Poetry: I look upon greener pastures

This work is inspired by Chilean poet Pablo Neruda. Which means his work, as is his remarkable life, is awesome. While this is poorly-crafted drivel. He is among my favorite poets through translation. His love poem Puedo Escribir is a favorite.



I look upon greener pastures
Where you guide my hands,
Fuel my fire,
Forge our wind.

May your fairness endure my shortcomings.
The thoughtless dreamer I sometimes am,
While you stand on a dusty doorstep; waiting to scold and touch my face.

I curl myself in your arms at sunsets.
The every days are wondrous with you.
The bending sky painted purple and adorned with your eyes.
I see more in one glimpse at you than in a lifetime given to me.
The morning rainbow’s beauty stems from your tears,
Asks and receives its orders from you.

When I am alone-

I shall never sleep like in your arms.
I fail in the world, lost and forgotten.
I dream to only dream of you.
I am incomplete and insignificant.

My heart is yours.
A tangle of web, blood, tears, and growing joy.
Taken away in beats and returned in your kisses.
The hidden flesh and yours.

My simple thought to be enough.
And your infinity is to love.

ESPN Poll: Barry Bonds Divides World, via his race

Barry Lamar Bonds was a topic on Baseball Tonight, prior to the Philadelphia and San Francisco game. This time via another "scientific" poll. The results were displayed on the TV broadcast, but I lack the link to the final results...They were "interesting"...to say the least.

The biggest results of this poll is that RACE and RACE RELATIONS are still skewed. Not a shocker, not a surprise, given the subject matter: Bonds, Steroids, Successful African American males in Sports.

Bonds has done little good for his image, with his off-the-cuff, coming-across-as-arrogant nature. But I think he's used almost solely as a scapegoat for the inability of commisioner Bud Selig to manage his quasi-monopoly properly. Bonds made trouble for himself - via words and his friction laden relations with the all-powerful sports media - and gets the spotlight shown on his career as a sham.

Steroids, steroids, and more steroids. Right before the Giants-Phillies game, another Steroids Ad was ran to show what steroids do...Another generalization to anyone who has taken them or knows about the 600 types of steroids.

Lastly, successful black athletes don't get the bypass that caucasians do often for their behavior. While they will both get media, black athletes will be more scrutinized, more vilified, and otherwised dismissed as a "product" of their upbringing, not knowing what is right or not knowing how to handle success. Both an overgeneralization, but done by the majority white media...

More to come - and read the second post I made on the STEROIDS FALLACY. It's long, but the GRAPHS (clickable) reflect some analysis about what did not cause this problem...

MLB Franchise Success: A breakdown of a few ideas

Before I go into my diatribe, two friendly bloggers to tag:

Another Maria

Dwacon - http://dwacon.blogspot.com (post kept screwing up)

MLB Baseball has various objectives:

1. Revenues/profits
2. Home Attendance
3. Championships
4. Winning Regular Season Games

One of the best tools to determining a correlation is coefficient of determination.or R-sq. This number is extremely useful in determining the close correlation between two variables. A number above .9 is excellent. .75 is very good. .55 and above is adequate to good. and anything above .4 can reflect a moderate correlation. Zero to .15 correlation shows little or no reflection of a match.

Revenues to Home Attendance (1998-2005): R-sq= .596. This is a adequate to good correlation between these factors. It is no surprise given more people equal more revenues. Factors such as Team marketing, Publicity and TV contracts would (or should) strengthen this, but data is unavailable for that.

Championships to Winning Regular Season Games: It takes regular season wins to go on to the playoffs. There, it is chance and chance alone (Billy Beane's comment: "My shit does not work in the playoffs,") reflects that. Yet, the Ability to win games is tied to Run Differential (R-sq: .97).

Runs Scored: Requires two factors: OBP% and SLG%. On Base % is nearly three times as important as Slugging Average. R-sq is greater than .9, reflects an importance in these factors.

