Great moments in OMF: Non-sports columnists columnizing on sports

(Moral of the story: Anything only known to us through black-and-white photos and film footage, probably not relevant to the present day.)

It seldom ceases to amaze why columnists who are not on a sports beat get to waste ever-shrinking newspaper space writing about sports. It almost always ends in mental cutaways to Barbara Bush saying to a reporter, "I'm embarrassed for you," or Walter Sobchak in The Big Lebowski bellowing, "Donny, you're out of your element!" That alone is usually enough to say, don't bother with behind-the-curvers.

Still, you wonder why someone such a columnist at the Toronto Star gets to cliché-monger his way through a fine whine about the Toronto Maple Leafs having the NHL's longest Stanley Cup drought among the Original Six teams, since the Chicago Blackhawks won for the first time in 48 seasons. It also covers a twit typist for the Ottawa Citizen using the World Cup as a device to betray his own aging white guy insecurity by recycling feeble footy jokes about "let's go to Nairobi to find out how to make a soccer ball out of garbage" and "stay tuned for Ghana versus Serbia!"

There are people who pull off the cross-over. Stephen Brunt can touch on universal themes through his books and columns. Earl McRae, whom it was privilege to count as a colleague, could do it with aplomb. There are people who are shifted from sports to "city side" to plug a hole. It's a very short list, though.

The practice could be justified by saying, "Well, sports affects people's lives and the mood of a city and everyone is entitled to an opinion." Anyone who writes a column eventually resorts to writing one about how they have no use for a particular sport (if memory serves, someone wrote a "I choose not to golf" column for the Simcoe Reformer one time, but at least it ran in the appropriate section).

It never goes the other way, though. A sports columnist does not get to say, "Screw writing about the Senators' salary cap situation. Today, I am writing about light-rail transit even though I am barely acquainted with the details and the paper has people with a much firmer grasp of the subject. It affects Senators' fans lives and everyone is entitled to an opinion."

Besides, most of the time, when the columnist ranges into sports, it's a gong show. Take it away, Royson James:

"Consider, since the likes of Frank Mahovolich and Red Kelly and Ted Kennedy, hockey’s best players have not worn the blue and white. Canada’s Team — the grand and glorious Maple Leafs — has failed to sign a single one of the game’s greatest players during all those championship-empty years.

"Wayne Gretzky may consider this his NHL home city, but Leaf team owners managed to scuttle any chance The Great One would skate for the home side. Bobby Orr, Mark Messier, Pavel Bure, Teemu Selanne, Mario Lemieux, Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin and the most spectacular talents shone elsewhere. Leaf fans settled for Darryl Sittler, Mats Sundin and Doug Gilmour."

Talk about a flagrant misread — which teams did the transcendent stars of the 1950s and '60s such as Maurice Richard, Bobby Hull, Gordie Howe and Jean Béliveau play for again? HockeyDB also has no listing of a "Mahovolich."

A cursory understanding a sports history, which granted is not a job requirement for laying out pages in either Toronto or India, would suggest it is folly to compare the Original Six days with the modern 21- to 30-team NHL. The Leafs of yore were one of just six teams. In those days before the entry draft, they had right of first refusal on any player in the richest and most populous region of essentially the lone country scouted by the NHL. All that, and Bobby Orr ended up in Boston. Speaking only as smugly as someone not yet alive may, it is a wonder the Leafs captured only nine of the 25 Cups during the Original Six period.

The Montreal Canadiens, with first crack at players in the second most populous region of the same country, won 10 over the same time span. Like Harry Sinden said once, "Let me tell you about that so-called great rivalry ..."

Point being, why give space to someone who writes the Blue Jays won "back-to-back titles in 1991 and 1992" and expects overworked copy-editing cats, who someday soon will be located in Sagar, would correct it to 1992 and 1993? Or thinks he's scoring debate points by referencing how the New York Yankees "routinely sign baseball's biggest names and brightest stars" without informing readers who might not follow sports religiously that Major League Baseball has no salary cap, unlike the NHL?

The same goes for Mark Sutcliffe at the Ottawa Citizen, the same guy who finds humour in the abject poverty of Nairobi, spewing about CBC's World Cup coverage. There is no need to party like P.C. thugs circa 1991 and accuse him of anything ending in -phobia. Hacky and hickish suffice.

Someone who feels it necessary to spend two good paragraphs explaining to readers Canada is not playing in the FIFA World Cup should probably see if the LCBO has that little-known English lager Shutyerwordhole on special during said FIFA World Cup.

Far be it to say Sutcliffe is writing more out of his generational discomfort than any actual knowledge. That would be a classic case of a writer creating an imaginary divide to soothe his own ego, and he's not to be bested in that Olympic event:

"What does it say about our hyphenated national identity that between Sidney Crosby's goal and the next Winter Olympic hockey tournament, this is what passes for a unifying event: Millions of Canadians enthusiastically waving the flags of other countries?

" ... Plus, the soccer audience is more urban and urbane than the typical Canadian, which might attract a different advertiser to the CBC. Hockey evokes a rural picture, with guys in mullets and lumberjack shirts sipping Tim Hortons while they watch their kids on the outdoor rink. Soccer is played by the archetype metrosexual, David Beckham."

Metrosexual? No one has used that word in three years, although in Ottawa, being three years behind the times would have ahead of the general populace by a cool decade.

Short answer, it says we live in a great country where people have an option in their rooting allegiances. It is not harmless, although it's a challenge for the Canadian Soccer Association when the national team is playing a home friendly.

However, that is a question for the soccer crowd to answer and report back to the group. Point being, people who do not know sports being allowed to embarrass their newsrooms and the trade is bad editorial policy, or old media fail. That space could be used on something more meaningful. The non-sports columnist opining on sports belongs in the Bad Idea Jeans Hall of Fame.

It also goes against the grain of a better way to do it, finding broading meaning by staying specific to a subject. Be universal by being particular. Like, no wonder this site went back to being a hobby blog, eh? That's how the mulleted Tim Hortons patrons would say it.

Rob's rational, reasonable swing at realignment

Everyone wants a piece of the realignment action, trying to resolve MLB's unbalanced schedule, unbalanced divisions and disparities in local revenue (which the media revolution might exacerbate). Yahoo! Sports baseball scribe Jeff Passan has floated the notion of unalignment, two 15-team leagues, no divisions, balanced schedule. Some called it a "writearound" with respect to the revenue issues (the Yankees will always make the most money, which is fine, but how do you control for that on the field?). Joe Posnanski wants the Pittsburgh Pirates and Kansas City Royals to trade leagues. Toronto Blue Jays president Paul Beeston has scenarios out the wazoo.

A little while back, after a desperate plea for a balanced schedule, cisblog.ca chief cook and a number-cruncher Rob Pettapiece offered to improve this writer's half-assed math. Here's his explanation:

So I took the 2008 results and built the RPI/SRS rankings, just like I do for CIS football and basketball and so on. From that I get each team's "true" winning percentage.

Then I figured out the odds that each team would beat every other team (e.g., Toronto and Kansas City is about 60-40 for the 2008 Jays). The divisions are the same as in 1990, except Tampa Bay replaces Milwaukee, so we have 13 games against divisional teams and 12 against the other half of the league. Then we can use the odds and the number of games to get an expected number of wins (again using Toronto-Kansas City), it's 7.3 wins for Toronto and 4.7 for Kansas City).

Add up everyone's wins and you get their record for this new season, below the jump:

Below are the standings, with "balanced wins" on the left and the actual wins from 2008 on the right.

AL East
94.2 BOS 95
92.9 TBA 97
87.2 TOR 86
86.8 NYA 89
80.2 CLE 81
72.8 DET 74
71.6 BAL 68

AL West
90.9 LAA 100
86.3 MIN 88 (in 163 games)
85.9 CHA 89 (in 163 games)
75.3 TEX 79
74.1 OAK 75
72.7 KCA 75
63.2 SEA 61

From 86 wins and fourth place to 87 wins and third place. Hooray.

(Neate: Yes, but with the league's fourth-best record.)

The problem isn't with an unbalanced schedule, it is with unbalanced divisions.

The "true" W-L record (RPI/SRS-based) of the seven teams in the new AL East was .553. For the new AL West, it was .521. The reason both are above .500 is that the AL was better than the NL in 2008. That difference is huge: five wins over the course of a season. So, just because you balance the schedule doesn't mean you balance the quality of competition.

