
But the worst was the smell. That sense was working overtime on a Sunday holiday. The odor of burnt tooth is not pleasant. And it added to the unpleasant taste.
My next appointment, to put a permanent crown in place and to collect whatever money I haven't yet paid, will be in three weeks with a different dentist. At that time, I'll be envisioning the dentist who worked on me basking on that tropical island. See? Root canals aren't so bad for some people.

Royals remind me of some similar teams

I was thinking that this October's Royals brought to mind two other World Series teams from days gone by.
One was the 1969 Mets. Another was the 2007 Rockies.
The Mets, because of the better-than-average defensive plays, especially outfield plays, Kansas City has been able to make. In truth, once Lorenzo Cain and Co. started making some plays, the network analysts went a little overboard in overselling some of the web-gem candidates. I mean, sure, plays such as Alex Gordon's catch on the warning track and run into the fence were good plays. But you can see a play like that virtually every day in the major leagues.
Where the Royals fall short of the Amazin' Mets is in the ridiculous plays that were made by players not  known for defensive skills. Amos Otis' plays in center field weren't a great surprise, but Google Ron Swoboda and see what it says about him. And if you can find video of his airborne diving catch (which I found for you; it's about 3:45 in, though I have seen more spectacular video of the play), just know that was almost totally out of character with his career.
Don't get me wrong. What KC's defense has done has been remarkable. And I've done research showing that the area of the game that correlates most closely to winning postseason series is defense. The team with the better statistical defensive record in the World Series -- measured by bases saved and extra bases allowed -- wins a higher percentage of the time than the better-pitching or -hitting teams.
Many of you who aren't old enough to remember the '69 Series can, however, remember the '07 Rockies. They got on an undefeated roll through the final games of the regular season to earn a playoff berth, then kept winning for all but one game before reaching the World Series. Once Colorado arrived in that championship event, the Red Sox swept the Rockies.
So on the one hand, we have a good defensive team. Probably a better defensive team than the Giants, from the limited amount I have seen them on TV.
On the other hand is a Cinderella carriage waiting to turn into a pumpkin before Halloween.
Today, I thought there was a third World Series team brought to mind by the '14 Royals. But I didn't write it down, it's late and I'm not fully thinking straight. Perhaps I'll remember it, and I can write about it before the Series begins Tuesday night.
* * *
Made it into the playoffs in two of my three Inner League Baseball fantasy leagues. Lost in the Championship Series in both leagues. Now, as the leagues' commissioners, I've helped the remaining teams re-draft and reset their rosters for the World Series. I'll try to remember to keep you posted on what's happening there.
* * *
Won one, lost one in my fantasy football leagues this week. Not a good week. I don't feel like talking much about either of them right now.
* * *
My ESPN fantasy hockey team, Texas Shooting Stars, has risen from the depths of a 20-team league to the middle of the pack. Some time when I have time, I'll let you know some things I realized about how a 20-team draft is vastly different from a 10- or 12-team draft. One thing that has developed since the season began is that I no longer have any Dallas Stars on my team. I dumped Ales Hemsky, who started slowly and now has been taken off the superpower power play where he started the season. Probably more of that in future posts.
* * *
I've kind of debated whether to get into an ESPN fantasy basketball league, but I think I owe it to myself to try to win another title. I'll keep you posted, and probably will be drafting within the next week. Saw the Mavericks and Grizzlies play tonight, by the way. Good game for Dallas C Tyson Chandler, who now appears able to shoot with greater range.

Homers help, too

Homers help, too

I realized after I made my last post that it might have left the impression that home runs aren't important.

That wasn't my point. Perhaps I didn't make well enough that point: Teams need more than home runs to make their offense strong enough to win in the playoffs.

Conversely, it's very difficult to win in the postseason -- or even get there -- without some kind of home run threat.

There's nothing wrong with getting an instant run with a homer. But it's not always easy to hit the ball out of the park against the better pitching staffs you'll see in the playoffs.

And the Giants and Nationals might still be playing if San Francisco 1B Brandon Belt hadn't led off the  top of the 18th with the home run that brought a 2-1 victory. If you look back at a lot of extra-long games in baseball history, they're won by long balls. And not always by the big boppers, but often by someone like Jack Reed or Rick Camp. Google them and if there's anything on the web about them it's probably that home run.

The Dodgers also won last night on CF Matt Kemp's tie-breaking homer.

