By Bob Markus
Plaxico Burress is going to jail, the Chicago Cubs are going nowhere, and the New York Yankees are going to town. So I am going to have to apologize for ignoring a bunch of good stories and, for the third week in a row, write about golf. Believe me, I didn't want to do it. I love to play golf and I like to watch it, but as a sports writer for 36 years at The Chicago Tribune, it was way down on my list of favorite sports to cover. I promise you I won't write another word about golf after today for at least a month or more--probably more.
But today we have to talk about Michelle Wie. We have to talk about Michelle Wie because she is the future of women's golf in America. That all became clear over the week-end when the 19-year-old led the United States to a 16-12 victory over a team of European stars, to retain possession of the Solheim cup. It was her first Solheim cup and she was magnificent. Actually, it was my first Solheim cup, too. It's been around for awhile, but if I ever thought about it at all, I probably figured a Solheim cup was a plastic drinking vessel that you throw away after using.
Turns out it's the women's version of the Ryder cup and it made for some compelling TV viewing. Most compelling sight of all, was the performance of Wie, who, before she was old enough to vote went from a phenom to a has been. There was a time when Michelle Wie had been seen as the Tiger Woods of the women's game. That was when she was 12 and the youngest girl to qualify for an LPGA tournament. That was when she was 13 and the youngest ever to make the cut in a major tournament, the Kraft Nabisco Championship. That same year she became the youngest to make the cut in the U.S. Women's open. That was when she was 15-16 and finishing in the top three in four of the eight majors played during the 2005-06 seasons. She never won a major. No. Never won any pro tournament, in fact. But she was still just 16 years old, had signed a multimillion dollar contract with Nike, and the golf world was hers for the taking.
That was then. Within two years the male golfer she most closely resembled was John Daly. Tons of natural talent, but no results. Missed cuts, last place finishes, controversy over whether she had an injured wrist or not, controversy over her seeming obssession with playing in men's events, controversy over the way her parents were running her life, ruining her career. No one thought of Michelle Wie as the next Tiger Woods anymore. Nobody thought of Michelle Wie at all. Then she started to get it back. She went to the LPGA qualifying school and finished seventh, plenty good enough to earn her tour card. She still hasn't won an LPGA tournament, but played well enough to be chosen as a captain's pick for the Solheim Cup. She more than justified the selection. She posted a 3-0-1 record in her four matches, including a 1-up singles victory on the final day at a time the Europeans seemed to have the advantage. All you need to know about Wie was revealed on the second hole of that match against the veteran Helen Alfredsson. The second is a par five over water that the longer hitters can reach in two. Both players had drives in the 300 yard range. Alfredsson, hitting first, planted a fairway wood inside of 5 yards from the flag stick for a probable eagle. Wie never blinked. She simply put HER second shot within 3 feet of the cup and eventually won the hole. Although she faltred some at the end, she managed to hang onto the lead.
The LPGA leadership had to be ecstatic over the outcome. Not only did the U.S. retain the Cup, but a new star emerged from the shadows of an old scar. The LPGA has been in some difficulty lately, mainly because it lacks enough U.S. born players. Nearly a third (47) of all the LPGA players are from Korea (where both of Wie's parents were born). Wie, along with Morgan Pressel, another rising star who at 21 already has won two LPGA tournaments, including a major, should be able to compete with the Asians while they await the arrival of the next phenom. That would be Alexis Thompson, who at 14 already has played in three U.S. Women's Opens and made the cut this year. But Thompson has not exhibited the drawing power that Wie wielded at such an early age. Nor, to my knowledge, has anybody thrown millions of dollars at her. That's probably just as well. Let Wie's rise and fall and rise serve as a cautionary tale for all 14-year-olds with talent beyond their years. It was another golfer, Walter Hagen, who said it best: Wherever you're going, stop and smell the flowers along the way.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
By Bob Markus
Tiger Woods wasn't just beaten in Sunday's PGA championship final round--he was Shanghaied. No, there were no British press gangs lurking at Hazeltine, hoping to send the four-time PGA champion on a slow boat to China--unless you count the British newshounds sent to cover the British Isles contingent, i.e. Padraig Harrington, Rory McIlroy, Lee Westwood et al, who played prominent roles in the tournament. The days are long gone when unsuspecting landlubbers who were indiscreet enough to visit the waterfront late at night risked being impressed into duty on an English ship.
