Vinny Rottino gets an at-bat; Marlins lose
Just a quick note, folks . . . in Tuesday night’s game between the Florida Marlins and the New York Mets, Vinny Rottino entered the game in the 12th inning to play right field. He then came to the plate in the bottom of the 12th to hit, and grounded out. The Marlins lost the game, 7-4.
Note that this was Rottino’s first major league at-bat since September, 2008, when he was still a member of the Milwaukee Brewers organization.
Here’s hoping Rottino gets another at-bat soon, and this time gets a hit — preferably a ringing double into right-center.
Just reviewed George R.R. Martin’s “A Clash of Kings” for SBR
Folks, here’s the link before I forget:
There’s so much to talk about whenever you read any of the books in George R.R. Martin’s “Song of Ice and Fire” epics . . . at any rate, I did my best to do justice to it, and I hope I succeeded.
Enjoy!
This Labor Day, We Know Fewer are “Laboring”
After a horrible August, where zero jobs were created whatsoever in the United States, we know that as of this Labor Day, fewer workers are working than ever before — thus, fewer are “laboring,” which is part of what is keeping the American economy down for the count.
I don’t know what the answers are, but I do know a few things could be instituted right now that would help.
For example, in Betty Jin’s recent article at BusinessInsider.com, she suggested the following:
1) Cut the corporate tax rate by 5%; this may stimulate jobs. (The risk in doing so is that it would probably increase the deficit in the short-term.)
2) Print more money, and start taxing corporate savings. This would force companies to invest, but could cause inflation. The hope here is that the American companies would invest in American workers, which would keep inflation down to a manageable level.
3) Increase “infrastructure” spending — in other words, start building roads, bridges, and other things like rail lines, as this definitely would create jobs. Also, everyone of every party wants safe roads and bridges — this one seems like a win/win, especially if President Obama stops calling it “infrastructure,” something very few people seem to realize means “roads and bridges,” and starts calling this exactly what it is — putting people back to work doing something that’s vital and necessary.
This last one, to my mind, is the strongest of the 10 things Jin says can be done right now to improve the economy (it’s third on her list; to see the other seven, click on her article) because Dwight D. Eisenhower, a Republican President, was the one who pushed for the Interstate highway system we all take for granted back in the 1950s. So it would be really hard for the current crop of radical Republicans to say that this is a bad idea, considering it was started by their own party.
Next, there’s the New Republic’s article, written by Jared Bernstein, that’s headline states “Obama’s Got Plenty of Options to Right the Economy — He’s Just Got to Fight for them.” This article is part of the New Republic’s “Symposium on the Economy” that’s sub-titled, “Is there Anything that can be Done?” Other articles in this series can be found here.
At any rate, here’s the first few paragraphs from Bernstein’s article:
Here’s the policy reality facing the president: The economy is stuck in the mud and the American people are losing faith that policy makers can do anything about it. As long as GDP growth is persistently below trend—trend being around 2.5 percent—the unemployment rate won’t be going anywhere good anytime soon. Paychecks, meanwhile, are declining in real terms, so we’re stuck in a cycle where the weak job market hurts household budgets, which trims consumption, which discourages investors.
The only games in town are fiscal or monetary stimulus—there, I said the ‘s’ word—but the president is boxed in, it is said, by three forces: First, he’s got no job-creation bullets left; second, even if he did, and American people don’t believe the government can help on the jobs front (a pathetic 26 percent have confidence in Washington’s ability to solve economic problems); and, third, Republicans in Congress will block any idea he proposes anyway. Thankfully, none of these challenges are as insurmountable as they might seem, and pushing relentlessly to overcome them is the president’s best, and only, chance to change the fundamental direction of the debate, find his footing, and create some momentum for the economy and for himself.
