A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it.
- Agent K

I admit it completely. I am not a guy that the average baseball fan would enjoy bringing to a ball game:

1. I will not do the wave. In fact, I was at the Mets-Braves game on Saturday and seriously questioned the logic of the guys in the right field Mezzanine seats at Shea trying to start the wave. In the ninth inning. Of a one run game. Do you guys have any interest in the outcome of the inning at all???
2. I won’t get drunk at a game. Beers are too expensive, and when my choices are Bud, Bud Light, and Bud Select, I will most likely choose “none of the above”. Besides, there’s a game going on. Focus, people.
3. I do not jump up and down at the sight of the Pepsi Party Patrol shooting t-shirts out of a cannon. Nor do I understand people who are sitting all the way in the back of the sections who do so. I mean, do you understand at all that there’s no way in hell that a t-shirt is coming your way? It’s not a matter of being vocal. It’s just physically impossible. Plus the t-shirts are crap.
4. I refuse to boo. It’s a worthless exercise.

I can go on and on regarding why I’m no fun at a baseball game. But it’s that fourth reason that I want to address right now.

A lot of Mets fans spent all winter fuming. We basically had six months to stew over “the collapse”. When April rolled around, the general fanbase was out for blood. The team had let us down in September. The manager and coaches had let us down. The front office executives let us down. And the fans wanted to let them know it. So what have Met fans done consistently in April?

They booed. A lot. They even booed Johan Santana, who had the audacity to allow five runs in one game. I’m serious. These people are nuts.

But the guy who has taken the brunt of it has been Carlos Delgado. Prior to last night’s game, the Mets first baseman had the line of .186/.276/.256. That’s not a typo. Carlos Delgado was slugging .256. And the fans booed him after every out he made at the plate.

This changed yesterday afternoon, when Delgado cranked two homeruns against the Braves in the Mets 6-3 win. Following his second round-tripper, the fans stood up and cheered loudly, begging Delgado to give them a curtain call.

But Delgado would not come out. He celebrated in the dugout, taking high-fives from teammates with a grin on his face. But he ignored the fans’ request (and then, they predictably booed him). And I didn’t blame him one bit.

I’m not sure when it came to pass that the fans started feeling entitled to things. We’re entitled to a team that contends each and every year. We’re entitled to an owner who’s willing to spend every dollar to make that happen. We’re entitled to a team that not only excels on the field, but also shows fire. When we don’t get these things (at least here in NY), the fans become upset. And I don’t know why. Maybe it comes down to ticket prices. We’re paying more and more each year and as a result of paying that price, maybe we expect too much.

But the fact remains that booing a player is not going to get him “untracked“. It only creates resentment. It only makes New York less appealing. The players are not our monkeys. They’re not going to, nor should they, oblige to our every whim. So why should Delgado care as to what we think? When we didn’t show any signs of support when he was down, why should he appreciate any level of goodwill that we may show? It’s incredibly condescending to expect otherwise.

The part that really bothers me is the mob mentality. If these fans met Delgado one-on-one, I’d bet that each person would gushing at the chance to meet a real Met. But because the baseball writers and bloggers have nothing else to write about, all the fans hear is how underachieving and lackluster this team is. Hence, the booing. Individually, we’re genuine human beings. Together, we turn into jackasses.

So what does Carlos Delgado owe us Mets fans? Nothing he doesn’t owe himself. We treated him like crap and we’re surprised when he doesn’t beg for our approval? Please. You reap what you sow.

NOTE: The one thing I can’t help doing at a game is air drumming to “Enter Sandman” when Billy Wagner comes out. It’s early Metallica. The apex of rockitude. I will not sit idly by. Thank you.

Nick forwarded the above story to me yesterday. I read the headline and was shocked—SHOCKED. Joe Torre was trying to sabotage Andruw Jones! Then I read the article. Apparently, Torre was not, in fact, trying to derail his centerfielder. He was trying to get him “on track,” not “untracked.” After some anal bitching between Nick and myself, Nick turned up several more examples—it appeared that this word was being misused all over the world of sports journalism! (So why am I writing about it and not Nick? Nick said it was too anal, even for him. I have no such compunctions.) Behold:

“With Bedard back, McLaren can concentrate on getting the offense untracked.” (Seattle Post-Intelligencer)

“Ortiz, Sox can’t get untracked.” (Worcester Telegram)

“It won’t matter what the pitcher’s name is when Ortiz gets untracked.” (Hartford Courant)

“The hitters seemed to get untracked a bit in the past week, so perhaps it’s now Sabathia’s turn to get it all together against the Royals.” (MLB.com)

