UoP’s Greatest Hits

In the spirit of “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all,” I will refrain from writing about last night’s midterm election results, except to say, “Don’t blame Minneapolis.” Also, to quote Apu Nahasapeemapetilon, “If you survive, please come again.” The next two years will either prove or disprove the merits of the Tea Party movement, and if we’re lucky we’ll still be around in two years to start cleaning up the mess.

OK, I knew I couldn’t avoid saying something snarky about it, but that’s it. No more. Let’s move on to something fun… ME! I’m taking a look back at the top 10 posts on Underdog of Perfection, based on the number of hits they’ve received according to WordPress stats. Without further ado… I present the all-time top 10 Underdog of Perfection posts to date.

OK, just a little further ado: here’s a chart of my hit count over the past month.

And now the list…

10. Mechanically-separated chicken or soft serve ice cream? You be the judge.

January 17, 2009 — When the gross picture of mechanically-separated chicken exploded as a full-fledged meme last month, as part of a factually challenged story hyping the dangers of the stuff (come on… you don’t need to make up stuff like “bathed in ammonia”; the truth is bad enough), I immediately recognized the picture as one I had seen about a year before. As I recalled, I had seen it on TotallyLooksLike.com next to a strawberry soft serve. I had forgotten that I had created that “totally looks like” image, which apparently is no longer available on that site, but is still on mine. Hence, traffic!

9. Best Google Doodle yet

June 6, 2009 — Ah, that would be the Tetris Google Doodle. But I suspect that every time there’s a new Google Doodle, someone googles “Best Google Doodle yet” and finds this post. Traffic!

8. Honda Fit iPod controls: when something is worse than nothing

August 23, 2009 — Rants are always good for some hits, especially when it’s something other people are annoyed by too. The fact is, the Honda Fit iPod controls suck, and Honda doesn’t seem to be doing anything about it, so I suspect as each model year is introduced, this post will generate more… traffic!

7. Migrating from CakePHP 1.2 to 1.3: My Story (Part One of… Possibly More than One)

May 16, 2010 — Writing about technical issues surrounding web development is one of the ostensible purposes of this blog, especially since I went freelance, so it’s gratifying to see my fellow developers relying on me for information, on those rare occasions when I actually have some to share. Thanks for the traffic! (I really didn’t set out to end each of these with the word “traffic” but it seems now that I am destined to do so. Um… traffic.)

6. This is what I wanted all along

October 27, 2010 — Being just a week old, this may be the fastest ascension of any post I’ve written to date. I suspect a lot of that has to do with the timeliness of the topic, but given the vague and keyword-free title (take that, SEO strategists!), the most logical explanation for its popularity is surely the conscious effort I made to promote it. Near the end of the post I make reference to the review of the MacBook Air by Jason Snell for Macworld. I also tweeted an announcement of the post, and stuck in an @jsnell, both in honest appreciation of his review, but also in the somewhat crass hope that he would retweet it. Which he (and several others, most notably Michael Gartenberg) did. Boom! Traffic!

5. Brooks Brothers: what’s up with the sheep?

July 25, 2007 — I’m glad some of these “random observation” posts are generating traffic. I believe I’ve spent a grand total of less than 5 minutes of my life inside Brooks Brothers stores, but I’ve pondered their bizarre logo for much longer, and the fact that others have too has brought my blog significant traffic.

4. Why does Safari 4 Beta take SOOOOO LOOOONG to start up? Am I the only one having this problem?

March 1, 2009 — I kind of wish some of these posts would stay buried. Three of the top four all-time posts on my blog are related to issues with Apple products, specifically, issues with early releases and/or beta software. People continue to visit these posts long after they’ve become irrelevant. Seriously, Safari 4 Beta? It’s currently up to version 5.0.2! Please, this post needs no more traffic!

3. Dog inequality in Walt Disney’s world

November 18, 2008 — And then there are posts like this one. Awesome. I love the fact that this has resonated with so many people. Goofy + Pluto = Traffic.

2. Solution for the iPhone Facebook problem

June 8, 2009 — Here’s another post pertaining to early software, and one that’s way past its sell-by date. Here, from an SEO perspective, we have an interesting case study: a keyword-laden but still generic title. What iPhone Facebook problem? The post was referring to the dilemma of iPhone users who were stuck with the then-crappy iPhone Facebook app or the then-crappy iPhone-optimized Facebook mobile site. The best option at the time, in my opinion, was the non-iPhone mobile site, but Facebook had a redirect built into that site that would automatically take iPhone users to the inferior iPhone mobile site. I found a way around that, and shared it in the post.