In this instance the term "Shanghaied" takes on new meaning. You see, this wasn't the first time North Korea's Y.E. (for Yong-Eun) Yang bested the world's best golfer in a tournament. Nearly three years ago, in November of 2006, Yang won something called the HSBC Champions in Shanghai, China. He won the tournament by two strokes over runners-up Tiger Woods and Retief Goosen. So, on Sunday, Woods was "Shanghaied" again. By whatever name you want to call it, Sunday's stunning result was the most heart-breaking loss of Woods' career. It wasn't just that it was the first time Woods had ever lost a major when leading going into the final round. He had been 14 for 14, but, after all, nobody's perfect. It wasn't just that a 15th major had slipped from his grasp. At 33 he still has plenty of time to win the four more that will tie him with Jack Nicklaus for the all-time lead. That he will win more majors is a virtual certainty. That he will win another PGA is not. There are four major championships a year, four chances to edge closer to his goal. But only one chance each year to win his fifth PGA title, which would tie him for the alltime lead with Nicklaus and Walter Hagen.
Yang, who had but one previous PGA Tour victory, deserves all the credit for doing what no one else has ever done--overtake Tiger Woods in the final round of a major tournament. But Woods contributed greatly to his own demise. His medium range putting, usually impeccable, was, in a word, horrendous. It started on the final hole of the third round the previous day when Woods, leading by two strokes, appeared ready to make it a more comfortable three. He had a birdie putt of under 10 feet, the kind he usually gobbles down like a python swallowing a toad, but this time it stuck in his throat. So, when he lined up a nine-foot putt on the first hole Sunday I said to myself, "if he makes this he's going to run away with this tournament. But if he misses. . . ." He missed and Yang was still only two shots behind and never got farther behind than that. With five holes to play the two were tied and this was the moment Yang was supposed to crack. Instead he hit two magnificent shots over the final five holes, the chip shot for eagle on the short par four 14th, the shot that ultimately won the tournament, and the three iron over the trees from 210 yards out on the 18th, the shot that sapped the last of Woods' iron will. Thus Yang became the first Asian male golfer to win a major, although Woods himself has more Asian blood (50 per cent) running through his veins than African-American (25 per cent). You can bet that there will be more and more Asians coming to the PGA tour. If you doubt it, just look at the women's tour where there are so many Asians--mainly Korean--winning championships that tour officials considered making speaking English mandatory for LPGA tour membership.
The victory by the 37-year-old Yang, who did not take up golf until he was 19 (compared with Tiger, who seemingly started playing in the womb), is being hailed as the greatest upset in golfing history if not the biggest upset in all of sports. Perhaps so. But if Jack Fleck's 1955 U.S. Open victory over Ben Hogan does not top it, at least it runs a very close second. Fleck was, essentially, a club pro from Davenport, Iowa, who, at the behest of some of his golfing buddies, started playing some of the winter tour events, mainly to escape the bitter midwestern winters. He had only been playing fulltime on the PGA circuit for about a year when he qualified for the 1955 Open at the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Hogan at the time was as revered and respected as Woods is today. He was looking to become the first man to win five U.S. Open titles and appeared to have it in his pocket when he left the 72d green with a par and a one-shot lead over some guy named Fleck. So sure was Hogan that he had won the tournament that he flipped his ball to an official and said, "this is for the Golf House (museum)." NBC, which covered only the final hour of the tournament, went off the air saying that Hogan had won his fifth Open. Bantam Ben was sitting in the clubhouse, sipping a glass of Scotch, when Fleck lofted a seven iron over a bunker and landed it eight feet from the pin. Then he sank the birdie putt, tying Hogan for the lead and setting up an 18-hole playoff for the next day.
It was a foregone conclusion that the battle-tested Hogan, the greatest golfer of his era, and some still say the greatest of any era, would dust off the upstart Fleck as easily as an elephant stomping on a mouse. But Fleck won the playoff 72-69 and nobody yet has won a fifth U.S. Open. Tiger Woods has three of them among his 14 majors and if anyone is going to win five, he's the man. Unless he gets Shanghaied again by some golfer who is unknown, unsung, and unimpressed with going toe-to-toe with the world's greatest golfer.