Stolen Bases have nearly zero correlation. The best analysis of a excellent running team(s) - the 1980's St. Louis Cardinals - shows that they generated only 10-12% of total runs scored via the Stolen Base. Without a success rate of 75% or greater, the value is minimal or negative.

Runs Allowed:The biggest breakthrough came when Voros McCracken devised two new metrics:

BABIP and DIPS.

Batted Average on Balls in Play are tied mostly to the fielder's ability to catch the baseball in play. A pitcher, though partly responsible for these hits (line drives, grounders, flies), can not position or improve his fielder's natural ability to succeed. If scouting the other team's hitters and pitch-to-pitch placement succeed then this average will likely go down. If this value is low and DIPS is favorable, then a Pitcher's ERA will likely be lower.

It turns out 4 factors have a great deal to do with a pitcher's success (DIPS) independent what his fielders can do (BABIP.)

• High Strikeouts ( less balls to field, easier to play defense)
• Low Walks (less runners, less opportunities to score, less disruption of pitcher and fielders)
• Low Home Runs (Or solo shots, these are guaranteed runs)
• Less Hit Batters (tied to walks - but it could be used as a tool to deter)

With these two factors, R-sq can be as high as .77. JC Bradbury, The Baseball Economist, 2007, pg 171.

The biggest ways a team improves are through:

• Trades
• Drafting
• Free agency

It takes talented GMs, Managers, Scouting and Stat Gurus to accomplish the goal of assembling good to great talent.

Much of this concept can be explain in this excerpt from my work in progress project Bringin' Gas and Dialin' 9:

As a primer to this subject (since it included much of Bill James’ astute statistical analysis) is that much of the actual premise behind Michael Lewis’s research and writing in Moneyball was that the Oakland Athletics of the late 1990’s and early 21st century utilized this statistical knowledge to build their teams judiciously (and frugally) in the high stakes baseball scouting market that reflected a higher regard for speed for speed sake, the rare 5-tool players (Batting for Average, for Power, Speed, Arm and Fielding Excellence) and drafting younger players out of high school that were somewhat difficult to project 5-7 years later.

Whereas, Oakland, spent more time looking at key statistics to find unusual selections in their drafts, utilized low cost free agents that still retained either a power component or on-base component that could also fit piece meal into their lineups because they had also lost players due to high salary demands (such as Jason Giambi moving over to the Yankees after winning the AL MVP, Johnny Damon to the Red Sox, or All-Star shortstop Miguel Tejada to Baltimore) and also drafted college pitchers that could immediately be used at the major league level because they met defense independent pitching statistics (DIPS) criterion, such as Rookie of the Year closer Huston Street in 2005.

As Paul Caron and Rafael Gely reflect in a similar vein in a 2004 Texas Law Review article comparing the legal education ratings of law schools and Major League Baseball:
“Moneyball paints an intriguing portrait of how Billy Beane’s “superior management” allowed the Oakland A’s not only to compete with, but also to prevail over, teams with double or even triple the resources. Beane realized that Major League Baseball was rife with inefficiencies that he could exploit. These inefficiencies derived from baseball’s reliance on subjective evaluation of players by scouts, as well as objective evaluation using conventional Triple Crown statistics, to measure players’ contributions to a team’s success. Beane disdained the view that you could evaluate players by watching them play and instead tapped into an alternative body of statistical data to more accurately value players that other teams either under-or over-valued using the traditional measures. In the case of hitters, Beane displaced the traditional Triple Crown statistics (batting average, home runs, and RBIs) with “OPS,” which combines a player’s on-base percentage (“OBP”) and slugging percentage (“SLG”) in measuring his offensive value to a team. In the case of pitchers, Beane discarded two of the three Triple Crown statistics (wins and ERA) in favor of “DIPS,” defense independent pitching statistics, which attempt to strip away the effect of a team’s defense on a pitcher’s performance by focusing on those statistics exclusively within a pitcher’s control: walks, home runs, and strikeouts.

