Maine Street, Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh Pirates (2-3) @ Los Angeles Dodgers (5-1) - 10:10 PM EDT

Another game, another dismal performance by Pittsburgh’s offense.

The Pirates dropped a 4-1 decision to the Dodgers Wednesday night in Los Angeles. While they weren’t facing a Cy Young Award-winner like they had in three of their first four contests, they certainly weren’t facing a slouch. Chad Billingsley pitched six effective innings for the Dodgers, scattering five hits and striking out four. The beefy right-hander’s sole mistake was a third-inning homerun surrendered to Clint Barmes (the shortstop’s very first hit as a Pirate). Billingsley has been very impressive in his first two starts of 2012, having allowed only eight hits and a walk in 14.1 innings against the Padres and Pirates (that translates to a WHIP of 0.63).

Pirates fans have no other choice but to once again put the recent past behind them in anticipation of facing left-hander Chris Capuano tonight. Fans’ optimism might be justified as Pittsburgh looks to avoid the sweep. Capuano is probably the the first starting pitcher the Bucs have seen in this young season that they can torch for multiple runs. He posted an 11-12 record with a 4.55 ERA while pitching for the New York Mets last year; the erstwhile Brewer made two June starts against the Bucs in 2011, taking a loss at Citi Field and pitching seven shutout innings in a win at PNC Park.

In the June 1, 2011, loss in Flushing, N.Y., Capuano cruised through six innings without allowing any runs. His shutout effort unraveled in the top of the seventh inning, however, as the Pirates strung a series of base hits together to score five runs and chase him from the game (imagine that - successive singles as a way to produce runs!). As a buoy for a team that has only crossed the plate nine times in five games, I’m sure the Pirates would be glad to duplicate tonight the success they had last time they faced Capuano on the road.

Regardless of what Capuano throws at the Pirates tonight, it will be interesting to see how Pedro Alvarez fares against the first left-handed pitcher he’ll face in 2012. Alvarez will be hitting in the seventh spot tonight while Casey McGehee takes over for Garrett Jones at first base. It’s no secret that Alvarez has struggled at the plate in the past year, but the Pirates’ coaching staff and ownership maintain faith in him. At least he didn’t have to test his mettle against Cliff Lee or Clayton Kershaw.

The reliable Jeff Karstens gets the ball in his second start of 2012. As with the rest of the Pirates’ staff, Karstens pitched well in his first start - he gave up one earned run on five hits in six innings of work against the Phillies on Saturday. Karstens’ only outing against L.A. in 2011 was a May 9 win at PNC Park in which he only allowed a first-inning earned run over 5.2 pitched. Also of note: Michael McKenry (catcher) and Yamaico Navarro (left field) will be starting the game in Chavez Ravine.

The Pirates are back in action late tonight taking on the Los Angeles Dodgers in Chavez Ravine. The Bucs nearly spoiled L.A.’s home opener yesterday afternoon, but were bested after Andre Ethier (who was celebrating his 30th birthday on the day Dodger Stadium itself turned 50) golfed a solo homerun in the eight inning to break a 1-1 tie.

The Pirates are very likely breathing a collective sigh of relief as they prepare to face right-hander Chad Billingsley tonight. Though they’re still at the beginning of a harrowing nine-game road trip during which they’ll square off against the Dodgers, Giants and Diamondbacks, the Pirates are not likely to see another Cy Young Award-winner for a while (the Buccos will fortunately miss Tim Lincecum when they face San Francisco this coming weekend). In the club’s first four games against the Phillies and Dodgers, Pittsburgh faced three (THREE!) pitchers who share four of the awards (Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee and Clayton Kershaw). Small wonder the Pirates have scored a paltry eight runs and are batting .189 as a team.

