Where In The World Is Valdosta?

There has been and continues to be a debate about the relevance of blogs under the rubric of journalism. Newspapers are real journalism, goes the argument primarily put forth by the mainstream media, which (surprise!) consists mostly of newspapers. Unlike blogs, newspapers have editors and reporters who are trained to find a story, sniff out the details, and bring that mutha home. I mean, they've been to school for it, so obviously they know what they're doing. Blogs are just some fat naked guy with acne sniffing his butt lint in his mother's basement. I mean, duh.

Its an interesting argument to have, but the more you think it through, the harder it is to take seriously. Then you read stuff like this and it just blows the whole thing out of the water, like fishing with hand grenades, which I'm sure they actually do in Valdosta, Georgia. I mean, you gotta eat, right?

I'll ignore the lousy sentence structure and clumsy grammar, primarily because I'm likely as or more guilty of similar violations to our language, and go right for the meat of it. Hey! Another thing they like in Valdosta: meat. I'm on a roll! Hey! Another thing... oh, never mind.

My point: Adam MacDonald of the Valdosta Daily Times wants to rank the best Major League baseball teams of the current decade. So, he devised a system to let him do just that. I'll let him describe it, but I warn you it contains potentially overly complicated mathematical systems. (If you need explanations, I suggest you check here.)

...my MLB rankings are heavily — very heavily — weighted on World Series championships, World Series appearances, playoff appearances and division titles. Because titles are what define success in pro sports.

OK, not really any overly complicated mathematics. Fooled you! But back to the article. The most important - the very most important - aspect to Adam MacDonald's MLB team of the decade rankings are World Series championships. Because that's what defines success in pro sports. Well, I guess you can see where this is going. Mr. MacDonald is obviously going to choose a team that hasn't won a World Series in this decade as his top team of the decade. Assume crash positions!

1. New York Yankees

Yup. OK, he didn't get one listing into the rankings without ignoring his entire ranking system. I'm going to need an explanation. Fortunately Mr. MacDonald is kind enough to provide one, which I shall quote in full so as to not shortchange Mr. MacDonald of his say.

1. New York Yankees — 1-for-3 in World Series; 8 playoff appearances; 7 division titles — Yes, the most hated team in baseball is actually the best choice for team of the decade. Just because they peaked early in the 2000s doesn’t mean the Yankees should be punished. The Red Sox did win two World Series (to the Yankees’ one), but New York won six more AL East titles than Boston, which they share the division with, and have appeared in the playoffs three more times than their archrivals [sic].

Hmmm... how to say this nicely?... Mr. MacDonald seems to have mis-remembered when the decade began. Decades do not begin in year 'x0, they end there. For example, this decade did not begin until 2001 and it will not end until after 2010. So, using this Fancy, Ivy League, Liberal, (accurate) Definition (FILL(a)D), the Yankees have not won a World Series this decade. They are not "1-for-3", but, in fact, 0-for-2.

In fact, using the FILL(a)D, seven teams have won more World Series this decade than Mr. MacDonald's Team Of The Decade. In the words of a great American, "Doh!" Also, a minor point, and as a Red Sox fan I'm contractually obligated to bring this up, they authored the biggest playoff choke job in baseball history, and, again, using the FILL(a)D, it occurred in this decade.

Other than that though, yeah, team of the decade. Definitely.
.