Moreover, moving back to reality for a second, the five real AL East teams from 2008 averaged 92.2 wins (in "true" terms). Not only is that five wins higher than their actual 2008 average of 87, it's way higher than every other division:

92.2 ALE
85.7 ALC
82.0 ALW
79.4 NLC
76.5 NLW
71.0 NLW

Again, the solution isn't simply balancing the schedule, because your W-L record is compared against better competition to determine who finishes first, second, etc.

And getting rid of that problem is easy: just get rid of the divisions.

Okay, so that's not going to happen. But you could realign divisions each few years based on quality: No. 1 to the East, Nos. 2 and 3 to the West, Nos. 4-5 to the East, and so on. Rename the divisions to "Robinson" and "Koufax," similar to the NHL once upon a time. If we did that based on this "true" record, the 2009 divisions would look like:

Robinson Division: Red Sox, Blue Jays, Yankees, Indians, Rangers, Royals, Orioles
Koufax Division: Rays, Angels, Twins, White Sox, A's, Tigers, Mariners

The expected results don't change much, but at least they're more equal.

And hey, if you took all 30 teams, divided them in the same way for the 2010 season, made the DH home manager's choice (to remove the AL-NL difference), you'd have these five divisions:

Robinson: Red Sox, Cubs, White Sox, Indians, Mets, Nationals
Koufax: Yankees, Rangers, Cardinals, Mariners, Giants, Pirates
Ruth: Angels, Phillies, A's, Braves, Orioles, Padres
O'Neil: Rays, Dodgers, Tigers, Rockies, D-Backs, Reds
Clemente: Twins, Blue Jays, Marlins, Brewers, Astros, Royals

Each team would play 13 games against your own division (65 games) and four or five against three of the other four (adding up to 75 more). The five division winners and an at-large wild card would advance to NFL-style playoffs (3 seed vs. 6 seed 4 vs. 5 in the first round, top two seeds receive byes). The season is down to 140 games, which you could run from April 19 to Sept. 19. Playoffs go Sept. 21 to Oct. 10 and the World Series would be Oct. 15-23.

The first- and second-place teams would get about two weeks off before starting the playoffs, which is wonderful for them after a five-month season.

And that's a three-quarters-assed look at the situation.

Happiness is a naked Richard Griffin; make BBWAA voting public

The Baseball Writers' Association of America shouldn't mind being transparent, since they're so easy to see through.

It wasn't worth writing a rage-filled post on Wednesday over a childhood idol, Roberto Alomar, being forced to wait a year to enter the Baseball Hall of Fame. Two days after the fact, though, it cannot be internalized. What comes to mind is a line Matthew Broderick said in Election, right before Jim McAllister's life fell apart the way the voting process has across the past decade where borderline candidates (Andre Dawson, Bruce Sutter) have got in while stone-cold locks (Alomar, Tim Raines) play left out: "We're not electing the pope here."

You gotta keep it in perspective, eh? We're not electing the pope here. Who gets a plaque in a museum is not as important as Parliament being prorogued, whether airport security officials knowing what you look like naked will stop a terrorist or even how Boise State might have done vs. the Alabama Crimson Tide. It also hints at how the Hall of Fame election process needs to be done out in the open. Doing it in a way that dates from a long-gone era is not working.

Start with one fix: Everyone's voting record should be public the second results are announced, the same with elected officials in politics or with a publicly traded company in the business world. This is the way of the world, the naked corporation. (While we're here, who are some of the people on voter rolls?)

The guts of the matter is not the "who's smarter?" game between Seamheads or even which player was hosed. It's that just desserts delayed are just desserts denied, for anyone who cares about the game. A few of BBWAA's bad apples have shown absolute power corrupts absolutely. (
Glenn Dickey: "Writers love the feeling of power they get from denying a worthy candidate — and yes, that is very sick.")

Making the ballots public might cut down on the high-horse routines. It was a hoot-and-a-half to see the apologias coming out Toronto about the Alomar snub, while American writers were rightly outraged. (It's like the U.S. guys were actually more sensitive to what Robbie meant to a generation of Canadian ball fans.) One, apparently taking readers for village idiots (his term not mine) who can't do a Google News search, insisted there is no special cachet associated with going in on the first ballot and that it was right Alomar has to wait (even when he said the complete opposite four days earlier). Another came off like he was 50-something going on five, all but sticking his tongue out: "At the risk of offending those who think only statistically, (Andre) Dawson and his weak on-base percentage (.323) got this vote on the basis of my actually having watched him play." In fewer words: Nah-nah-nah-nah-nah.

The point is that people who write like that forfeit the right to secrecy. It is pretty obvious the secret ballot is more about media privilege than recognizing a great baseball player. An I've-got-mine arrogance runs through it all Those who think only statistically? ... writing, Whatever happened to reasonable discussion on baseball issues? just a few grafs after smearing the FAN 590's Mike Wilner? Come on. Wilner, to his credit, took it in decent humour.

Small wonder, then, that a smart guy such as Jeff Blair seems so cranky about it all. How funny is it, by the way, that one guy calls it "ridiculous" to suggest voters take five minutes to make their selections when Blair wrote, "All told it takes a couple of minutes?"

Such smugness calls to mind Henry Hill in GoodFellas, after Tommy (Joe Pesci) got whacked:

"And there was nothing that we could do about it. Batts was a made man, and Tommy wasn't. And we had to sit still and take it ... It was real greaseball shit."

Making the ballots public might address a few of the issues:

1. Make it about the players again.
   
   Secrecy has caused distrust and made the process to become less about whom the BBWAA actually manages to vote in than, in the aftermath of the announcement, rooting out who didn't vote for someone (remember Corky Simpson, the dork who left Rickey Henderson off his ballot?), who didn't vote for anyone or who actually cast a vote for David Segui.
   
   A lot of the writers know it, too, as Bob Klapisch had the grace to admit:

   "It is hard to argue with anyone who thinks the BBWAA has lost its way, especially when Jay Mariotti taunted the organization to throw him out after failing to vote for anyone.
   
   "Appearing on ESPN's Around the Horn, Mariotti said, 'If (Blyleven and Dawson) haven’t gotten in for years and years I cannot vote them in now,' although he admitted he voted for both players in 2008.
   
   "That's the sort of recklessness that sharpens the fangs of those who already distrust the media. Alomar? He’ll be making his acceptance speech in July 2011, but the BBWAA’s politics stood between him and first-ballot induction."

2. Keep the hypocrites down to one face per person.
   
   Some obnoxious as they are obtuse types would have you believe it does not matter whether Alomar goes in this year, 2011 or 2024.
   
   Right. As Bob Sansevere put it, there is "a block of Hall of Fame voters who are self-anointed keepers of the Hall. They have been given the power to decide someone's fate and, right or wrong, they are going to wield it.
   
   "Some of these voters believe no one should ever be a unanimous pick, and no one, not even Babe Ruth, ever has been.
   
   "Some believe no one should be elected in his first year of eligibility, which I'm sure is what kept Alomar and (Barry) Larkin out."
   
   
3. Track the bloc voting.
   
   The one voter I had do a drive-by on a few paragraphs ago did note voters identified with two media capitals with two MLB teams, Chicago and New York, have a lot of sway. Andre Dawson might still be waiting if his most famous season (winning National League MVP in 1987) had not come with the (cough, last-place) Cubbies. Alomar played with the Mets and White Sox and didn't exactly set the world on fire.
   
   We deserve to know if that is a factor. It is a sad commentary if Bert Blyleven has waited this long because he couldn't get traded to the right city back in 1975. Of course, if he'd been on the Cubs, his winning percentage would be even worse, ha-ha.
   
   
4. Get them to leave the goddamn goalposts in the ground.
   
   Full disclosure would stop — take it away, Jonah Keri — "voters who game the system, whose cognitive dissonance and egos drive them to make up arbitrary rules about who should and should not get in based on their own whims. Forget PED-linked players for a second. We see players fall short because some voters don't find it proper to vote in anyone but Hank Aaron on the first ballot. Other voters decide they’re moral watchdogs, so they're going to make one of the greatest second basemen of all-time wait, because he once did something rude and insulting on TV."
   
