Posts tagged ‘sports’

April 18, 2017

#126) Book review: “House of Nails” by Lenny Dykstra

Some baseball fans remember Lenny Dykstra for his hard-nosed, balls-to-the-wall style of play that earned him the nickname “Nails.” Others remember him for bankruptcy fraud, falsifying documents while leasing a car and writing a bad check to a prostitute. Dykstra’s ups and downs are chronicled in “House of Nails” – a memoir that is part self-reflection, part shit show (if you are offended by the term “shit show” don’t read this book; it contains an amount of cursing that would make a longshoreman uncomfortable.)

Anyone looking for balance, meaningful remorse or nuance in this book will want to keep looking, but that shouldn’t come as a shock. “House of Nails” is written by a die-hard Lenny Dykstra fan and is best read through that filter. Given that, how well does Lenny Dykstra present the awesomeness that is Lenny Dykstra?

Like the New York Mets in the years following their 1986 World Series championship, “House of Nails” is a collection of promising parts that never quite live up to their potential. The pieces are all there – no holds barred accounts of steroid use (by Dykstra and many others); unapologetic descriptions of life on the road with two of baseball’s most notorious teams (the 1986 Mets and the 1993 Philadelphia Phillies); boasts about blackmailing umpires; an insider’s perspective on the real estate crisis of 2008; escapades with Charlie Sheen – but while the anecdotes are by turns entertaining and cringe-worthy, the potential for a bigger whole is never realized. Granted, this is a sports bio, not Shakespeare, but with a little more finesse, “House of Nails” could have been a seminal baseball book of our times: “Ball Four” meets “Scarface.”

A mythological interpretation of the story, to which I don’t think Dykstra would object (he refers to himself as “a Greek fucking statue” in a way that may or may not be tongue in cheek) would see Dykstra as a tragic figure who starts from humble beginnings and achieves greatness but is undone by a desire for the forbidden (steroids, girls, Wayne Gretzky’s house). Our hero then pays his penance and becomes a New Man. However, Dykstra’s repentance is generic and conditional (“Undeniably, I have made some monumental mistakes in my life, some of which, inadvertently, have had a negative impact on my family”) while his accounts of those whom he feel wronged him are given much more detail (“Please note that [my attorney’s] letter is dated February 28th, 2012….eight months after I was incarcerated for grand theft auto.”) Dykstra enjoys playing the tough guy card (“I called him a cunt, and [Dodgers catcher Rick] Dempsey took something that resembled a swing at me”) but also the victim (“I was placed in solitary confinement for leasing a car”) when it suits his narrative.

Dykstra’s grievances have legitimacy. Major League Baseball turned a blind eye to steroids when record-breaking home run races were filling seats and then took the moral high ground when it made them look good (and why exactly did the federal government feel the need to step in anyways?) Dykstra may have been obsessed with buying Wayne Gretzky’s mansion, the prize that would prove to be his undoing, to the point where he irrationally walked into an unsound home loan, but at the height of the real estate bubble, banks weren’t exactly known for doing the right thing either. As for Dykstra’s treatment while incarcerated, the book may only give his side of the story – but misconduct by wardens and other officials in the L.A. County jail system is a matter of record.

Ultimately, “House of Nails” could be seen as a microcosm of Dykstra’s baseball career. Hall of Fame? No. Fun to watch/read? Yes. Considering how many books and baseball players alike come and go without making an impact, one could do worse than Lenny Dykstra did both on the diamond and the printed page.

 

Advertisements
September 21, 2014

#86) Facebook and the NFL: When sucking doesn’t matter

Everyone’s pissed off at the NFL. Everyone’s disgusted with Facebook. Everyone will be watching the NFL this Sunday and letting Facebook know about it.  Yes, despite–or perhaps because of–their efforts to alienate their fan/consumer bases, Facebook and the NFL aren’t going anywhere.

We hate them but we can’t look away. It’s more than the car-crash-staring instinct; it’s a true love-hate relationship. Nobody hates Myspace or baseball. You can only hate something or someone that you once truly loved.