Is the American rail industry in such dire straits (note: not dire ’straights’) that we’ve lost our ability to use the simple railroad metaphor, “get back on track”? As with many misused turns of phrase (note: not ‘terms’ of phrase), there’s some confusion about what “untracked” actually means. These sportswriters, if they’re thinking at all, seem to be mishearing “on track,” thinking it’s “untracked,” and confusing being on a track with being “stuck in a rut.” Thus, to get “untracked,” to them, is a good thing. (For similar mistakes, see: “Play it by year;” “For all intensive purposes;” “A mute point;” “A tough road to hoe;” “Sewing his wild oaks;” and “Tow the line.” You play something by “ear.” You don’t have “intensive” purposes, but intents AND purposes. It’s a moot point, not a mute one. If you’re hoeing a road, no wonder it’s so tough—trying hoeing that “row” instead. Likewise, it’s a lot harder to sew wild oaks than sow wild oats. And if you’re towing the line, what’s the line and where are you taking it? You might be better off “toeing” it.) But as the Language Log notes, the only entry in the OED for “untracked” is “not furnished with a track or path” and “not tracked or traced.” But I don’t think these writers mean that once Big Papi eludes his trackers, he’ll start hitting again.

The worst part is, the editors of these publications are either unaware of the problem or, where the term appears in a headline, even perpetuating it. (Kudos to Bob Costas’ producer, who seems to have shouted a correction into his earpiece after he slipped up in this clip.)

You know, lives aren’t at stake here. This is sports journalism. Maybe to some folks, that excuses such sloppiness. But I say, if it’s not well-written, what’s the point? Sports writing is like the dessert of the journalistic meal. It’s just empty calories, so if it doesn’t taste good, why eat it?

I have a problem.

I. Hate. Julio. Lugo.

I hate the stupid sub-.300 OBP he had last year. I hate the stupid hitting streak he’s on right now, because I know he’s just doing it to be even more of a $%@#$ later. I hate his enormous bug-eyes that stare so widely AND YET STILL MISS THE BALL. I hate that he wears his belt higher than Steve Urkel. I hate that he’s owned in 56% of ESPN fantasy leagues—who are you people and who is your leader??

Because of Julio Lugo, I am even starting to hate the song “Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard,” which makes me hate him even more, because that’s a good $#@%* song, goddammit.

I hate that Lugo’s six errors are nearly TWO-THIRDS of Boston’s 10 team errors. I hate that he would have even more errors if the official scorer were allowed to assume EVEN THE MOST BASIC AND ELEMENTARY LITTLE-LEAGUE LEVEL DOUBLE PLAYS. I hate that even when he doesn’t make an error, he still finds a way to suck. I even hate the one thing about him that doesn’t technically suck—his speed on the basepaths—because that speed masks the true depths of his sucktitude in the batter’s box.

Is this measured, or rational, or fair? No, no, and hell no. But then, hatred so rarely is.

So most of all, I hate that Theo Epstein offered him way more money than any other GM was even imagining offering him, so that now, not only are we paying through the nose for this @#$*%!, we can find no one else to take him off our hands. The $26 million remaining on the deal would be better spent stuffed directly into owner John Henry’s 164-foot yacht, the Iroquois, and burned as fuel.

And of course, I hate that Julio Lugo is blocking fuzzy-cheeked Jed Lowrie. Did you know that Lowrie has 5 RBI in 26 plate appearances, while Lugo has 5 ribbies in 86 plate appearances? Typical. More errors than runs batted in! And five GIDPs too! Even with the speed! And I laugh—LAUGH!—at the fact that in the ninth inning of of a recent game, with the Sox up by a run and Manny Ramirez out of the game, Terry Francona moved Lugo to left field and Lowrie over to shortstop as a defensive replacement.

But it is not happy, trilling laughter. No, it is cold, cynical laughter. Because, as I was forced to conclude in this week’s Metro column, Julio Lugo’s below-average play and above-average pay likely mean that Jed Lowrie’s days in Boston are numbered. Not only is the entire left side of Boston’s infield locked up through 2010, Jed Lowrie may not be a natural shortstop anyway, as he lacks some of the necessary “first-step quickness” (in the words of Baseball Prospectus). However, he has worked hard to cut down on his error rate and his throws are generally solid, so his comparative lack of range may not be immediately apparent. This leads me to conclude that, at short, the most that could be hoped for is the defensive capability of Derek Jeter, who has very sure hands but, like that other good-looking Derek, one Mr. Zoolander, “can’t go left.” Thus, another team may be happy to take Lowrie and stick him at second base. As for the possibility, explored by Coley at MLB Trade Rumors last weekend, that Boston would keep him and use him as a super-utility guy? It’s possible, but I think it’s unlikely as long as he has even greater value to the team as trade-bait.