Mind you, all of this means one thing: President Obama must lead, and the country must follow wherever the President leads with regards to the economy. This means a comprehensible strategy must be created, and thus far, I really haven’t seen very much out of the current Administration that leads me to believe there’s much going on there except reactionary spending — that is, Timothy Geithner, current Secretary of the Treasury, and Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, have performed well in their jobs but they haven’t really seemed to set policy so much as react to it instead. This may be an error on my part; I’m no financial wizard by any stretch of the imagination. But it seems to me that if these two men have a grand, overarching vision, it surely hasn’t been well-explained to the “men (and women) on the street” like me. And it also seems that if these two men do have a way out of this mess, the President doesn’t seem to know what it is, either — or, perhaps, he’s just not saying because he knows the Republicans in Congress wouldn’t like it and would say so with great vigor and dispatch.
Note that at a Labor Day rally and speech that President Obama gave today in Detroit, Michigan, the President seemed to not only understand the high stakes of this “game” (if he loses public opinion on this issue, any chance he has of a second term will be gone), but understood the need to boldly counterattack the current crop of Republican Presidential candidates including Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Gov. of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney according to today’s AP article listed at Yahoo News. Obama said:
“I’m going to propose ways to put America back to work that both parties can agree to, because I still believe both parties can work together to solve our problems,” Obama said at an annual Labor Day rally sponsored by the Detroit-area AFL-CIO. “Given the urgency of this moment, given the hardship that many people are facing, folks have got to get together. But we’re not going to wait for them.”
“We’re going to see if we’ve got some straight shooters in Congress. We’re going to see if congressional Republicans will put country before party,” he said.
Now, this sort of rhetoric is exactly what most Democrats and Independents have been waiting for, but until voters see some action beyond the words, it’s unlikely to help overmuch. Still, this is the right message — people are hurting, and the President seems to “get” that — and one can only hope that the President’s advisors are reading the same articles I am that offer some real possibilities rather than just allowing the economy — and workers — to continue to be flushed down the drain.
Milwaukee Brewers Catcher George Kottaras Hits for Cycle
Tonight, Milwaukee Brewers catcher George Kottaras hit for the cycle. He’s only the seventh Brewer to have done so, and is the third catcher behind Charlie Moore (who did so in 1980) and Chad Moeller (who did so in 2004) to have attained this feat. Kottaras is also the first major leaguer to have done so in 2011.
Now, for you non-baseball fans out there, “hitting for the cycle” means that Kottaras hit a single, a double, a triple and a home run in the same game. It is exceptionally difficult to do, and happens only rarely. (For example, Corey Hart nearly hit for the cycle a few weeks ago, but didn’t quite get it. And my favorite minor league player, Vinny Rottino of the New Orleans Zephyrs, nearly hit for the cycle this year but didn’t quite make it, either.)
Here’s a player analysis of the six Brewers (before tonight’s game) who hit for the cycle, in case you’re interested: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/392627-player-analysis-the-six-brewers-who-have-hit-for-the-cycle
Here’s part of what the Bleacher Report article has to say about Charlie Moore, the second Brewers player overall to do so:
Moore reached the cycle on Oct. 1, 1980 . . . According to Baseball-Reference.com, Moore pounded out four hits in a 10-7 win against the California Angels. Moore went 4-for-5, knocking in three runs and scoring three times.
A bit later, the same article observes:
Moore’s career spanned 15 seasons and 1,334 games. He finished with 1,052 hits, 408 RBI, and a .261 lifetime batting average.
During his time with the Brewers, Moore played multiple positions. As a right fielder in ’82, Moore posted an impressive .992 fielding percentage, second best in the American League.
I was young in 1982, but I remember Moore’s play very well; he was an outstanding defensive outfielder, a good defensive catcher, and a very good contact hitter when he was on. He is by far my favorite Brewers player because he maximized his ability every time he went out onto the field; he was the type of guy who had no “quit” in him, and I greatly respected that.
Now, Chad Moeller is another story; while Moeller is an excellent defensive catcher, no one could ever say that Moeller’s added much with his bat except for one evening in 2004 — April 27, 2004 to be exact.
Here’s what the same Bleacher Report article has to say about Moeller:
Moeller reached the accomplishment by going 4-for-5, with four RBI and one run scored.
