More on Newsday

Apparently Repoz at Baseball Think Factory found his way here and linked up my recent Newsday post. It has sparked an interesting discussion over there and I urge you to check it out.

First off, as commenter NaOH pointed out both there and here, I probably missed a big aspect of the reasoning behind the decision. He writes:

Cablevision owns Newsday. Cablevision, for now, also owns the Knicks and Rangers, but they will be spinning off that portion of the business. Cablevision’s core assets are tied to television and cable: Rainbow Media Holdings, digital cable service, providing Internet service, and VOIP. This move is about using Newsday as another value-added component to Cablevision’s range of core offerings. Why? Because Verizon FIOS is steadily chipping away at their customer base.

That seems pretty likely, when I think about it. Still, I wonder a) how much value access to Newsday adds to a television or cable subscription and b) how long Newsday could possibly last if its parent company is making moves that will stave off online readership.

I have a “From the Wikipedia” post I’m hoping to do later today and I don’t want to harp on this since it’s not really about sports, but I find the whole subject massively interesting. I suppose I should, since I work in online journalism.

A man I firmly believe should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame, Sean Forman — the creator of baseball-reference.com — provided a pretty interesting business model for newspapers in the BBTF thread. He’s one of very few people that I’m willing to admit are likely way, way smarter than me, so it’s probably worth reading what he has to say.

Anyway, whatever the reason, the main point of said Newsday post stands: I won’t be able to read Davidoff or Best or Lennon anymore, and that’s a shame.

Previewing Jets and Raiders

If the Jets lose this week, I will be a very sad man.

Here’s me on the phone with Brian Bassett to discuss:

C’mon, that’s an impressive “wounds” segue there.

Learning a lesson

I’ve beat up on John Harper a fair share in this space. I’ve never met the guy and it’s not anything personal, but I read the Daily News every morning and Harper often focuses his columns on (what I deem to be) unquantifiable nonsense.

But Harper published a column yesterday that has to be considered a must-read. And I don’t toss that phrase around liberally.

Essentially, Harper is issuing a huge “my bad” on behalf of the mainstream New York media for criticizing Cashman upon his failure to acquire Johan Santana before the 2008 season. He writes:

All along Cashman clung to what he believed was a better idea, a long-term vision that is materializing right before our eyes as CC Sabathia pitches the Yankees toward the World Series while players such as Phil Hughes and Melky Cabrera, who would have been dealt for Santana, contribute as well.

Cashman was skewered for the gamble, and the Yankees did pay a price, missing out on the playoffs last season. But more and more it is looking as if that were a relatively small price to pay for a likely return to the World Series and more in the years ahead.

In a market where way, way too often people simply dismiss the idea of rebuilding or retooling by saying, “Well, New York demands a winner! We must win now,” Harper admits here that sometimes, patience pays off.

I think that’s something pretty important for fans and the media to remember when discussing the Mets this offseason. Yes, I think the Mets should be active on the free-agent market if they can find good players to fill in some of their holes at the right cost.

But I am certain there’ll be a call for the Mets to trade a gang of their better prospects for one good player, and I’m equally certain that’s a bad idea. The Mets have many holes to fill this offseason and, regardless of how they fill them, many question marks heading into 2010.

Moving forward — and especially if they continue to be active in the free-agent market — the Mets will need to have contributors that they’re not paying too much for. Real, actual Major League contributors who are above replacement-level. And the way to get those guys is not to trade away prospects in bulk.

You’ve heard this from me before, of course. Many times. But it’s still true, and it’s nice — and quite rare — to hear a newspaper columnist echo the sentiment.

Items of note

Theo Epstein echoes your boy, me. Obviously I didn’t invent the idea, but it’s awesome to hear it from the mouth of an actual Major League GM.

Joe Janish gives a thorough rundown on Aroldis Chapman. The coolest thing about Chapman? He’s one of like 12 people who live in Andorra. I’ve always been fascinated by the tiny European nations. Chapman should help his country blow by Lichtenstein in their annual rivalry game*.

*- Note: totally fictional

Ruben Tejada and Ike Davis are torching Arizona Fall League pitching.

Mike Salfino blinds me with science while investigating Mark Sanchez’s psychological state.

Zoe Rice, a familiar name in the Mets’ blogosphere, and I speculate on some good potential board-game movies for the Perpetual Post. This might be funny, but I can’t tell how it came out because it’s blocked by SNY’s fascist Web filter. We’re apparently not supposed to play or read about games, which ends up blocking a whole lot of baseball content and even more game-theory content. I’m looking at you, IT director Gil.

UPDATE, 10:23 A.M.
Gil has lifted the ban on games on my computer. Great job by him. The mark of a good IT man is his ability to keep up with the times. The times clearly called for the ban on games on my computer to be lifted.

Baseball players who look like musicians

Mike Cameron’s name has, for whatever reason, popped up as a candidate for the Mets’ open left field slot for next season.