Interestingly, these alternative statistical methods did not arise from within Major League Baseball itself. Instead, Lewis traces the lineage of these new ways to evaluate players to Bill James, at the time a night watchman in a pork and beans factory. In 1977, James self-published a sixty-eight-page book that turned into an annual “abstract” that looked at player performance through new statistical lenses.”[1]

With Bill James’ innovative insight, two decades later, the Oakland A’s were beating the long odds that most teams faced having 1/3 to 2/5 of the financial wherewithal as the Yankees had, but winning nearly the same amount of games in the regular season. But this fact was only brought to a greater public light with the publishing of Moneyball.

Once again, in Moneyball, Michael Lewis reports that Bill James also stated, “college players are a better investment than high school players by a huge, huge, laughably huge margin.”[2] And the Oakland Athletics have pursue this particular motto due to ownership constraints on signing bonuses in the picking of their top players and their firm beliefs in their drafting practices. They have gotten immediate returns on college players, such as Joe Blanton, Nick Swisher and Huston Street; which is exactly the formula they look to compete with for years to come. Primarily, they [the Oakland A’s] have utilized hard and real statistical analysis and college performance versus gut feel or sensed potential.[3]

In quoting Michael Lewis, [Paul Caron and Rafael Gely] in a 2004 Texas Law Review address the Legal Profession’s similarities to this Moneyball analysis in referencing, “ ‘Everywhere one turned in competitive markets, technology was offering the people who understood it an edge. What was happening to capitalism should have happen to baseball: the technical man with his analytical magic should have risen to prominence in baseball management, just as he was rising to prominence on, say, Wall Street.’ But real general managers, as contrasted with their fantasy counterparts, obdurately refuse to embrace the statistical measures of players’ contributions to teams’ success and thus create enormous inefficiencies in the Major League Baseball market for players.”[4] This is very nearly the Core Mantra of the Beane Philosophy: Exploit inefficiencies in evaluation of players through statistical analysis, utilize certain predictive measures (such as OBP*SLG 90%+ correlation to Runs Scored) and price it according to (and favorably against) the existent market forces in MLB.
[1] Caron, PL, Gely R. What Law Schools Can Learn from Billy Beane and the Oakland Athletics. Texas Law Review Vol. 82 (1483). 2004. 1491.

[2] Lewis M. Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game. New York: W.W. Norton & Company; 2004. 99.
[3] http://www.protrade.com/. 2002 'Moneyball' Draft Revisited.http://www.mlb.com/; 2006 June 6.
[4] Caron, PL, Gely R. What Law Schools Can Learn from Billy Beane and the Oakland Athletics. Texas Law Review Vol. 82 (1483); 2004.1493-1944.

Political Reform: My Brief Take on What is Wrong

I never espoused to the whole idea of political office being a good civic duty to harness for an entire lifetime. Yet many, once they reach the minimally required age limits, do make the procession to the arena of politics to make a long career of campaigning on behalf of the public interest solely for a title and an office. Their ideas are rarely unique. Their preaching is mostly on the same platforms established by other once-successful politicians in long-established political parties. Their best ideas even come from influential persons that are long dead, yet brought to life in the choosing of once-catchy phrases from ancient speeches which these new career politicians make into trite speeches while examining their electorate’s demographics in order to win elections. After this, the amount of actual change for the better sought is dependent on a variety of factors which can be all be traced back to one motivation: money to the candidate or the party’s political machine.

I am not hear to berate the political mechanisms and the good-buddy system developed to advance the careers of the select few who make it – namely those from a good family name in a local area or just a wealthy descendent whose money and prestige won him (or her) many friends (some specious at best) in their life- but to point to an alternative. I realize a few of those leaders do make good on promises made, however, once again the book turns to many that bowed down to influential organizations (with big money), big business (with even bigger money), or radical groups (with more marginal votes). I wish that was also different because the current lobbying process undermines the idea of all men being created equal, except for those with more money, pedigree, or affluence backing them to their selfish ends.