A bit later, the B/R article states:
Moeller spent three seasons in Milwaukee (2004-06), splitting time at catcher with Gary Bennett and Damian Miller. The year Moeller hit for the cycle, he played in 101 games, the most by far in his career.
Moeller is a career .226 average hitter, while Moore, over fifteen seasons, hit for a career .261 batting average — very solid hitter, Moore. But as the B/R article says, the “stars aligned for Moeller” and he did, indeed, hit for the cycle.
Now, as for Kottaras . . . to date, he’s a career .219 hitter with some power in his bat and has greatly improved, defensively, in the past year or two since he came to the Brewers. Kottaras, entering tonight’s game, was hitting .241; because he’s played sparingly, his excellent game tonight raised his average to .273 with 4 HRs and 14 RBI in 88 official at-bats in only 38 games. (Kottaras plays once a week or so, mostly because he is Randy Wolf’s “personal catcher.”)
In tonight’s game, Kottaras started instead of Jonathan Lucroy perhaps so Lucroy could rest a bit, as Lucroy has caught a great many games this year (116 to date). His start obviously paid off for Brewers manager Ron Roenicke, and for the Brewers as a whole.
I like Kottaras; he’s a scrappy hitter with some power and speed to him, and he fights for every at-bat he gets. I wouldn’t have said, before tonight, that it would be likely that Kottaras would hit for the cycle as he’s received very little playing time; for example, Charlie Moore played in 111 games in 1980, batting .291 with 2 HRs (one of ’em being in that “cycle” game), 30 RBI, 10 SBs and 42 runs scored, so Moore had more opportunities to get his cycle in during the 1980 season than Kottaras has had this year.
That being said, Kottaras is now in rarefied company, as among the seven people who’ve hit for the cycle are Brewers Hall of Fame players Robin Yount (SS-CF) and Paul Molitor (3B-DH) along with Moore, Moeller, Mike Hegan (who hit the very first cycle in Brewers history) and Jody Gerut (who hit for the cycle last year).
Congratulations!
Just reviewed Jennifer Haymore’s “A Season of Seduction” for SBR
Folks, I wanted a great deal more than I got out of Jennifer Haymore’s “A Season of Seduction.” Maybe it’s that there are a great many more writers who’ve worked this sort of premise better, including Sherry Thomas and Rosemary Edghill — I know better writing exists, and better books, and this one just did not measure up.
Anyway, here’s the link to tonight’s review at SBR:
What to do when a Publishing Relationship Ends
Why is it that most writers plan for the beginning of a publishing relationship, but never plan for the end?
I know, I know. The end of any relationship, in or out of publishing, is not what most people prefer to dwell upon because it’s depressing. The end of any relationship means the end of any current possibilities, and that’s sad and extremely difficult for most human beings to contemplate.
That being said, in the current world we live in, we need to plan how to deal with failure graciously. (Not that every end to every publishing relationship means you’ve failed, mind you; just that it’s going to feel like failure, especially when you know you’ve tried everything in your power to make a publishing enterprise work.) We need to learn how to come to terms with setbacks, be they minor or major, and learn to deal with them as graciously as possible.
See, I look at the publishing business as a long-term thing that, in its own way, is a microcosm of life. We’re going to have good days and bad. The good days are usually easy to handle; it’s the tough ones we must learn from as best we can.
What I do when a publishing relationship has ended is to acknowledge it, make some sort of announcement to those who need to know about it, and am otherwise as polite as humanly possible. My thoughts, which are greatly influenced by those of my late husband Michael in this regard, are these: who knows if I’ll be working with this person/these people in the future? So why be obnoxious now when there’s really no need for it?
Yes, we need to acknowledge when we’re upset or frustrated. I’ve never advocated “sitting on” any emotion, as in my experience that tends to fester and make things worse later on. But we don’t need to go out of our way burning bridges this way and that, either . . . in fact, if we can avoid burning bridges, that’s probably the best way to handle things.
