Ichiro and the Autobot Matrix of Leadership

Too often the American public and the sports media become infatuated with this romanticized ideal of leadership. They clamor for a gruff and weathered player to lead the way. They ache to portray a player as a gritty vet, a John Wayne type who will help the younger players through the trials of a rigorous 162 game season. They want a General Patton type of rousing and epic speech, words that'll get the troops ready to kill. The same type of speeches Ichiro satirizes in his yearly address to the AL All-Star team. There is an expectation on loquacious speeches and wild gesticulations that goes unmet and is unsettling to some.

Ichiro is quite the opposite of the gung-ho leader. He is stoic in his regimented dedication to baseball. There is a singular focus to Ichiro and that is to work to become the best player he can be. The need to to tell Yuniesky Betancourt to go easy on the ho-ho's is absurd to him. In his mind all should be as dedicated to bettering themselves as he is. After all they are all professionals being paid a shit ton of money to play a game. So if Carlos Silva feels like ingesting the entire lunch buffet, table and all, it is not Ichiro's job to tell make sure he gets in the proper cardio to burn of his snack.

When Ichiro seeks to lead by example through his hard work and dedication to his task it is puzzling to those looking for a "win one for the gipper!" speech. "Where is Ichiro's Autobot matrix of leadership", they ask. "And in our darkest hour of the 2008 season why did he not pull it from his chest and light the way to a division title?" They fail to realize, games are won on talent, not leadership.

The 2008 season of The Seattle Mariners was a 50 car pile up, a spectacle so gruesome that I could not tear my eyes away from it. Dreams of competing for the AL West were crushed under the foot of cold reality as The M's were 20 games out by the All-Star break. From the pile-up of the lost season one bloody and battered horse of a topic emerged from the carnage, staggered, collapsed and died in plain view. This was the horse of team chemistry. It was then jumped on and flogged until the end of the season.

As the season decayed in the summer heat, more and more complaints and shots were aimed at the teams best player, Ichiro. He was called a selfish primadonna who cared only about achieving his hallowed stats, team be damned. He was accused of not giving enough effort to win games, not diving for balls, not changing his approach at the plate in key situations to drive in runs and other such bullshit. Essentially he was being called a shitty leader for not somehow magically granting washed-up Richie Sexson access to the fountain of youth. He was chastised because he couldn't lessen the gravitational pull of team fat asses Carlos Silva and Yunieksy Betancourt.

So, imagine the shock when the Japanese team, ostensibly led by Ichiro, went on to win the WBC again. How could this selfish prick, who cared only for himself and was a terrible leader, will his team to victory on a world stage? This was one of the many questions asked to him by, enemy of the blog, Geoff Baker.

Baker was the reporter most responsible for beating the shit out of the dead of horse of team chemistry and stoking the anti-Ichiro fires. It was he who provided anonymous quotes at the end of last season divulging the news about certain players threatening physical harm to Ichiro. And he was the asshole who thought that he could pull that rotting and putrid dead horse and ride it for one last furlong and "allow Ichiro to respond to his detractors".

Ichiro was rather surprised about Bakers line of questioning but answered the queries anyway. Ichiro told Baker that a team leader is not important. Per the WBC team

"I did not think or feel that I wanted to be a leader for the Japan WBC team,'' he said. "And at the end, I was not a leader for the Japan WBC team. And something I'd felt, this thought of mine, became even stronger after playing with this Japanese WBC team, is that to have a leader -- who is a leader? -- that's not important.

"What is, is to try to group together a group of individuals who want to improve themselves for what they do. We're baseball players, so, who want to improve themselves as baseball players and also want to improve themselves as human beings. That's what's important. Although, trying to get a team together and pointing out a leader and saying 'Everybody follow this leader' sounds very easy and like a simple thing to do, if you go with this style, there are manholes.''

With the M's Ichiro told Baker:

"This is major league baseball,'' he said. "We're all professionals here. Is it really at a level where I have to explain to other people what the reasons are that I do some things? We're all professionals. It makes me feel like..that's like the level of a Mom telling a child 'This is why I do things."