The conscience of men should not be bought and sold like in the days of slaves. And so, a national referendum should be made to limit all service in all political areas to 12 years total (not including last term.) That would include service in all municipalities, local, state, and federal governments. An example could look like this:
1) State senator – 2 years
2) Mayor – 4 years
3) U.S Representative – 4 years
4) President – 4 years

The overall length of service could be longer than 12 years, but last term of office must begin before the 12th year started. No additional time could be given to this person if they do receive a reelection nod. In this way, so many individuals now situated in key positions will not become these abstract monoliths of power on this Nation’s Capitol Hill or a local stronghold of subversive power. I would also propose that after 10 years out of office a person could renew this process and the time duration of service would be an additional 12 years. This is the only compromise I would be willing to add. (We limit the President to two 4-year terms.)

The reason for this is to make way for new leaders whose vision is not so clouded in the purpose of just getting reelected, forming election coalitions, or making contacts with more powerful individuals. I realize we need good leaders with experience; ones with high moral character; ones with background on issues; ones with strong attitudes towards their electorate; but at what time did we believe that 25 to 50 years of servicing persons solely through election, committee and title helps?

I believe that everyone needs to diversify and realize that their powers of good can be spread in more avenues and with greater focus if they approach life without a solitary and singular devotion in the political realm. And not all these elected officials serve our best interests - whether they can ever say so or not. New leaders promote new ideas and foster change where needed, even if their experiences with certain persons is lacking or that the primary problem needing a solution takes years to solve. (Maybe they should only focus on that primary problem instead of skating on to a better position.)

It may also be said it takes ten years to accomplish many tasks. Well, I am giving you twelve. If that does not help, then after a ten-year hiatus, twelve more are available. In the meantime, prior professions, charitable foundations, representing diplomatic (non-elected) or humanitarian needs are just a few ways to bide time if politics is the sole calling of that individual.

The reasons to serve should not be born out of the obsession to build title for self, family, friends, or to trumpet for only the wealthiest people, largest radical voter block, or biggest campaign contributor. They should be born out of the necessity to provide answers to local dilemmas, state catastrophes, federal crisis, and humanity causes in all arenas of this purpose called life. And all this can be done in more ways than in politics.

Profiles in Baseball: Babe Ruth and Satchel Paige

Two men that shaped their respective leagues around their play, and provided huge drawing power based on their personas were Satchel Paige and Babe Ruth. Nothing this author can write in a blog can do justice to their legacies and legend, but the following is an attempt at a brief biography of both men.

Satchel Paige (1906-1982): A man who started his MLB career in his 40’s, Satchel Paige was known for his fastball, illegal hesitation pitch, and coming and going as it suited him. Being a man without country, since he rarely stayed put in one place, Paige was a nice fit on the Cleveland club, led by Bill Veeck Jr., that would win the World Series in 1948. In Satchel’s first three games started in the majors the attendance was a staggering 201,829.[1]

Growing up in Mobile, Alabama, destined to be recognized for his antics, ‘Satchel’ likely earned that moniker via the five-finger discount road that led to five years[1] in Mount Meigs reform school.[2] (Historian Robert Peterson states Paige was nicknamed for carrying the mailbags used by the railroads.) Leroy Paige, like George Herman Ruth did at a Baltimore reformatory, developed into a renowned ballplayer. Both had fathers that were strictly blue-collar: Paige’s was a gardener; Ruth’s ran a bar.

His legend extended well back into 1920’s as a fastball pitcher with little control that got by on overpowering talent. His first seasons were spent deep in the Jim Crow South playing in Mobile, then for the Chattanooga Black Lookouts and Birmingham Black Barons.[3]

As he reached his prime, Satchel’s name would come up in the Negro Leagues (or baseball in general) when asking about who was the best pitcher. His records in the early 1930’s for Pittsburgh Crawfords (32-7 and 31-4), his North Dakota barnstorming tour of 134 wins in 150 contests or his out dueling Schoolboy Rowe and a team of major leaguers reflects just how well he pitched. But beyond the won-loss records, his showmanship and supreme confidence, was both exciting and abrasive.