But Red Sox fans, take heart. Even if we are stuck with Julio Lugo through 2010, we do have another, potentially even better shortstop prospect waiting in the wings. Right now, he’s down at Greenville, Boston’s single A affiliate. Oscar Tejada, writes Baseball Prospectus, is a “toolsy Dominican” who was “impressive” last year, in his debut season for the Gulf Coast League, “showcasing gap power, good speed, excellent range, and a cannon for an arm.” He’s still “at least three to four years away,” but he’s also “brimming with potential.” Some additional info:

The Good: Tejeda has all of the tools necessary to be a star-level shortstop. He’s a good hitter with a line-drive stroke who has the frame and the bat speed to develop into some power. Defensively, he has excellent range, crisp actions and a strong arm.
The Bad: Not even 18 yet, Tejeda is still rough around the edges in many aspects. He still hasn’t seen enough breaking balls to make the proper adjustments to them, and he needs to improve in the little parts of the game, like bunting and baserunning. Like many young, flashy shortstops, he’s prone to errors when trying to make spectacular plays.
Perfect World Projection: A starting shortstop with the ability to create runs at the plate, and prevent them in the field.
Timetable: Tejeda’s youth and inexperience leaves him very far from his potential. While it seems like he’s ready for a full-season assignment, he’ll be only 18 for all of 2008, and there might be a need for patience.

I hope Oscar Tejada comes along well. I hope he’s ready to go by spring training in 2011. And I hope to God that I still have eyes to see him by then, because if I’m stuck watching Julio Cesar Lugo for the next three full seasons, I may actually claw them out.

It wasn’t enough that we all had to be dragged through the Miguel Tejada ordeal by ESPN (yes, fine, big deal; but why make a spectacle out of it?), the Mother Ship from Bristol has decided to criss-cross the Caribbean from the sunny beaches of the Dominican Republic to the northern coast of Colombia to bring us the apparent bad blood between its two most prominent baseball players, Orlando Cabrera and Edgar Rentería.

According to an upcoming report in ESPN The Magazine (and published today at espn.com), there is rising animosity between the two shortstops originating in a business deal gone bad related to Colombian professional baseball, Cabrera and Rentería’s family.

To make a long story short, Cabrera bought the Cartagena franchise “Los Indios” last year from Rentería’s family business, Team Renteria (who runs the professional league down there) only to sell it right back after the short one-month season. Cabrera claims he’s owed money in from his cut of ticket sales, advertising and TV deals. Rentería alleges Cabrera bought the franchise only to run it into the ground out of what Rentería considers spite and jealousy; what’s more, he is saying:

“I won’t accept dealing with him. I think he’s disrespected so many baseball people in Colombia who have been working to improve the sport. And that’s not something I can accept, even with an apology from him.”

And…

“He wanted to buy one team so he could wreck everything that’s been done with the league,” Edgar says. “I think he did it out of malice. You should ask him what he has against the Renterías. For several years, people have told me that he’s jealous of me. People have always known me more in Colombia than him, and I think that bothers him.”

There are a couple of things that surprise me about this story; one of which isn’t ESPN’s gullibility in believing there is a story here. Just like in the Tejada case, they found a fissure and wedged their press pass deep enough to create a gaping void. Again, there may have been journalistic recency to the Tejada story, but ESPN was marketing the thing like it was a heavyweight title fight. And in this case, just as the White Sox are playing the Yankees in prime-time, and as Orlando Cabrera is at the plate, the TV anchors point to the story as it’s being published on ESPN’s website. What? Does ESPN get the final say in what’s news?

But again, that doesn’t surprise me.

What does surprise me is Rentería’s handling of this situation. In Colombia, baseball is an afterthought; it’s like Lacrosse, you know it’s there, but you think only college kids are playing it every now and then. The exception to the rule is Rentería’s name. Just like ESPN correctly points out, he became a celebrity after his game-winning hit in the ‘97 World Series. Hell, I was watching the game on public access TV in Colombia – There were three public channels back then. Unlike Rentería, Cabrera is lesser known, and that I dare say is a direct result of Rentería’s fame (and quite literally, Rentería was scouted by Cabrera’s father, who also gave the Expo’s Orlando’s older brother, Jolbert, before Cabrera himself made it to the big leagues).