While it’s easy to make some excuses for the woeful offensive performance (THREE!), it hasn’t entirely been the exemplary pitching Pittsburgh has faced that has cut into their run production. One of the most troubling things we’ve seen through the first few games has been the team’s inability to bring runners in scoring position home. Yesterday, for example, the Pirates managed to squander Casey McGehee’s second-inning lead-off triple, hanging him out to dry as subsequent batters failed to get a base hit or sacrifice fly. Whether they’re facing Kershaw or some beer-bellied dude from the local slow-pitch softball league, the Pirates should be able to send a fly ball deep to the outfield with a runner on third base and no outs. It’s what they’re paid to do, and when they can’t do it, it’s frustrating.

Also troubling is shortstop Clint Barmes, who’s still looking to collect his first hit in a Pittsburgh uniform. The Buccos are paying Barmes $5 million this year to patrol the middle infield, but have yet to see much return on their investment. Though Barmes is known much more for his defensive work than what he does with his bat, fans must surely be expecting more from the veteran at the plate.

But, looking ahead, the Pirates should hopefully be able to generate more runs tonight with Garrett Jones and Pedro Alvarez back in the lineup. The two - who’ve both been historically ill-suited to face left-handed pitching - didn’t get the start against the southpaw Kershaw. Jones, like Barmes, is searching for his first hit of 2012, and Alvarez is hoping to continue where he left off in his last appearance against the Phillies on Sunday, when he sent a Vance Worley fastball on a one-way flight over PNC Park’s right field stands.

The Pirates’ saving grace has again been their pitching. The staff has posted a stingy 1.50 ERA through four games. Left-hander Erik Bedard makes his second start of the year tonight. I’m interested to see his match-up against Ethier, who, like Jones and Alvarez, has had difficulty hitting well against left-handed pitchers (Ethier batted .220 against them last year, as opposed to .321 against righties). I’m also interested to see if Bedard can mitigate any damage that Matt Kemp might do, as Kemp hit .341 against left-handers in 2011 with a 1.143 OPS. Yikes.

Made it to my very first Opening Day baseball game in my nearly 27 years of existence on Thursday. Took a four-day weekend from work to mark the occasion (forget the Easter and Passover holidays - this was my own little secular celebration) and went down to PNC Park with the wife to watch the Pirates host the big-budget Phillies. The weather sure was fine: just a shade under 60 degrees and a big, bright sun burnished everything with a nice warm glow. I submit to you Exhibit A:

The atmosphere on the North Shore (where PNC Park and Heinz Field - home of the Steelers - are located) was extremely upbeat. Hope springs eternal, especially for baseball fans in April. We parked in one of the large lots outside Heinz Field amidst a bevy of tailgaters and took a leisurely stroll to PNC. It was nice to see that the overwhelming majority of people out and about were sporting black and gold rather than red and white. Philadelphia, after all, lies a mere five hours to the east in the same state; our experience last year at a Phillies/Pirates game was a very large, very vocal contingent of the latter team’s fans. I imagine more Phillies fans will descend on the ‘Burgh for the Saturday and Sunday games.

Once inside the park, we walked around the perimeter, grabbed a bite to eat, and picked out differences from the previous year’s food and drink offerings. We weren’t big fans of the grub inside the gates in 2011, so it was nice to see a few improvements. For instance, to cater to more exotic tastes, the powers-that-be added a sushi window (run by Nakama, a popular destination on the South Side of the city) and some more exotic hot dog/hamburger arrangements. They also have a booth selling Chickie’s & Pete’s “crab fries,” which are apparently a big thing in Philadelphia (*shrugs*). Old favorites such as the Primanti Bros. (thePittsburgh sandwich, though it loses its charm after the second time you try it - I’ll take an Italian sandwich from Amato’s over a load of meat, fries and coleslaw any day of the week) still remain, but the park is still using hot dogs made by Sugardale. Not a fan. Pittsburgh also has a lot to learn about craft beer. The general lack of local, small-scale breweries (which typically lead to a wider variety of beer styles) is very noticeable when you’ve arrived in Pittsburgh via New England. Nevertheless, I was able to grab a Victory Hop Devil on draft (a great beer, but brewed on the outskirts of Philly, nowhere near Pittsburgh).