Tiger Woods wasn't just beaten in Sunday's PGA championship final round--he was Shanghaied. No, there were no British press gangs lurking at Hazeltine, hoping to send the four-time PGA champion on a slow boat to China--unless you count the British newshounds sent to cover the British Isles contingent, i.e. Padraig Harrington, Rory McIlroy, Lee Westwood et al, who played prominent roles in the tournament. The days are long gone when unsuspecting landlubbers who were indiscreet enough to visit the waterfront late at night risked being impressed into duty on an English ship.
In this instance the term "Shanghaied" takes on new meaning. You see, this wasn't the first time North Korea's Y.E. (for Yong-Eun) Yang bested the world's best golfer in a tournament. Nearly three years ago, in November of 2006, Yang won something called the HSBC Champions in Shanghai, China. He won the tournament by two strokes over runners-up Tiger Woods and Retief Goosen. So, on Sunday, Woods was "Shanghaied" again. By whatever name you want to call it, Sunday's stunning result was the most heart-breaking loss of Woods' career. It wasn't just that it was the first time Woods had ever lost a major when leading going into the final round. He had been 14 for 14, but, after all, nobody's perfect. It wasn't just that a 15th major had slipped from his grasp. At 33 he still has plenty of time to win the four more that will tie him with Jack Nicklaus for the all-time lead. That he will win more majors is a virtual certainty. That he will win another PGA is not. There are four major championships a year, four chances to edge closer to his goal. But only one chance each year to win his fifth PGA title, which would tie him for the alltime lead with Nicklaus and Walter Hagen.
Yang, who had but one previous PGA Tour victory, deserves all the credit for doing what no one else has ever done--overtake Tiger Woods in the final round of a major tournament. But Woods contributed greatly to his own demise. His medium range putting, usually impeccable, was, in a word, horrendous. It started on the final hole of the third round the previous day when Woods, leading by two strokes, appeared ready to make it a more comfortable three. He had a birdie putt of under 10 feet, the kind he usually gobbles down like a python swallowing a toad, but this time it stuck in his throat. So, when he lined up a nine-foot putt on the first hole Sunday I said to myself, "if he makes this he's going to run away with this tournament. But if he misses. . . ." He missed and Yang was still only two shots behind and never got farther behind than that. With five holes to play the two were tied and this was the moment Yang was supposed to crack. Instead he hit two magnificent shots over the final five holes, the chip shot for eagle on the short par four 14th, the shot that ultimately won the tournament, and the three iron over the trees from 210 yards out on the 18th, the shot that sapped the last of Woods' iron will. Thus Yang became the first Asian male golfer to win a major, although Woods himself has more Asian blood (50 per cent) running through his veins than African-American (25 per cent). You can bet that there will be more and more Asians coming to the PGA tour. If you doubt it, just look at the women's tour where there are so many Asians--mainly Korean--winning championships that tour officials considered making speaking English mandatory for LPGA tour membership.
The victory by the 37-year-old Yang, who did not take up golf until he was 19 (compared with Tiger, who seemingly started playing in the womb), is being hailed as the greatest upset in golfing history if not the biggest upset in all of sports. Perhaps so. But if Jack Fleck's 1955 U.S. Open victory over Ben Hogan does not top it, at least it runs a very close second. Fleck was, essentially, a club pro from Davenport, Iowa, who, at the behest of some of his golfing buddies, started playing some of the winter tour events, mainly to escape the bitter midwestern winters. He had only been playing fulltime on the PGA circuit for about a year when he qualified for the 1955 Open at the Olympic Club in San Francisco. Hogan at the time was as revered and respected as Woods is today. He was looking to become the first man to win five U.S. Open titles and appeared to have it in his pocket when he left the 72d green with a par and a one-shot lead over some guy named Fleck. So sure was Hogan that he had won the tournament that he flipped his ball to an official and said, "this is for the Golf House (museum)." NBC, which covered only the final hour of the tournament, went off the air saying that Hogan had won his fifth Open. Bantam Ben was sitting in the clubhouse, sipping a glass of Scotch, when Fleck lofted a seven iron over a bunker and landed it eight feet from the pin. Then he sank the birdie putt, tying Hogan for the lead and setting up an 18-hole playoff for the next day.