Colombia’s major and most important daily, El Tiempo, relishes in Rentería’s success. Their coverage of Rentería’s career seems to imply that he is Colombian baseball. Check that, Rentería is Colombian baseball. If Rentería has a bad night, it’s news, if he hits a home run, it’s news. Ironically, just tonight as ESPN published their story, Rentería’s line at the plate sat under the “Grandes Ligas” headline (Major Leagues) on El Tiempo’s website (ironic also that El Tiempo was caught with their pants down, and in haste, after the embarrassment of being scooped, they decided to buy the story from ESPN and run a word-for-word translation).

Cabrera does gets some coverage, as he’s made a name of himself, mainly due to his leadership and gamer attitude. And he’s always mentioned every year when the Colombian media select the sportsman’ of the year. But make no mistake, ask any Colombian to name a ball player, and Rentería will be the overwhelming response.

So what does all this have to do with this squabble over the $25,000 Cabrera invested (keep in mind these two players make millions)? Nothing! And that’s why there’s no story here. ESPN makes it seem like because there just happens to be two Colombian ball players in the league, it’s news that there is some tension where one would assume would exist cordiality and friendship. What? Do all players from Hawaii have to get along? Canadians?

I don’t blame ESPN; the New York Times had a similar piece during the 2004 World Series (theirs was of the positive spin kind) that still commodified the difference these two ball players represent. And it’s a natural thing for the MSM to take a “cultural” angle to any story and run with it; but ESPN took it to the gutter.

Even after reading ESPN’s masturbatory story “Behind the story”, it’s still not clear to me how the reporter “discovered” it, or why it’s relevant to us. In fact, Team Rentería’s communication director, Fabio Poveda Ruiz, published an open letter on its website, criticizing the writer behind the story, Jorge Arangure, for various factual inaccuracies, and for relying on stereotypical descriptions of life in Colombia.

What is really sad, however, is Rentería’s handling of the situation. This is a personal matter between his family and his family’s business and Cabrera. It’s no secret that Rentería has had issues with being in the spotlight (main reason he got shipped out from Boston), but he didn’t have a choice in becoming the face of Colombian baseball, he simply was ordained by the nature of Colombian sports and sports journalism where idolatry supplants true, good-hearted sport fanaticism. In fact, it was because of his prominence amongst Colombians that I was able to land an interview with him for a magazine I work for here in Atlanta that caters to the Colombian community – instead of being open to the opportunity to engage, he asked me to get it over with quick after he took batting practice.

At the time I figured, hey, we’re a small magazine, I should appreciate any second I get. But it’s clear now; like many prominent Colombian sports figures, fame and fortune get to their head to a point where they forget what their role is. In this case, Rentería fell for the oldest trick in a reporter’s notebook. By speaking publicly about his problems with Cabrera, he dragged his fellow country man through the mud; Rentería says Cabrera is giving Colombian baseball a bad name, but what’s clear to me is that not even Yamid Haad, the next best Colombian prospect, who was suspended for using steroids, did as much damage as this “story” will.

I’m not one to pick a fight. Whenever the editor of a newspaper for which I don’t work for comes over to my cubicle screaming obscenities as to why the Internet is jacked up, I look down, blush red in anger, and bite my lip.

Loyal UmpBump readers know that I rarely have a bone to pick with anyone (well, except Jay Mariotti, but who doesn’t?!)

But this morning, as I unfolded the sports section of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution I came across a column by one Furman Bisher, a pundit I’d never heard of in my life. And his column, “Sayonara, baseball tradition” though eloquent, rich in historical facts, embellished with romantic longing for yesteryear, came across as outstandingly ignorant and scandalous.

Now, as I said, I’d never heard of Bisher, so I brushed up on his bio just to know who I was dealing with, and it’s more than evident that he’s an eminence and he’s earned his place among accomplished sports journalists.

But passages like this have finally broken my impression of printed dates preceded by the number 19 as current or modern; and clearly, like Bisher, those dates belong in the 20th century, and not in the opinion pages of any publication:

Well, not any longer. Money can change any habit. Eight springs ago the Mets and Cubs opened the season, not in Cincinnati. Guess where? Tokyo. That Tokyo, the guys who gave us Pearl Harbor. Some people don’t like you to bring that up, trade with Japan is so hot. But I’ve got a long memory. I saw what a few bombs can do to our property.