   One wouldn't go far to say the "political statement" (Dan Lamothe, Red Sox Monster) that 26.3% of the BBWAA made by not voting for Alomar had a generational element. There's no age minimum (or ceiling) for solipsism! It does seem a little more Gen-X to be non-judgmental, realize what Alomar did was not that bad, and ask people be judged on their own merits rather than some kindergarten-worldview concept of character, like Drunk Jays Fans said:

   "Alomar’s vote total is 'pretty damned good,' Griffin tells us. “And for someone to say that writers don't know what they are doing and to ask "how could the writers leave him out while Dawson with his lousy on-base percentage is in" (on his ninth try) is silly.'
   
   "It is??? ... I thought they were voting on who deserves to be in baseball’s Hall of Fame based on the merits of his career as a baseball player — not sure where I got that crazy idea from! — and if the group entrusted with deciding whose career merits it the most chooses Andre Dawson over Alomar, Raines and Blyleven, then it would seem to me that there is something fundamentally wrong with this group and their concept of what makes a baseball player good."

   Lamothe said much the same:

   "When someone like (Alomar) misses out because voters want to make a political statement, it's time to find voters who will simply and objectively look at the numbers and check the appropriate box. Immediately. Before one of them gets strung up from the flag pole by pitchfork-wielding baseball fans who are sick of the sanctimonious crap."

   Oh, and as for Griffin's insistence that first-ballot, second-ballot, doesn't make a difference? Check out this part of that Klapisch column:

   "Alomar would’ve been the first Puerto Rican player to be inducted into Cooperstown by the normal election process – Robert Clemente was posthumously admitted less than three months after his death in 1972.
   
   Ray Negron, a friend and adviser to Alomar, said, 'People on the island had been preparing for this for weeks, months. It’s one thing to say you’re in the Hall of Fame, another to say you’re a first-ballot player. It wasn’t easy for Robby or anyone else to say, Wait ’til next year.' "

5. Rewarding those who are caught up to the curve.
   
   There is gratitude for the baseball writers who are only too happy to debate and defend their choices. They're probably closer to the majority in the BBWAA.
   
   They, like most of us, know being in the media doesn't give you all the answers. It's good for a sportswriter to have your feet held to the fire as part of informing and entertaining people (the second part is why it's bogus some media outlets don't let reporters vote for awards and such; it drives debate).

It probably will not happen but it should. When the process is so far gone that the best second baseman of the past quarter-century cannot get in on the first crack, it tears the lid right off the jar.

Alomar will be elected in 2011, but the memory should linger. Personally, it took two nights to get the words together. There was too much worry of saying something regrettable or coming up with a diamond variation on Don Cherry's line that some people wouldn't know a hockey player if they slept with Bobby Orr. In other words, make your own Albert Pujols analingus pun, dammit!.

Besides, traditional media, Twitterati, blogs such as Circling The Bases, you name 'em, were all over this on the day of the snub. It was impossible to find anyone who could defend Alomar not getting the requisite 75% (not to go off on a purpose-defeating rant). True, his 73.7% was very strong by the standards of first-time candidates, but MLB Network's Bob Costas expected him to be "somewhere above 80%." For someone who cares about this stuff, waiting a year will not ease the sting, sorry.

Apologies for taking this long to channel rage into something productive. Meantime, the BBWAA is going to have to become transparent, sooner rather than later.

If they're so sure and smug in what they're doing, they won't mind in having their ballots made public. After all, we're not electing the pope here.

The NHL moves the goalposts, and maybe a whole team it was sworn to defend

Honestly, this was just a joke!

"If you want a short and snappy answer about where the Phoenix Coyotes will play, just say Kansas City." — Aug. 6

Then it gets out that the NHL's Hail Mary play to buy the Phoenix Coyotes would only keep the team there for one season before they would try to move it. They have to protect those expansion fees, don't you know (and Eric Duhatschek's put-the-Coyotes-in-Toronto theory actually makes a lick of sense, keeping in mind this is coming from a newspaper which is part of the same corporate family as TSN):

"In an about-face, the league's bid to purchase the Coyotes out of bankruptcy court specifically mentions it is open to relocating the team.

" ... Since the NHL states in its bid that it 'does not anticipate there would be a net profit upon a resale of the team to a Glendale buyer,' its own interests, and those of the creditors, would likely be best served by relocating the team to a market where its value could be maximized beyond $140-million.

The league’s apparent openness to relocating the Coyotes flies in the face of its commitment to Glendale, dating back to when the team’s troubles surfaced last season and throughout the league’s four-month fight with Canadian billionaire Jim Balsillie ..." — globesports.com

"... the NHL’s plan (to buy the Phoenix Coyotes) is nothing but a stay of execution. In the short term, it will give Glendale one last chance to lure a local investor or bring (Jerry) Reinsdorf back into play. If it doesn’t work, the Coyotes will be off for greener pastures." Arizona Republic

In the words of a Kurt Vonnegut character, "I had to laugh like hell." Make It Eight, Eh dug out a great quote from NHL deputy commish Bill Daly from just last month.

"Daly stressed the new terms would not allow the Coyotes to break the lease in a year or two and move elsewhere.

"The NHL must fight for the bankrupt Coyotes to stay in Glendale long-term, he said, to send a message to other cities that have spent money attracting or retaining hockey teams.

" 'If we want communities to continue investing in our franchises, we need to work arm in arm to protect their investments,' Daly said."

Whoopsy-doodle. It turned out those "communities" are not actual communities where people live and pay taxes, but groups of really, really rich guys. There is, for instance, L.A. Kings owner Philip Anschutz, whose company owns an arena in Kansas City which needs a tenant from a big ball-and-stick league. (This just a personal opinion.)

Meantime, it's behind the times to portray this as Hamilton vs. Phoenix (Puck Daddy). Never was. Gary Bettman and Bill Daly know who they work for, and it's whoever needs a hockey team as a front for Hoovering back scads and scads of corporate welfare.

Plus, for the Bob Loblaw Law Blog devotees, there is the whole issue of the NHL violating an important legal principle. Sub judice restrictions don't apply in the U.S., let alone in civil court, but it still doesn't mean it's not jerkass arrogance:

"Confident that the fans and the sports media would back them up ... the NHL circled their wagons and put on a Balsillie Is Rotten campaign.

"The pinnacle of NHL hypocrisy came in remarks recently made by Ottawa Senators owner Eugene Melnyk. Melnyk is often deservedly ridiculed by the outside-of-Ottawa hockey press for his allegiance to a lame-duck general manager (Bryan Murray). Ottawa's recent run of personnel crises has been reflected in league and playoff results.

"Melnyk, as the sports press seems so quick to forget, was the subject of an Ontario securities commission inquiry which alleged misleading and untrue statements made in the financial statements of Melnyk’s company, Biovail Corporation. Melnyk, before the OSC chastised him, blamed his staff! He settled the charges in 2007, was fined $1 million and ordered to cease being director of his company, Biovail, for one year. The OSC record is no credit to Melnyk.

"What pricks the conscious of caring lawyers is the NHL pre-emptive strike against Balsillie even while the bankruptcy proceedings are sub judice in Phoenix. By sending out their general counsel Bill Day to media outlets to spin doctor the rejection of Balsillie by the NHL board based on, apparently, Balsillie’s lack of integrity and character, not only offends the rule of sub judice, but seems to be the epitome of hypocrisy.

"The media is lapping it up too. The venerable Sports Illustrated published an article which actually quoted Melnyk’s self-serving drivel.

Long story short, this is ugly. At least we now know where the NHL was coming from. It never really made sense why they were so gung-ho about Phoenix, other than Bettman's ego. As Make It Eight, Eh says:

"The NHL and the Reinsdorf group were looking to relocate this team either now, or within five years to another centre that fits the plan of the NHL.

" ... The NHL has shunned the fans of Canada, and is quickly shunning the fans of Phoenix.

"Jim Balsillie has a brighter future in the NHL than Gary Bettman, and let’s see who is around in 10 years.

"Jim Balsillie, despite being voted against, has been approached by other struggling franchises, and is the true white knight to help the destitute owners."

Who knows what will happen. There's a fatigue at this point. It is perfectly rational and understandable if you have shunned sports radio and probably will until it gets resolved, since the Howard Bergers of the world are way in over their heads with this story. It has been fun, though.

Zen Dayley: Rios' release is a payoff kvetch

Saying something is hard really is code for wanting an easy way out, hardly a human failing.

