Johnny Damon headed for the Tribe

 Just some of the photos that come up when you Google "Johnny Damon."

Old friend Johnny Damon has apparently signed with the Cleveland Indians for a one-year deal with "$1.25 million in base salary with $1.4 million," according to ESPN.com.

The Indians are off to a 1-4 start, and though that gives them a better winning percentage than the Red Sox, they have more reason to worry - namely the .176 team batting average and going 1-for-11with runners in scoring position.

The Tribe will be Damon's seventh team, and somehow he's never played in the National League, having played for Kansas City, Oakland, Boston, New York (Yankees), Detroit, and Tampa Bay.  Of course, we know him best as the once fun-loving Idiot who broke our collective hearts when he jumped ship for the Evil Empire after promising that he wouldn't.

He resurfaced in New York without his iconic hair and beard, and had some solid years for the Yankees, winning the World Series with them in 2009.  When he went off to the mid-west in 2010 to play for the Tigers, I for one thought that the healing could begin, but then he vetoed a waiver-trade back to us late in the year, and I decided to never look back.

Johnny Damon is a quality baseball player: he's approaching 3,000 hits, and by all accounts he's a great guy to have in the clubhouse. But I'll never forgive him for shunning us TWICE - and the second time it wasn't even about the money.  So Johnny Damon is becoming an Indian... maybe that's karma?

Ozzie Guillen garners the wrong kind of attention

 If you're not following Ozzie Guillen on Twitter, you should be.

Whatever problems you might already be having with the new manager (and trust me, I understand if you have concerns), you can at least rest assured that it could be much worse. The Red Sox could have gone the route of Marlins owners Jeffrey Loria and David Samson and hired the one and only Ozzie Guillen.

In case you haven't heard, Guillen recently did an interview with Time Magazine, and, as usual, he had some questionable things to say, most infamously, "I love Fidel Castro."

What Guillen was trying to get across is that he admires the Cuban dictator's survival and longevity, not his philosophy of governing, but the intent doesn't matter.  The Marlins are at the beginning of a new era: they just spent huge amounts of money in the offseason for the biggest name free agents (and for Guillen himself), and opened up the season on national television with the unveiling of their new $500 million ballpark in the Little Havana section of Miami.

Yes, that's correct, Little Havana. New manager Ozzie Guillen just announced his love for despised Cuban dictator Fidel Castro in the city with the largest concentration of Cuban refugees in the country, just as the Marlins are trying to recruit them into the fanbase.  It would be like walking into the Upper West Side Jewish Center and announcing to a group of Holocaust survivors that you loved Hitler, then asking them to please support your business.

Needless to say, the fallout has been immediate and messy. Marlins ownership has suspended Guillen for five games for his comments, and the Cuban population in Miami is livid and calling for a termination of Guillen's contract.

It's a safe bet that the Marlins ownership brought Guillen in to garner them some much-needed publicity in a state that is mostly apathetic about baseball.  It's an even safer bet that this was not what they had in mind.

So I understand the frustrations with Bobby V.'s bullpen handling, or the angst about his radio show gig in New York - but at least he hasn't professed his love and admiration for any evil, murderous dictators lately.

A look on the bright side.

I'm tempering my alarm, using every ounce of logic I can come up with to keep the hot bubble of panic from rising up inside me. It's only six games. It's one more win than we had last year at this time. We'll lose 5-of-6 in July and no one will notice.  Sometimes it works. More often, I get more creeping thoughts encroaching on my logic: The bullpen is in shambles. Bobby V is a nutcase (though admittedly nowhere near as nutty as Ozzie Guillen - but that's another post). Youkilis is falling apart. And on and on and on.

But enough of those crazy voices in my head (is it just me, or do you guys have them too?). There is plenty to be excited about so far this season, and if you - like me - sometimes have difficulty bringing these to mind, here they are in a convenient list.

1. Jon Lester is in mid-season form, and seems to be taking the whole "make up for September" thing very seriously. Lester has traditionally struggled in April, but he has absolutely dominated in his first two outings, and the fact that he doesn't have a win yet is just more evidence for how useless a stat the win can be.
2. Daniel Bard's first start was promising, though the surface numbers (5IP, 5 earned runs, and a loss) are less than ideal. Bard recorded six strikeouts, allowed just one walk, and induced eighteen swings-and-misses at his pitches. His BABIP was way above average (a fancy way of saying more balls fell in for hits than is normal - the law of averages should make up for that over a full season).
3. Dustin Pedroia looks ready, willing, and able to carry this team on his back all the way to the playoffs. The sparkplug second baseman began late rallies multiple times this week, seemingly willing the Red Sox to score runs. I don't think the Red Sox will be awarding a "C" to a player any time soon, but we all know who the leader is inside that clubhouse.
4. Adrian Gonzalez seems to have come to understand us. Last year he was calling for fans to relax after the 0-6 start.  Not so this year, after an off-season of Sox mea culpas, Gonzo was out there claiming that the first game in Toronto was a must win. Gonzo came prepared - he has six RBIs so far this season.
5. [This one is more personal, so I apologize in advance.] I am in the United States of America, in Red Sox Nation, where I can watch baseball on my TV.  At this time last year I was in Dakar, Senegal, praying that the power/WiFi wouldn't go out, and paying a classmate 10,000 CFA (about $20) to use his mlb.tv account. This is much better.