Oh, well, ‘scuse me. It’s just tough to get away from it when you turn on your TV in the morning there are the Boston Red Sox playing the Oakland A’s in the Tokyo Dome. Not only that, but the Red Sox pitcher is Daisuke Matsuzaka, who didn’t grow up in Wampole.

I have no problem with Furman waxing nostalgic about Red Stockings and how every season was opened in Cincinnati; yes, tradition is something we all long for and have a hard time breaking off. But when you go from Cubs-Mets in Tokyo, to the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor, to Daisuke and Opening Day ‘08, it’s time to ignore the senile old man and let him sit in his chair, drinking his sweet tea.

Except, of course, he’s not sitting idly reminiscing on his better days. He’s in the opinion pages of both a major daily and its website!

Bah, who am I kidding. This is the AJC, and this is Georgia, where it’s still illegal to buy beer on Sunday. Too bad old man Bisher doesn’t realize that, much like him, some traditions, for better or worse, will simply not go away.

It happens every spring. A scrappy young player walks into big league camp as a relative unknown to the general masses. While the veterans greet each other with big smiles, the newcomer has to introduce himself to pretty much everyone. Initially, the sportswriters ignore him and concentrate on the more established players made available by the team’s PR department. But when the preseason games begin, and when the new kid steps into the batter’s box, the attention is his. And he capitalizes.

The next day, he finds his name in the sports sections of numerous newspapers. Do this a few more times and the fan base begins to get excited. He continues to succeed throughout the month of March to the point where he improbably cracks the big league roster. By now, the fans know who he is. He’s the new guy who batted over .400 or had an ERA below 2 throughout the exhibition games. And the first time he comes out of that home dugout for his first appearance of the regular season, he gets an ovation from the crowd that’s usually reserved for the star players.

For the 2008 New York Mets, that guy is Angel Pagan, the 26-year old outfielder who the Mets drafted back in 1999 but had to reacquire in a trade with the Chicago Cubs during the offseason. While not completely anonymous on the big stage thanks to the 318 ABs he’s had as a Cub in ‘06 and ‘07, the average fan probably knew very little about him except that he has perhaps the most oxymoronic name in Major League history.

But in the last three weeks, Pagan has accumulated 45 ABs during which he’s gotten on-base at a .426 clip and slugged .578 with a .400 batting average and a couple stolen bags to boot. This has prompted the beat writers to collectively call for his inclusion on the big league roster. His stock became so high that some people actually bought the fake rumor that the Red Sox were going to trade Coco Crisp to the Mets in exchange for Pagan. Really? Isn’t that taking things a bit too far?

Due to the not-so-shocking injury to Moises Alou, the starting left-field spot on Opening Day is yet to be determined. Just two or three weeks ago it would have been considered foolish to even suggest that Pagan deserved the gig. And I don’t completely understand why we should be thinking any differently now.

It appears on the surface that most people get it. It’s spring training. Hitters are facing AA pitchers and vice versa. Established pitchers are trying out that new cut fastball that they can’t quite command just yet and the veteran hitters are trying to get their timing back. There’s no evidence that spring training success bodes well for the regular season. None. Zilch. Nada. I think the majority of the baseball world is in agreement on this one.

Then why doesn’t this logic hold true for Pagan? Why should we be impressed by a .426 OBP and a .578 SLG when it’s blatantly obvious that both stats are being held up by an impossibly high .400 AVG? Why should we ignore the fact that so far in his career the man’s line is an unimpressive .255/.306/.415? Because he’s young and has room to grow? Because he wasn’t wearing a NY Mets uniform prior to this year? Not buying it.

Far more indicative of his skill set than the 45 ABs he’s gotten this spring is the 2483 ABs he’s accumulated in the minor leagues. Pagan didn’t fare amazingly well during this time either, going .280/.338./.373 - numbers that would be fine… if he was a speedy shortstop who excelled defensively. Pagan does run well, but he appears to be cut from the same cloth as Endy Chavez, another backup outfielder for the Mets. They are useful as fifth outfielders who can be called upon as a defensive replacement or pinch runner, but why would you want two of them on your team?

Regardless of what I think, it appears that Pagan will be heading north with the team in a couple of weeks. But unless the Mets continue to be decimated by injuries, I just don’t see how they could justify keeping Pagan in the bigs for much longer. I hope I’m wrong on this one as I’d like nothing more than to see him succeed far beyond what I perceived were his capabilities as long as he does it in a Mets uniform. But history tells me that’s just a pipe dream.