We started loving football in the 1950s and 60s. Football looked better on television than baseball.  Baseball expanded, diluting the talent pool and bringing the game to cities where it didn’t have a chance, such as Miami*. Free agency meant that baseball teams no longer stayed together. World Series games started too late but the Super Bowl was always on a Sunday and the whole family could watch it. With far fewer games than any other sport, each one was an event. We’d anticipate them and spend Monday talking about what those damn Steelers should have done differently. The NFL became so big that it thrived even without a team in the country’s second biggest market, Los Angeles. Rotisserie leagues in baseball became a thing, but NFL fantasy leagues became a bigger thing.

We started loving Facebook in the late ’00s–April of 2008, to be precise, when it officially became the #1 most visited social network site. Myspace had shown us how easy and fun it can be to put together an online scrapbook of photos, websites, songs and pithy quotations, but it had become too messy and impersonal. Facebook made connecting with that kid you used to beat the crap out of (or perhaps vice versa) back in 8th grade simple and easy. Facebook translated better to smartphones.

Then, to use Facebook relationship status terminology, it got complicated. Facebook faced questions about the privacy of its users’ information. Naysayers pointed out that it was losing ground to Instagram and Pinterest. The user experience started to seem more about getting into political arguments with virtual strangers than reuniting with long lost friends. In the NFL, Janet Jackson happened. Michael Vick and Plaxico Burress happened. Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson followed. Yes, it got complicated.

Or did it?

As of this writing, Facebook is ranked as the second-most visited site in the world according to Alexa. The NFL saw a 7% increase in viewers of the first Thursday game of this season compared to the first Thursday game of last season. We may say that Facebook is dead and that the NFL only cares once its sponsors pull out. We’re going to watch anyways. According to Alexa, we’re going to spend an average of 27 minutes per day on Facebook this month. Some of us might even call 911 if we can’t log on. No number of poorly handled press conferences or allegations of privacy violations can change that.

It’s not that we buy in in spite of the fact that the NFL and Facebook suck. It’s not that we buy in because they suck. It doesn’t matter if the NFL and Facebook suck or not. We’re married to them. Myspace was our high school crush whom it was easy to leave when things didn’t work out; Facebook is our spouse.  Facebook and the NFL made good impressions on us when it counted and continued to not suck for long enough to convince us to spend the rest of our lives with them. Yes, some of us might get divorced–we all have the friend who has actually followed through on their plans to swear off Facebook and goes to the park on Sunday to feed the ducks while the rest of us watch ball–but most of us won’t. Years of marriage has taught us that fighting usually leads to great make-up sex.  Besides, is it really worth it just to have to file all of that paperwork and decide who gets what? We’ve all got better things to do.

Like watch the New York Jets and post about it on Facebook.

*Yes, I know the Marlins have won the World Series twice. Nobody gives a fuck.

February 26, 2014

#73) The best baseball game you’ve never heard of

We already know that Game 6 of the 2011 World Series was the greatest game of baseball ever played, but in this post – with a fresh new season of America’s Pastime about to get underway – we’ll look at a game played more than 50 years ago that, despite the winning team’s dramatic comeback, has been surprisingly overlooked in Greatest Game Ever Played discussions.

I speak of the second playoff game between the Los Angeles Dodgers and the Milwaukee Braves to decide the 1959 National League Pennant.  Until recently I wasn’t aware that there had even been a best-of-three playoff to decide the ’59 NL race, much less that the Dodgers won the second game and the pennant with a three-run ninth inning rally and another run in the twelfth.   I’m not the only baseball fan who’s been unaware of or has overlooked this game: in Bert Randolph Sugar’s “Baseball’s 50 Greatest Games”, the book to which I attribute more than any other my baseball history geekery, he passes this one over.  The game is also not mentioned on the Baseball Moments page of Major League Baseball’s official website.

Why has this game languished in obscurity?

The biggest reason may be that it wasn’t a decisive game, unlike the playoff games the Dodgers lost to the Giants in 1951 and 1962, or the famous American League East one-game playoff in 1978.  The Dodgers had beaten the Braves in Milwaukee and were not in a must-win situation when they faced Lew Burdette in the L.A. Coliseum for the second game.  The Dodgers’ comeback in the bottom of the 9th lacked a dramatic home run; they scored three runs on four singles and a sacrifice fly, and their winning tally in the 12th was the result of a throwing error.

