Where's the credit for Dom DiMaggio?

Dom DiMaggio just had a nice little eulogy spoken about him by Vin Scully in tonight's Dodger game, where I first heard that he had passed away today at the age of 92. However, even a broadcaster as masterful as Scully couldn't work around the big shadow in DiMaggio's life - his brother, Joe.

In a quirk of genetics, three of the nine DiMaggio's made the majors - Vince, Joe and Dom - and even today as obituaries start to populate across the web, most mention Joe straight away. To do so is to sell Dom short as has been happening for decades now. Some of the wrtie-ups I've read tonight raise the question of whether Dom would have made the Hall of Fame by now if he'd been allowed to play instead of joining the Navy during World War II, while others hint at the role that constant comparisons to Joe played in the voting process.

Dom was seemingly always underestimated for one reason or another. His 5-9 frame and glasses - gasp, glasses! - led to his nickname, "The Professor" and it was those glasses that led to his transition to the outfield. Anecdotally, he was moved out there from his spot at shortstop by a manager so he wouldn't break his glasses . DiMaggio took that move and made the most of it, developing a hybrid style as a hard-charging center fielder who would close in quickly and agressively on balls hit his way.

In doing so, he became one of the greatest defensive center fielders of the time.

Additionally, he maintained a solid batting average and gave Joe a run for his money with a hitting streak of his own. As Scully pointed out, it was Joe who ended his brother's hitting streak at 30-plus games. See, there's that whole "Joe" thing again.

I imagine it's on par with being Michael Jordan's brother - both an athletic and cultural icon - where no matter what you did as a player, you'd always seem to be lacking by comparison. Don't be mistaken, this is not an Ozzie and Jose Canseco situation, Dom held his own in the majors and was a key piece of the strong Red Sox teams of the 40s and 50s.

DiMaggio was central to one of the biggest losses in Red Sox history - though not in typical Sox fashion - when an injury in the 1946 World Series led to the deciding play in the series. From the Boston Globe's excellent write up:

Mr. DiMaggio’s skill as a hitter inadvertently helped create one of the darkest moments in Red Sox history, their defeat at the hands of the St. Louis Cardinals in the seventh and deciding game of the 1946 World Series. In the top of the eight inning, he doubled home two runs to tie the game at 3-3 — but pulled a hamstring on the way to second base.

Leon Culberson replaced him in center field. In the bottom of the eighth, with two outs, the Cardinals’ Enos Slaughter tried to score from first on a single. Culberson was slow to field the ball, then made a mediocre throw to shortstop Johnny Pesky, whose throw home was too little, too late. Slaughter was safe, giving the Cardinals the lead and, half an inning later, the championship.

“If they hadn’t taken DiMaggio out of the game,” Slaughter later said of his daring sprint, “I wouldn’t have tried it.”

His time with Boston is covered nicely in David Halberstam's The Teammates, a solid, short read about the relationship between DiMaggio, Bobby Doerr, Johnny Pesky and Ted Williams. His life after baseball is covered well in the obituaries today, which describe his business sense and suggest that he'd have been a success in whatever he chose to do.

I think I like DiMaggio so much because he's an interesting man for many reasons outside of his control. Some of my favorite players of all time - Mickey Mantle, Williams, Joe DiMaggio - have major personal flaws or quirks that made them ill-suited for any sort of life outside of baseball. I am drawn to their stories that are tinged with elements of sadness and personal defeat, but which helped them to excell with a highly specialized skill set. Dom doesn't really fit that mold.

The fact that he was squarely in shadows of two of the game's giants in Williams and his brother, yet still found a way to maintain his own identity, accept and embrace his talents and move along is nothing short of extraordinary. To be comfortable enough being Dom DiMaggio to be successful and not dragged down as some may have is really a tribute to DiMaggio the man.

He was able to walk away on his own terms, start a series of successful business ventures and live to 92 (seeing two Red Sox World Series victories in the process). I think I'm with Scully here, where there's no real need to wail and feel sorrow for DiMaggio's passing, as he'd led a full life on many levels.

So here's to you, Dom DiMaggio, so much more than Joe's brother and Ted's center fielder. You'll be missed.

(Image from: WBZ.com)

Oh, you think so, Doctor?

In updating my fantasy team tonight, I stumbled across this tidbit when trying to figure out what happened to Hing-Chih Kuo of the Dodgers:

Kuo finally admitted there was something wrong with his elbow after he threw two pitches over the bullpen gate and onto the field while trying to warm up to enter Friday night's game against San Diego.

Yeah, I'd say that might be cause for concern. I'd also love to see a tape of that game.

Show that man "The Crazy"

It seems that Lin Brehmer is getting his way so far this year.

Now I'm wondering if the term "out of left field" really comes from the Cubs' past. The geography certainly lines up right.

(And I know the Rube Waddell story is accepted as fact, even if it seems a little hard to believe at times.)

What does MLB have to lose by lifting blackout restrictions?

Like most baseball fans, I am not independently wealthy. This means that I am forced to spend large chunks of my time on this earth working to pay for all sorts of things like food, shelter and Xbox games.

Why must I do this without live baseball being streamed directly to my laptop?

As I understand it, the big reason behind blackouts is to push fans to the games (The Bill Wirtz Theory of Fan Aliention), to punish a fan base for failing to get off their lazy asses and buy tickets (we're looking at you, Minnesota Vikings fans) and to drive fans crazy by denying them a few moments of peace by watching an inning or two of the home team while they eat lunch at work.

There are certain instances - especially regarding technology - where policies that once made a lot of sense are suddenly made less sensible. This seems to be one of those cases.