You might dislike the Yankees. You might be jealous of all those World Championships. Maybe you blame them for financial disparity in all of baseball. Perhaps you think of them as the willing host body upon which the leech Scott Boras feasts. Maybe you’d like to accidentally push Alex Rodriguez down three flights of stairs. You may even want to go back in time to the 1996 ALCS and tackle the then-twelve-year-old Jeffrey Maier down to the ground and beat him to a pulp just so he wouldn’t be able to reach over the wall and grab Derek Jeter’s “homerun” ball (if you do want to, you just ain’t right - he’s twelve for god’s sakes! Why would you even think of doing such a thing you bastard???).

But if you’re a baseball fan, you have to respect Yankee Stadium. It may not look like much now, but too many things happened there and too many legends crossed those foul lines onto the playing field for anyone to say “good riddance” to the stadium once the Yankees vacate it after this season. It deserves to be remembered in baseball lore - not only as the House That Ruth Built,  but also as one of the most meaningful cathedrals built on American soil.

And a place like that needs to go out with a bang. It merits a fitting tribute. It demands an event so powerful and lasting that will remain forever linked with the Stadium itself.

Instead, it looks like we’ll get a New York Rangers game. That’s right. Hockey. That’s what baseball fans around the world want as the last event at hallowed Yankee Stadium. A Canadian sport.  Hazzah.

It’s not even the case that I dislike hockey. I do like it. In fact, as a kid my brother and I had a poster of Pat Verbeek, Kirk Muller, Ken Daneyko, John MacLean, Aaron Broten and Sean Burke hanging from our bedroom wall (we’re Devils fans if you couldn’t tell).

But Yankee Stadium is and forever will be known as a baseball stadium. Sure, it’s seen other memorable sporting events in its time such as Joe Louis vs. Max Schmeling, Pele and the NY Cosmos, Notre Dame vs. Army, NY Football Giants vs. Johnny Unitas and the Indianapolis Colts in the 1958 Championship game.  Despite this, I imagine that very few people will say that these other events are what they will remember most about the shrine on River Avenue. They’ll remember the Babe, Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle, Berra, Reggie and Jeter. They’ll remember the sound of Bob Sheppard’s voice. They’ll sit in bars and talk about which grounds keeper was the best at dancing to “YMCA”. And they’ll knock back a drink in salute to Cotton Eyed Joey and his lethal moves in the broadcast booth.

Alright, fine. I’m terrible at waxing poetic. But you’d think that a proud organization like the Yankees would want the average fan’s final sight of Yankee Stadium to be… Yankee-ish or at least something related to America’s pastime. Instead, we’ll get Henrik Lundqvist. Now that just ain’t American.

New York Times sportswriter, George Vecsey, penned a wonderfully ridiculous article in today’s edition, essentially playing the role of party pooper in the Johan Santana celebration. Why? Quite frankly, I’m not sure. And I’m not convinced that George knows either. He writes:

Omar Minaya may ice the deal for Johan Santana any hour now but, until further notice, the Mets are still the team that fell apart last September, disastrously.

The Mets still have to report to their legion of self-appointed probation officers, that is to say, Mets fans, on a regular basis from now until October to prove they are not recidivists in the worrisome habit of folding.

Actually, George, in case you didn’t notice, the majority of us Mets fans (rightly or wrongly), are quite happy at the moment. If we really are the “probation officers”, then the ex-con just dropped off James “Whitey” Bulger on our front doorstep.

I would strongly advise giddy Mets fans to envision the Marlins and the Nationals whacking them around in the final two weeks of last season. That should neutralize the euphoria, assuming Minaya and the family Wilpon sign the Twins’ star lefty to a six-year contract.

Why would we want to do that? That sounds about as much fun as punching yourself in the groin repeatedly just to prevent yourself from making a move on that incredibly cute girl standing across the room and giving you that ‘come hither’ stare. It’s completely irrational.

Essentially, the Mets are front-ending their pitching staff — Santana for the departed Tom Glavine. That upgrade does not necessarily make them a better…

And this is where Vecsey’s logic supernovas into a blackhole. Is he really arguing that keeping Tom Glavine may actually have been preferable to adding Johan Santana? Do I even need to post comparative statistics to prove how inane that suggestion is?

Even if Santana stays healthy, he is 28, and pitchers can fall apart in a heartbeat. For that matter, he did not have such a wonderful September himself.

See, George, you were so freaking close to making a coherent statement with that first sentence. Yes, pitchers (moreso than hitters) are a fragile bunch. But “he is 28″ is your argument? 28 is too old for you? I’m 27 and am still waiting to hit puberty for god’s sakes (any day now…). And picking one freaking month - 5 games - out of a pitcher’s 251-game career (that’s less than 2% of games he’s appeared for those who care) simply doesn’t make sense.

