Posts Tagged ‘opinion’

My Post World War II (1946-1960) MLB All Stars

December 18, 2010

My Two Greatest Hitter of All Time: Stan Musial & Ted Williams.

My Post World War II (1946-1960) MLB All Stars

There will be no one group of nine that fills the bill for all of us on this one. These are just my picks, the stars that lit nights and guided the best and worst summer days of my growing-up years in Houston, with nothing more to help me keep up with them all but the Houston Post, The Sporting News, the Mutual Game of the Day on radio, DIzzy Dean and the TV Baseball Game of the week, and some very early and primitive long distance reporting by the first evening sports announcers at TV channels 2, 11,, and 13.

If you were around at the time, you will have your own choices – and we would like to hear who they are in the comment section of this column. There are no right or wrong answers here – just differences based on factors of personal preference, but, as Bum Phillips was wont to always say: “I’ll be happy to put my guys on the field to play “”yurn” any day of the week.

Here are my starting nine. They are all Hall of Famers, but that was just a common thread that easily fell into a stitch pattern through my entire nifty nine. In the old days, at least, the Hall of Fame didn’t miss often on awarding the signature of greatness to the folks who deserved it, based on their performances on the field. Mine are these:

Pitcher: Bob Feller. He came right out of WWII and won 26 games in 1946. The post war years were not his best, but he could still win big and get you the innings and fan people too. He certainly played well enough to get my long distance attention.

Catcher: Roy Campanella. Roy was the first black MLB catcher and the steady heart of those great post-war Dodger teams in Brooklyn. He could hit with pop and a high catcher average – and he has an arm that runners respected mostly as a stop sign on spurious stealing attempts.

1st Base: Stan Musial. In my book, the only “wrong” answer in this exercise will come when somebody submits a lineup that does not include “The man somewhere – either at first or in the outfield. As a kid, he was easily the best all-around hitter that I ever saw in person, even if those Musial performances were generated in spring training against our Houston Buffs. Musial’s 1948 NL batting title year, won by the .376 batting average that sprang from 230 hits and 39 homers, left the greatest impression on my 10-year old mind.

2nd base: Jackie Robinson. Robinson was my guy from the start of that 1947 year that saw him break the color line and then go on to steal home in the World Series against Yogi Berra. Robinson followed Musial ’48 by taking the 1949 NL batting title with 203 hits that produced a .342 mark. Although he played variously in the field, I’m putting him down as my second sacker, even at the cost of passing on another favorite, a little guy named Nellie Fox.

3rd base: George Kell. The MBS radio Game of the Day must have been partial to the Tigers and Red Sox because it seems like those two teams kept popping up all the time on the air, and maybe even more so when Kell played in first Detroit and then Boston. Kell had no power, but, oh Lardy, could he hit. His .343 mark won the 1949 AL batting title. As a fielder, we was no Brooks Robinson, but he was smooth enough to get the ever  done at one of baseball’s toughest positions.

SS: Ernie Banks. Hard as it was for me to pass on Phil Rizzuto, Pee Wee Reese, Marty Marion, Chico Carrasquel, and Luis Aparicio, I had to go with my partiality for shortstops that don’t hit like shortstops – and few represent that model any better than Ernie Banks. Ernie’s 44 HR and .295 BA in 1955 were clearly antithetical to our usual expectations at short. It was only after time moved beyond our current era of  reference and into the 1960s that we would discover Ernie’s secret. He could hit for power and average because he was really a first baseman.

LF: Ted Williams. In my book, Teddy Ballgame and Stan Musial are the two greatest pure hitters for average and power that ever lived. I cannot pick one over the other.  Rogers Hornsby had better career stats and a similar reputation from the right side of the plate, but the Rajah didn’t have to trade his bat for plane, guns, and bullets in two wars on his slightly more peaceful run on greatness, as was the case with Ted – and Stan also lost time to military service,

CF: Willie Mays. He was simply the arguably greatest five-tool center fielder to ever play the game. His iconic “catch” in the 1954 World Series is sufficient testimony to the fact. Mays lost his only potential challenger to the title of best center fielder ever when he personally dumped a dink fly to right center at Yankee Stadium in Game Two of the 1951 World Series. Another rookie named Mickey Mantle destroyed a knee on the play when he pulled up to avoid collision with center fielder Joe DiMaggio on the catch and managed to trap his heel in a drainage grating in the turf to set up the damage. Had Mantle not lost a lot of speed as  result of that injury, and also been forced to play the balance of his career in pain, Mays would’ve had a formidable challenger for the honor.

RF: Mickey Mantle. He was simply a man who was great in spite of unfortunate injuries and a lifetime of serious addictions and bad habits. I’ll take him on my team and how could I not? I thought he was great from the time I first saw him homer against my Houston Buffs in April 1951. On that day, DiMaggio still owned center field for the Yankees and the 19-year old Mantle played right field.

Those are my picks, folks. How about yours?

It’s Saturday morning. Merry Christmas shopping too.

Time Traveler in 1928 Chaplin Movie?

