My baseball career ended at age 15. Lack of identifiable talent, if you must know. But I did play tennis competitively throughout high school, and I was forever on the cusp of making the varsity squad.
The way the tennis team worked was that in order to move up the ranks, you had to play “challenge” matches against the guys above you. I was usually right at the top of the JV ladder, and I had some skills. Good ground strokes, when I was able to hit them. Good serve, when it was working. I could move around the court fairly well, although I was more comfortable at the baseline than at the net.
My problem was that although there were a lot of things I could do reasonably well on a tennis court at any given time, the chances that I actually would do more than, say, one or two of them well at the same time were pretty remote. I had some talent but no consistency. I could make some real nice plays, but I could blow some real easy ones.
In short, I couldn’t be counted on to get the job done when it mattered. And because I had some talent (being young, I overestimated how much, but that’s another story) it frustrated the heck out of me that “lesser” players were ranked above me. They did not possess the skills that I had, or that I thought I had, and I couldn’t understand how they were able to advance while I didn’t.
My nemesis was a guy named Jon. I constantly played challenge matches against him but never could beat the guy. And for the life of me, I couldn’t figure out why. I hit my ground strokes harder than he did, my serve was stronger than his, I could cover more court than he could, and even my net game (not a strength for me by any stretch) was at least as good as his.
The only thing Jon had going for him, and it’s a big one, is that he could return almost any shot. He wouldn’t necessarily hit it hard or with a lot of spin, but he would put it in play and usually in a spot he wanted. His entire game was predicated on your making mistakes. And unless you were very good, chances are you would make those mistakes and he’d win with a smile, while you’d walk away muttering under your breath, wondering how he could beat you.
At the time, you’re thinking it’s luck. You can do everything better than he can, and you know it. But when push comes to shove, you can’t get all facets of your game working at the same time, while Jon’s game never varies. He’s consistent. He always executes. He has a plan; it’s not a sexy plan but he nails it every time and you walk away frustrated, every time.
At some point — and it may be years later — you have to acknowledge that even if you’ve got the better individual skills, unless you’re able to harness those and coordinate them all in a manner that allows you to win with consistency, you don’t have the better game. The serve, the ground strokes, the net game — none of that matters if you’re shooting yourself in the proverbial foot with unforced errors. If you routinely fail to execute maneuvers that are necessary to your winning a match and you subsequently lose the match, it’s nobody’s fault but your own. And it’s prideful folly to insist that you are the better player despite all evidence to the contrary.
Even if you are certain that you possess stronger individual skills than your opponent, the inability to use those skills to your advantage is a fatal flaw that needs to be corrected. If you are smarter and more self-aware than I was at age 17 (heaven help you if you aren’t), you should be able to examine your own game with honesty and identify the weak points, then work to address those points so that the next time you meet your opponent, you’ll be better prepared to do battle.
Luck will play a part, of course, because whether we prefer to acknowledge it or not, that is always an element. But anything you can do to help tip the odds in your favor is a good thing. Because the next time you get that chance, you don’t want to walk away until everyone else has fallen. And if you don’t believe that, then why are you even playing?
* * *
Congratulations to the Padres on a great season, and thanks for all the thrills. I have no doubt that next year will be even better. Is it Opening Day yet?
49:
Keith Law is not a self-proclaimed pundit with a pen. He is not a writer by trade.
Law spent 4½ years with the Toronto Blue Jays as a Special Assistant to the General Manager.
You should at least google someone before you rip them.
49: Keith Law spent four years as a special assistant/advisor to J.P. Ricciardi in the Blue Jays front office.
Therefore, he’s not your average “self-proclaimed pundit with a pen”.
I admit you’re right on that assertion with most guys, but not Law.
Wow, jinx.
And hey, Peter, good work, as always.
50:
A-Rod would play 3B with the Padres. So it doesn’t matter that he can’t play SS as well as he used to. The Padres 3B problems are the reason they are being mentioned as a possible destintation.
50:
As long as the new team is willing to pay all or almost all of A-Rod’s salary, the Yankees won’t be asking for comparable value for him. So something like Hensley and Linebrink for A-Rod is possible. The Yankees wouldn’t ask for the Padres three best players.
Kevin, I agree that they wouldn’t ask for the Padres three best, but they’d likely ask for one of the three best and w/ their pitching needs…
The “SS” was actually directed elsewhere, someone near the top mentioned him as a Greene replacement.