The cynical, snarky response to the hue-and-cry over the Rogers Jays letting Alex Rios go was, "Too bad they don't have a 21-year-old outfield prospect who has popped 14 extra-base hits in his last 45 at-bats in Triple-A. Wait, they do!" That is rather insufficient, on some people.

It is understandable why jettisoning Rios was upsetting to Jays followers. No talk of financial flexibility or how much God's Gift of Sunshine, Travis Snider, is smacking the ball around in Las Vegas is going to brighten the picture immediately, especially for a lower-revenue team. Rios getting the ax is a splinter under the fingernail.

It's right to be irrational and kvetch about the salary dump, for a day or two. There is no reason to buy a full-priced Rogers Jays ticket for the duration of this season, although there are the 20,000-30,000 diehards who keep turning out. The lone reasons to attend a game are to watch Roy Halladay and Ricky Romero pitch or throw support to the Tampa Bay Rays (who come to Rogers Centre Aug. 24-26).

If that smacks of being fair-weather, so be it. Being a sports fan is not supposed to be exceedingly difficult. It is supposed to be fun. Only a deranged few, guilty as charged, get their jollies peeling back the onion and trying to understand the how and why of a team being only-OK when people's vanity and egotism demands awesome. The rank-and-file have enough on their plates. Adding the burden of being emotionally involved with a ballclub which is trying to mow the lawn with a pair of fingernail clippers by playing in the AL East is a little much to ask.

"Toronto is not Cleveland, with its budget problems, Pittsburgh, with an organizational model that has been a complete failure, Kansas City, which is awful but still wastes money on second-tier journeymen who don't know how to win, or San Diego, which will check out of the contending business for the next couple of years until its farm system improves. Toronto's problem is that it is a good team in the wrong division. 'Good isn't enough,' Ricciardi said. 'You have to be great.' "

Tom Verducci, Sports Illustrated, Aug. 4

In that regard, The Tao was nails for saying, "Then there is the 'fan' in us, who is totally irrational and has spent roughly about a thousand hours over the past couple of years irrationally feeding into the hopes and dreams and misery and agony of Jays fans through this very blog. And that part of us is really finding it difficult to root, root, root for the home team's corporate ownership's bottom line."

That is where good friend Dan Rowe got the idea of terming Rogers' approach to its holdings "uninterested ownership." (Jan. 18, 2008). There is scarcely little rebuttal. Jeff Blair's column was spot on: There is every reason to believe Rogers is trying to sell the team. It probably ties in with their NFL ambitions, since that league dictates that owners cannot own teams in another sport.

There is stability with having a corporate owner. Stability is close to stagnation and stasis in the dictionary. The playoffs are a pipe dream with the current ownership and divisional alignment, but the unknown could be worse unless Jim Balsillie is a secret Seamhead.

Within the past couple months, greater minds such as Ottawa residents Howard Bloom of Sports Business News and Pete Toms of The Biz of Baseball have each voiced some variation of "baseball is dead and dying in Toronto." Pete's point is supported by sociologist Reginald Bibby's findings that only one in 10 Canadian teens follows Major League Baseball, down from one in three in the early 1990s.

Rogers can sense the break of the waves. It might well believe Blue Jays baseball is being affected by what Business Week calls the "incredible shrinking Boomer economy" or has run its course as a consumer product in Canada. (That might not necessarily be right.) Stephen Brunt recently related the story about when the late Ted Rogers wanted to invest in wireless. The vote among his company's directors was however many opposed against one in favour, but Rogers was the one in favour. Now you know the rest of the story.

They might have decided to punt, the way so many Buffalo Bills possessions end. The fact the aforementioned Rays might be before to trade leadoff man extraordinaire Carl Crawford (Jonah Keri, SI.com) is an indication that baseball has swung back toward the unfair system it had in the late 1990s.

That being said, talk about the Jays being headed down the same path as the late and lamented Montreal Expos is a bit much. For that to happen, there needs to be a viable market for relocation. MLB already has one lame-duck franchise, the Oakland Athletics, which cannot move.

Toronto is stuck with a stadium no one likes, a corporate owner who does not seem to care and a stacked deck for a division. People can hardly be blamed for begging out of the situation.

As for Rios, the player was often accused of being a no-brainer. It remains to be seen with the move. Baseball Prospectus and Game of Inches thought the White Sox must be out of their minds for taking on Rios' contract. FanGraphs thought it was a steal for Chicago. Walk-Off Walk pointed out if you want to blame anyone, blame Paul Godfrey and Vernon Wells:

"Ricciardi's hand was forced because Rios' talents could not fully shine when an even larger bag of waste was blocking up the dollar flow. Blue Jays CF Vernon Wells is owed almost $100 million before 2014, at which point he'll be 35 and have a mailbox clogged with AARP junk mail. In a move reminiscent of Sophie's Choice, J.P. was stuck choosing between the two big OF contracts and ended up giving up the more attractive one. If Wells wasn't around, Rios could rotate into center. But Wells will be around, jingling the pocket change from his Albert Belle-esque contract without the Albert Belle-esque production."

Bottom line, the anger over Rios is understandable, but misdirected. Whether the Jays pried a player loose from Chicago is irrelevant. Since Kate Hudson was at Monday's Jays-Yankees game, you at least wish they could have got $50 and a case of Heineken, like in Almost Famous, but would people really feel any different if Dayan Viciendo was now in the Jays system? No, they wouldn't. No one wanted to hear about the players whom J.P. Ricciardi got in return for Scott Rolen. Try to be consistent, please.

The point is the obvious, it was right to give into emotion for a while. It's a little rich to start being doom-and-gloom and always blame Ricciardi, who is out the door in October. At the end of the day, the desire is to always want Major League Baseball in Canada, in the worst way. Hopefully that's not the way you'll start getting it in Toronto.

Zen Dayley: Halladay stays, Rolen goes, and so should that attitude

Hang on tightly, let go lightly.

The straight from the gut is that keeping Roy Halladay and moving third baseman Scott Rolen to the Cincinnati Reds calls to mind a line from The Simpsons when Homer got a dishonorable discharge from the U.S. Navy: "It's the most any of us could have hoped for." Thirteen more Halladay starts, plus several million off next season's payroll? Score! Great move, Paul Beeston J.P. Ricciardi!

The wild guess that the juice (sorry for the double entendre, Red Sox Nation) was not worth the squeeze with regard to the Rogers Jays trading Halladay actually turned out to be right ("I know, kids, I'm scared too."). Granted, sometimes making moves to appease fans can be very bad for a team's record.

Rolen will be missed the first time the third baseman they got for him, 26-year-old Edwin Encarnacion, uncorks a throw that reminds us there is no fair catch rule in Canada.

Whoever is making the calls seems to have shrewdly gauged the law of diminishing returns with Rolen. He is 34 years old. He has only been healthy two of the past five seasons. In case people forgot (or never knew to begin with), was in Toronto because he asked out of St. Louis.

Taken together, Halladay's Non-Independence Day and people being upset over seeing Rolen go to some wrongheaded thinking. Who are we, White Sox fans?

This is not an apologia for the Roger Jays. Stephen Brunt nailed it when he wrote of Rogers, "there is a reason the NFL forbids corporate ownership of its franchises."

It is more an appeal for some clear eyes to go along with the full hearts of those who hang in season after also-ran season. One enduring belief in my whole watching baseball through adult eyes life is that the entire history of the game is a history of money.

That is a main reason why the Yankees are pretty much always on top. The only exceptions were when they were, wait for it, owned by a media conglomerate (CBS in the late '60s and early '70s) and the period when George Steinbrenner was at his most megalomaniacal, demanding the Yankees trade away future all-stars such as Fred McGriff, Doug Drabek, and of course, Jay Buhner ("Ken Phelps, Ken Phelps") to plug leaks on the big club.

The Boston Red Sox had ownership issues around that time; old Tom Yawkey, a sole proprietor, died in 1976 and the franchise was kind of circling the drain until his widow passed. It took another decade beyond that before John Henry, Larry Lucchino and Tom Werner got the Red Sox. That is a big piece of understanding which is left out when people hearken back on the Jays' glory years, 1983-93. The twin banes of their existence were both a mess in hindsight.