This is not really relevant anymore, but now any time there is any kind of problem with iPhones and Facebook, this post sees a surge in traffic.

1. Disabling the pinch-zoom feature on the new MacBook

March 9, 2009 — I’m always a bit annoyed when I look at my stats and see this post near (or at) the top. To me it’s a long-dead issue, but apparently not. I just showed this solution to SLP yesterday, so the problem still persists, and whenever I get a new Mac or reinstall my software, I have to remember to go in and deal with this again.

I don’t know whether or not I’m in the minority of Mac users here, though I suspect not, but I do not like the multitouch features of the MacBook trackpad. The only one I use is two-finger scrolling. That’s nice, but the rest are just an unwanted nuisance. I forget they even exist until I trigger them accidentally when I’m trying to do something else. Then I have to dig into System Preferences again and turn them off. Apple may love multitouch, and it’s great on iOS devices, but clearly there’s some distaste for it on the Mac, which for me means traffic.

P.S. You may notice a logical inconsistency here: the rankings in this list — specifically, the placement within the rankings of #10 and #6 — don’t jibe with the chart I showed at the top. That’s because most of the traffic driven to my site in the wake of the mechanically-separated chicken meme went to the home page, for whatever reason, not directly to the post. In which case those visitors would have completely missed the mark. In short, it’s a failure both for Google and WordPress Stats. Great job!

This is what I wanted all along

Last Tuesday night, I was sitting in a chair upstairs in my house*, with my 15-inch MacBook Pro, my iPad, and my iPhone 3GS all on my lap. And I had a revelation…

I’m a huge nerd!

No, not that revelation. I had that long ago. The revelation was…

This is ridiculous!

Earlier in the evening, I had spent a considerable amount of time hunting, as I had several times before, for a workable iPad app for writing code. I decided to spring for the $6.99 for Gusto, which seems promising. But since it currently doesn’t support SFTP (due to government regulations on encryption software, which the company says it’s working on), it’s completely useless to me in its present state. The bottom line: while there’s plenty I can do with an iPad, I still can’t do my work on one, which limits its usability.

The conclusion I had last Tuesday night was simple and obvious: I need a Mac that’s as small as an iPad.

And then came Wednesday. Steve Jobs must have been reading my mind on Tuesday night, and then he hopped in his Delorean to go back in time* a few months and develop a solution to the problem I had only just realized I had. Because at the Back to the Mac event Apple held that day, Steve Jobs introduced my dream computer: the 11-inch MacBook Air.

The moment I saw it, I knew I needed it. I worried a bit that it might be underpowered, or its storage capacity might be too small. But that’s not important. It would fit in the CaseCrown iPad messenger bag I had recently purchased, and that was all that mattered.

OK, performance mattered too. So before buying one, I wanted to try it out and see if it could handle what I was going to throw at it. I’d call myself a “power user” (if it didn’t sound so stupid), although I don’t usually push my Mac’s limits in terms of processing power: I rarely edit video (unfortunately), and my work in Photoshop is usually limited to small, web-scale graphics. But I do often have a lot of programs open at once: I’ll be coding in Coda; uploading files with Transmit; checking email; previewing sites in Safari, Firefox and Chrome (and occasionally bothering to check them in Internet Explorer too, which means running Parallels Desktop); writing project proposals in Pages; and editing images in Photoshop… all while keeping the music running constantly in iTunes.

My somewhat idiosyncratic suite of applications wasn’t on the demo unit at the Apple Store, of course, but I did the best I could to push the little dynamo to full capacity: I opened all of the iWork and Microsoft Office applications at once, and then simultaneously ran a video preview in iMovie, played back a multitrack audio project in GarageBand, and watched the Close Encounters of the Third Kind trailer in iTunes. All of the video and audio ran perfectly even under these conditions, and at that moment I knew I wouldn’t be walking out of the store without a MacBook Air in my hand. I also picked up the external SuperDrive (for CD/DVD access), and I supplemented the feeble 128 GB of Flash storage with a portable external 1 TB USB drive from Seagate.

I spent most of Saturday afternoon installing applications and transferring files from my MacBook Pro to the MacBook Air. Make no mistake, my goal from the moment I laid eyes on it has been clear: this machine was going to replace both the MacBook Pro and the iPad in my “digital lifestyle.” Which means that I am also doing that thing that so many of the tech bloggers are asking if it’s even possible: I’m using the 11-inch MacBook Air as my only computer. I’m on day three of this experiment, and days one and two were heavy work days. Here’s a summary of my experiences so far.