It's all going to be okay. This team is solid (though the bullpen is more suspect than I would prefer), and over the course of 2012 they are going to win a lot of games. There will probably be more drama than we've been used to since Manny took off, courtesy of Bobby V., but what's Boston baseball without a few shenanigans?

"Is he a giant?"

Courtesy of 25 YouTube comments that are actually funny.

Yes. The answer is yes.

Fans who use "we:" normal or annoying?

I've blogged about my History of US Sports class in this space before, but we had a particularly spirited debate this evening - and it wasn't about a team, or a player, or even a sport. It was about the fans. Specifically, how attachment to a particular team is displayed.  There were students who were personally offended when fans used "we" in most contexts, students (including myself) who use "we," and some who didn't care.

Personally, I only get annoyed when people will say "We won," when their team wins, but "They lost," when their team loses. Don't lump yourself in only when the team is successful, then seek to distance yourself during the bad times.

In class, there were more people who used "we," or who didn't mind when others did, than those who disliked it. However, when I asked if people minded the use of "we" on social networking sites, opinions seemed to be more split. On Twitter I got two responses, one on each side of the issue.

 On Tumblr, I got five responders who bristled at the use of "we," and four who either didn't care or embraced it.  On Facebook I got four answers: three didn't care, and one was particularly vocal and articulate about her support for "we:"

"I've got my time, money, and emotions invested into these teams, go through the ups and downs with them.... sometimes fans can be the difference maker in a game... Teams can't thrive as professional teams without us... I def feel justified using "we""

The crux of the issue (on both sides) seems to come down to ownership and attachment to the team in question.  Those who thing "we" is inappropriate seem to be concerned that fans who use the term feel too close, and that they should step back some.


For me personally, sports are EXTREMELY personal. I have a visceral, emotional response to the team. I feel elated when they win, and depressed when they lose - the Boston athlete's accusation that the fans take things too seriously sometimes describes me to a "T."  I feel like my Facebook friend quoted above: I spend a huge amount of time, money, and energy on the Red Sox, and I use "we." [I do NOT feel invested enough in the Pats, Celts, or Bruins to use "we."]


What do you all think? Am I crazy and/or annoying to refer to the Sox as "we?" Do you ever do this?

Red Sox Photo Day Outtakes

As Mike Aviles says to open the video, "I love this part of the year:"



From Youkilis making fun of Pedroia's Alma mater (Arizona State), to Jon Lester proclaiming that he's not an English major, to Darnell McDonald claiming he can't read, this video is sure to have you laughing. And, in case you were wondering, Clay Buchholz is not a morning person.

A little late: An Andy Pettitte reaction

So the title for this post is two-fold: first, because I'm a terrible blogger and this post is wayyy overdue. Sorry. Second, because Pettitte's return is a little too late in his career.  The man will be forty years old in June, and given his history, you have to believe there will be some suspicions if he's too successful this season, especially with his recent history of muscle injuries.

Because he was ostensibly "retired" last season, Bill James has no 2012 projection for Pettitte.  He does, however, have a projection for 2011 based on his last year pitching in the majors, 2010.  James projected 23 starts, 140 IP, 9 wins, 7 losses, and an ERA of 3.86.  These are very respectable numbers - but if we take into account what has changed since late 2010 when James made these projections, I think we can assume they might be slightly lower.

Pettitte has not played in a major league ballgame since 2010, and for all he says that he's been throwing at home, I think we can assume he  will backslide some from the 11-3, 3.28 ERA performance from that year (which is interesting in itself, as it followed four years of ERAs over 4).

He is also looking at extended Spring Training, as he showed up out of retirement well after his teammates had reported - if all goes according to plan, he's looking at a mid-May return, cutting that innings estimate down. Pettitte also lacks the luxury of an assured rotation spot that he would have had in 2011, and has to fight his way into a rotation that is already overcrowded (as a Sox fan, I hope they make room for him by taking out someone young and strong).

There's really no way to guess how Pettitte's return will be - whether it's triumphant or embarassing will be up to his readiness, the state of the team when he returns to it, and Manaer Joe Girardi's decisions concerning his playing time.  But it should be interesting - obviously, the players from the late-90s glory days can't stay away - perhaps we should be on the lookout for Jorge Posada to renege on his retirement next season.