If you can hit homers AND build big innings by stringing hits, walks and whatever else you can get -- see Baltimore Orioles, 2014 -- you're going to have a better chance to win. You can't just will a home run.

* * *

The Royals-Angels series is reminding me of the best Championship Series no one remembers. That's the 1980 NLCS, which the Phillies won over Houston three games to two. (That was 5 years before that playoff round was stretched to best-of-seven.)

The first two KC-LAA games, plus the Royals' wild card game, have gone to extra innings. The last four games between Philadelphia and the Astros went into overtime. The last three were won by one run. It was nail-biting fun that wasn't duplicated until Houston and the Mets went 16 innings to decide the '86 NLCS -- and there was tragic drama between the Red Sox and Angels in the other league.

Another forgotten feature was a line drive back to the mound that caused great confusion among the players and the umpires. Was it a triple play or only one out? There was no official replay in those days, but the play was resolved when the umpires went to the commissioner's box, where Bowie Kuhn made a ruling: Double play. Huh?

I did take the time to consult Google about that 1980 NLCS and found something else that surprised me. Through five games and 50 innings, there was only one home run, by Phillies LF Greg Luzinski in their 3-1 first-game victory.

Teams to do live by homers alone

Let's see.

Thursday got off to a bad start. My friend Bruno Sniders' stepson called to tell me that Bruno had died Wednesday night.

That set back my schedule for the day. The biggest casualty was that I didn't have or take the time to switch quarterbacks from Kirk Cousins to Aaron Rodgers. When I heard the early scoring from the Packers-Vikings game, I thought that omission would be costly. It could be, but Rodgers finished with just 18 points and change.

As Thursday's games played out, they reminded me of something that I observed about the Pirates' 8-0 loss to the Giants the night before.

My biggest concern coming down the stretch was that the Bucs' offense frequently depended solely on home runs, and not on building runs and sustaining big innings. The biggest example was during a five-game stretch when Pittsburgh scored just nine runs but still went 4-1 because the pitchers held the opponents to five. But even those meager nine runs, if I'm not mistaken, all scored on home runs.

My observations on the National League wild card game I expressed in a Facebook post: The Pirates were like McCroskey in "Airplane!". I guess they picked the wrong day to start walking people. I guess they picked the wrong day to stop hitting popups. I guess they picked the wrong day to have no range in the infield. Bottom line: The Pirates did almost everything poorly. It didn't help that Giants LHP Madison Bumgarner was in his best postseason form, which is very good.

Back to Thursday's American League Division Series games and home runs. The Tigers scored three runs, all on solo homers, and lost. The Angels scored two runs, both on solo homers, and lost. The dagger in Los Angeles' loss was that the Royals won that game on Mike Moustakas' 10th-inning ... solo homer.

Baltimore put a game-clinching eight-run eighth inning together with a series of base hits and misplays.

And don't you know today the Orioles overcome a 6-3 deficit with a four-run eighth built on hits and walks. No home runs. Four of the Tigers' runs scored on homers, but even for the purposes of this post, you can't really complain when three consecutive hits started their five-run fourth inning, which closed with J.D. Martinez's three-run homer and Nick Castellanos' solo shot.

But aside from that one inning, the Tigers couldn't put together any sustained offense. If they go home this weekend and do the same, they won't make it to a Game 5.

A few words about J.D. Martinez. Two years ago, he was the best player I saw in the Double-A Texas League and in the Corpus Christi Hooks' lineup. That's saying something, because one of his teammates was 2B Jose Altuve, who was almost as good in the Texas League as he was as this year's AL leader in batting average, hits and stolen bases.

This season didn't start out well for Martinez. The Astros released him. The Tigers signed him. After Martinez tore up the Triple-A International League, Detroit called him up and he almost immediately began to hit.

He talked about how he reconstructed his swing during the off-season. After he joined the Tigers, I asked him whether he went back more to the hitting style he used at Corpus Christi, and he said it was similar. He indicated that the Astros and hitting coach Dave Mallee wanted Martinez to hit more to the opposite field. He had trouble doing that, partly because he couldn't change his swing adequately and partly because he was resistant.

Another time-consuming task Thursday was running playoff fantasty drafts for the three Inner League Baseball leagues.

In those leagues, which began a year before Rotisserie Leagues, our starting lineup is one player in each of nine statistical categories. I'm in the playoffs in two of the leagues. In one of them, J.D. Martinez is in my lineup for RBI. In the other, he's my HR guy. It appears that I did something right.