Baseball also had a two-division format in each league and a balanced schedule (AL teams played 13 games vs. each division rival instead of the current 18 or 19), which also levelled the playing field. Part of the reason that changed is ESPN. The rule of thumb two decades ago was that regular-season baseball was a write-off in terms of the U.S. TV audience. A 162-game season, as opposed to the NFL's 16, means there was not enough at stake to draw in the casual viewer. NFL fans can count on seeing certain personalities. There's nothing like that in baseball.

ESPN refuted that and Bud Selig, who is no dummy, fulfilled their need to play up rivalries by creating the unbalanced schedule and interleague play. People can kick and scream about ESPN, but a lot of their themes filter up from the audience. By and large, people want to see the Sox and Yanks ad nauseam.

That illustrates why baseball has an unbalanced schedule while carrying on as if it is a fair fight for the eight playoff berths. It sucks. However, deep-down, as fans people have to accept the sporting tail wags the business dog. The Red Sox and Yankees are also paired with regional sports networks (NESN and the YES network). The difference for the Rogers Jays, to borrow from a comment good friend Pete Toms left at ShysterBall when the Halladay soap opera premiered, "There just aren’t enough ball fans here." There were only 24,000 people at Halladay's last home start, which Rogers Sportsnet did not even broadcast to the entire country. Some show of love. It's enough to make one utter the words "death spiral," but if the Pittsburgh Pirates haven't been moved after 17 losing seasons in a row, the Jays should be safe.

This is straying farther afield than anticipated. The point was to address the derision, some of it Twitter-amplified, about dealing Rolen and keeping Halladay, and to reiterate the folly of falling in love with players instead of falling in like, unless it's for humourous effect (here one thinks of The Tao dubbing Rolen GBOAT for Greatest Blue Jay of All Time).

The Jays did what they said they would. In Mike Wilner's phrasing, "They listened, they weren't blown away," so they passed. It is amusing, as others have pointed out, that the same people who said Ricciardi was unfit to make this deal will now rip him for not making said deal.

(By the way, within a hour after that became official, the NHL's Edmonton Oilers have said they are officially not interested in making a trade for disgruntled Dany Heatley. Honestly, it was just ass-talking writ large to say two weeks ago that the Jays would "trade Halladay the same day the Ottawa Senators deal Dany Heatley.")

The upshot is that there is still time to work out something amenable for Halladay, as Bart Given wrote before the trade deadline. The price tag might be lower, but it will still be more than the two compensatory draft choices a team gets for losing a big-time free agent.

"Assuming the mandate of remains the same, the Blue Jays will try and move their ace beginning in November. His value will be less than right now, as he will have just six months left under his current contract. On the positive side, there will be more interested teams in the mix as organizations ponder the opportunity to build their off-season around acquiring Roy Halladay.

"From a fan perspective it has to be torture. It will be like a farewell tour for the remainder of the season. I guess some fans will hold out hope ownership changes itss mind and tells Ricciardi to pull him off the market – or that no trade package is good enough. Unlikely – but possible I guess."

As for complaining about the loss of Rolen, please. Beyond Aaron Hill, who is signed through 2014 counting club options, the rest of the Jays infield consisted of three likeable 30-somethings they can move out for a younger and/or more productive player (whether one materializes, well...).

True, Rolen is hitting .320. However, his batting average on balls in play (BABIP) is an unsustainable .342 (most players come down to the median, which is around .290). Going month by month, he just had a 200-point drop in OPS from June (.966) to July (.761), and that was still with an average BABIP (.301). You don't make calls based on one month, but one wonders if his July performance was closer to reality.

Please keep in mind Rolen was acquired straight up for Troy Glaus, who hasn't played all season. You could say the deal was Glaus for Encarnacion and two relievers with some potential. From FanGraphs:

"Josh Roenicke looks like a decent middle reliever who will be glad to get off the Louisville-Cincinnati shuttle. His fastball has some giddyup and he throws a solid cutter as well.

"Zachary Stewart is the 'get' of the trade. He has a 92-95 MPH fastball with good sink and a hard cutting 82-85 MPH slider. He’s quickly climbed the ladder, pitching at High-A, Double-A and now Triple-A, and has a cumulative 2.92 FIP (fielding-independent pitching) in 92 innings pitched. He pitched mostly out of the bullpen last year but is showing some good promise as a starter. He’s a solid B grade pitcher.

Of course, that would be too honest and rational. It's just that people shouldn't start dismaying over Rolen. The Jays picked up some young talent for very little. Raptors GM Bryan Colangelo did that with his trade with the Golden States for guard Marco Belinelli this week and was hailed as a genius.

For pity's sake, when all this was going down, a friend who knows better started dismaying about Hill leaving. Of course, he'll leave someday. All players do. And one day the sun will explode and since cockroaches and columnists are all that will survive, they’ll blame that on J.P. Ricciardi, too.

Reshaping Toronto

Bryan Colangelo: consummate professional, competitive businessman, an asset for the city of Toronto.

As the GM Colangelo commented during the press conference today the Raptors Organization is about promoting that family aspect. The recent signings have been clear moves to reinforce that notion, and make Toronto more attractive as a nasketball destination not just a location.

First it was the Hedo Turkoglu press conference, downplaying earlier media comments about the Turkish community in TO and lavishing praise on the great chemistry he should have with his new teammates.

With Jarrett Jack obviously the questions instantly went to his relationship with Chris Bosh as the two were former teammates back in college at Georgia Tech. Colangelo will likely be unapologetic about any move he makes to keep Bosh in town however, he didn't stray from signing European based players a few years back and that lead to success. He must do the same in all his efforts to keep Bosh.

Bosh himself actually came and joined in at the end of the press conference and joked around himself, passing on stories about Jack getting kicked out of practice in college for being too aggressive and getting into a playful argument about who will be the best dressed throughout the season.

For a location that has been less than favourable for NBA players over its history the TO sales job is in full effect, following down a path that GM Bryan Colangelo has been restructing since his arrival. Entering phase two of the Make Toronto Primetime (if you will) Colangelo has once again set Toronto up in a favourable position.

At first it was working with the cultural dynamic of the city. It's well known that Europeans enjoy the cosmopolitan nature of Toronto, and initially Colangelo took advantage of that asset. It lead to the playoffs and even a divisional championship, however that well has dried a little.

In downplaying that aspect of the city Turkoglu kept the attention on the American ballers, showing that this wasn't simply another European joining the team. This is now a competitive location, the team is worth it, this is a team oriented destination not just a city with lots of ethnic neighbourhoods and an exciting Caribana celebration.

Should Bosh resign with TO that image may be cemented.

Toronto will be marketed as a prime sports destination in basketball, just like hockey, if Colangelo has his way. There are no longer any limitations in play for the new gameplan, to compete Colangelo knows that means marquee players and at any cost. That is phase two: bring the best into town, keep the team on the march forward.

"Why here? If you're not guaranteed a starting spot why would you come here?", says Bryan Colangelo. "It's about team and it's about success and it's about winning."

Asked about his opinion of the team Bosh was non-committal but honest in his assessment.

"I was a little nervous at the end of the season with all the moves we had to make", said Bosh, "But so far things are going well."

The more optimistic that statement becomes the more successful phase two will be. Toronto is becoming more and more attractive under Colangelo's watch and while the Raptors Organization may have dropped the ball in becoming the main attention of the city last season, they should not fall into obscurity this coming year. It's likely the GM would not have it any other way.

DocTalk: The juice ain't worth the squeeze

Reading anything into the Blue Jays setting up their pitching rotation so Roy Halladay gets two starts at home before the July 31 trade deadline is a fool's play, likely.

It is just that if Halladay was throwing Friday against the Red Sox instead of Sunday, his next two starts would come on the road, assuming a normal five-man rotation with no one getting bumped. This way, with the temporary move to a four-man rostation, Halladay is in line to start a Friday home game on July 24 vs. the Tampa Bay Rays, so if Doc is headed out of Toronto (to possibly Philadelphia, San Francisco or St. Louis) that is the night to head down to Rogers Centre with a black armband fashioned out of hockey tape affixed to a powder-blue throwback jersey. (If they were still using a five-man, it would be July 25.)

Gut feeling: Richard Griffin's rationale that the Jays should hold on until the winter, do some fact-facing and say, "We're not gonna contend in the 2010 AL East," makes some sense. The media and fanbase will be on a less of a hair trigger.

The reasoned response all along was that Halladay was not going to be traded before the end of this season. By the way, the snappy answer to the question, "Where is Doc headed?" is, "Cooperstown." Those of you who like to feed two birds with one scone can say, "They'll trade him the same day the Ottawa Senators deal Dany Heatley."