Paige squabbled with a wide variety of owners over contracts, took stances based on his upbringing and came and went as he desired. Due to his gate attraction, Paige was in constant demand. The Newark Eagles owner Effa Manley obtained a restraining order in 1938 against Paige leaving the country for an opportunity to pitch in Venezuela.[4] Soon after, he went to Mexico instead. He showed up batters by removing his fielders, leaving only him and usually Biz Mackey as his battery mate. (Josh Gibson also caught Satchel.) Those man-to-boy encounters with his ‘bee ball’ or ‘jump ball’ were lopsided in favor of Paige.

He led players in contract jumping – with money (or a car) as the primary motivator. This was only after the low salaries in the Negro Leagues provided the impetus to jump to the Dominican Republic: “if we got the dough that we deserve, we wouldn’t want to run out on anybody.”[5] As usual, money and material things usually made the decision for the HOF pitcher than was later utilized by ever-the-shill owner Charlie O. Finley in the mid 1960’s at a record age of 59 years old. Paige got through those 3 innings with little damage and received a well-deserved pension. Satchel Paige also refused to pitch in towns where he could not lodge or get a meal in a restaurant.[6]

While on his Mexican excursion, a sore arm jeopardized his career where Paige struggled through a couple seasons before coming back to nearly full strength. He added polish – throwing a curve ball, and employing the hesitation pitch – but his Prima Donna act was still intact. He made his way to Kansas City (where he resided at his death in June 1982) and pitched for the Monarchs for much of the 1940’s, when not in the American League.

Robert Leroy Satchel Paige pitched in five decades from 1926 to 1965, likely amassing well over 10,000 innings pitched, more wins than the immortal Cy Young and admiration from competitors and observers alike. Joe DiMaggio, a lifetime .325 hitter, surmised he was the toughest pitcher he ever faced in West Coast exhibitions.[7] Ultimately though, Paige’s free spirit, his fastball and wit made his way and he never looked back.

Satchel Paige’s Famous Words to Live By

1. Avoid fried meats which angry up the blood.
2. If your stomach disputes you, lie down and pacify it with cool thoughts.
3. Keep the juices flowing by jangling around gently as you move.
4. Go very light on the vices, such as carrying on in society. The social ramble ain’t restful.
5. Avoid running at all times.
6. Don’t look back. Something might be gaining on you.[8]

George Herman ‘Babe’ Ruth (1895-1948) was a child of the world, prone to excesses and boastfulness, but dominated the sports world in the 1920’s in a manner hard to compare (or duplicate) in the late 20th - early 21st century sports panorama. Growing up in Baltimore and spending most of his formative years as a ‘incorrigible’ at the St. Mary’s Industrial School for Orphans, Delinquent, Incorrigible and Wayward Boys[1], Ruth learned one lesson there from the priests, and probably one only, how to hit a baseball as far as anyone could envision in those heady days of organized baseball. (Somehow the rest of the ‘lessons’ to be learnt there never took.)

Babe Ruth was placed in this reformatory at age seven as a hyperactive, big and outgoing boy that soon acquired a great desire to play baseball as likely the only positive diversion from his meager assignment as a youthful garment maker. He also obtained a rude moniker that stuck into the 1920’s –‘Nigger Lips’[2] – as McGraw’s New York Giants would jeer during the ‘23 World Series. Later though, his array of nicknames would only add to the Babe’s foggy legacy: The Colossus of Clout, the King of Crash, the Sultan of Swat, the Monster of Mash, The Bambino and a host of others never heard mentioned quite enough, so they faded away foggily, much like Montville Leigh The Big Bam describes of his childhood years.