All that being said, it’s sad when anything you’ve spent a great deal of time and effort on goes for naught; I’ve had this happen a few times this past year, and the only thing that can be done is this: chalk it up to experience, be as polite as possible, and move on.
This is very hard to do, granted. But if you can do it, others will notice and appreciate the professionalism of your attitude, which may lead you to further and better work in the future.
So, to sum up, here’s the three things you need to do when a publishing relationship of any sort ends:
1) Come to terms with it and write a brief, polite, professional note saying you’re sorry things have come to this pass (whatever it is), and that you’ve appreciated working with whomever. Also, if you can bring yourself to it, wish the person (or people) well in the future as this costs you nothing.
2) Acknowledge it to those who need to know in a brief, polite and professional note. (Keep your feelings about it, as much as possible, to yourself.)
3) Allow yourself to grieve the loss, because it is a loss — give yourself an hour, or even half a day if you must, to be upset over it. Then, do your best to pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and move on.
Most importantly, do your best not to bear a grudge. Remember that we’re all human, we’re all fallible, and there’s no need to spread nastiness. You don’t need to put up with bad treatment, mind you; far from it. Just try to rise above it if you can while knowing that it’s possible that someday you might work with this person (or these people) again. And if that opportunity arises, you want to be able to work with whomever without undue rancor if at all possible.
You need to think long-term at a time when your inner self is screaming, “No!” at the top of its lungs. This isn’t easy, but if you can do it, it’ll help you in the long run.**
——–
** Michael’s name for this was the “better in sorrow than in anger” method. Try it. It works.
Chris Capuano, now a Met, pitches a 2-hit shutout
Former Milwaukee Brewers pitcher Chris Capuano, now 33 years of age, pitched a 2-hit shutout in New York for his new team, the New York Mets, last night. Capuano did this knowing full well that Hurricane Irene was on its way and won easily, 6-0, against the Atlanta Braves.
As the story from the New York Times said:
While the storm commanded headlines, Capuano’s superb performance got attention at Citi Field. He threw a two-hit shutout, striking out a career-high 13 and walking none.
“I was able to get ahead and just finish some guys off,” Capuano said. “It just felt really good.”
The Times story also pointed out that Capuano did not fret about the weather before Friday evening’s game as many of his teammates (quite understandably) did. Capuano’s serenity paid off, as he took a no-hit bid into the 5th inning before Dan Uggla got the first hit off Capuano, a single.
Here’s a bit more from the story:
Capuano threw at least 65 percent of his pitches for strikes in all but three innings, according to data from the Web site pitch f/x. He effectively used his changeup, which generated swinging strikes more than 25 percent of the time.
Capuano said his trust in catcher Josh Thole was an important element of his outing.
“I took a little different mental approach tonight,” said Capuano, who improved to 10-11. “I really tried not to shake off too much and just stayed in a good rhythm. I let Josh call the game back there, and it worked out.”
This was by far the best game Capuano has pitched since his return to the big leagues last year for the Brewers.
As I said last year when “Cappy” returned to the Brewers after rehabilitation from a second “Tommy John” surgery, I knew it was only a matter of time before he’d regain his complete pitching form. But now, it looks like he’s done so, and the Mets are the beneficiaries of taking a chance on him.
“Cappy,” when he’s on, pitches lights-out in the same way future Hall of Fame pitcher Greg Maddux used to (Maddux, like “Cappy,” never had blazing speed; he instead had pinpoint control). He’s also one of the most professional, put-together ballplayers around, as shown by going out the night before he knew a huge hurricane was on the way that was about to postpone the rest of the baseball series and pitch a two-hit, complete game shutout.
Note that ESPN.com called Capuano’s performance last night “one of the best games in (Mets) franchise history.” And on that article page is a link to last night’s “Baseball Tonight” show on ESPN where the commentators talk about how good it is when a veteran like Capuano can “persevere” through two major arm surgeries, which just goes to show you how important persistence — along with faith and belief in yourself — can be in overcoming nearly any obstacle.