It was a foregone conclusion that the battle-tested Hogan, the greatest golfer of his era, and some still say the greatest of any era, would dust off the upstart Fleck as easily as an elephant stomping on a mouse. But Fleck won the playoff 72-69 and nobody yet has won a fifth U.S. Open. Tiger Woods has three of them among his 14 majors and if anyone is going to win five, he's the man. Unless he gets Shanghaied again by some golfer who is unknown, unsung, and unimpressed with going toe-to-toe with the world's greatest golfer.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
By Bob Markus
The PGA championship is the Rodney Dangerfield among golf's four major championships. It gets little respect. The Masters, U. S. Open, and British Open all seem to have more cache than the PGA, which begins its 91st championship Thursday at Hazeltine. The Masters has magnolias and the ghost of Bobby Jones. The U.S. Open has rough as high as an aardvark's eye and, as its name suggests, is open to anyone good enough to qualify for it. The British Open has tradition and links golf. And the PGA has. . . .what? Well, it used to have match play, which made it distinct among the majors. But that was before television came and pointed out that televising a 36-hole final would provide more dead air than a mausoleum. So now the PGA has. . . .what? Only "the best field we play against," according to Tiger Woods. "Usually 99 out of the top 100 in the world are here. You win this championship and you've beaten the best field in the world of golf." Win this championship, and your name is not Tiger Woods, you've beaten the best player in the history of golf.
I think it's time to say that now. It's always been a given that some day Tiger might claim that distinction. But there was Jack Nicklaus to consider, along with my personal favorite, Ben Hogan. But at age 33, with 70 PGA tour titles in his pocket, Woods has already passed Hogan and needs just three more to catch Nicklaus, who was 40 when he won No. 70. That would leave only Sam Snead, the alltime tour leader with 82 wins, ahead of him. And the way he's playing now Tiger will catch Snead by the end of next season or early in 2011.
Also on his agenda is surpassing Nicklaus' record of 18 major championships. That will take a little longer, unless Tiger, who enters the PGA with 14, comes up with a grand slam next year. "Those numbers are mind-boggling," Woods said, speaking at a press conference after his practice round Tuesday. "I don't think about them unless you guys ask me. It doesn't happen in the course of a single year. To get to 18 and beyond is going to take a full career." But, "I've got a lot of years left," he concluded.
Woods was asked to compare his game today with the one with which he so dominated the field in 2000. That was the year in which he won nine events, including the last three majors of the season and was named Male Athlete of the Year. His U. S. Open win at Pebble Beach was by a mind-blowing 15 strokes. So, if you were to play head-to-head against the Tiger Woods of 2000, he was asked, who would win? "I would," he replied. "I know how to manage my game much better now. I have so many different shots to get me around the golf course now." Despite not winning any of the first three majors this year, even failing to make the cut in the British Open, Woods has to be the heavy favorite to win this week-end. He has won the last two weeks, even though he feels his game is just now rounding into shape after his knee surgery in June of last year. "At first, I was relying on other parts of my game, my pitching and putting," he said, "but now my ball striking is getting better."
A year ago," he recalled, "I was just coming off crutches and trying to learn how to walk. It usually takes awhile to come back. I'm happy with how consistent I've played." Yet, Woods has struggled at times while winning the Buick Open and Bridgestone Invitational in consecutive weeks. In the Buick he had trouble finding the fairways over the last two rounds, but played several brilliant recovery shots to save the day. He fell far behind over the first two rounds at Firestone this past week-end, then posted back-to-back 65s to win by four strokes. Not that it was as easy as that sounds. He started the final round three shots behind Padraig Harrington, but was two shots ahead by the time the final pairing made the turn. When Tiger Woods seizes the lead in the final round he hangs onto it with the ferocity of a rottweiler defending a meaty bone. But, to his credit, Harrington snatched the bone away--borrowed it temporarily--and went back ahead by a stroke going onto the 16th tee. The view from there does not include the green, which is 667 yards away. That's when time would not stand still. As the two contenders were preparing to drive, a PGA official warned them that they were on the clock, being timed because of slow play. Neither player hit a good drive or a good second shot, for that matter. Then Woods hit what might have been the shot of his life, cranking an eight iron to within tap-in range for a birdie four. Harrington went in the opposite direction, hitting his third shot over the green, then pitching it back into the water, resulting in a triple bogey eight.