The game got underway at 1:35 and finished less than two-and-a-half hours later, the product of two pitchers dueling well. It was the first time I’ve seen Roy Halladay pitch in person. He was impressive, as one would expect. He gave up singles to Alex Presley and Jose Tabata in the first inning, then cruised through the rest of the game until Jonathan Papelbon pitched the ninth inning for the save. On the other side, Erik Bedard made his debut as a Pirate and was equally impressive, scattering a few hits over seven innings and only surrendering one run. Unfortunately, that one run was all the Phils needed for the victory. Phillies 1, Pirates 0.

Listened to some of the local sports radio on the drive home and heard a lot of Pittsburgh fans bemoaning the two-hit performance, suggesting that the Pirates are doomed to a twentieth consecutive losing season because of their inability to score runs. I say, “Relax.” I concede that I have the advantage of having only followed this team for one season (my faith hasn’t been destroyed by the long record of failure), but let’s look at the game in context. The Pirates were facing Roy Halladay! Y’know, the dude with the pair of Cy Young Awards? The dude who has a perfect game under his belt? The dude who, along with Don Larsen, is the only pitcher to ever throw a no-hitter in the postseason? That list of achievements indicate that he’s pretty good. Additionally, it’s not like he mowed down the Pirate batters. Sure, he was highly effective, but he was pitching to contact a lot of the time, only striking out five in eight innings of work. Even Pedro Alvarez, the much-maligned third baseman whosemodus operandiis to strike out in four pitches or less, was able to barrel up some balls, only striking out once in three plate appearances. The Pirates were able to put balls in play, they just didn’t fall as hits.

There were also some fans suggesting that manager Clint Hurdle should’ve had Andrew McCutchen lay down a bunt after the first-inning singles by Presley and Tabata, the logic being that it would’ve been wiser to sacrifice the out and move Presley and Tabata into scoring position for Neil Walker and/or Garrett Jones. The argument makes sense if it was the sixth or seventh inning of a scoreless game. But sacrificing the number three hitter with 27 outs in front of the offense on Opening Day? After McCutchen just signed a lucrative long-term deal to produce runs in such a situation? Do these fans have any faith at all? Sadly, McCutchen grounded into a double play which killed the burgeoning momentum, but, in my opinion, there was never any doubt about whether he should’ve been swinging away.

The Major League Baseball season, with its slate of 162 games, is not a 100-meter dash. It’s a lengthy marathon whose field of contestants often looks radically different in September than it did in April. This is why I don’t yet despair. There’s no doubt the Pirates face an uphill climb in April (they head out to the west coast after the conclusion of the opening series against the Phillies to take on more pitching-heavy teams in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Arizona), but they’re playing in a division in which they can legitimately compete in 2012. And there’s an extra Wild Card in each league this year! And our offense will eventually come around to buoy our pitching staff, which is pretty decent and will only improve once A.J. Burnett is healthy again.

What was that I said earlier? Oh, yeah. Hope springs eternal, especially for baseball fans in April.

I’ve been internalizing most of my feelings about tonight’s game for two weeks now, and I think it’s best to get some of them out before kickoff.

This Super Bowl has several subplots that pundits and fans have analyzed, argued and re-analyzed again during these past two weeks. It’s the re-match of Super Bowl XLII. There are questions about how to compare the Manning brothers if Eli is to win his second Lombardi Trophy (one more than Peyton). Will Bill Belichick retire if he wins another Super Bowl? Will Tom Coughlin stamp a ticket to the Pro Football Hall of Fame if he can capture another title?