Another factor may have been timing.  The 1959 Dodgers were a team in transition, posting a rather forgettable 86-68 record.  They still had a few mainstays from their glory years in Brooklyn – Duke Snider, Gil Hodges and Carl Furillo to name a few – but PeeWee Reese, Roy Campanella and Jackie Robinson were gone and it would be a few years before Don Drysdale and Sandy Koufax would reach their primes, leading the team to two championships in the ’60s.

It’s possible too that the baseball world didn’t yet take the Los Angeles Dodgers fully seriously; perhaps the team was still dealing with the backlash from having moved to L.A. the year before.  While the franchise would go on to win a total of five titles in L.A. with Koufax, Drysdale, Steve Garvey, Kirk Gibson and Tommy Lasorda all becoming household names along the way, in 1959, baseball in So Cal might have felt like the proverbial round peg in a square hole.  The L.A. Memorial Coliseum, where the team played through the 1961 season, wasn’t meant for baseball, as evidenced by the awkward playing field dimensions.

Still, one would think that a game that so perfectly illustrates what everyone loves about baseball – the unpredictability, the lack of a clock – would be better known.  If anything, the Braves, then two-time defending NL champs and boasting the bats of Hank Aaron and Eddie Matthews and the arms of Warren Spahn (who won more games than any other lefty in baseball history) and 20-game winner Lew Burdette, should have given this game some cache.

Baseball fans can be guilty of selective memory.  Why did the Red Sox lose the 1986 World Series?  Because they blew two leads in Game 6, allowing the Mets to force extra innings, then after scoring two more gave up three runs in the bottom of the 10th.  They also blew a three run lead in Game 7. Bill Buckner.  When you Google search for George Brett, what comes up in the search bar?  Why, his .390 average in 1980 and his championship with the Royals in 1985, of course.  Just kidding; pine tar.  It’s ironic that in a sport that cherishes history perhaps more than any other, great moments remain overlooked.  Perhaps comparing this game to legendary contests such as the ’51 Giants/Dodgers playoff or Game 6 of the 1975 (or 1986 or 2011) World Series is a stretch, but there have been plenty of less dramatic games that have gotten more attention.

The Dodgers would go on to beat the “Go Go” White Sox in a six-game World Series.  The playoff proved to be the end of an era for the Braves, who would move to Atlanta in 1966.

December 31, 2013

#69) Top 14 of ’14! (A goal and prediction)

What’s wrong with this picture?  Why am I writing about my Top 14 hikes of 2014 on New Years’ Eve 2013 – and on this blog, not Nobody Hikes in L.A. where such a list would belong?

It’s a prediction, readers.  I am attempting to manifest my destiny for 2014 by writing about what I hope will be my top 14 hikes of next year.  Will they happen?  Maybe, maybe not; maybe I’ll discover some better ones; who knows.  I thought it would be an interesting exercise, sort of like a time capsule.  And heck, it might give you, the readers–at least those of you interested in exploring Southern California’s natural landscape–some ideas.  The links are to existing reports about the hikes; the commentary is my own fudging.  Enjoy, and see you in 2014!

#14) South Mt. Hawkins Loop.  Great hike from Crystal Lake with excellent views of the San Gabriel high country and the L.A. Basin.

#13) Dripping Springs Trail.  Long hike in southwestern Riverside County and northern San Diego County, climbing the slope of Agua Tibia Mountain.

#12) Santa Cruz Island – El Montanon and High Point.  Challenging 8-mile loop to one of Santa Cruz Island’s highest points.  (I already have two hikes on Santa Cruz Island on NHLA, but this one would cover some new ground.)

#11) Combs Peak.  Remote desert summit in the northwestern corner of Anza-Borrego Desert State Park.

#10) South Fork Trail.  This trail climbs over 2,000 feet through a steep-walled gorge, as the scenery dramatically changes from high desert to forest.

#9) Santa Rosa Island – Black Mountain. Strenuous eight mile hike to the highest point on Santa Rosa Island.

#8) Alta Seca Bench. This hike explores the remote high country of the Santa Rosa Mountains, providing excellent views of the desert below.

#7) Santa Barbara Island.  Like San Miguel, this is one of the more remote islands in the Channel Islands National Park, known for its wide ocean views in all directions and springtime wildflowers.