As it was, George Herman Ruth learned how to hit towering fly balls from Brother Matthias Boutlier (from Cape Breton, Nova Scotia)[3], a burly man that was as large as an offensive tackle in the modern NFL. Boutlier might be the ‘Father of Home Run’ since his fungoe-style hitting was mimicked by the son that mastered the art of swinging skyward in evading outfielders and depositing balls over the fences. With baseball’s domination of his time, Ruth took Boutlier’s lessons to heart and practice them nearly year round, playing everywhere on the field, before someone important took notice.

In 1914, Jack Dunn, the operator of the powerful and influential Baltimore Orioles franchise of the minor league circuit (with the likes of HOF pitcher Lefty Grove playing in the early 1920’s) would acquire the Babe. Jack Dunn had a short career as ballplayer, playing on smarts to make up for a bad arm due to childhood mishap[4], but Dunn made his real mark as talent scout and a big league feeder system of star players for a price. On Valentine’s Day 1914, Ruth was signed as a pitcher sight unseen by Dunn for $250 per month. But before Dunn could reap any real benefits from his acquisition, Dunn was forced into competition with Federal Leagues’ Baltimore Terrapins, and shopped the Babe to Connie Mack and John McGraw, only to eventually sell him to Boston’s owner Joe Lannin.[5]

Within two years, Babe Ruth was a superstar pitcher, leading the league in ERA (1.75) and shutouts (9) in 1916. The Babe though would soon progressed to power hitting as naturally as ducks take to water or owls take to the nocturnal hunt. But as one passage by Montville Leigh weighs Ruth’s pitching prowess versus another ace of the day:

"Matched against Ruth, the emotional, developing reprobate, [Hall of Famer Walter] Johnson easily was cast as the white hat against the black hat, goodness against perdition. The problem was, perdition had a much better team behind him. The two men faced each other five times during the '16 season:" Ruth won four times, 5-1, 1-0, 1-0, 2-1 and had a no decision, but was ahead 2-0 in ninth before getting into trouble. Ruth's record against Johnson from 1915 to 1917 was 6-1.[6]

Even with Ruth then earning his living on the mound, it was his greater potential that sparked conversations early on in May 1917. As Montville Leigh’s Big Bam reflects, “Ruth took Johnson deep for the first time and earned a tailored suit [a favorite item of soothing] in the process. It also saw his future as a Yankee discussed jokingly amongst the principles: Col. Jake Ruppert and Harry Frazee. This as Ruth saw a change in his usage from star pitcher to mediocre first basemen to a Manny Ramirez/Ted Williams style of outfielder later on that season.”[7]

By 1918, Ruth was as dangerous with a bat as he was proficient with pitch. Ed Barrow took on the onerous task of taming the unconventional Ruth, leading to plenty of fights, tantrums and dramas. As Bill James reflects, “Ruth tested the limits of the rules constantly; this was what made him who he was. He refused to be ordinary; he refused to accept that the rules applied to him; until it was clear that they did. Constantly testing the limits of the rules, as I see him, was Babe Ruth’s defining characteristic...”[8] Barrow soon tested but eventually defined Ruth as an outfielder – due in large part to Provost Marshal General Crowder issuing his “work or fight” order in June 1918 – and the Babe led Boston to its last championship until the 21st century, garnering the first of twelve home run titles to boot.

As Ruth’s ability to smack the long ball grew, his desires to get compensation followed in concert. From his 3-year, $10,000 per year contract signed in 1918, Ruth reconsidered for $20,000 after his superior 1919 season in which he smacked 29 home runs, scored 103 times, drove in 114 runs and slugged a then modest .657, all leading the American League by wide margins. Ruth alone hit 12% of the leagues’ home runs. He scored 18.26% of Boston Runs and won 9 games with a ‘mediocre’ 2.97 ERA off the mound in his last significant pitching season.

His theatrical owner, Harry Frazee, refused to pay Ruth and demeaned the man’s recent exploits, citing his petulant and decadent behaviors as barriers to his future production, resulting in (likely) the most infamous trade ever made in baseball history. Three days into the Roarin’ Twenties, the Babe went to the New York Yankees for $425,000 (in total cash transferred, since $300,000 was a loan), and his hitting prowess would result in the biggest affect in baseball scoring until President Clinton took office 72 seasons later.

