Night Owl Cards

I'm just noticing the ghostly Clayton Kershaw on this liquorfractor. How did I miss that before? Anyway, the Dodgers will be without the services of Rod Barajas for 2012. He's decided to be a Pirate. No great loss. But the thought of a season with Tim Federowicz and A.J. Ellis isn't making me book reservations for L.A. in October. I received this information in the 45 minutes of free time I had before hitting the job. It's been a very involved week, one that robs you of your creative strength, so when you return home you're only capable of monosyllabic responses. That's fine for the dog, but others have problems with this kind of conversation. It's a problem for the blog, too. Wait, let me check to make sure that's true. ... Uh. Oh. Yup. Buh. 'K. Wha? ... Yeah, that's not going to work. So, in times like these, I guess I'll have to go to my ... M-m-m-m-m-m-iiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii...

I'm told that the Yankees are calling up some guy named Jesus when the rosters expand today. He's supposed to be pretty good. But the only thing I care about is that his position is catcher. That means he might nudge Russell Martin out of a few catching assignments, which would be good -- not only because I wouldn't have to listen to Yankees announcers give birth on the air over a .240 hitter, but because Martin on the bench is the only way I have of winning a bet. At the start of the season I placed a bet with The Lost Collector over which teams' catchers would be more productive offensively this season -- the Yankees' Russell Martin or the Dodgers' collection of stiffs. If the Dodgers' catchers were better, I'd win a blaster of my choosing, and vice versa. Now, I bet very rarely. I'm not good at it. But I figured this was my do-good deed for that particular month. I knew that Martin probably would do a little bit better with the Yankees jus...

You know, I thought by being on vacation I would have more time for some thoughtful posts. But it's not happening that way. I seem to have less time than normal, and it's going to get worse as the week progresses. So, apologies in advance. Here is all I've got for you this morning: See the card above? It's a Topps Series 2 item of the injured Rod Barajas. I just noticed today that Clayton Kershaw is sharing space with Barajas on the card. You may have heard I collect Clayton Kershaw cards. So, um, is this a Clayton Kershaw card? I mean in terms of it being listed in the Clayton Kershaw library and included in a Clayton Kershaw binder, if I had one? (I still consider a binder devoted to one player as stalkerish. I know. That's my issue. But I'm a collecting child of the '70s, and it will always seem a little weird to me). So that's my question. Simple question. Simple post. Now, back to doing things I don't want to on MY VACATION...

I am trying to rid myself of the habit of referring to certain major league ballplayers as "nobodies." I know it's a common phrase used by baseball fans. It refers to players who are on the fringe of the major leagues. They could be rookies, and others not so hopeful, who are called to the bigs. They could be pinch-hitters, mid-inning relievers, and late-inning substitutions. But the phrase has gotten myself into trouble a few times. In this hyper-sensitive world, some people have objected to reading my reference of a player as a "nobody." The protests usually come from those connected to the player -- family members, etc. -- or those connected to the team, fans proud of their knowledge of their squad and eager to share it with the less informed. I'm not trying to rid myself of the term because of those people. Those are their hang-ups, not mine. I'm trying to do so because calling players "nobodies" is in direct opposition to my colle...