Besides, he can start only once every five games, or somewhat more than 30 starts a season.

Do I need to continue? Fine. I’ll keep going. By this logic, no starting pitcher in MLB is worth much of anything since they “can only start once every five games”. But Jon Rauch is more valuable because he pitched decently in 88 games.

Let’s say (Santana) wins 20 games. He is still taking up a certain number of starts that would have been made, and perhaps even won, by another regular.

I’m not even going to talk about VORP to get my point across. But this is like trying to minimize the impact of Alex Rodriguez by making a case for Wilson Betemit. Had the Mets not landed Santana, they would have trotted Mike Pelfrey - or even worse, signed Livan Hernandez - instead.

Little has changed since last September. Paul Lo Duca is being replaced by Brian Schneider at catcher, maybe an upgrade in defense and comportment but a downgrade in hitting, and they now have Ryan Church in right field, not necessarily a big deal.

Um, have you forgotten what you were writing about in the first place? Isn’t the whole point of this article to talk about the Mets trading for Johan Santana? That’s a “little change”?

The core of the team remains the same. Moises Alou was a rock last September, but he turns 42 this summer. David Wright is terrific, but not yet the assertive leader he may be someday. Carlos Beltrán has his moments.

You know something’s wrong when Moises Alou is described as “a rock” but Carlos Beltran - arguably the best all round centerfielder in baseball - is diminished to a “has his moments”.

On a team constructed with veteran players, many of them Latino, no critical mass of leadership emerged to shake Reyes out of his walkabout… It appears that nobody took Reyes into the back room and said, “¿Qué tal?”— what’s up?

See, now you’re just guessing to make a point. And not only that, what does being Latino have anything to do with anything?

Ultimately, you can make the case that the Mets shouldn’t have traded away their future. I disagree given the supposed talent levels of the prospects headed to Minnesota, but at least it’s a plausible argument. You can make the case that no pitcher deserves such a lengthy guaranteed deal and logistically speaking, you’d be right. But for a big-market team like the Mets - with their own cable network and a new stadium opening in 2009, the financial damage isn’t completely crippling.

But what doesn’t make sense is trying to argue that the 2008 Mets are not a better team now than they were last week. It doesn’t make sense to insinuate that keeping Tom Glavine instead of acquiring the best pitcher in baseball may have been the right move. And even Vecsey himself can’t believe that Carlos Beltran is simply a player who “has his moments”.

AAAARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

See what you did, George? You reduced me to doing a terrible Lewis Black impersonation. I hope you’re happy, sir.

Because I’m guessing they are not racist, right-wing Japanese ultranationalists.

You’d have to be one or the other to build an entire ad campaign around a symbol that is deeply offensive to millions of people across Asia:

Sure, maybe a lot of those Asians don’t care about baseball, or the Cubs but isn’t this still kind of a bad idea? I mean, I don’t know if 85-year old Eastern European Jews care much about baseball either, but would you build a marketing campaign around the Nazi swastika flag?

What’s more amazing than the fact that this ad campaign even exists is the way the Cubs are so blithely hyping it on their official website. In an article on Cubs.com entitled “Cubs unleash bold, new ad campaign: Promotions international in scope with dash of local flavor,” there is clearly no understanding whatsoever that this image might at all be offensive:

CHICAGO–Kosuke Fukudome is among the players featured in a new ad campaign unveiled on Tuesday designed to showcase the international breadth and depth of the Cubs.

A graphic red, white and blue image of the Japanese outfielder that includes a rising sun includes the statement, “I don’t need an interpreter. My bat does the talking.”

The campaign focuses on individual players with a bold treatment using elements from each player’s unique background. Ads featuring Aramis Ramirez and Alfonso Soriano will use a portion of the Dominican Republic flag as a background…. There also is an ad with pitcher Kerry Wood that will feature the Texas flag.

….

“It’s a very international campaign. Yet the red, white and blue also makes it very Cub,” said Scott Maney, president and executive creative director of Jones, which is based in the River North section of Chicago and the company behind the creation of the ads.

….

“Most of the time, advertising has to work pretty hard to lift a brand up,” Maney said. “But with the Cubs, the opposite is true. The brand is already so sacred, the advertising has to work extremely hard just to keep up. It has to earn the right to represent the Cubs.”

This is the kind of ad that will “earn the right to represent the Cubs”? This cheery article gets posted on the Cubs’ official site, including a picture of the Fukudome ad? And the ad has already been printed in several Chicago area newspapers? It boggles the mind to think of the number of people in the Cubs’ front office who must have had to green light this ad for it to get so far.