During the all-star game telecast on Tuesday, FOX Sports' Ken Rosenthal came off like he was backpedalling like a Pro Bowl cornerback when he reiterated that Halladay would be traded, and now he's admitting the St. Louis Cardinals and L.A. Angels are all but out of the running, although Cardinals fans sure were fawning over the right-hander. No doubt you read speculation that the Yankees could take Vernon Wells ludicrous contract off the Jays' hands. Of course, as Jason Rosenberg at It's About The Money, Stupid noted, adding Wells might be too rich even for the Yankees' blood, even with the extra revenue they're bringing in by streaming broadcasts online. It would potentially leave them with almost $170 million committed to nine players come the 2011 season.

"That's flat out insane. Of course, this doesn't include resigning Halladay or any other free agents. They might try to overpay Jason Bay (assuming he's not signed to an extension by Boston), sign Matt Holliday or any of the eventual Rays free agents. Bottom line, that money's gonna be spent.

"Wells might be another Bobby Abreu with a lower OBP and less SB; a solid player with 20 HR power. Is he 'worth' $23M? Not a chance. Is he worth absorbing that contract to land Halladay, assuming you don't have to give up Joba (Chamberlain), (pitcher Phil) Hughes, (outfield prospect Jesus) Montero? I'm not sure. I've been debating this for a long time and I've been staunchly saying that 'there's no way the Yanks take on Wells,' but maybe I am wrong. (Veteran outfielders Johnny) Damon and (Hideki) Matsui are gone after this year. (Xavier) Nady, too. Can you put Wells in CF for the next few years and have greater productivity than (Brett) Gardner and/or Melky (Cabrera)? Probably. Can you absorb Wells' abortion of a contract for the year and a half (at least) of Halladay's services? I'm not sure."

It cannot be stressed enough that all of this is just a fan's futile attempt to, in the parlance of those MacLean's promos which are played ad nauseam on Blue Jays radio broadcasts, make sense of it all. The best one can do is try to offer some guidelines:

• Baseball Prospectus believes the Jays should act with Halladay and the left side of the infield, 34-year-old third baseman Scott Rolen and 33-year-old shortstop Marco Scutaro. A lot of people have fallen in love with those two, instead of merely falling in like.
  
  
• One should shudder at hearing any rumours about a deal with the Yankees that would send Chamberlain, Hughes, Gardner and Shelley Duncan to Toronto. It's not out of the realm of possibility that Chamberlain has plateaued as a pitcher. Also, he's shown a lack of durability in his career to date, which would make the optics of dealing Halladay even worse.
  
  
• It should have been stressed from the get-go that using the 2008 Erik Bedard trade, where the Baltimore Orioles got all-star outfielder Adam Jones and closer George Sherrill (among others), is a poor baseline. That was more of an anomaly and the GM who signed off on that, Bill Bavasi, has since been fired.


• Meantime, the San Diego Padres' story arc with their ace Jake Peavy is pretty germane. That franchise has overriding internal issues (change of ownership), not unlike the Blue Jays (an interim CEO, a meh attitude in their local market and questions about their uninterested ownership). The Padres were unable to get anything done with Peavy, and are now on course to finish with about 97 losses. The gist of it the Jays probably have to act, but there's a time and place for it and that time is not in the next two weeks.
  

Anyway, you know it's not my style to rubberneck rumours (better to dilettante around committing to nothing, that's how it's done in Sageritaville, right?), but this one was rich:

"The Phillies remain 'very, very interested' in acquiring Blue Jays ace Roy Halladay and are currently putting together a package of prospects that may actually also include recently-signed P Pedro Martinez. The Cardinals are also a favorite to land Halladay if, and only IF they are willing to part with blue-chip prospect, OF Colby Rasmus, along with several other prospects. The Dodgers remain in the action as well and a late entry into the field are the San Francisco Giants who are unsure of the availability of Randy Johnson for the rest of the year. Their package is said to include former AL Cy Young winner Barry Zito and the highly-touted Jonathan Sanchez, who threw a no-hitter in his last start right before the All Star Break.

Halladay and Tim Lincecum in the same starting rotation in San Fran? At least that would be ironic. Another irony for an Ottawa-based Jays fan: Michael Taylor, the one outfielder whom the Phillies are said to have dangled, just got promoted to Lehigh Valley. Oi, a thousand times, oi.

(There's no graceful way to segue into it, but Bart Given has a post up at Inside The Majors explaining what a travelling secretary does in major league baseball. He managed to dig out a picture of George Costanza and Wilhelm from Seinfeld. Kinger referenced Seinfeld when Given was a guest on his CFRC sports show several weeks ago.

Nazem Kadri and the Hockey Reflex

It might be a stretch, but whatthehell.

The way some media portrayed the Leafs drafting Nazem Kadri, a young man who is Muslim, might be a symptom of what a friend calls the Hockey Reflex. It's an umbrella term for a much larger identity crisis which envelops the national obsession. Canada is evolving faster than ever as a nation, albeit not in ways that can be 100% anticipated. That has stoked angst hockey will one day concede some of centre stage to other sports. If that happens (stress, if), it will be because it is cost-prohibitive and a sport of the middle class, which has been shrinking for more than 20 years.

Please bear in mind this is not directed at any individual. It's more of an attempt, as someone on the outside, to try to figure out what is at the heart of the Saturday Star describing Kadri as a "symbol of change" (beat writer Kevin McGran's story) and a sign "the cultural tectonic plates of the GTA just shifted a little bit." (Damien Cox's accompanying column.) The Globe & Mail also got in on the act ("The new face of the good ol' hockey game"). Here you thought the Leafs drafted Kadri because they thought he might be a potential 35-goal scorer whom you can already see skating on a line someday with Taylor Hall. Suspend your disbelief and presume that Leafs GM Brian Burke is waiting for next year to make a big move to snag a phenom from the OHL, instead of just talking about it so much).

Kazem being Muslim is part of the story, certainly. One could not get away with not noting it when only one other Muslim, early-2000s journeyman Ramzi Abid, has played semi-regularly in the NHL (68 games). There are certainly fans who are going to identify with a player who's of a similar background to them, or commit it to memory like his height, weight and junior team (case in point: On Newsday's blog item about Kington Frontenacs forward Ethan Werek being drafted by the New York Rangers, the first comment makes reference to Werek being a "dual Canadian-Israeli citizen").

This comes back to the Jason Whitlock saying that social agenda does not trump truth. One way to get away from a loaded word such as "agenda" is to say that labelling and packaging — Leafs draft Muslim player! — should not stand in for honest dialogue.

Think about it. It as if there is a nettle tugging at the heart that mandates reassuring people that newer Canadians are taking up the game en masse, even when they are not. It comes off as a Hail Mary, hoping there something will just magically happen to off-set trends which are working against sustaining the elitist youth hockey model in Canada.

That would include, off the top of one's head, urbanization, an aging population, the decline of the manufacturing sector in smaller Ontario centres (if the family breadwinner now works at a big-box instead of on an assembly line, it will be tougher to afford new skates for little Logan) and last but not least, the fact the cost of youth hockey is divorced from sanity. You can only count on families being willing to make a sacrifice for so long.

However, The Globe's Jeff Blair had a point when called BS on the Kadri coverage in his Monday column, writing, "Look, I like to sing Kumbaya as much as anybody but it's a stretch to see anything remotely altruistic behind the Maple Leafs drafting a Muslim player of Lebanese descent. Really." The Star, once it had time to flesh out a sober second thought, moved from "symbol of change" stuff to following up with a story headlined, "Immigrants won't flock to hockey for Nazem Kadri." The money quote probably came from minor hockey organizer named Paul Maich:

"We are still not seeing the numbers from the visible minorities that represent the percentages in the local population. I really don't think the short term effect will be that great but I'd like to be proven wrong."

Not to presume anything of some random minor hockey guy, but I'd like to be proven wrong is not far off from, It'd be nice, but I'm not gonna actually make an effort.

Point being, citing Kadri as a "symbol of change" is unfair. This is not out of concern for Kadri. It's presumed he has the head on his shoulders to handle being a hyped-up high draft pick and a Leafs prospect from Southern Ontario, plus being the team's first Muslim. That's for the Leafs and sports psychologists to handle.