October 29, 2010

Have you seen the story that went viral yesterday about the woman walking down the street as an extra in a 1928 Charlie Chaplin silent movie called “The Circus?” The problem is – she seems to be talking on a cell phone – and we didn’t have cell phones in 1928 – or transistor radios – or little recording devices that one could carry and hold by our ear as we spoke into them.

Here’s a link, if you haven’t seen the film itself. If this one isn’t enough for you, or doesn’t work for some reason, just Google or Bing “Time Traveler Chaplin” and you will spring loose a barrel of viewing options for the same brief clip.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4392185/time-traveler-caught-on-tape/

What is this all about? Who really knows, but since we are heading into Halloween weekend, this is as good a time as any to consider the phenomenon.

Forget all the impossibilities for a moment. Here’s my take on what my eyes see: The woman definitely appears to be talking into a device that she holds firmly to her left ear. At the end of the brief segment she is shown in the film, she even stops and turns obliquely to the camera at her left. You can still see her lips moving.

What my head tells me: No way she’s talking into a cell phone. Science wasn’t even close to anything like cell phones, portable radios, or small recorders in 1928. They had a crude hearing aid about that time, but sane people didn’t talk into them as this woman is doing. Even if it were a cell phone, which it could not be without time travel, how would a time traveler use it? There were no cell phone towers back in 1928 and, unless the time traveler were talking to someone back in the time travel ship, there was no one to talk with, anyway. Also, if this were a legitimate time traveling scientist we see, I cannot see how this particular individual could have passed the physical that would have qualified her for such a critical operation. The subject of interest here apparently is female, middle aged, and overweight. Unless the expedition were looking for someone who might blend in better, or she’s wearing a “fat suit,” I would bet on a younger, more fit timestronaut handling this job.

What I really think: I have to go back to my early psychological clinic days at Tulane Med school for this one. During my time as a member of the Tulane clinical faculty in the Department of Psychiatry & Neurology, we worked with a large population of schizophrenics in a drug and treatment studies program and most of these people lived on their own – and some were homeless when we met them.

The tag phrase for these semi-indepedent people was “ambulatory schizophrenia,” meaning simply as it sounds that all these people could get around town on their own, even if they couldn’t hold jobs or get along with others all that well.

Back in the 1960s in New Orleans, and this is probably still true, it wasn’t unusual to pass people on the street who were simply caught up in either talking to themselves or fighting with some unseen phantom adversary. On top of or preceding mental illness, alcohol and other mind-altering substances often came into play as either a foundational or contributing factor in this scenario.

When cell phones first went viral here in Houston, I now recall thinking: “This is getting to be like the old days in New Orleans. All these one-voice conversations we now have to unavoidably sample in public are like the time of epidemic street-loaded schizophrenia back in New Orleans.”

I think the mystery woman in the Chaplin film is most probably an ambulatory schizophrenic who just happened to have wandered into the street scene as an extra. As for the device she’s holding, she may even have fantasized it to be a “portable phone” so that she could stay in touch with whatever forces she felt were protecting her. (If we had the time and right to do so, I could inundate you with case stories of how that worked in the lives of some psychotic patients I knew, but confidentiality bleeds against the practice.)

Sound far-fetched? OK, then drop the schizophrenia possibility and just go with cell phone using time traveler. I can’t think of anything else it might be.

A Saturday Morning Postscript: Schizophrenics are not necessarily impaired on a number of intellectual levels. Many are quite intelligent – and certainly smart enough to have figured out years ago that it’s not talking to yourself that gets you into trouble with society so much as it is doing it in public places often enough in towns and communities that pay attention to that sort of thing. From what I saw with our Tulane patients back in the 1960s, talking with themselves on the streets of New Orleans was not a big problem unless their language or body movements brought threat to others in the immediate area.

It’s occurred to me that many schizophrenics today have quickly figured out that they may talk to themselves in public all they want these days – as long as they are holding a cell phone next to an ear.

Have a nice weekend, everybody. And make sure that cell phone is charged. You never know when you may get whisked away by a time travel service to some other era in which you are the only one there who has one.

My Choice for Astros’ New Batting Coach

July 12, 2010

"You really want to know what makes me sad, Carlos??? ..."

The causes of bad hitting are not hard to identify. They’re just sometimes hard to pin down and correct in a given situation.

In a general nutshell, the causes of bad hitting are these: (1) good pitching; (2) poor natural hitting ability; (3) bad hitting mechanics; (4) terrible coaching; (5) reflex failure due to injury or aging; (6) eye problems; (7) bad habits off the field that deplete performance ability; and (8) bad mental attitudes at bat that include lack of confidence and everything that falls between trying too hard and not giving a flying-flip what happens at the plate.

Although I like Astros icon Jeff Bagwell, I personally don’t think that the current Mendoza Land Doze of the 2010 Astros has anything to do with the absence of good coaching from Sean Berry. If we were going to fire Berry in the name of “changing something,” I have a guy in mind whom I like better than Baggy for this job. In fact, here’s a link to the fellow whom I think would have been the best new batting coach choice for the problems of the troubled hitters of the current Astros team:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEbzM2FUP9s

Good Luck, Sean Berry, and have a nice Monday, everybody!