The only odd thing about Capuano’s game last night from my perspective (being a long-time observer of his pitching style) is that “Cappy” struck out thirteen guys. (Not walking anyone, well, that’s part of “Cappy’s” game.) Normally, “Cappy” is a pitcher who induces a lot of ground-ball outs and might strike out one or two guys, not thirteen. Even in “Cappy’s” best season, 2005, where he was 18-12 for the Brewers, he didn’t come close to doing anything like this.
As Chris Capuano’s USA Today fantasy baseball page put it (emphasis added):
Chris Capuano had the start of a lifetime on Friday, striking out a career-high 13 in a two-hit shutout of the Braves in New York.
The outing was one of the best by any pitcher in baseball this season.
Well done, “Cappy!”
Just reviewed Anjali Banerjee’s “Haunting Jasmine” for SBR — Plus More Book Review Stuff
Before I forget, here’s the link to today’s review:
Now, as to the rest of the “book review stuff” I promised.
I started following author Victoria Strauss on Twitter and one of the articles she Tweeted (or possibly re-Tweeted as I now can’t find it) talked about how some places are paying people a fee, per review, in order to give a place a five star review. An undeserved five star review, at that — the highest possible rating for many rating scales — which skews the curve and makes a business that employs this practice seem to be a little better than they really are until people catch on that many of the highest reviews are out-and-out frauds.
I quickly did a Web search and put in “pay for reviews.” I saw many links at Craigslist and other places (including Jobs.com) promoting this despicable practice. Which is why I wanted to discuss it tonight.
I review books because I enjoy reading and I enjoy reviewing what I read. I do my best to give the fairest review I possibly can. I don’t give a ton of negative reviews, but I have been known to give two star reviews and have even given a one star review to a major author (Mercedes Lackey) once because I felt she could do much better and that she also should’ve known better because by that time she’d published at least fifteen solo novels and certainly knew her art and craft. (Mind you, this is where the highest review possible is a five-star review.)
I also, occasionally, have re-reviewed something when I felt I didn’t give someone a fair shake; I’ve discussed that here on my blog before. I don’t do this often, but if I feel I’ve made a mistake, or that there were other things that I should’ve known but somehow didn’t that clearly would’ve changed my review, I’m glad to correct the record as best I’m able.
But I do that because I’m honest, and because I like books, not because anyone is paying me to give ’em a better review.
Look. The only thing a reviewer should accept from a place like Baen Books or Tor Books or whatever publisher is a free copy of the book (in dead-tree or e-book form). That’s it — that’s the only gratuity any reviewer worth his or her salt should accept — because if reviewers start accepting money from a publisher (or from a travel company, which is one of the places hiring for the fraudulent reviews) in order to review something, that throws the entirety of their reviews into question. And by extension, it makes every reviewer — including the poor but honest ones, like me — look bad.
I love books, and I don’t enjoy giving bad reviews to anyone. But I’ll do it — I’ve done it with Debbie Macomber, one of my favorite romance authors, in my review for “Hannah’s List” at SBR. I’ve done it at Amazon.com in a review for one of Ursula K. LeGuin’s books (two stars). I’ve done it at Amazon.com in a review for one of Misty Lackey’s books as previously mentioned, and Lackey is one of the few authors I’ll go out of my way to buy in hardcover.
The reason I do it is because if I don’t like a book, I had better say so, and say why I don’t like it. This is the right thing to do, and it’s the only fair thing to do, even if you occasionally tick off one of your favorite authors in the process.
So if you’re thinking about selling your skills to write a fake review, please take another look at this and realize it’s a scam. Yes, you’ll get paid something to do it. But you’ll also be selling something that’s far more worthy than any amount of money — your good name and reputation.
———-
Additional note — there are still some places out there, like the New York Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, and the Washington Post, who pay book reviewers for their time and trouble. I am all in favor of paying reviewers when it’s done by an independent newspaper or online source. But that in no way, shape or form allows for people to sell fraudulent reviews to Web sites.
Barb Caffrey's Blog 