These comments agree with my view that leadership in baseball is rather meaningless. A team leader yelling at his teammates to get them pumped up won't allow them to hit the ball any better, or if they do make contact not have it be caught. It won't somehow allow a pitcher to pitch better or really anything else necessary to to win the game. Leadership and chemistry are immaterial bullshit that beat writer feeds readers to justify and outcome e.g. "He showed his leadership by coming through with a clutch hit because he didn't want to let his team down." which sounds better than "His BABIP(batting average for balls in play" had been extremely low lately combined with his career success against lefties meant he was due to get a hit."

The reason the 2008 M's were so terrible was because they were a poorly constructed team without a lot of talent. A portion of the talent that team did possess got old quick and became useless.

The reason, I believe, the 2009 M's will win is because Jack Zduriencik has accrued a good amount of talent not because of intangibles like leadership and team chemistry.

An Exercise in Fine Simile and Metaphor

Remember that episode of "The Simpsons” in which Lyle Lanley (voiced by the late great Phil Hartman) convinces the town of Springfield to purchase a monorail with excess city funds? You know the one that Leonard Nimoy made a cameo in?

Yes of course you do.

In retrospect, that episode is eerily similar to Bill Bavasi era of Mariner baseball. After the city grew weary of Pat Gillicks’ disdain for major activity as a GM, it succumbed to the allure of a salacious shill. A rook, which brought promises of greatness. Of prosperity. Of Championships.

This and more could all be achieved… Through investing just a tad bit more cash than normally allotted. In the range of say, twenty million.

The logic made sense at the time. The Mariners had remained a fringe contender for the better part of the decade. Imagine adding one more potent bat to the 2003 lineup that won 97 games and still came in second in the division. Or for that matter, another solid pitcher to the 2002 team that won 93 games and finished third.

And so under Bavasi’s rule, Seattle took the gambit and became a large market team.

Then immediately began playing like a small market team.

Coaches were fired. Players vilified.

It did not take long for the mojo to die.

And in the end, Mariners faithful and the residents of Springfield were faced with the same dilemma. A train wreck to clean up.

My biggest fear entering this season was the fact that it was common knowledge that Bavasi was on his last rope with management. Desperate GM’s are always scary, as they mortgage everything on the hopes of a playoff appearance that will assure them job security. This is why we traded for Erik Beddard, why we were rumored to be getting Griffey for months and why we cut bait on Brad Wilkerson’s 3 million dollar contract.

But we have taken the first step to righting the ship. Bavasi is no more. Seattle bars are still replenishing their supplies of bourbon after the announcement was made.

Seattle also bid adieu to Jon McLaren. A necessary move, yes. However McLaren never really stood a chance. When his contract was extended entering this season, it reminded me of “Transformers: Heavy Metal,” when Optimus Prime bequeaths the Autobot matrix to Ultra Magnus. A soldier thrust into a leadership role. You would have thought that Seattle would be cognizant to the perils of promoting longtime assistants after the Bob Weiss debacle.

So the stage is set for a new era in Mariners baseball. Which direction will they go? What moves will they make? That is for time to decide.

In the meantime, while I wait it out, I am going to go watch the episode of “The Simpsons” where Bart saws the head off of the statue of Jebediah Springfield. You know the one where he hangs out with Jimbo, Kearney, and Dolph? The one where he redeemed himself by admitting his character flaws and threw himself upon the mercy of the mob?

Howard Lincoln, I suggest you go dig out the DVD player and look this one up. It’s a classic.

Nihilistic Gobbledygook

VS.

The other day I treated myself to a fond stroll down memory lane by watching the 1981 classic "Heavy Metal." Perhaps it was a part of me longing to recapture a fond fleeting remnant of my childhood that is fluttering away with time.

Or perhaps it was because "South Park" paid homage to the flick in one of this seasons episodes.

Whatever the case, the movie embodies the eighties unlike any other. Essentially it is nothing, but a clip show of boobs, blood, and rocking music. Beyond this however several notable aspects stood out in my recent viewing:

- Don Felder's long forgotten gem "Heavy Metal (Taking a Ride)" remains as lucid and seething as ever before.