#6 ) Nordhoff Peak.  Challenging summit in Ojai with excellent views of Ventura County.

#5) High Point/Palomar Mountain.  One of San Diego’s tallest and most scenic summits.  The hike takes you from the edges of the high desert to a thick pine forest.

#4) Pine Mountain.  After Baldy, this is one of the tallest summits in the Angeles National Forest, with excellent views of the high desert, the Cajon Pass and…oh yeah, Mt. Baldy.

#3) San Miguel Island.  The most remote island in the Channel Islands National Park, San Miguel sits on the edge of the open sea, at the mercy of the elements in a way that few other places are.  Highlights include the Caliche Forest and the Cabrillo memorial.

#2) San Bernardino Peak.  Excellent, challenging hike with phenomenal views all around.

#1) San Gorgonio Mountain.  Putting So Cal’s tallest mountain at #1 is about as hard a decision to make as placing Sandy Koufax on the pitcher’s mound of an all-Jewish all star baseball team.

Well, there are my hiking goals for 2014.  Happy new year everyone and best wishes for success, prosperity and peace.

December 4, 2013

#64) The real reason Red Sox fans are upset about Jacoby Ellsbury

Red Sox fans aren’t upset about Jacoby Ellsbury signing with the Yankees; they just think they are.

Oh, they’re pissed, no doubt; at least if tweeting death wishes can be seen as a sign of being pissed.   But let’s take a step back here.  The Red Sox are the defending World Champions and have won more titles in the last decade than any other MLB team.  Many baseball pundits believe that Ellsbury isn’t worth what he wanted to be paid by the Red Sox and that the Yankees are overpaying him.  As Yogi Berra once said, in baseball, you don’t know nothin’, but it’s certainly plausible that the deal will have more of a net benefit for the Red Sox than the Yankees.

Granted, the fan who expressed hope that Ellsbury “get[s] herpes from Jeter and die[s]” might not represent the overall mentality of Red Sox Nation, but let’s face it, New Englanders can hold a grudge like nobody else (present company included).  But while the sense of outrage at having lost yet another player to the Yankees might have been justified ten years ago, before the Sox broke the “Curse of the Bambino”, it now comes off as a little bit petty.  From 1987 to 2001, no Boston/New England sports team won a championship, but since the Patriots’ victory in Super Bowl XXXVI in 2002, the market has claimed more titles–8–than any other: three each for the Pats and Sox; one for the Celtics and one for the Bruins.  In the same time period L.A. has six (including the Anaheim teams) and New York has four (including the New Jersey Devils).  Boston fans have the look of the successful businessman who still resents the high school girlfriend who dumped him.

Be all that as it may, perhaps there’s a deeper explanation for why Sox fans are so outraged.  It could be that the recent wealth of Boston championships is actually the cause of the Nation’s animosity.  Before 2004, the line was always, “What are we going to do when the Sox actually win the World Series?”  It’s like prisoners who anticipate their release but once they’re actually on the outside, don’t know how to function.

My guess is that before long Sox fans will have forgotten about Ellsbury.  Sure, he’ll get some half-hearted boos when he comes to Fenway wearing pinstripes, but maybe he’s not the real problem.  Maybe Red Sox Nation misses the good old days.  Maybe they need Bucky Dent to hit the pop-fly home run.  Maybe they need Aaron Boone to hit the home run off Tim Wakefield.  And maybe, just maybe, they need the ball to go through Buckner’s legs.

September 8, 2013

#59) Miles and Manning: Score another one for the music geeks!

Note: this is a Simulblog, posted both on Positive Music Place and D-Theory.

It’s rare to hear the name  Miles Davis mentioned on any non-jazz radio station–especially a sports station–so when it happened yesterday morning I assumed that either I needed another cup of coffee to clear the fog from my head or that there was another Miles Davis being discussed; perhaps a little known tight end for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

But no, it was the Man with the Horn; the jazz legend who gave us “Kind of Blue”, “Birth of the Cool”, “Bitches Brew” and much more.  Exactly just was Miles doing on the “Weekend Warriors” sports talk show?