While the easiest solution would be to find a fan in a town you have zero interest in (like Toronto) and swap logins with them, I question why the league hasn't lifted blackouts on the web. I can watch both Cubs and White Sox games (home and away) at home, but I'm guessing that hauling in a TV to my desk might raise a few eyebrows.

No one in their right mind is going to opt for a streamed ballgame above high def or going to a game in person. This is pretty much a last, best option for those of us stuck at work during day games or forced to stay late from time to time.

When I don't see the local teams on the MLB Extra Innings package, it makes sense - the games are on local TV anyways. When I can't see them on a web broadcast, it just makes me think MLB doesn't want to be my friend anymore.

Does anyone have an explaination for these odd blackout rules?

Oh, Canada... How could you?

I know that baseball probably isn't much of a draw in Canada, but there have to be a few fans scattered throughout the country, right?

I bring this up because the following appears in the line items for MLB.com's online streaming package:

All live Toronto Blue Jays games are blacked out throughout the entire country of Canada.

Ouch. Sucks to be a fan of the Jays.

Play Ball

In observance of Opening Day for the Cubs and Sox, the Tribune posted a photo album of famous first pitchers through the years.

(They missed my favorite honoree, Chewbacca because that was at Fenway. Also, I never knew Chewy was a lefty.)

The album raises a few questions for fans with a discerning eye and a secret hope that they may some day be asked to throw out a first pitch for being the best lawn and garden salesman at Sears or the bestest blogger ever.

Like, mitt or no mitt? You won't need to catch a damn thing, so why bring the leather? Jersey open or closed? For that matter, should you have your own name on the jersey? Because Michael Jordan wore a Sammy Sosa jersey when he took the mound at Wrigley.

I think the balance falls between looking like you're trying too hard and looking like you really don't care in case you suck. I think the open jersey look says, "I'm here to do this, but I'm a celebrity, so I'm far too cool and busy to practice tossing a ball beforehand."

On the other side of the fence is the desire to really suit up - some in their astronaut suits - before they take the field. I'm not sure how far people can push the envelope in this regard, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't lose a little respect for Will Ferrell when he opted out on the baseball pants and spikes combo.

That's an outfit to give Chewbacca a run for his money.

(Image from: The Boston Globe)

MLB.com shows it has a sense of humor

It's the usual storyline, but for some reason, the headline struck me as funny tonight. (I'd like to point out that this likely the 100th anniversary of the first Cubs fan saying, "This is the year.")

Tonight, as the third story on the MLB.com home page was the headline, "Once again, this could be the year."

It seems like even MLB.com might be sick of its own hype. Just look at the monster they've created.

* Maybe they want to re-evaluate running commercials with Dontrelle Willis in them for right now? Just let the poor guy lay low for a few weeks until he feels a bit better?

* God, how I've missed the wit and wisdom of Mark Grace. On the pre-season replay MLB Network is running right now, there was just a 30-second conversation about how he was not a "stats" guy.

To kill time, Grace was being asked if he would be following and of a host of categories from WHIP to BABIP. After each stat listed, Grace would just utter a "nope" or a "nuh-uh."

Preseason baseball is the best, especially when the announcers just assume no one is listening anyways. It's like a real life Harry DOyle, but with a little less alcohol.

Marlins offically put down roots in Miami

The Tulsa Sound Machine.

Spokane Vice.

The Miami Marlins?

Monday marked the day that the Florida Marlins signed off on a new home and a new-ish name, as the Miami city council approved a stadium deal to take the Marlins out of Dolphin Stadium and give them a home of their own. Who says the housing market is tanking?

According to the Palm Beach Post:

The financial breakdown on the $634 million stadium plan is top-heavy for the county. Miami-Dade is on the hook for $297 million from tourist taxes, another $50 million from a separate bond referendum, and $12 million for road and utility repairs.

Miami pledged last week to spend $94 million on the parking structures, $13 million toward stadium construction, and $12 million for other improvements.

Miami will also operate the garage and pay the yearly debt payment, though the Marlins have agreed to buy most of the expected 6,000 parking spaces at between $10 and $12 over the 35-year stadium contract. The Marlins keep any profits made from selling those spots.

The Marlins will spend $120 million in the later years of construction, and pay the county back another $35 million of borrowed money.

Additionally, the team is penalized if it backs out of the deal early, with the city and county splitting profits on a descending scale for the next decade. If the Marlins ownership should choose to sell the team in the first year of construction, the city and county would split 70 prcent of the profits. The team retains all profits beginning in 10 years.

Good for them.

Also, as NPR pointed out this morning, the team is backing away from the trend to market to a region (the Minnesota Twins, New England Patriots or Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim) to try and snap up more merchandising revenue. The team will go from the Florida Marlins to the Miami Marlins, in a move that makes me like that team a little more, despite their participation in the 2003 post-season games that mentally crippled the city of Chicago for several years.

What really caught my eye was a throwaway line in the article, which read, "The Marlins, despite their winning ways, are consistently among the bottom in baseball in payroll and attendance."

While I guess all of those statements are true - counting two World Series titles as winning ways and not dwelling the low spots in between - it surprises me a bit that there's not a bigger fan following of the team. More than that, the Marlins seem to be caught in the middle ground after a series of fire sales following their championship runs that have to be damaging to the team.

While prior owners have cried poor (especially regarding the stadium issues) before selling off a winning team, hopefully this new deal helps to cut down on that. My only question is why south Florida needs a retractable roof, when Minnesota decided to pass on that option. Must be those balmy Minneapolis autumns I miss so dearly.

(Image from: Ballparks.com)