Screen Size

The MacBook Air’s screen is indeed small, but its high resolution makes up for the lack of physical space. It’s basically like a widescreen iPad: the vertical pixel count is the same (768 pixels), with the horizontal increased substantially (from 1024 to 1366). Its dimensions are comparable to the iPad’s, which means its pixel density is about the same.

The image is very clear and sharp. But it’s also making me realize my eyesight isn’t what it used to be. It’s also not directly comparable to the iPad, because I would typically have the iPad’s screen about a foot from my face, but the MacBook Air is usually at least twice as far away. When I’m working on it directly it’s acceptable. But at my desk I attach the MacBook to a 19-inch LCD and use the MacBook’s own display as a secondary monitor. In this layout the screen is even farther from my face, and I do have a bit of trouble reading it clearly at that distance.

In short, although the screen is small, it has a high pixel count and dense resolution, so it’s a very usable size, albeit a bit challenging for aging eyes.

Tip: I’ve always kept the Dock on the bottom of my screen, but the demo unit had it on the left, which seems to make sense given the widescreen aspect ratio on this screen. I’m trying it out and so far I really like it, even though I do sometimes accidentally go to the Dock when I mean to go to the tool palette in Photoshop.

Storage Capacity

128 GB is not a lot of storage space anymore. My first Mac, back in 1994, had an 80 MB hard drive. Times change. I knew I’d never be able to fit my 250 GB iTunes library on the MacBook Air, but I was worried that I wouldn’t even be able to fit Mac OS X plus all of my applications on it. I’m pleased to say though that I was able to install all of the applications I regularly use, plus all of the iTunes content I keep on my 32 GB iPhone (allowing me to sync the phone), and I still have over 62 GB free. I’m planning to allocate about 20 GB for a Boot Camp Windows 7 set-up, but that will still leave about 40 GB for data files for future projects. The bottom line is that 128 GB is an acceptable bare minimum for my needs, but I would not have been able to get by with the 64 GB base model.

As noted above, I’m supplementing the on-board storage with a 1 TB external drive. It’s an investment I definitely recommend if you’re considering a MacBook Air. Not only is it great for Time Machine backup, but I’ve been able to load all of my iTunes and iPhoto data on it, plus archives of all of my digital crap dating back to 1994. It’s small enough and light enough to go with me in the messenger bag, too, so if I do need to access anything that’s on it, I’ll have it with me.

Tip: In order to make this work, I needed to manage two separate iTunes libraries. This is a lot easier than it might seem. When starting iTunes, hold down the Option key. iTunes will give you the opportunity to select a different library or create a new one. Same goes for iPhoto.

Performance

My old MacBook Pro had a 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, almost double the 1.4 GHz unit in the MacBook Air. Processor speed is important for heavy-duty tasks like video editing, but in practice, I find the computer’s speed is far more a factor of its hard drive performance. Read-write operations are so much faster with Flash storage than with a traditional hard drive that with the kinds of day-to-day tasks I do, the MacBook Air seems at least as fast, if not faster, than the old MacBook Pro.

Memory

I knew going into this experiment that the biggest sacrifice I would be making was in giving up half of my RAM. My old MacBook Pro has 4 GB of RAM, and the stock MacBook Air comes with 2 GB. You can get a MacBook Air with 4 GB of RAM, but it has to be installed at the factory (since it’s soldered right onto the logic board), which means you have to special order it. I was too impatient for that, as well as reluctant to drop an extra $100, so I went with the stock 2 GB.

The biggest impact of this limitation for me is that I can’t keep as many applications open at once as before. I had gotten to the point where I never even paid attention to how many applications I had running, and rarely bothered to quit an application when I was done using it.

Tip: In the Mac OS X era, we Mac users no longer have to worry about manually setting memory allocations for our applications, but Parallels Desktop does still need to have its virtual machines’ memory limits set. I copied over my Parallels VMs from the old MacBook Pro, where I had given them each 2 GB of RAM. Doing this on the MacBook Air was not good… the thing ground to a halt when I fired up Parallels. Reducing the VMs’ memory allocation to 768 MB solved the problem.