I don’t think they would have to give up Peavy or Young. If the Yankees asked for one of those, the Padres could certainly turn them down.
I think Peavy for ARod could be interesting, but I don’t think it would be done. ARod would want to play short again which could play into moving Greene to 3B which could work out for San Diego.
Alex Rodriguez would be an amazing acquisition. There’s no single player I wouldn’t trade for him and I’m not sure if there’s even a combination of two players I wouldn’t give up.
Re: 45
ChrisK,
What do you have in mind to inject some personality into this team?
59:
Well said.
Kevin & Richard, I mostly agree, but I wouldn’t give up any combo of Young/Peavy/Gonzales… It’s not that A-Rod isn’t statistically worth it, it’s that we’re too thin without at least two of those guys.
The Yankees would probably go with Young or Peavy and Linebrink or Meredith…
I wish I could offer a solid suggestion of a personality-inducing player, manager, bat boy (remember when the Padres’ bat boy had an afro? I guess that was too interesting, so even he cut his hair!) or anyone else. Right now, very little excites me about the Padres.
I remember players like Tim Flannery or Eric Owens. Not great players, not game-changing players, but players you could root for. Khalil fits this description to some extent these days. Fans have latched onto him because he is exciting to watch in the field, and is unlike any other player (or maybe girls just think he’s cute).
Then we had players like Gwynn, Caminiti and Finley who were both game-changing players and also exciting to watch. Not exactly a dime a dozen, of course, and I don’t know of a current player who fits the bill. I’m sure others here will have suggestions.
Re 51
Fair enough. I should have Googled Keith Law before ripping him. My comments were about writers in general, as I obviously know little about Law.
Would I be correct in saying that Law was a writer who became an assistant who went back to writing?
The Blue Jays during the Law era:
2002 78-84
2003 86-76 (.531)
2004 – 67-94 (.416) 2004
2005 – 80-82 (.494)
I guess being a genius is a little easier from behind the pen than on the field after all. Now we know why he went back to writing.
65: Wouldn’t your insult make more sense if Law had been a manager that screwed up and was fired rather than an assistant to the GM that elected to resign?
65: Plus, I’m also a self-appointed expert, and I know I couldn’t manage a major league team for many, many reasons. But that doesn’t make Bruce Bochy any more compotent. It doesn’t mean he is good at what he does.
For example, just because a music critic can’t write or play music doesn’t mean their criticism of Britney Spears is false.
I think Cameron should fit your bill, Chris, Ks and all. At least he doesn’t have to run odd routs to make highlight catches (Eric Owen, at least his rep; my memory is foggy). Personality can be one of those vague or subjective complaints. Whether Cameron or Gonzalez or Young, I think this team is OK there.
I like how my e-mail was included by Travis in an anti-Bochy comment. Makes me proud.
Re 66 – If Law chooses to write about in-game strategy, he should be judged on his team’s record during his tenure with the Blue Jays. Law is insinuating that he would be a better in-game manager than Bochy (who shouldn’t even be on the plane ride home, according to him), so we can only look to how his team fared when he had some level of responsibility in the overall decision-making process. Unfair? Maybe. A little like lambasting a manager that takes a mediocre team to a first-place finish and then is sniped as a bad in-game strategist by a writer- failed assistant GM -writer.
re 67 – “For example, just because a music critic can’t write or play music doesn’t mean their criticism of Britney Spears is false.”
You are 100% correct.
“But that doesn’t make Bruce Bochy any more competent. It doesn’t mean he is good at what he does.”
And just because Law was an assistant to a GM and writes for ESPN doesn’t mean he is competent or that his in-game strategy is any better than Bochy’s.
From the posts I’ve gone back and read about Law resigning his position with the Jays he seems to be a nice enough guy. I also have no idea how good he did in his position, so my claiming he failed is unwarranted.
Mostly, I’m just a Bochy fan, and I was especially irked today by ESPN’s poll asking readers who they would rather have on their team, Terrall Owens or ARod? Millions of readers will see this poll, and a large number will now equate the two (as if they were comparable). That would be like me asking: Who would you rather hire as a writer, Keith Law or Jason Blair? Irresponsible, defamatory, and a sign of the times, I’m afraid. Is ESPN owned by FOX?
BigKTFan, might I suggest that you read “The Book” by Dolphin, Tango and MGL.
Thanks, Richard. You’ve mentioned that before and seem sold on its ideas. I will have to order it.