The unfair part with some of the Kadri coverage is that it wrongly assumes a person who is a visible minority needs that role model. It's a little too close to the old liberal canard, add-minorities-and-stir. It is pandering. Just because your parents were born in another country does not you need a role model to get into a sport.

We can all find it on our own. Many already do this in Canada. The demographics of a Leafs crowd are distinctly different from Toronto's other teams, but it's a far cry from what it looked like at Maple Leaf Gardens in the 1970s and '80s. People from all walks of life are discovering hockey in Canada since it is the No. 1 sport, although it's overcovered. (There is even a side point that having the world junior here almost every year might be a good entry point, since it's the most publicized hockey event whose format is similar to the World Cup, with group play followed by knockout rounds. That is just a personal observation.)

The Kadri-to-the-Leafs love-in glosses over a larger truth. No matter what your cultural makeup is, you play a sport because there is an opportunity. It's like the riff Chris Rock did on blacks dominating U.S. sports — "and as soon as we get a heated hockey rink, we'll have that too!" (Oddly enough, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's story about the Thrashers drafting Evander Kane did not mention that Kane is black.)

Opportunity hinges on the values of one's family, community and society's ability to pay. On a macro level in Canada, that means there is a push to keep men's hockey on the front burner, even to neglect of other sports, which has passed the point of satire. Meantime, the way it works in this country is that if you want to be great at a sport, your family is expected to go out-of-pocket (unless said sport has a very thin field at the Winter Olympics).

That puts hockey beyond the means and interests of many families, pure and simple. That dictates a day is coming when the drop-off between No. 1 and whatever is the No. 2 sport will shrink. Exercising the Hockey Reflex only prolongs the inevitable.

(As a footnote, some recent examples of the Hockey Reflex. It is a gross generalization, to be fair, but you can see it in the sports section every day.

You can see at play with Canada Basketball having to scrap its successful beyond belief National Elite Development Agency or the fact our national women's basketball team's summer schedule is being subsidized by China and Cuba. Dave Feschuk, writing in the Toronto Star, noted sarcastically, "Thank goodness for Communists."

It's even prevalent within hockey. Earlier this month, ctvolympics.ca posted a story headlined, "Hockey schmoozers to gather at Olympic centre" which outlined how there will be a 80,000-square-foot entertainment and hospitality complex for rich folks and hockey players to hobknob during the Olympics.

On the same day, no less, the Calgary Olympic Oval scrapped its women's hockey program where national team mainstays such as Cherie Piper, Gina Kingsbury, Carla MacLeod, Colleen Sostorics, Delaney Collins, Tessa Bonhomme and Gillian Ferrari train. At least the schmoozers' needs are being addressed, eh!

As a second post-draft footnote, for any Sennies fans — love the choice of Jared Cowen — did you see this from the Columbus Dispatch:

"It's hard to believe how far the Ottawa Senators have fallen, and how fast they went from Stanley Cup runner-ups to one of the most dysfunctional clubs in the NHL.")

Related:
Newest Leaf's hockey-mad home; Kadri's father made sure son could play the sport his own parents couldn't afford for him (Kevin McGran, Toronto Star)
Immigrants won't flock to hockey for Nazem Kadri; New face of Leafs might help introduce the sport, but cost still a big factor (Lois Kalchman, Toronto Star)

Joey Votto makes fans, reveals other fans' hang-ups

From the when-the-going-gets-weird files: Some sports fans would be more comfortable with a gay ballplayer than one who, as Joey Votto self-defined, is dealing with "real life shit."

Please bear in mind it's best to focus on the positive. Votto, the Cincinnati Reds slugger who's from Toronto, handled it like a champ on Tuesday when he sat in the dugout at Rogers Centre and calmly explained (full audio is on YouTube) how the death of his dad, Joseph, at age 52 last summer led to what the Reds would only call "stress-related issues." Most of the media coverage was empathetic. The announced crowd of 30,000-plus gave him a warm ovation when he came to bat in the top of the first inning. It showed how much society has turned the corner with mental health issues, even within the last 10 years. Twenty-five years ago, Jim Eisenreich, who had Tourette's Syndrome, was run out of baseball for a time because people took his nervous disorder to be a "case of nerves."

It is amusing to read after the fact was that in some dark corners of the Internet, there was persistent speculation that Votto is gay. In other words, some twitbags could not comprehend a 25-year-old ballplayer who just lost a parent being depressed, so that has to be their default for everything. It's so stupid. No one should making that speculation about anyone. Doesn't that beat all?

Jim Buzinski at Outsports.com wrote, "I think this is a weird kind of progress. It was not too long ago that many fans denied there were gay players in pro sports. The acceptance of these rumors as being at least plausible shows that the average fan realizes that his favorite team might have a gay player."

(Jeff Pearlman noted that it is puerile to traffic in the "is-he-or-isn’t-he-gay? bullsh$# we affix to celebrities.")

Anyway, this is really about Votto. This space was already duty-bound to cheer for him since he is a Canadian ballplayer, but hopefully he made a few fans with the way he handled everything on Tuesday. For someone who is supposed to be a very private guy, it was pretty illuminating.

There is a fine balance for people with anxiety and depression. You need to make people aware of your condition, since at best it can only be managed (whether by meds or holistically, i.e., diet, exercise, staying engaged socially). At the same time, one cannot demand sympathy. Everyone else has their own stuff to deal with. The Cincy Enquirer ran most of his quotes in full:

"I got sick in May. I had the upper respiratory thing and the ear infection. It was the time away from baseball and recovering from being sick when, for the first time, all the emotions that I had been pushing to the side, that I had been dealing with and struggling with in the winter, hit me. They hit me a hundred times more than I had been dealing with.

"I was taken out of three separate games. The first game it was a combination of me being ill. But I could tell there was something going on. I couldn't recover. I had this feeling of anxiety. I had this feeling in my chest.

" ... I'm seeing doctors and being able to talk to them and doing the therapy part has been the biggest thing. I really hadn’t acknowledged how important it was to express the things that I had been dealing with on the inside. I hate to sound to like a real dramatic person. These were serious things that I was dealing with. To have someone to talk to was really important. To be able to talk to the team was really important. That’s probably been the most important thing."

Votto stressed that he had great support from the Reds, notably manager Dusty Baker and GM Walt Jocketty. One should not idly speculate how the situation would have been handled in a certain ice-based pro sport which normally dominates sports headlines in Southern Ontario.

Meantime, one has to laugh like hell that some people broke out the Jump To Conclusions mat when the Reds were keeping a lid on why Votto, their first baseman, had gone on the DL.

Of course, that would come to light when it's PRIDE Week in Toronto. D'oh!

Related:
Father's death affected Votto; Depression led to panic attacks and disabled list (John Fay, Cincinnati Enquirer)
Votto: 'I thought I was going to die' (Jeremy Sandler, National Post)
Player stressed, so fans conclude he must be gay (Jim Buzinski, Outsports.com; via Jeff Pearlman)

Alligator mouth and a hummingbird ...

Blue Jays outfielder Alex Rios didn't do himself any favours, swearing at some random jerk hours after wearing the golden sombrero (five strikeouts in one game) in a one-run loss to L.A. Angels.



Anyway, the man yelling at Rios and saying "remember where you came from" comes off like more of an ass. As for the kid who was denied an autograph, what was doing out that late on a school night? (And honestly, does this pass as news? Like Rios, sometimes the media needs to learn when to lay off.)

Chris Bosh to test waters, T.O. sports fans to test blood pressure

Sports in Toronto comes loaded with a bit of an inferiority complex, with a few exceptions to root for a team in Hogtown you need a little paranoia mixed with conspiracy theories and a whole lot of skepticism. It's not necessarily found in other Canadian cities but then again it's because Toronto is in a unique position with regards to professional sports in this country, and that's the heavy involvement in so many North American wide leagues.

While Vancouver got a fresh taste of it with Steve Francis' refusal to play in Vancouver, followed up by the loss of the entire Grizzlies franchise altogether, and Montreal also felt the brunt with the loss of the Expos, Toronto has the unenviable task of worrying about itself on a daily basis. And nowhere is this more pronounced, and maybe even a cause that has further enhanced the city's self esteem issues, than in the world of NBA basketball.