The guest was David Epstein, author of “The Sports Gene“, and he was discussing a theme from his book: parallels between the thought processes of great athletes and great musicians.  Epstein said (paraphrasing here): “Musicians like Miles Davis and Steely Dan* are known more for what they don’t play; how they use space to shape their music; defining what’s there by what’s not there.  Similarly, an amateur quarterback, like me, would look downfield at all of the wide receivers to decide where to throw the ball while Peyton Manning looks at where they aren’t, because that’s where they will be as the play develops.”

So there you have it – an example of how seemingly disparate worlds have parallels.  In high school, the star quarterback and marching band geek may be on opposite sides of the social spectrum, but in achieving greatness after graduation, they just might have something to teach each other.

* Epstein didn’t actually mention Steely Dan; I just felt like dropping them in.

April 9, 2012

#41) Learning from Geniuses (geeks): Game 16, Move 37

I came across an interesting chess story the other day.  Yes, I realize, for most people, using the words “interesting” and “chess” in the same sentence is contradictory, but this one contains some good teachable moments – even for those outside the chess world.  (And anyone who reads this blog knows how much I love teachable moments).

In 1984, 21-year old Garry Kasparov, the future world champion, was challenging incumbent Anatoly Karpov for the title.  Karpov had been the reigning champ since 1975, when Bobby Fischer refused to defend his title against him.  The rules of the match stated that the first player to win six games took the prize.  Karpov was crushing his young challenger, leading four games to none (with 11 ties).  In the sixteenth game, after 37 moves, Karpov offered Kasparov a draw, which was accepted.  At the time, no one had any idea that this unspectacular activity would be discussed (and blogged about) in the decades to come.

Many experts who have since analyzed the position at the point where Karpov offered a draw have said that he could have easily won the game, taking a commanding 5-0 lead.  It’s easy to assume that, after falling behind so early, Kasparov might have become discouraged and lost the match soon afterward. As it turned out, following the draw, Kasparov started mounting a comeback.  After losing a fifth game, he won three, but following many more ties–40 total–the match was called off.  The two players battled again in 1985 under different rules, and Kasparov won.

Garry Kasparov would go on to make waves both in and out of the chess world.  He defended his title against Karpov in 1987 and 1990, but all the while, he was feuding with FIDE (Federacion Inernationale des Eschecs, or World Chess Federation; pronounced “fee-day”), the governing body of professional chess.  Kasparov formed his own organization, the Professional Chess Association.  In 1993, when he defended his title against Englishman Nigel Short, he did so under the jurisdiction of the P.C.A., not FIDE.  FIDE organized a championship match between Karpov and challenger Jan Timman, which Karpov won.  In 1997, Kasparov was defeated by a computer called Deep Blue, after which he speculated that the machine was being “fed” moves by its inventors.

While Kasparov would retire from chess in 2005, he would remain an active political figure, outspokenly opposed to Gorbachev, Putin and other Soviet leaders.  At one point, Kasparov considered running for the presidency, but withdrew.

As polarizing a figure as Kasparov became, one could make the case that had Karpov not offered him a draw in a game he should have won, none of it would have happened.  The story of Game 16 illustrates some interesting points:

  • You never know when you might be on the threshold of victory.
  • You never know when, or how, an event – as unspectacular as it may seem – might impact the future.
  • Sometimes, geniuses can miss simple details, which are obvious to mere mortals.

To be sure, most peoples’ lives haven’t been deeply affected by whether Karpov or Kasparov was the champion, or whether chess is governed by FIDE or the P.C.A.  But it’s interesting to consider the impact that a seemingly inconspicuous move might have had on the game.  Like the removal of Yankees first baseman Wally Pipp (replaced by Lou Gehrig) or the chance meeting on Church Road in Liverpool between young John Lennon and even younger Paul McCartney, Karpov’s draw offer became part of history in a way that no one who witnessed it could have predicted.

November 19, 2011

#31) “Leave Tebow Alone!”

I’m not a Broncos fan, and I’m not a Christian.  So what am I doing writing about Tim Tebow, the Christian quarterback for the Denver Broncos?