Woods was glad to have the win, but unhappy with the way he got it. He was critical of PGA official John Paramor for ordering the hurry-up. "He (Harrington) was in control of the event," Woods said. "When we were put on the clock it changed everything. The thing I don't understand is we were the only two players in contention. The winner was not going to come from any of the groups ahead of us. We were having a great battle and we weren't that far behind. If Paddy doesn't hit the ball in the water we're right behind the group ahead of us." There were reports that Woods was fined for his remarks, but Tiger said, "I've heard from the tour and there is no fine. That was an erroneous report."
Harrington, who preceded Woods on the press room podium, said he had not read anything about the contretemps so he couldn't comment, but later, when a reporter filled him in, he remarked: "We were having a great battle. I was enjoying it and I think he was enjoying it. I reacted poorly to the situation. Having won the tournament he (Woods) can take the moral high ground. I lost the tournament so I"m going to sit back and take it on the chin."
Ironically, Woods and Harrington will be paired again for the first two rounds of the PGA. They will be joined by Rich Beem, the winner in 2002 when the tournament was last played at Hazeltine. In a sense they all three are defending champions. Beem, because he won on the same venue, Woods, because he won the last two before missing last year's PGA after his surgery, and Harrington because he won last year's event in Woods' absence. It's Tiger's last chance to win a major this year, but his game is sharp and he's taking Wednesday off "to spark up my game" even further. That's bad news for the rest of the field. It's Tiger vs. the Tiger-proclaimed
"best field we play against." Take the Tiger.
The PGA championship is the Rodney Dangerfield among golf's four major championships. It gets little respect. The Masters, U. S. Open, and British Open all seem to have more cache than the PGA, which begins its 91st championship Thursday at Hazeltine. The Masters has magnolias and the ghost of Bobby Jones. The U.S. Open has rough as high as an aardvark's eye and, as its name suggests, is open to anyone good enough to qualify for it. The British Open has tradition and links golf. And the PGA has. . . .what? Well, it used to have match play, which made it distinct among the majors. But that was before television came and pointed out that televising a 36-hole final would provide more dead air than a mausoleum. So now the PGA has. . . .what? Only "the best field we play against," according to Tiger Woods. "Usually 99 out of the top 100 in the world are here. You win this championship and you've beaten the best field in the world of golf." Win this championship, and your name is not Tiger Woods, you've beaten the best player in the history of golf.
I think it's time to say that now. It's always been a given that some day Tiger might claim that distinction. But there was Jack Nicklaus to consider, along with my personal favorite, Ben Hogan. But at age 33, with 70 PGA tour titles in his pocket, Woods has already passed Hogan and needs just three more to catch Nicklaus, who was 40 when he won No. 70. That would leave only Sam Snead, the alltime tour leader with 82 wins, ahead of him. And the way he's playing now Tiger will catch Snead by the end of next season or early in 2011.
Also on his agenda is surpassing Nicklaus' record of 18 major championships. That will take a little longer, unless Tiger, who enters the PGA with 14, comes up with a grand slam next year. "Those numbers are mind-boggling," Woods said, speaking at a press conference after his practice round Tuesday. "I don't think about them unless you guys ask me. It doesn't happen in the course of a single year. To get to 18 and beyond is going to take a full career." But, "I've got a lot of years left," he concluded.
Woods was asked to compare his game today with the one with which he so dominated the field in 2000. That was the year in which he won nine events, including the last three majors of the season and was named Male Athlete of the Year. His U. S. Open win at Pebble Beach was by a mind-blowing 15 strokes. So, if you were to play head-to-head against the Tiger Woods of 2000, he was asked, who would win? "I would," he replied. "I know how to manage my game much better now. I have so many different shots to get me around the golf course now." Despite not winning any of the first three majors this year, even failing to make the cut in the British Open, Woods has to be the heavy favorite to win this week-end. He has won the last two weeks, even though he feels his game is just now rounding into shape after his knee surgery in June of last year. "At first, I was relying on other parts of my game, my pitching and putting," he said, "but now my ball striking is getting better."
