Wobb Parker, sooper dooper geenus!

Unfortunately, my taking a few days away from TWFE caused me to miss commenting on the latest Wobb Parker magnum opus right away. Ian and Brian both touched on the vapid, inarticulate, poorly researched, and inspid column that ran in the Monday's Detroit News. But I can't keep myself from talking about the train wreck that was Wobb Parker's column. I don't know where to start...

From what I gained from the article, because the double switch gives Parker a chubby, the National League is better. It's nothing but pure baseball snobbery.

He claims the AL is a beer league when compared to the oh-so-sophisticated NL. Supposedly, the AL is nothing but softball style scoring. I guess he hasn't noticed the team ERA of the Detroit Tigers. Or the fact that 3 of the top 5 staffs in team ERA are from the AL. The NL has "Bigger" stars? In age, weight, and head size, maybe. But if "Bigger" you mean "More talented," well, you could easily win the arguement that the best young talent and better all around teams currently reside in the AL. The NL has "Better" cities? That's an extremely subjective opinion, to say the very least, and NOT a reason to call a league better. That's just dumb.

In Pakerland, we should just throw out the All-Star game, World Series, and interleague results, and say that the NL is better because Wobb enjoys watching pitchers flail about at the plate? Because once in a blue moon, Tony LaRussa has a pitcher shift to the outfield for a batter? That the 9 hole is an automatic out, but it creates limited "Stratergery," so the NL is the baseball be all, end all? That Jim Thome, Travis Hafner, and David Ortiz would be better served as NL pinch hitters, as the DH removes "Stratergery" from the game? That might make sense in the loony bin that is Parkerland, but in the world we reside in? Not so much.

Then again, this tripe is coming from "Joe Dumars' lapdog" a "Columnist" (Term used loosely) that said Jeff Weaver was "Clearly a better pitcher" than Jeremy Bonderman and claimed that Dave Dombrowski is the worst GM in the city.

Then he says this...

There was a time, however, when the NL won (the All-Star game) every year. These things go in cycles.

And the general consensus back in the 60's and 70's when the NL dominated was that the NL was a more talented league! The cycle has come back around to AL dominance, and the general consensus is that the AL is more talented. Is that so hard to comprehend? In Parker's case, yes it is.

The other reasons used in in the "NL is better" arguement? Barry Bonds and Albert Pujols. Pujols is a great player, that's a given. But one player does not a league make. And to bring up Barry Bonds? You've got to be kidding. He of the creaky knees, .249 BA, 12 HR's, and grand jury appearances? He forgets the fact that Bonds would most likely be a more productive player in the AL due to the DH.

Whatever. I wouldn't have made such a stink if Parker had said he "Prefers" or "Enjoys" the NL style of play. That's his perogative. But to say it's better? Pure unadulterated lunacy.

Parker must be smoking crack with Pat Caputo and the other clueless ink stained wretches...