While spending a day at Woodbine Racetracks yesterday Chris Bosh was aproached by reporters and, surprise surprise, questioned about summer contract talks while at the race track (didn't see that one coming!). To these questions Bosh replied that things were being put on hold for now, as in for the entire summer, and while not stating it implied he would test the Free Agent market next year.

For the always cautious sporting Torontonian the skepticism kicked into full gear, while for the basketball fans in town - who have been discussing who Bosh can be traded for, and Shawn Marion signed-and-traded for, fo quite some time already - the words from Bosh just legitimized their concerns about Bosh.

Certainly as Vince Carter proved there's no way a player in their contract year would stay in Toronto when there are far more intriguing markets around the United States to play basketball. Honestly unless it's hockey the Toronto sports fan has little faith in any of their teams to not only attract but attract and then secure marquee players. Always on the defensive of criticism from Americans and fellow Canadians alike Toronto's sports scene needs to check into therapy and soon! Because the fact of the matter is just because the man wants to test the waters, it does not mean he's instantly leaving town.

There are some optimists out there such as Doug Smith of the Toronto Star who have asserted time and time again that if Toronto puts a winning product on the Court in 2009 then all signs point to Bosh resigning in 2010, regardless of all the hype surrounding the Free Agent class. The fact that Toronto can pay him more than any other team backs up this theory. A player like Chris Bosh is not one who broadcasts himself as a prima donna, in fact he projects loyalty above sponsorships and scenes. He has made it clear that he wants top dollar for his services but as a four time all star and one of the most touted names in next year's open market it seems more of a smart business move than act of arrogance.

It was reported earlier in the week that Bosh said keeping Shawn Marion would make him happy as he feels that with Marion in place as he was down the stretch the Raptors would produce a winning product. There are still pieces to fall into place, right now the biggest uncertainty is the Shooting Guard position (presently no one has been named to start), and this Raptors team is not a Championship calibe team more moves do need to happen.

But to re-sign Marion, a player who has played and lived in Phoenix and Miami and made it well known his extreme displeasure with colder climates, to the lone Canadian team in the NBA would be a good sign to players wary of coming to Canada (read: all NBA players who are NOT European or Canadian). It would not only help the club on the court but in terms of PR as well, and if the team wins maybe with the Bosh sweepstakes as well. And maybe, just maybe, help the Toronto sports fan to relax just a little bit.

Should Chris Bosh leave next summer the sport psyche in the city will likely take another hit. Even if it works out that the loss of Bosh actually improves the team (which could very well happen for, as talented as Bosh may be, there are holes apparent in his game), the fans -and more importantly the casual basketball fans - will certainly notice the departure of one of the top Free Agents in the NBA.

Nobody wants to be that person always waiting for the perfect match and in a way it's hard for Torontonians to not feel like that consistent bridesmaid of the basketball world. But before everyone jumps off the cliff there is still time to go and games to be played. The Raptors didn't meet expectations last season and if it happens again it will cost them, Bosh and maybe even GM Bryan Colangelo. According to Tim Micallef's Twitter entry after interviewing Bosh and Marion on The Score earlier he said not to worry, Bosh likes it here in Toronto likes the people and just has to work some things out. Hopefully Toronto can handle what happens, whatever the final outcome.

Bosh won't extend deal before 2010 (ESPN)
Bosh may seek to opt out in 2010 (National Post)

Reality Check: Rogers Centre, 20 Years On

I will start this post by saying what most people already think: even now, 20 years after its much lauded opening, my relationship to the Rogers Centre is a lot like a couple married for 20 years: every year, I find more and more reasons to be irritated.

Truth be told, I can still vividly remember the first time I visited the place. It was July 1989 and, amazingly, my dad had managed to acquire tickets (which were incredibly hard to find back during the halcyon days of 48,000+ crowds every game from 1989 to 1994).

For a baseball crazy 12-year-old, it was a wonder to behold: good vantage points to the game, far superior ambience to the unpleasantness that was Exhibition Stadium and it felt, well, just better. Sure, it was cold, impersonal and chock-full of concrete, but after years of attending games at the Mistake-by-the-Lake – the coup de grâce being during a game in June 1988, when a young couple sitting two rows in front of my dad and I got pooped on by seagulls and, in a fit of anger, threw beer cups at them, beer still in the cups and drenching an old man in the process – it was a welcome, welcome relief. I’m sure many young men and women in their mid-20s to mid-30s feel the same way.

This being said, it’s never smart to trust your childhood memories.

Looking back on it, the Rogers Centre is, quite possibly, the kind of monument to Toronto that fits the place as well in 1989 as it does in 2009. Rogers Centre, like the City of Toronto itself, is a collection of competing interests and suffers from a mass scale inferiority complex. It is a soulless ode to the irritating, utilitarian ethic that plagues Toronto in almost every large-scale project this city undertakes.

As Bob McCown and Stephen Brunt discussed on Prime Time Sports on Wednesday night, Rogers Centre was borne out of a need to respond to political interests above all else. Toronto – a city that routinely declares itself as world-class, which automatically disqualifies it from actually being world-class – needed to make a statement to the world, at least in the cash-rich 1980s, that they were capable of competing with the urban big boys like Paris or New York City when it comes to large-scale projects. Being the first city on Earth to have a fully retractable roof was a golden selling point for Toronto – a city that was, to borrow a Simpsonian turn of phrase, "on the grow."

Of course, like all things in Canadian politics, a major project or sporting event -- cough Montreal, cough Olympics, cough -- is not about vision or a projection of the intrinsic values a community shares. Canadian politics is almost entirely about compromise, inclusion, cherry-picking certain groups' needs over others and balancing of specific and sometimes competing interests. This mindset can be positive in terms of local democracy, but is often hellish for developing unique symbols of Toronto's identity. It's hard to argue either way on this point, but this need to pile on an assortment of interests may have directed contributed to the outrageous costs of Rogers Centre (does anyone really believe a hotel and health club was sensible in a development-crazy city like Toronto?).

The Big Idea-driven stadium – think Camden Yards or Safeco Field – that appeal directly to deep-seeded signifiers and symbols in sports was never going to happen in Toronto. For the politicians of this beta-class city, it was always about what could appeal to the broadest community of interests and peoples possible. Don't care about baseball? Okay, sure, we’ll house the Argos here too! Don’t care about sports at all? Don’t worry, we’ve got the SkyTent so you can come watch Pink Floyd or the Backstreet Boys. Who cares if it has no soul or personality? As long as we can make it work for everyone, that will justify the cost.

But you can’t come down entirely on the politicians of this fair land. Naturally, Canadian corporations and various multinationals haven't stopped to keep this vision of hyper-pragmatism going. From Day One, Rogers Centre has been a corporate raider’s dream. Everything from the deeply short-sighted 10-year lease for corporate boxes (always the main money maker for any stadium or arena) to the Sickly Sweet Deal Rogers – once believed to be a godsend for the Jays and their stadium, now mostly tolerated as the quintessential "uninterested ownership" – managed to snag by buying the bankrupt SkyDome, it’s been a great deal for corporations. Of course, this is another aspect of Toronto many of us ponder with astonishment from time to time: the overwhelmingly pro-business, anti-investment conservatism that dominates our city's mindset. It’s quite telling that, as McCown and Brunt noted last night, that claims the Rogers Centre's gaudy, concrete façade was planned to be covered with more aesthetically pleasing panels was abandoned due to costs.

Thing is, and this may be hard to accept for some, is that Rogers Centre is exactly what we deserve.

I'm not going to come down on those loyal Jays fans that have suffered for years in front a sub-par product. I won't do that to Argos fans or those millions of people whom have seen concerts, trade shows and countless other events.

Yet it’s become harder and harder to ignore the reality that Toronto is a city that tends to gravitate toward the new and the trendy. You can see this in everything from our recent building projects like the Michael-Lee Chin Crystal at the Royal Ontario Museum to the condo building boom around the city’s southern edges. We’re a city that tends to follow the leader, whether that is ideas developed in Berlin or in Brisbane. We lack a signifying, unifying cultural meme that defines Toronto. We are constantly looking outside of ourselves to find meaning and identity – a trait that at one time might have been just cute and politically expedient, but is now just plain sad and frustrating to those of us looking for something more than just a “high-tech” building like Rogers Centre.

All the multi-coloured lights, HD screens and grilled Panini stations can’t change the fact we sacrificied vision in the name of political expediency. For that reason alone, we should keep Rogers Centre around for years to come.