A year ago," he recalled, "I was just coming off crutches and trying to learn how to walk. It usually takes awhile to come back. I'm happy with how consistent I've played." Yet, Woods has struggled at times while winning the Buick Open and Bridgestone Invitational in consecutive weeks. In the Buick he had trouble finding the fairways over the last two rounds, but played several brilliant recovery shots to save the day. He fell far behind over the first two rounds at Firestone this past week-end, then posted back-to-back 65s to win by four strokes. Not that it was as easy as that sounds. He started the final round three shots behind Padraig Harrington, but was two shots ahead by the time the final pairing made the turn. When Tiger Woods seizes the lead in the final round he hangs onto it with the ferocity of a rottweiler defending a meaty bone. But, to his credit, Harrington snatched the bone away--borrowed it temporarily--and went back ahead by a stroke going onto the 16th tee. The view from there does not include the green, which is 667 yards away. That's when time would not stand still. As the two contenders were preparing to drive, a PGA official warned them that they were on the clock, being timed because of slow play. Neither player hit a good drive or a good second shot, for that matter. Then Woods hit what might have been the shot of his life, cranking an eight iron to within tap-in range for a birdie four. Harrington went in the opposite direction, hitting his third shot over the green, then pitching it back into the water, resulting in a triple bogey eight.
Woods was glad to have the win, but unhappy with the way he got it. He was critical of PGA official John Paramor for ordering the hurry-up. "He (Harrington) was in control of the event," Woods said. "When we were put on the clock it changed everything. The thing I don't understand is we were the only two players in contention. The winner was not going to come from any of the groups ahead of us. We were having a great battle and we weren't that far behind. If Paddy doesn't hit the ball in the water we're right behind the group ahead of us." There were reports that Woods was fined for his remarks, but Tiger said, "I've heard from the tour and there is no fine. That was an erroneous report."
Harrington, who preceded Woods on the press room podium, said he had not read anything about the contretemps so he couldn't comment, but later, when a reporter filled him in, he remarked: "We were having a great battle. I was enjoying it and I think he was enjoying it. I reacted poorly to the situation. Having won the tournament he (Woods) can take the moral high ground. I lost the tournament so I"m going to sit back and take it on the chin."
Ironically, Woods and Harrington will be paired again for the first two rounds of the PGA. They will be joined by Rich Beem, the winner in 2002 when the tournament was last played at Hazeltine. In a sense they all three are defending champions. Beem, because he won on the same venue, Woods, because he won the last two before missing last year's PGA after his surgery, and Harrington because he won last year's event in Woods' absence. It's Tiger's last chance to win a major this year, but his game is sharp and he's taking Wednesday off "to spark up my game" even further. That's bad news for the rest of the field. It's Tiger vs. the Tiger-proclaimed
"best field we play against." Take the Tiger.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
By Bob Markus
Love's more comfortable the second time around. That's what the song tells us and I think it might be true. As some of you know, my lifelong love affair with the Chicago Cubs ended last October with the Cubs' craven three-game surrender to the Los Angeles Dodgers in the National league playoffs.
I didn't have to look very far for a new team to love. I've lived in Ft. Lauderdale more or less fulltime the last 10 years and I already had developed a fondness for the Florida Marlins, a team that is constantly looking for love in all the wrong places. As far as the majority of sports fans down here are concerned, the Marlins are just an entr'acte, something to fill the time between the Heat's final loss in the NBA playoffs and the opening of the Dolphins' training camp. This despite the fact the Marlins, extant only since 1993, have won two World Series titles since the Dolphins last appeared in the Super Bowl, while the Heat has just one NBA title in its much longer history.
The local media seems to be even more indifferent to the local baseball franchise. Most of the South Florida columnists have opposed the new stadium the Dolphins finally managed to convince local politicians to approve. The Dolphins had page 1 coverage almost every day for the two weeks before training camp actually opened Sunday. And it isn't as if there was any news coming out of Dolphins headquarters. One day most of the front page was taken up with a Dave Hyde column. Hyde is generally a fine columnist, but on this occasion he took a thousand words, more or less, to tell us that it was anyone's guess where the Dolphins will finish in the AFL East this season. The rest of page 1 was devoted to a feature story on a rookie wide receiver.