- John Candy as the star voice actor proves just why he is deserving of enshrinement in the "Comic Fat Guys" Mt. Rushmore.

- The short "Harry Canyon" is gleefully entertaining and in hindsight serves as the entire basis for that forgettable Bruce Willis fare, "The Fifth Element." I was pleased to be reminded of this one, as in my previous recollection of the film, the immortal "B-17" trumped all others.

And while I was overall pleased with my choice to dig out the flick for one last hurrah, I had one major complaint.

How can a film that is given the handle "Heavy Metal," in fact be less metal than "Transformers: The Movie?"

(Note: Before we go any further into this, please allow me to clarify one poignant issue. By "Transformers: The Movie" I am referring to the 1986 animated feature, not the Michael Bay debacle that is rapidly approaching "Rocky 5" status of movies never happened. I will admit becoming a little misty eyed in seeing Jazz torn in half by Megatron, but this in no way compares to the emotional trauma my psyche endured in witnessing the massacre of Ironhide, Prowl, Ratchet, Brawn, Windcharger and Wheeljack.)

How can Sammy Haggar touch Stan Bush's offerings? He wishes that he wrote these songs. "You Got the Touch" was even cited in "Boogie Nights!" Dirk Diggler sang transformers music for Gawd sake!!!

"Heavy Metal" had a Deo helmed Black Sabbath in tow, but even the pioneer of the devil horn hand sign himself could not touch the caustic wailings heard in Lion's cover of the "Transformer's Theme."

Even the prophet Steve Perry crumbles in the face of "Instruments of Destruction" by the band N.R.G.

This being said, while "Heavy Metal" warrants a presence in my collection of disintegrating VHS tapes, I hold divisively that the title should be awarded to the Transformers on account of lack of metal awesomeness.

From here on out "Transformers: The Movie" will hereby be referred to as "Transformers: Heavy Metal" with "Heavy Metal" changing its name to "Pterodactyl Riding Thunder Cunts:
Starring John Candy."

That is my word and it has been written.

...

..

.

At this point if you have read this far into the article, you may ponder what bearing this has at all on the sports landscape.

You are right. It doesn't.

Which is exactly why I take issue with the direction sports journalism is headed towards in our modern era. Articles like this have absolutely nothing to do with sports and yet are being passed by sports columnists all over.

I get it. "The Wire" is a brilliant show and I cannot wait to sit down and watch it in its entirety on DVD. However I fail to see how promotion of the show has anything to do with the NBA. Just because one or two of the players might one day end up like some of the characters on the show, I do not see the connection.

Yes, I have heard that the Raconteurs new album is supposed to be fabulous. And this will affect my fantasy draft how? For that matter, why are you being paid to tell me who to pick in a fictionalized league based entirely upon pure luck?

We have access to a nigh infinite amount of information via the web and yet I am more likely to find an in depth interview with Adam Corrolla in regards to his short lived stint on "Dancing with the Stars," then I am of finding one journalist willing to hold Matt Walsh's feet to the fire regarding his accusations against the New England Patriots.

Most people probably do not even know who Matt Walsh is.

Who dropped the ball in inquiring about steroid use in baseball, allowing Jose Canseco to be "vindicated" by the Mitchell Report?

What dirt has not been dug on "Sneaker Pimp" William Wesley allowing him to continue his influence on basketball?

Why is it not fishy to some that NBA commissioner David Stern is friends with Sonics majority owner Clay Bennett and somehow franchise player Kevin Durant ended up in Seattle?

No, no. Those questions will never do.

Journalists who ignite fires end up broke. Journalists who sit around and argue sports, (while citing other TV shows starring journalists who sit around and argue sports) get to write player's memoirs.

A journalists job is not an easy one. Newsworthy material is not often entertaining. Serving as a living information filter, it is understandable of how one would use pop culture and hip simile to attract more attention to bylines.

However journalists have an obligation to the masses, and that is to provide an insight. To seek truth in a world of lies. To delve into unexplored realms. Damn it, they evoke the "vox populi."

.

..

...

And you know what? Maybe that has been the problem all along.