Hahaha, Good One. Wait, You Were Serious?

Warning: Extremely long and not all that well done.

I don't really like to pick on other bloggers too much. After all, we're all in this new medium together, spreading rebellion and damning the man and whatnot, but sometimes, I just have to. While the blogosphere gives everyone a voice and often leads to really intelligent debate and commentary, it sometimes turns out like talk radio and reminds us of why we should be damn glad that only 40% of the country votes.

Today's late-term sports commentary abortion comes from the blog "I'm Writing Sports," which prior to today, I'd never heard of. I'm sure the dude that writes it has never heard of us either, so we're at least starting off on even ground.

It's clear that the article was written yesterday around the point that it looked like the Cubs had finally overtaken the Brewers in the NL Central race. Now, let's get one thing straight: I actually may agree with this guy on some aspects of what he's talking about. Overall, though, all he does is complain about how teams don't develop their own stars "anymore" and just buy championships. Surprisingly, this blog post was not dated August 3, 1979.

I'll do my best to take the best of this thing and look at it FJM...er...YCS style, but I encourage you to read the original post if you're a really hardcore masochist.

For a minute there I was starting to think that the Chicago Cubs weren’t going to be able to buy their coveted National League Central title. After an amazing stretch that saw them win 33 of 50, they’re right back in the thick of things. I just hope that the Wrigley faithful can enjoy this. I know they’ve been suffering for a long time, but going for a title this way is like being a 99-year-old virgin and finally getting “lucky” at your local bunny ranch.

See what he did there? He set up the post and further drew you in with a snappy one liner about old people sex. Bill Simmons would be proud.

Call me old fashioned, crazy, or out of touch if you wish, but I fail to find the honor in going out and literally buying yourself the title.

While out of touch is probably a good start, I think a better term would be revisionist. The fact that you don't see the honor in a team doing everything in its power to win a championship is kinda dumb. Sure, you hear this argument a lot in sports, people complain about how the Yankees win because they have the most money, but the truth is, every single team would do exactly the same thing if they had that kind of scratch. Also, little known fact - GM's refer to their payrolls as "scratch."

Also, as to your being revisionist - I'll address this further down the road.

Now-a-days having an owner with deep pockets that’s willing to spend is more important than a solid minor league system. What happened to the days of Bird Dogs trudging around towns that no one knew existed beating the bushes for the next Babe Ruth?

I find an endless amount of humor in the fact that he actually used the phrase "now-a-days" in this article. I think Garrison Keillor writes this blog.

Also, funny you should bring up Babe Ruth. Ruth himself basically disproves what you're saying here about this being anything close to a new phenomenon. See, the way Ruth became a Yankee is because the Sox were almost bankrupt and needed to get some quick cash, or "scratch." So, they sold their best player to the team with the most money, who then proceeded to parlay having "the best baseball player ever," whom they "bought," into four World Series and 2 American League pennants.

Side note: did you know that despite having a 207 career OPS+ (seriously, read that again, that's not a typo), Babe Ruth only won the MVP once? And it wasn't the year he hit 60 homers, either, Gehrig won it that year. That seems insane to me.

Speaking of Gehrig and those '20's Yankees teams, there's something else I should point out. While many think of "buying" a team only in today's context of paying a ton of money for free agents, this has been going on pretty much since baseball started. What used to happen is that those "Bird Dogs" would find the best players, but most of the time most teams would find them. What would then happen is that the teams with the most money would eventually sign the best players because, obviously, they had the most money. That's how Gehrig, Mantle, Maris and the rest of the plaques in monument park got there. Serious, no foolin'.

With the modern system of scouting clubs rely more on common services and computer printouts than guys with a brain and a nose for the game.

This sentence follows the previous paragraph. Seriously. It seems really out of place, and I think Joe Morgan and Bill Plaschke collaborated on this.

Also, in re: "computer printouts:"

GM: "Well, what do you think, should we sign this guy?"

Scout: "I don't know, let me check the computer printout."

Goes over to giant 60's style computer with a ton of flashing lights and shit on it

Scout: "Well computer, should we get this guy?"

Computer: "100111100010100100001001"

Scout: "Get him signed, pronto!"

You don’t need Branch Rickey to tell you that a kid with a 98 mph heater might be a good prospect, but what about the kid that gets guys out with a 12-6 curve ball that breaks knees? That’s the grey area that gets lost somewhere in the black ink and white paper. You have to get to know a kid to understand his game, especially if he beats people with brains, intangibles and sheer guts. There are just some things that can’t be read on a radar gun.

No, but most of those things can be told via the stat sheets and stuff. Presumably, the kid with the 12-6 curveball that "breaks knees" has a gigantic K/9IP ratio, which should tell you he's pretty good. Also, the pitchers who beat people with "brains, intangibles and sheer guts" are usually relying on "great control." It's not supernatural.

In re: the '04 Red Sox: Boston might be a prime example of capitalism in sports, and sure they bought a title, but at least they didn’t go about it as shamelessly as the Yankees.

Now, I assume he means that Boston didn't sign guys like A-Rod and shit who were just the most expensive, but just for fun, consider this:

2004 Red Sox Roster - How Acquired
C Jason Varitek - homegrown
1B David Ortiz - from Minnesota
2B Mark Bellhorn - from Colorado
3B Bill Mueller - from San Francisco
SS Orlando Cabrera - from Montreal
LF Manny Ramirez - from Cleveland
CF Johnny Damon - from Kansas City
RF Gabe Kaplar - from Detroit
SP Curt Schilling - from Arizona
SP Bronson Arroyo - from Pittsburgh
SP Pedro Martinez - from Montreal
SP Derek Lowe - from Seattle
SP Tim Wakefield - from Pittsburgh
CP Keith Foulke - from Oakland
SU Mike Timlin - from Philadelphia

Of all those players, the Red Sox scouted and developed exactly one of them. 1. Jason Varitek. The others, they bought or traded for.

The Brewers are the last of a dying breed and the Cubs are the present and the future of sports. The scouted versus the purchased. The entitled veterans against the naïve new jacks.

Not true. See, teams like Milwaukee, Oakland and Minnesota will never have the kind of money that the Yankees, Red Sox or Cubs do. So, what happens is that they're forced to get a little bit more creative with how they assemble a roster. Maybe it's a few more bargain basement trades or a better farm system, but this isn't likely to change, ever. They'll always be behind monetarily as long as baseball has no salary cap. So, the small-market team is not a dying breed. Trust me.