The cost of the Babe’s trade [in 2005 dollars] is roughly $1,357,500 (without the loan), a bargain to say the least. As Leigh Montville compares the Babe’s salary: "A conversion system from the American Institute of Economics Research translates the Babe's [contract in 1922 of] $52,000 into $564,737.43 in 2005 dollars. Only two members of the 2005 New York Yankees, outfielder Bubba Crosby at $322,950 and second baseman Andy Phillips at $317,000, made less than $564,737.43…[For the Babe] to make the same amount in 1922 dollars as Alex Rodriguez, Ruth would have had to sign for $2,246,913.58. Baseball simply didn't pay that kind of money."[1] Frazee’s $1,357,500 [in 2005 dollars] for the loss of 659 home runs, works out to just less than $2,060 per dinger. Even in the 1920’s, this amount was easily made up at the gate for a $.50 ticket, a typical seat price. Frazee soon sold numerous other players between 1921-1923, including HOF pitcher Waite Hoyt, SP Joe Bush and SP Herb Pennock, only to build his rival to unparalleled success.

Yankee Stadium became the "House that Ruth Built" as his home run prowess, championships brought to the New York (after leaving Boston) and his image grew to be baseball's iconoclast. He found adulation, but not love. He longed to manage, but never did in the majors. Babe Ruth's immortality grows from the stories of his bombastic, devil-may-care nature, but his numbers (714) and (3) are remembered forever.

Even Barry Bonds, who just passed the Babe referred to passage of the Babe as "his home run record." Barry must be mistaken since Henry Aaron has long since held the NL (and MLB) record - the only ones Barry can break. Ruth's HR record in the American League is still secure until Alex Rodriguez grows five years older.

Both these men defied convention; grew up in low circumstances; and, fought the powers-that-be in baseball on numerous occasions. Likely, the two would have squared off with each other in much the same way, with the result a matter of a fan's dream and fancy. But respect was something both would command of each other in such a fantastic meeting.

Footnotes:

[1] Peterson Robert. Only the Ball Was White. London: Prentice-Hall International, Inc.; 1970. 140.[1] Peterson Robert. Only the Ball Was White. London: Prentice-Hall International, Inc.; 1970. 140.[2] http://www.nlbemuseum.com/history/players.html - Biography of Robert Leroy ‘Satchel’ Paige. Last Accessed: February 10,2007.[3] http://www.nlbemuseum.com/history/players.html - Biography of Robert Leroy ‘Satchel’ Paige. Last Accessed: February 10,2007.[4] Lanctot N. Negro League Baseball: The Rise and Ruin of a Black Institution. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 2004. 74.[5] Lanctot N. Negro League Baseball: The Rise and Ruin of a Black Institution. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 2004. 73.[6] Only The ball Was White - pg. 10[7] http://www.nlbemuseum.com/history/players.html - Biography of Robert Leroy ‘Satchel’ Paige. Last Accessed: February 10,2007.[8] O’Neil B, Wulf S, Conrads D, Burns K. I Was Right on Time. New York: Simon & Schuster Inc.; 1996. 220.
[1] Montville Leigh. The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth. New York: Doubleday; 2006. 17.
[2] Montville Leigh. The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth. New York: Doubleday; 2006. 21.
[3] Montville Leigh. The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth. New York: Doubleday; 2006. 24.
[4] Montville Leigh. The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth. New York: Doubleday; 2006. 34.
[5] Montville Leigh. The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth. New York: Doubleday; 2006. 39-40.
[6] Montville Leigh. The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth. New York: Doubleday; 2006. 56-57.
[7] Montville Leigh. The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth. New York: Doubleday; 2006. 69.
[8] James Bill. The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract: The Classic – Completely Revised. New York: The Free Press; 2001. 998 p.

[1] Montville Leigh. The Big Bam: The Life and Times of Babe Ruth. New York: Doubleday; 200. 147.