Meanwhile, the Marlins and Cubs were engaged in one of the gretest midseason series I've ever seen and you could read all about it on page 3. The Marlins won two of the three games and in the one they lost they rallied from 6-0 and 8-5 deficits to tie the game in the ninth on a two-out three run rally against the Cubs' closer, Kevin Gregg. That wasn't too much of a surprise to anyone who had watched Gregg last year, when he was the Marlins' closer. Derrek Lee's homer leading off the 10th gave the Cubs their only win of the series. They thought they had anoter one wrapped up Sunday when they took a 2-1 lead into the bottom of the ninth. But the thing I love about these Marlins is they don't quit and they have enough thunder in their lineup to be dangerous. Just ask the Mets, who two years in a row have been kept out of the playoffs by the spoiler Marlins. Or the Washington Nationals, who earlier this year lost ninth inning leads to the Marlins three days in a row.
Anyway, Gregg was on the mound again, ready to close out the feisty Marlins. This time he got only one out before Dan Uggla and Cody Ross walloped homers on consecutive pitches to give the Marlins the game, 3-2, and the series, 2-1. This was the most meaningful series these two teams have played since the 2003 N.L.championship series when the Cubs blew a three games to one lead and the Marlins went on to win their second World Series championship. The Marlins haven't sniffed postseason play since, while the Cubs, under Lou Piniella, are working on a third consecutive Central division title.
I don't think either team will win it all this year. The Marlins have a good, young pitching staff headed by starting pitcher Josh Johnson. They have a marvelous player in shortstop Hanley Ramirez and some pop throughout the lineup with the likes of Ross, Uggla, Jorge Cantu, and the just acquired Nick Johnson. They have two of the best pinch hitters in the game in Wes Helms and Ross Gload. But although the relief pitching has been fine of late they don't have a proven closer and they are a little too young. The Cubs have a couple of super stars in Lee and Aramis Ramirez and a couple of faut super stars in Alfonso Soriano and Milton Bradley. They have sufficient starting pitching. But their fate probably rests in the shaky hands of relief pitcher Carlos Marmol, he of the electric stuff. Marmol is so overpowering that few can hit him. But he is also wild, sometimes Steve Blass wild and if he doesn 't regain the command of his pitches, the Cubs aren't going anywhere. But I'll say this: If the Marlins get to the post season they've got a better shot to win it all than do the Cubs.
As I write this the Marlins are five games behind the Phillies, in second place in the N.L. East while the Cubs are in a virtual tie with the St.Louis Cardinals for first place in the Central division. But the Marlins were only three games behind the Cubs/Cards in the wild card race. Both of the Marlins' world championships have come as a wild card team. They have never won a division title and have never lost a playoff series. The Cubs, meanwhile, have lost their last nine playoff games as they continue their 101-year quest to add a third World Series victory to the two they won in 1907-08.
The just-finished three game series served as a test of my conversion from Cubs lover to Marlins admirer. I think I passed the test. I found myself rooting whole-heartedly for the Marlins. Friends told me it is impossible to stop loving the Cubs once you're hooked. But they're wrong. It's not that I hate the Cubs. I don't. This was not an acrimonious divorce. I didn't ask for alimony. I still have some feelings for the Cubs and wish them well. But I won't live or die with them.
It's not that I'm madly in love with the Marlins, my new flame. But I do like them a lot and when I have a choice between watching the Cubs or Marlins on TV--which I often do, given WGN's national reach--I choose the Marlins. I'm comfortable with that.
Love's more comfortable the second time around. That's what the song tells us and I think it might be true. As some of you know, my lifelong love affair with the Chicago Cubs ended last October with the Cubs' craven three-game surrender to the Los Angeles Dodgers in the National league playoffs.
I didn't have to look very far for a new team to love. I've lived in Ft. Lauderdale more or less fulltime the last 10 years and I already had developed a fondness for the Florida Marlins, a team that is constantly looking for love in all the wrong places. As far as the majority of sports fans down here are concerned, the Marlins are just an entr'acte, something to fill the time between the Heat's final loss in the NBA playoffs and the opening of the Dolphins' training camp. This despite the fact the Marlins, extant only since 1993, have won two World Series titles since the Dolphins last appeared in the Super Bowl, while the Heat has just one NBA title in its much longer history.