Meanwhile, the most discussed storyline seems to be the significance of Super Bowl XLVI’s outcome for Tom Brady’s legacy. Detractors like to point to the fact that Brady hasn’t won a meaningful postseason game since downing the Philadelphia Eagles in Super Bowl XXXIX en route to his third ring. Pieces like this one on ESPN.com emerged in the past couple of weeks, insisting that Brady isn’t all that great in the playoffs. Naturally, as a diehard Pats fan, I have a bone or two to pick with this piece. I understand this dude’s point, but his argument (as well as those of other Brady-haters) remains irksome because it oversimplifies a rather complex debate.

I’ll admit that it is difficult to praise Brady’s play in recent playoff contests – though I do get a kick out of the mental gymnastics required to dismiss the six-touchdown dismantling of Denver in the Divisional round a few weeks ago, which doesn’t comport neatly with the critics’ narrative. But if we’re going to apply such scrutiny to a conveniently selected segment of a player’s career, then I submit that the résumés of other established quarterbacks require such an evaluation. Honestly: what does it take to be considered a “great” playoff quarterback? Let’s take a look at the case against some of the league’s best signal callers:

Ben Roethlisberger – 10-4 career postseason record, 2-1 in Super Bowls. Fewer postseason wins and fewer rings than Brady. Also 0-1 in head-to-head matchup against Brady in the playoffs (losing the 2004 AFC Championship game at Heinz Field). I concede that Big Ben had a phenomenal performance in Super Bowl XLIII (indeed, that late, go-ahead touchdown pass to Santonio Holmes in the back corner of the end zone remains one of the prettiest throw-and-catch displays in Super Bowl history), but what about Super Bowls XL and XLV? His line in the former game (9 for 21, 123 yards and zero touchdowns against two interceptions) led to the lowest quarterback rating (22.6) of any Super Bowl winning quarterback. Moreover, his average performance in last year’s contest wasn’t nearly enough to earn a third ring.

Drew Brees – 5-4 career postseason record, 1-0 in Super Bowls. Despite all of his statistical accolades, Brees has only been to the Big Game once, and has yet to lead the Saints back since Peyton served up a win for New Orleans in Super Bowl XLIV (see below). He does have that championship ring, but he and the Saints also managed to lose a Divisional playoff game to the 7-9 Seattle Seahawks last year. So, y’know, there’s some great and some not-so-great to point to here.

Eli Manning – 7-3 career postseason record, 1-0 in Super Bowls. Eli’s résumé is impressive, and a win tonight will secure his status among the league’s elite. But, as Adam Schefter pointed out earlier this week, if then Patriots cornerback Asante Samuel had had surer hands and secured what should have been a game-ending interception on the play before David Tyree’s iconic oh-my-God-how-did-he-just-catch-that-pass? in Super Bowl XLII, the conversation surrounding tonight’s game could have been radically different. Not to slight Eli, but in certain cases sheer luck trumps skill.

Peyton Manning – 9-10 career postseason record, 1-1 in Super Bowls. The postseason in which the Colts went 4-0 and beat the Bears in Super Bowl XLI? Peyton threw three touchdowns against seven interceptions in four starts, which, as it suggests, means Peyton was carried by his team. And his fourth quarter interception to Tracy Porter in Super Bowl XLIV sealed the New Orleans Saints’ victory in that game (it was returned for a touchdown and put the Colts behind by two scores with less than four minutes to play).

There’s more: John Elway had a losing record in Super Bowls; Brett Favre hoisted the Lombardi Trophy early in his career, but never again replicated that postseason success in 14 subsequent seasons; Joe Montana was 4-0 in the championship game without ever throwing an interception, but an argument could be made that he was surrounded by an inordinate amount of talent. I could go on, of course, but I don’t want to belabor the point. Though some less broad-minded readers may see the above simply as sour grapes (especially the thoughts on Eli), I hope others understand my argument. There’s no doubt that most (if not all) of the above quarterbacks will have a bronze bust residing in Canton, Ohio someday, but postseason successes notwithstanding, they all have some ugly blemishes on their playoff records. But if we’re going to pick apart the bad performances by these guys (which are generally the exceptions to the rule), then how are we ever going to classify great playoff quarterbacks? Who could possibly fit the bill? Troy Aikman? Terry Bradshaw? Maybe – but then again, you could say they, too, were surrounded by an unparalleled cast of characters.