It’s not Tebow himself that I’m interested in, per se, but the reaction he’s caused in the last few weeks.   It’s no news that we love perfection…and that we love tearing people down.  And we love comebacks.  But typically these things happen over a little bit more time.  Britney Spears had several years of pure success before she started undermining it with her bizarre behavior.  Brett Farve had a decade-plus of glory before becoming a punchline.  Even Michael Vick’s rise, fall and comeback played out over several years.  But Tebow is still a rookie.  He hasn’t had time to prove successful, much less ruin it for himself.  The Broncos are 4-1 this season when he is starting, and he’s being raked over the coals as if he is 1-4 and has already been convicted of a D.U.I.

What exactly do we want, anyways?  If someone fails, we point and laugh.  If they succeed, we wait for them to fail.  If they don’t, we have to invent their failure.  Isn’t America supposed to be the land of opportunity?  Aren’t we supposed to love success, not failure?

In a way, Tebow’s plight reminds me of that of Kobe Bryant.  For a Celtics fan such as myself to be expressing empathy for a Laker is a little bit unusual, but I’ve always respected Kobe Bryant and seen through the hypocrisy with which the media portrays him.  If he scores 50 points, he’s a ball-hog and doesn’t want to share the glory with any of his team-mates; if he scores 15 or 20, he’s tanking it.  Tebow also reminds me a little bit of Gary Carter (the former New York Mets/Montreal Expos catcher).  Carter was an outspoken Christian who was often criticized as being “too nice.”  Pete Rose supposedly said that Carter was more interested in endorsements than winning.  But between Carter and Rose, only one of them made it to the Hall of Fame.

Maybe it’s all a rite of passage.  We want to see how much Tebow can take before he cracks. Maybe he will crack.  Maybe he’ll get pulled over with a BAC of .249.  Maybe he’ll get caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.  Maybe he’ll throw  twenty picks against New England when the two teams meet later this year.  (Actually, as a Patriots fan, I’d be okay with that.)

But give the man a chance.  Whatever happened to “innocent until proven guilty?”  LEAVE TEBOW ALONE!

October 29, 2011

#29) Top five lessons from “Moneyball”

This will be the last baseball post for a while, I promise.

It’s been said that one doesn’t have to be a baseball fan to enjoy “Moneyball.”  As a baseball fan, I wouldn’t be the one to ask, but I would guess that one would have to be a baseball fan to really enjoy the book.  There were some parts that were a little hard to follow, even as a baseball fan, and it’s my guess that the non-fan would be lost or bored by them.

That said, with “Moneyball”, the movie vs. book debate is apples and oranges: the film, thoroughly enjoyable, has wide appeal, whereas the book is already a classic among hardcore baseball geeks.

The book has several valuable lessons that transcend the sport, so for those who don’t feel like reading “Moneyball” but might be interested in some of its take-aways, I present my five favorites.

1) When life gives you lemons, make lemonade.  This may be the oldest cliche out there, but the story of Billy Beane, Oakland Athletics general manager, puts a new twist on it.  Beane himself was a highly touted baseball prospect in the early 1980s, whose career was a disappointment.  However, he became his own cautionary tale.  The scouts who saw him and built him up were impressed by his appearance, and Beane used the lesson of his own story to judge players by their actual statistics and records, not just what is apparent.

2) Use what you have, not what you need.  Billy Beane’s 2002 Oakland A’s won the same number of games as the Yankees, a team with a payroll four times higher.  Beane knew early on that it wouldn’t pay to fixate on the gap between the two teams’ budgets; he had to find a different way of looking at the numbers.  He reinvented how to read baseball statistics and found value in players who were under-appreciated by the market; he also saw how to replace the higher-priced stars whom he couldn’t afford to keep.

3) Know what you want.  Once Beane realized the type of players he wanted, he would put their names up on a board and figure out exactly what he needed to do to get them, bluffing, cajoling and negotiating his way to his goal.

4) Know how to be “wrong.”  Baseball people, be they fans, writers or those inside the game, are notorious for being stuck in their ways.  Beane didn’t change his course when his strategies were lambasted by the media.

5) Know how to be right.  As word spread of Beane’s effectiveness in finding undervalued players, others in the baseball world refused to do business with him, knowing that by definition, they were probably getting the short end of the stick.  Like a pool hustler, Beane had to convince his marks that the deal was actually in their interest.

The story of Billy Beane and the Oakland Athletics is certainly entertaining, educational and inspirational.  Even non-baseball fans can learn a thing or two from his persistence, innovation and creativity.