Battery Life

Apple has touted the battery life of the new MacBook Air line with claims that the 13-inch can last up to 7 hours on a single charge, and the 11-inch 5 hours. I haven’t taken the time to log my actual usage time, but so far I’ve run down the fully charged battery twice. On Monday and Tuesday I had it plugged in all day as I worked, and then went on battery power in the evening while I spent some time organizing my data files, doing a bit more work, and of course always listening to music on iTunes. Anecdotally, I’d estimate I’ve been getting at least 4 hours of battery time under these conditions.

Today’s usage is probably the most relevant yet. I ran on battery at a coffeehouse this morning for about three hours. Now I’ve been running for about another half hour on battery power at MIA, and the battery indicator is saying I have 1:47 remaining. Not bad. This definitely beats the battery life in my old MacBook Pro. Then again, I almost never ran the MBP on battery power. It’s so big it doesn’t really feel like a portable device in the same way as the Air, and whenever I would go anywhere with it, my first instinct was to locate an electrical outlet and plug in. The MacBook Air feels portable and “unplugged” in the way that up to now only the iPad did.

Portability

It’s perfect. Jason Snell has it right: “It’s quite possibly the most desirable laptop Apple has ever made.” Indeed.

Sembei!

Yes, from now on all of my blog posts will have one-word titles, ending in an exclamation mark.

But seriously… a couple months back I mentioned a new track I had recorded for the first issue of Ramen Music. That track didn’t make the cut, nor did it make it onto my recently released prog rock album Three, mainly because its style didn’t fit the rest of the album (which is the main reason it didn’t make it onto Ramen Music #01 either, apparently).

I still like it though, and I want you to hear it, so here you go.

[audio:http://blog.room34.com/wp-content/uploads/underdog/Sembei.mp3|titles=Room 34: Sembei]

Ahoy!

It’s been two weeks since my last blog entry which, while not exactly a record for inactivity, is surely too long. I’m too busy to write a full entry today but I feel compelled to write a brief status update to tide over anyone who for some reason cares about what I’m doing/saying/thinking.

Item! Lots of work going on at Room 34 Creative Services, LLC! I’m making major enhancements to cms34 and preparing to roll out a major site overhaul for a long-term client.

Item! I’m suffering withdrawal after the premature end to the baseball season in Minnesota. That said, my pain is eased considerably by the Rangers’ handy defeat of the Yankees in the ALCS, and by the success of my favored San Francisco Giants in the NLCS.

Item! Oh, man. The MacBook Air. I couldn’t resist the impulse to buy the 11-inch model this weekend, and I absolutely love it. More on that in a future post.

Item! I’m hoping to review another coffeehouse this week, as it’s been way too long.

Item! If random, bullet point-length updates from me are something you enjoy, be sure to check me out on Twitter for all of the latest trivialities.

That is all.

Will the real underdog please stand up?

It’s not easy being a Minnesota Twins fan.

When I was growing up, the Twins were in the midst of a decade-plus dry spell between postseason appearances. And then, when I was 13, 1987 happened. The Twins won the World Series, for the first time ever. But with a feeble regular season record (including a stunningly bad 29-52 road record), and winning only the home games in the World Series, it wasn’t long before the team was derided for relying too heavily on the unique home field advantage granted by the Metrodome… when they weren’t being accused outright of cheating at home to get ahead.

After another World Series win four years later, a second drought began. The team barely survived Bud Selig’s failed contraction scheme in 2001 before roaring back to become a consistent pennant contender, the most frequent winner of the American League Central Division championship, and the team with the second most postseason appearances in the decade.

Unfortunately, the one team that’s been to the playoffs more often than the Twins in the last ten years is… the Yankees.

Oh, the dreaded Yankees.

Rosters may change over the years, and the exact reason is still up for debate, but in the Ron Gardenhire era, one thing is clear: the Twins just flat-out suck against the Yankees. And unfortunately, it has consistently been in the cards for the Twins to go up against the “Bronx Bombers” in the first round of the playoffs almost every time they’ve advanced under Gardy. The result has not just been a failure to get past the first round, but over their past few American League Division Series appearances, a failure to even win a single game.

Every time, it feels like this year will be different. But this year, it really felt like it might be different. The Twins have a new stadium, a bigger payroll, their strongest lineup in recent memory (even without Justin Morneau), and a lot of momentum behind them. (No Game 163 this year!) Most significantly, the Twins snapped their multi-season streak of regular season losses to the Yankees, in New York, back in May in a most spectacular fashion: Jason Kubel hit a grand slam off legendary closer Mariano Rivera, the first grand slam he’d given up in several years.

That home run, more than anything, seemed to signal that this year really would be different. Really.