In spite of my argument, it does feel like Brady needs to win tonight – not to legitimize his career, but to silence any more absurd opinions regarding his putatively mediocre playoff record. I’m cautiously optimistic about Super Bowl XLVI, though I think the stage is beautifully set for a New England victory. The Pats have downplayed it these past two weeks, but how sweet would it be to exact revenge on the very team that denied them the perfect season four years ago? My spirits are also buoyed by the fact that the Giants have won two of three against the Patriots dating back to Week 17 of the 2007 season – I think it may be difficult for them to take a third game out of four from Belichick’s gang.

Speaking of Belichick, there’s been discussion (to a lesser extent) about the impact of Super Bowl XLVI on Bill Belichick’s legacy. Essentially, some continue to see Belichick as a cheater who has not yet atoned for the sins of the “Spygate” scandal. It’s true that he doesn’t have any Super Bowl titles since then, though I’m certain that Belichick-haters weren’t the best math students in school. What do I mean? The Patriots boast a 63-16 regular season record since Week 1 of the 2007 season (when “Spygate” came to light). This means New England has won nearly 80 percent of its games since it was forced not to “cheat,” which proves to be a higher winning percentage than the one they maintained in the regular season from 2000 to 2006 (Belichick has been head coach in New England since the 2000 season). If studying an opponents’ signals – which has been acknowledged by other NFL head coaches as previously de rigueur – provided such an unfair advantage to the Patriots, then shouldn’t their winning percentage have been adversely affected?

Okay, enough. It really is sick how worked up I get about such trivial matters. But, hey: it’s Super Bowl Sunday, and my team is in it. It’s hard not to get worked up.

Go Pats!

Dearest Mary Ellen,

Dear God in Heaven! How I miss you and the children! It has only been a month since I saw you last, but I’ll be damned if it doesn’t seem as if it’s been years.

First and foremost, I want to let you know that I’m all right. War is a terrible thing – very likely the worst of things in which men engage, but I lay my head down every night knowing that I’m fighting for a just and noble cause. They may refer to it as the ‘War on Christmas,’ but in my heart I know it’s a war for the soul of our nation.

Things haven’t been easy, I won’t lie. It’s nothing anyone could have prepared me for. Men much greater than me have met savage, ignoble deaths.

The worst I’ve seen was but two days ago, and I write you now so that I may ease the burden on my mind. It was a brave soldier named Sherman, a sturdy, corn-fed chap from Iowa, who met his fate as we defended a nativity scene outside one of the local public libraries. A group of us, maybe half a dozen or so, had taken up camp in the area the previous night after some local Faithful had set the scene up. We stayed up in shifts throughout the night, three awake while the other three caught some shut-eye, sharing tales of our favorite Christmas memories. Dawn eventually broke, and it was beautiful – the vapor of our warm breaths and the curling wood smoke of a dying fire greeting the amber horizon.

It was shortly thereafter that a roving group of Secularists caught sight of our camp and the scene over which we stood sentry. The bastards guffawed and had themselves a grand time as they came nearer, openly mocking us with chants of ‘happy holidays’ and asking us where they could find the tallest ‘holiday trees’ to take home to their families. We begged them to please go on their way and leave our nativity scene alone. We didn’t want any trouble, but we were prepared to defend our right to celebrate the birth of Jesus.

