We Must Encourage This Good Behavior

Good Starky Warky! Who's your buddy?! Is he Fluffy McAdamsers?! Whooza good BOY?! Whooza?! Izz it YOOOOO?!??!?

Yes, it is you, ESPN, because gosh darn it all if you didn't publish TWO Reds-centric articles in one single day! And they weren't stupid or uninformed, either!

First, we have Jayson Stark maybe halfway acknowledging ESPN's eastcoast bias (maybe more under the guise of "big market bias") by HOLYCOWingly introducing the nation to last year's NL batting champ (freaky Freddy Sanchez of the Midwest Whatevers) and wins/strikeout champ (Aaron Harang, whatwhat!!). So I'm happy about that, except, geez, I mean, it is March. Apparently even Mr. Useless Info found a way to overlook these guys for the 5 months that have passed since the regular season ended.

Second, Salisbury Sean McAdam (if C. Trent can make up 49 nicknames/post, so can I) writes some nice things about the Reds closer situat...but Jesus Christ, oh my god, I'm just re-reading this right now and realizing that fuck-of-all-things he HAS to compare the Reds possible "closer-by-committee" approach to that used by....THE RED SOX apparently in 2003.

Goddammit, Salisbury, it doesn't count as a non-eastcoasty article if the entire first paragraph is exclusively about the fucking Red "Scrotum" Sox.

Oh, NOW I see, the ONLY reason he writes about the Reds is because Jerry "Jrr Nrr" Narron used to be a Scrotum Sock:

Narron, in fact, understands better than most. He was the Red Sox bench
coach in 2003, when "closer-by-committee" famously sputtered and became a daily talking point among the anxious fan base.

Famously sputtered?! FAMOUSLY SPUTTERED?! Famous to WHOM, pray tell?! Who the fuck outside of -or, shit- even inside Boston remembers this, much less is going to be lumbering around their space-age nursing home in 50 years reminiscing about the dramatic heart-string-pulling, angst generating, in-pants-urinating 2003 Boston Red Sox closer-by-committee saga?!?!?

Damn you, McAdam, I was almost ready to forgive you for flagrabiasingly declaring Boston's bullpen as the Cold-Plate Special, but wow, I guess the futility of Boston's bullpen is a huge sticking point for you, isn't it? You dick.

I swear I wasn't planning to bitch when I started writing this and the truth is that it's a decent article besides the obvious urge to make the Red Sox the focus, so I'll try to be constructive. See, there's a MUCH better and WAY MORE relevant comparison McAdam could make. Especially since, when you think about it, there is absolutely no reason to use the Red Sox (except the Narron driving through Boston excuse) because how many other teams have used the closer-by-committee approach at some point in the past 4 years?!

Here's an example of a team that did it successfully, and is relevant because it's the same team the article is ostensibly about in the first place: the 1999 Cincinnati Reds

Danny Graves: 3.08 ERA, 27 saves
Scott Williamson: 2.41 ERA, 12 saves
Scott Sullivan: 3.o1 ERA, 3 saves
Stan Belinda, Gabe White, Dennys Reyes: 2 saves each

And, y'know what, I think Scotty Williamson even pitched for Boston a year and a half as did Stan Belinda, way back during Boston's Great Bullpen of Death of 1995-96(McAdam, 2007). So there's your flimsy tie-in.



References Cited

McAdam, Sean. "BOSTON BOSTON BOSTON BULLPEN BULLPEN DID YOU KNOW BOSTON HAD A BULLPEN SOMETIMES IT IS GOOD SOMETIMES IT IS BAD I LOVE BOSTONBOSTON REDSOX." Daddy's Scratchy Face Inc. Bristol, Connecticut 2007. 17,399 pages.