But then, the same old result. It’s not just that the Twins getting swept by the Yankees in the ALDS is predictable; each individual game of the series almost seems to be played off the same script: the Twins take an early lead while the Yankees barely seem to be trying. Then in the 6th or 7th, just as the Twins’ starting pitcher (who, up to this point, has been shutting them down effectively) is tiring, the Yankees wake up, knock in 2 or 4 or 6 runs and the starter exits, demoralized. Then New York’s seemingly bottomless bullpen enters the picture, sending in a string of top-notch relievers, each more fearsome than the last, culminating in the arrival of Mariano Rivera at the bottom of the ninth… or possibly with 2 outs in the eighth… and this time there will be no grand slam, no come-from-behind victory, no walk-off win on a Jim Thome homer that bounces off the American flag pole.

Why? Why does this same script play out again and again, even when, as Alex Rodriguez laughably claimed last week, the Yankees are the underdogs?

To suggest that the Yankees were the underdogs in this series, presumably — well, OK, obviously and solely — because they were the AL Wild Card team, is absurd. Never mind the fact that the Yankees ended the season with a slightly better record than the Twins — 95-67 compared to 94-68. This Yankees team will never be the underdog to this Twins team. Even when the Twins dominate other teams — as they did this year with the otherwise quite talented Chicago White Sox — there’s just something — something — that keeps the Twins from delivering against New York. But what is it? I have a few theories, but first, let’s discuss another theory… the conspiracy theory that the Yankees engineered a playoff matchup with the Twins this year.

I’ve been thinking it myself since about a week before the season ended, and I’m not alone. Today the City Pages ran an article speculating, much like I had, that even if the Yankees weren’t deliberately, consciously throwing games at the end of the season, Joe Girardi and crew weren’t exactly putting 110% (as they say in sports) into winning the AL East. Why bother? They were already guaranteed no worse than the Wild Card. And ending up with the Wild Card also meant they’d be facing the Twins in the ALDS, not the Rangers, with whom they’d had a lot more difficulty (ending up 4-4) during the regular season, despite the Rangers’ overall inferior performance to the Twins’ during the season.

I’m not going to say that there really was a conspiracy at work. I doubt a Yankees-Twins ALDS fate was decreed from Bud Selig’s office, or even the Yankees’ front office. But it might have been somewhere deep down in Girardi’s brain. Look at the numbers, examine the facts, and the conclusion is obvious: the Yankees stood a better chance at advancing to the American League Championship Series as the Wild Card than as the AL East champs. Whether or not the Yankees acted on this information, it’s still there.

The Yankees managed a feeble 2-8 record in the final ten games of the season. Then again, so did the Twins. But no matter what the Twins did, they were guaranteed to face the Wild Card in the ALDS, and that would either be the Rays or the Yankees. The Rays pulled off a mediocre 5-5 record over the same period, but it was enough to clinch the division title. The only team that could really do anything to seal the Twins’ fate for the ALDS matchup was the Yankees. Was that on their minds? I like to believe it wasn’t a factor in how they played those final few games, but there’s no doubt they were aware of what losing the division to the Rays would mean for their postseason.

But I’m not going down this dark path to lay blame for the Twins’ pathetic ALDS performance at the feet of the Yankees. The Twins have no one to blame but themselves for how ineptly they consistently perform against New York. Whether or not New York threw a game or two is irrelevant: the only reason they would even want to do that is because the Twins flat-out suck against them. And the Twins are too good a team to be so consistently bad against one particular opponent. And that is what I really want to explore.

Why are the Twins so bad against the Yankees?

Starstruck

The first place I look when trying to diagnose the Twins’ chronic Yankee defeats is on the field. The Twins are a good team. A damn good team. They led the league in team batting average this year; they’re nearly perfect on defense; they’ve got tremendous depth in the lineup; their starting pitching is solid, even if there’s no real “ace”; and their bullpen is better than almost any team’s besides… well… the Yankees. They’re brimming with confidence when they’re on the field, especially when that field is Target Field, where nearly every game this season was sold out, over capacity, and the fans were more enthusiastic than I’ve seen them in the past two decades.

This team rarely makes mistakes. And yet, when they’re playing the Yankees, they seem dazzled by the celebrities on the field: A-Rod, Jeter, CC, Mo. These guys are superstars. New York superstars. They’re celebrities beyond the baseball diamond, and when the Twins face them, it sometimes almost seems like we’ve put a Little League team out there on the field with all of the heroes whose baseball cards they’ve stuck between the spokes of their bicycles. The Twins, on the field with the Yankees, just don’t feel Major League in the same way, even though as a team, on the whole, they’re every bit as good.