They kept approaching. One of the men had a brown satchel thrown over his shoulder. He lowered it to the ground, reached in and pulled out a sizable menorah. He studied it for a moment and then looked on at us, cackling, and said that there was room for all kinds of holidays at this time of year. There was more laughing (evil, terrible) from the group, and then the man with the menorah broke into a dead sprint and ran the nine prongs right through Sherman’s stomach. Sherman was a large guy, but the approach surprised him and he didn’t make any move to avoid the menorah or fight back. The prongs drove through his flesh with a sickening thuck sound, and the rest of the group began pelting us with multi-colored Kwanzaa candles before they all retreated down the road. Sherman lay in a pool of blood, and we yelled for help. The police and paramedics came, but it was too late. Sherman was gone. And all the insensitive bastards could do was tell us that we had to move the nativity scene off of public property.

There are moments when I allow the dreadful notion into my head that they have won. The Secularists have won. The thought hit me as I watched Sherman die defending little baby Jesus. It also hit me when I walked out of a grocery store last week and passed a Salvation Army volunteer. Naturally, I gave her the spare change in my pocket and was on my way, until she wished me a ‘happy holiday season.’ I turned back, and it took all of my will not to seize the bell from her hand and bludgeon her over her head with it. Instead, I fell to my knees and wept. I wept for the past, I wept for the future. It was Sherman – yes, that poor bastard Sherman, whose insides had yet to be eviscerated – who followed me closely out of the store and offered me a hand, admonishing the Salvation Army wench that she ought to be ashamed of herself. It was then that I remembered that they Secularists haven’t won. No, not when we have great, great men like Sherman.

Damn. We had great men like Sherman.

Oh, Mary Ellen. I long to be with you again. One day, hopefully soon, we will be re-united. But I vow to you that I will not give up the good fight until I can rest assured that our boys will wake up on December 25^th of each year to open presents under a CHRISTMAS TREE.

God bless, and MERRY CHRISTMAS. I love you.

-Joshua

Dr. P.W. McCallum, the Marshall Applewhite Professor of History and Social Theory at Giles College in Pulaski, Tenn., regularly answers reader mail in The Tennessean. Today’s question comes from Kevin Talbot of Murfreesboro.

Dear Dr. McCallum:

While I am opposed to the big government ideas touted by the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement, I feel a certain kinship with the protesters, as they are exercising their First Amendment rights. It was not too long ago that I was doing the same with the ‘Tea Party’ movement. Do you think the ‘Occupy’ and ‘Tea Party’ movements are here to stay?

 Kevin:

An astute point and an excellent question! As it is impossible to predict the future – and historians should not deign to participate in such soothsaying – it is exceedingly difficult to proffer a prediction with any degree of certitude.

That being said, it is clear that the ‘Occupy’ and ‘Tea Party’ movements will soon give rise to a third, more radical movement: the ‘Animals as Overlords’ movement. As ‘Occupy’ and the ‘Tea Party’ begin to realize that the Republican and Democratic parties are helplessly beholden to the whims of the nation’s moneyed interests, and the movements’ respective pleas for change have fallen on deaf ears, they will unite and embrace the idea that we should replace members of the federal government with the strongest, wisest members of the animal kingdom.

I recently chaired a discussion panel on a paper authored by my colleague Joanna Katz-Manning at the 12^th Annual Conference on Equine Suffrage in Brussels – “Hear Me Roar: The Persistence of the Sage Lion in Film and Television” – which argued brilliantly that human beings have expressed a desire (namely through the characters of Mufasa in The Lion King and Aslan of C.S. Lewis’ The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe) to turn complete control of our societies over to a race of advanced lions. While there exists some debate in academic circles about the race of animals that we will ultimately elect as our representatives – indeed, some have argued quite convincingly that giraffes or elephants are just as likely as lions to take seats in the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court and the White House – the undeniable conclusion is that, as soon as the 2016 presidential election, ballots will contain the names of viable animal candidates alongside the names of Democratic and Republican politicians.

I, for one, welcome our future animal overlords, and advise others to do the same.

Best,

P.W. McCallum, Ph.D.