The local media seems to be even more indifferent to the local baseball franchise. Most of the South Florida columnists have opposed the new stadium the Dolphins finally managed to convince local politicians to approve. The Dolphins had page 1 coverage almost every day for the two weeks before training camp actually opened Sunday. And it isn't as if there was any news coming out of Dolphins headquarters. One day most of the front page was taken up with a Dave Hyde column. Hyde is generally a fine columnist, but on this occasion he took a thousand words, more or less, to tell us that it was anyone's guess where the Dolphins will finish in the AFL East this season. The rest of page 1 was devoted to a feature story on a rookie wide receiver.
Meanwhile, the Marlins and Cubs were engaged in one of the gretest midseason series I've ever seen and you could read all about it on page 3. The Marlins won two of the three games and in the one they lost they rallied from 6-0 and 8-5 deficits to tie the game in the ninth on a two-out three run rally against the Cubs' closer, Kevin Gregg. That wasn't too much of a surprise to anyone who had watched Gregg last year, when he was the Marlins' closer. Derrek Lee's homer leading off the 10th gave the Cubs their only win of the series. They thought they had anoter one wrapped up Sunday when they took a 2-1 lead into the bottom of the ninth. But the thing I love about these Marlins is they don't quit and they have enough thunder in their lineup to be dangerous. Just ask the Mets, who two years in a row have been kept out of the playoffs by the spoiler Marlins. Or the Washington Nationals, who earlier this year lost ninth inning leads to the Marlins three days in a row.
Anyway, Gregg was on the mound again, ready to close out the feisty Marlins. This time he got only one out before Dan Uggla and Cody Ross walloped homers on consecutive pitches to give the Marlins the game, 3-2, and the series, 2-1. This was the most meaningful series these two teams have played since the 2003 N.L.championship series when the Cubs blew a three games to one lead and the Marlins went on to win their second World Series championship. The Marlins haven't sniffed postseason play since, while the Cubs, under Lou Piniella, are working on a third consecutive Central division title.
I don't think either team will win it all this year. The Marlins have a good, young pitching staff headed by starting pitcher Josh Johnson. They have a marvelous player in shortstop Hanley Ramirez and some pop throughout the lineup with the likes of Ross, Uggla, Jorge Cantu, and the just acquired Nick Johnson. They have two of the best pinch hitters in the game in Wes Helms and Ross Gload. But although the relief pitching has been fine of late they don't have a proven closer and they are a little too young. The Cubs have a couple of super stars in Lee and Aramis Ramirez and a couple of faut super stars in Alfonso Soriano and Milton Bradley. They have sufficient starting pitching. But their fate probably rests in the shaky hands of relief pitcher Carlos Marmol, he of the electric stuff. Marmol is so overpowering that few can hit him. But he is also wild, sometimes Steve Blass wild and if he doesn 't regain the command of his pitches, the Cubs aren't going anywhere. But I'll say this: If the Marlins get to the post season they've got a better shot to win it all than do the Cubs.
As I write this the Marlins are five games behind the Phillies, in second place in the N.L. East while the Cubs are in a virtual tie with the St.Louis Cardinals for first place in the Central division. But the Marlins were only three games behind the Cubs/Cards in the wild card race. Both of the Marlins' world championships have come as a wild card team. They have never won a division title and have never lost a playoff series. The Cubs, meanwhile, have lost their last nine playoff games as they continue their 101-year quest to add a third World Series victory to the two they won in 1907-08.
The just-finished three game series served as a test of my conversion from Cubs lover to Marlins admirer. I think I passed the test. I found myself rooting whole-heartedly for the Marlins. Friends told me it is impossible to stop loving the Cubs once you're hooked. But they're wrong. It's not that I hate the Cubs. I don't. This was not an acrimonious divorce. I didn't ask for alimony. I still have some feelings for the Cubs and wish them well. But I won't live or die with them.
It's not that I'm madly in love with the Marlins, my new flame. But I do like them a lot and when I have a choice between watching the Cubs or Marlins on TV--which I often do, given WGN's national reach--I choose the Marlins. I'm comfortable with that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
