I meant to have this finished in time for the season opener; now the playoffs are on. Baseball is sure not a huge part of my mental calendar. I must go years without paying it any mind at all, as I think of Detroit and Pittsburgh as teams that sometimes win the World Series, which would put us in the '70s or '80s (though Detroit are still in contention as I write.)
The Thinking Fan's Guide to Baseball isn't making me repent my misspent summers, but it does have me wondering, "Do pitchers really get hit more often than batters?" Now I'm going to have to watch, and take notes, and maybe compile some stats.
I've been thinking about what I like about Koppett's prose style, and there are a couple of things. He has a great ability to describe action, which shouldn't be surprising considering that he's a sports writer. But far too many sports hacks rely on hyperbole and metaphor when what they should be using is that big workbench of sharp tools called verbs. Take this paragraph:
A pitcher actually tries to accomplish two things. He wants to upset the batter's timing, so that he can't hit the ball squarely. And, according to the game situation, he wants to induce the batter to hit either a fly ball or a grounder.
Accomplish, upset, hit, induce.
The other thing is that he talks sense.
Complaining about expansion is about as fruitful as yearning for the nineteenth century. You have every right to wish for whatever you consider the Good Old Days, but they're not coming back.
I find that the most entertaining bloggers have this latter characteristic. But it only comes across as naked assertion if unaccompanied by thoughtful example, some neat stats, and an interesting link. Which just goes to show that a good blog is like a good sports page. Brush up your Koppett, and they'll all kowtow.
Douglas