October 29, 2011

#28) Baseball’s greatest game

The debate is officially over.

Game 6 of the 2011 World Series is, by any reasonable measurement, the greatest game in the history of baseball.  Of course, it’s easy to get caught up in the moment and proclaim a recently played game to be the greatest ever, but as a baseball historian and long-time Red Sox fan myself, I here present an air-tight argument for my case.

I’ll start by comparing this Game 6 to MLB’s panel-voted top five games of the last fifty years.

#1) 1975 World Series, Game 6: as a Bostonian, I was taught to revere this as one of the greatest moments in sports history.  Certainly it was a classic, but the closest the Sox ever were to being eliminated was four outs.  The Cardinals were down to their last strike TWICE.

#2) 1991 World Series, Game 7: as a seventh game, perhaps this one does have an advantage over this year’s game 6, and it was certainly a tense, tight battle.  But for pure entertainment value, one has to place a 10-9 win with many ties and lead changes above a 1-0 shutout.

#3) 1986 World Series, Game 6: until last night, only the New York Mets had ever come back to win a World Series after being down to the last strike.  The Mets, however, only did it once in this game.  This year’s game 6 ended with a home run, which is a little more aesthetically appealing than a ground ball through the first baseman’s legs.

#4) 1992 N.L.C.S., game 7: never had a seventh game been decided with one swing of the bat, as Atlanta pinch-hitter Francisco Cabrera singled in two runs to beat the Pirates.  However, this game only decided the pennant.

#5) 1986 N.L.C.S., game 6: another classic; the Mets tied the score with three runs in the ninth inning and went onto win in 16, making it the then-longest post season game ever.  Still, this was pennant-clinching, not World Series-clinching game, and the Mets were never down to their last strike.  In fact, had the Mets lost, they would have had another chance in Game 7, albeit against Astros pitcher Mike Scott, who’d been dominant in his last two starts against them.

Since MLB’s list only covered the last 50 years, I’ve dug a little deeper and come up with five historic games that rival – but do not beat – Thursday’s game.

1) The Bobby Thompson “Shot Heard Round the World” is baseball legend, but Thompson’s home run to give the Giants a 5-4 win over the Dodgers came with one, not two outs; it also only decided the pennant.

2) Bill Mazeroski’s home run in Game 7 of the 1960 World Series was one of only two times a Fall Classic has ended with a jack.  The game, with multiple lead changes, was very entertaining, and the Pirates’ upset over the Yankees should not be underestimated, but for the sake of this argument,  Maz’s shot came with the score tied.

3) The seventh game in 1946 saw the Cardinals’ Enos Slaughter score from first base on a double (not a single, as is often said), making a goat out of Johnny Pesky and turning the Red Sox into World Series losers for the first time.  Slaughter scored in the eighth inning, however.

4) Who was the only team to lose game 7 of a best-of-seven series and win the World Series?  Why, the Boston Red Sox, of course.  The 1912 World Series actually went eight games (game 2 was called due to darkness).  In the eighth and decisive game, the Sox became the first team to win a Series after being an inning away from elimination (this wouldn’t happen again until 1985).   But it comes up short against Thursday’s game, in that the Sox tied the score with one out before winning on a sacrifice fly.

5) The Washington Senators – not the second version of the team which became the Rangers, but the first, which moved to Minnesota in 1960 – won the 1924 World Series.  In the seventh game, they scored the winning run in the bottom of the twelfth, after tying the score with two runs in the eighth.  A Game 7 wouldn’t go extra innings again until 1991.

The journey of the 2011 World Series champion St. Louis Cardinals is not unlike that of the very sport they play.  Over the last few decades, America’s pastime has been written off as irrelevant; languishing in its own history while losing market shares to basketball and football.  But baseball has a way of coming back–providing great games perfectly timed to revitalize interest in the sport.  Just as 10 years ago, the great 2001 World Series gave fans a much-needed escape a few weeks after the terrorist attacks, this one, the first to see a seventh game since 2002, will undoubtedly provide a great boost for baseball.  With a basketball strike threatening the upcoming NBA season, perhaps fans, inspired by the great World Series that just finished, will rediscover America’s pastime.