Clearly the Cubs have no idea what kind of campaign they have “unleashed.”

But what surprises me most of all is the reaction so far to this ad campaign, which makes me wonder, if only for a moment, whether I am giving the Cubs too hard a time. While plenty of people were shocked by the ads, there also seems to be a large number of people who think that it is not a big deal. Witness a representative comment to the post that first broke this story on the blog “On 205th”:

“Much ado about basically nothing. I would be shocked if anyone besides bloggers are “offended” by this image. For a country that sure loves to parade the image of our flag around, it is ironic that some of its citizens would get their panties in a bunch over this.”

Or this one:

“Given the craptacular diplomatic performance of our current administration could the same not be said of the American Flag?

Hell, that thing is all over the place in MLB.”

There seems to be an erroneous assumption here that this image is simply the Japanese national flag, equivalent to our own American flag, so what’s the big deal? Which means it’s time for a little history lesson…

So there are two flags which were used by the Japanese at various times in the 20th century:

The flag on the top is the current national flag of Japan. The flag on the bottom, however, is not. Rather, it was the battle flag of the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy during World War II and earlier Japanese wars. This was the flag that was raised over Nanking, that flew over “comfort” stations, that was saluted by Unit 731. It was the flag of Japanese militarism.

Anyone who has been in Asia for any length of time will recognized why the second flag is so offensive. There is a reason why extreme right-wing ultranationalists in Japan make a point of marching around carrying this flag and not the regular Japanese flag when they protest in favor of restoring Japanese military might. There is a reason why many Chinese and Koreans fly into a rage at the mere sight of this flag. There is a reason why the Japanese government itself never used this flag at all for more than 50 years after World War II, until some right-wing politicians made a political statement by passing a law in 1999 “rehabilitating” the flag as a national symbol, although it is still almost never actually used.

And then there is our good friend Jay Mariotti of the Chicago-Sun times, who writes a piece today calling for people to have some “perspective,” and asking us to “remember that World War II ended in September of 1945. A month later, the Cubs played in their most recent World Series. We’re talking a long, long time ago, maybe too long to get worked up over what’s supposed to be a proud showcase of the new right fielder.”

Yeah, and the Holocaust was a long time ago too.

World War II in Europe killed 40 million people. The War in Asia killed 30 million people. The only difference between the armies that bore the swastika on their flags and the armies that bore the sunburst was that the armies with the swastikas killed some more people. But we are still talking tens of millions of people killed.

So either symbol would be an absolutely moronic image to use in your “proud showcase of your new rightfielder,” let alone tout on your official website or run in actual print newspapers, no matter how long ago those atrocities were.

So I come home after a long day at work and sit down to one of my many benign guilty pleasures: flipping through the day’s catalogs. Tonight, we’ve got a good haul: LL Bean, J Crew, and Red Envelope. Browsing through this last, which specializes in expensive shit you don’t need (a.k.a., “gifts”), I noticed some expensive shit I actually might have wanted, if it weren’t so expensive:

This pen, which is “crafted from authentic stadium-seat wood from America’s most famous and beloved stadiums,” available in Yankee Stadium (royal blue), Wrigley Field (dark green), Fenway Park (dark blue), Dodger Stadium (Dodger blue) and Busch Stadium (gray).

And these cuff links, “crafted of salvaged seats from America’s most famous and beloved stadiums,” available in Yankee Stadium (royal blue), Wrigley Field (dark green), Fenway Park (dark blue), Dodger Stadium (Dodger blue), RFK Stadium (orange), Busch Stadium (gray), Tiger Stadium (dark green), Comiskey Park (light green), or Shea Stadium (orange).

It’s not that I’m shocked at three-digit price tags for office supplies or glorified buttons. No, what has my knickers in a twist is that while all of the pens are in the $170 to $190 (for Yankee Stadium) range, the Fenway Park pen is a whopping $250. Likewise, all of the cuff links are priced at $150—except, again, for the Fenway Park links, which are $230. Clearly, they think the most rabid fans in the game can be counted on to pony up more dough. Well, Mr. Director of Sales, the Fenway Faithful may pay more for tickets than other fans do, but we’re not stupid, and we’re not made of money. I might have bought my boyfriend $150 cuff links made of Fenway Park, but I ain’t shelling out 230 clams for those puppies. You just priced yourself out of a sale.

This member of Red Sox Nation will be saving her pennies for StubHub.