I don’t think it should happen and I don’t think it will, but the rumors have reopened debate amongst my friends over whether Mike Cameron looks just like Seal. You be the judge:

cameron_seal

There’s a cursory resemblance, but I don’t think they have very similar faces. Not like Raul Ibanez and Rage Against the Machine’s Tom Morello, as demonstrated in this 2008 split:

Or like, as Jake Rake recently pointed out, Tim Lincecum and the Arctic Monkeys’ Alex Turner:

Ken Davidoff, we hardly knew ye

According to press release from Newsday, Newsday is pioneering a new web model which involves charging money for Newsday.

According to me, Newsday is pioneering its way into new realms of dumb.

Here I thought the black background with white font was a bad idea.

I grew up on Long Island and my family subscribed to Newsday. Whenever I put aside dreams of being the President or an NFL linebacker to focus on the more realistic goal of becoming a professional sportswriter, I imagined writing for Newsday.

Now, starting in six days, I will no longer read Newsday, since I am unwilling to pay $20 a month to read Newsday.

The shame is that Ken Davidoff, the best baseball columnist in the New York papers and obvious respecter of me, writes for Newsday. So does Neil Best, the best of the sports media critics in the market and David Lennon, one of the best Mets beat writers.

They’re all good journalists, but they’re not $20 a month good when there’s so much else on the web. It’s essentially like paying for music or video on the Internet. Why bother when there’s so much free stuff out there?

Maybe Newsday really is pioneering a brilliant new era of Web money-making, and maybe they employed a bunch of really smart people who determined that this was a viable business model, but I doubt it. It feels like a last-ditch desperation move by another newspaper in financial straits.

I just don’t imagine making content exclusive is the way to increase awareness and expand the online footprint. It makes some sense when it’s the Wall Street Journal or something which fills a very specific niche and caters to rich people, but not with plain-old Newsday.

I have to guess Newsday will stop charging pretty swiftly, or maybe fold. I don’t know.

It’s a shame and I’ll certainly miss it, but the upside is at least I won’t have nearly so much exposure to Wallace Matthews.

Commenting on commenting

As you may have noticed, it was impossible to comment on this here blog over the last two days. I didn’t notice this, and I was pretty baffled since I was having some of my best traffic days and no one was commenting on anything.

I thought maybe, for no apparent reason, everybody just ran out of things to say.

I have no idea what happened, but I wholeheartedly blame Cerrone.

Anyway, I have restored the comments to the way they were, so anyone with an email address can comment. I recognize that allowing unregistered users to comment represents an uncharacteristic faith in humanity on my part, so I do reserve the right to change that policy should this blog ever get all Godwin’s Law.

So as you’ve probably figured out, I’m still figuring this out.

Items of note

Paul at Section Five Twenty-Eight returns with more John Olerud facts. My favorite: John Olerud avoids using the word “moist,” because it sounds so inappropriate.

Tim McLelland is sorry. In the words of Eric Gordon, “Sorry doesn’t put the Triscuit crackers in my stomach.” Also, one thing we’re all missing in this is that Tim McLelland is massive. Honestly, check it out next time he’s behind the plate. He’s huge. He’ll twist off your head if you argue a call.

You know what subject I don’t cover enough? Taco Bell. (Language NSFW.)

Alex Nelson of Amazin’ Avenue knows an absolute ton about the Mets’ 2009 draftees. I’m most excited for ZeErika Hall, because his name is ZeErika.

Steve Phillips’ scarlet birthmark

No man for any considerable period can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the true.” – Nathaniel Hawthorne.

Why yes, I have heard the sordid details of Steve Phillips’ affair.

Honestly, I feel really bad for his kids, not just because their father has once again been outed as a philanderer, but also because their father is Steve Phillips. That can’t be fun.

Also, I can’t understand why anyone could be surprised to learn that someone so willing to spend time around Steve Phillips would turn out to be criminally insane.

But really, what’s interesting here is one of the details in the young lady’s crazytime letter to Phillips’ poor wife.

It turns out Steve Phillips has “a big birthmark on his crotch right above his penis and another one on his left inner thigh.”

First of all, gross. Second, could this be a clue as to why Steve Phillips hates Carlos Beltran so irrationally and so thoroughly?

Think about it: After “being awesome at baseball,” Carlos Beltran’s most distinguishing characteristic is the massive mole over his right ear. And now we learn that Phillips, too, is riddled with embarrassing birthmarks.

Could it be that Steve Phillips’ is publicly punishing Beltran because he can’t handle his own birthmark-fueled shame? Is Carlos Beltran, in some vague way, like the Hester Prynne to Steve Phillips’ Dimmesdale, forced to carry openly the burden Phillips keeps secret?

And could you imagine a catharsis in which Steve Phillips, finally overcome by guilt, throws open his pants to reveal himself to the world, throwing himself at Beltran’s mercy?

I prefer not to. I’m not insane, and thus am not interested in seeing any more of Steve Phillips than I absolutely must.