Overexposure

Then again, maybe it’s not just the dazzling superstars of the Yankee lineup that intimidate the Twins. Maybe it’s the national exposure. When the Twins play the Yankees, even during the regular season, they’re a lot more likely to be broadcast coast-to-coast. Even when they’re not, Yankee Stadium is a much bigger stage than Target Field. But one need look no further than Joe Mauer’s embarrassing performance in this year’s All-Star Game for evidence that maybe it’s not really the Yankees, or at least not just the Yankees, that make these guys nervous. Joe Mauer is arguably the best catcher in baseball today, and he is inarguably the best hitting catcher in Major League history. He’s won as many batting titles as all other catchers in the history of the American League combined. And he has a couple of Gold Gloves too, proving he’s just as solid crouched behind the plate as standing next to it. But judging by his sloppy performance in the 2010 All-Star Game, you might wonder how he ever advanced past Class A.

So why did Joe look so bad in the All-Star game? Could be the same reason the Twins as a team look so bad against the Yankees in the playoffs, year after year. Maybe they’re just so unaccustomed to the spotlight that it blinds them.

Small Ball

Over the past few days, I’ve enjoyed the musings of Fake Ron Gardenire on Twitter. There’s no question in my mind that Gardy is a great manager. He’s done remarkable things with the Twins since he took the helm in 2002. The team has never enjoyed the kind of consistent success — at least at the division level — that they’ve had under his leadership. His six pennants — won over a span of nine years — outnumber the total won over the entire prior history of the franchise since moving to Minnesota in 1961. And yet, only once has he managed to advance past the first round of the playoffs, and that was in his first year as manager.

The Twins have earned a reputation for playing “small ball” — scraping together victories not through home runs and other big plays, but one small step at a time. The best recent example of the Twins playing “small ball” to their advantage came in Game 1 of the ALDS this year, when Orlando Hudson’s heads-up base running got him to third on a play that should have kept him at second, and a minute later allowed him to score on a passed ball by New York Yankees catcher Jorge Posada. It’s the kind of thing that isn’t even on most teams’ radar as a strategy, but that play padded the Twins’ lead in the game. And, if they weren’t facing the Yankees, that 3-0 lead might’ve held up for a win.

And therein lies the problem. They were facing the Yankees, and in the postseason no less. This wasn’t a “small ball” situation, facing the Orioles or the Royals in mid-May. Gardy is an obstinately routine-oriented manager. And that usually works well for a sport where you’re on the field six to seven days a week, for six to seven months of the year. But the postseason is not routine. Every game, every inning, every at-bat, every pitch in the postseason is a big deal, but I feel like Gardy just hasn’t learned to adapt his coaching strategy for the postseason. The “Twins way” may lead to consistent regular season success, but it’s no way to win a World Series.

Divided We Fall

There’s frequent talk about how some divisions in Major League Baseball are weaker or stronger than others. There’s little argument against the notion that the AL East is the toughest division of all; scarcely more argument that the AL Central is one of the weakest. I’ve heard suggestions that the AL Central is closer to AAA than it is to the Major League caliber of the AL East teams. No doubt, if you placed this year’s Boston Red Sox or Toronto Blue Jays in another division, they’d fare quite well.

In the days before the leagues were split into three divisions, the division a team was placed in mattered little: although it might be possible to win a division with a record that would put you in second (or even third) place in another division, each team still faced the other teams in its league with roughly equal frequency. In the era of 26 teams, for instance, American League teams faced the other teams in their own divisions 13 times each per year, and teams from the other division 12 times each. In order to be successful, you had to play equally well against either division.

But since the split of each league into three divisions, along with the advent of Interleague play, the schedules are stacked much more strongly towards a team’s own division: now American League teams generally play 18 games per season against the other teams in their own division, compared with only 7 or 8 games against teams in other divisions. Interleague schedules are often built around regional rivalries, and disparities in the quality of these match-ups may further affect teams’ relative success.

This divisional insularity has magnified the disparity in ability between teams in the different divisions. So it’s not just a matter of the Boston Red Sox finishing the season with a record that would have been more competitive in the AL West, for example. The Red Sox faced a far more difficult schedule this year, and likely would have had an even better record if they’d played significantly more games against the Angels, A’s and Mariners, instead of facing the Rays and Yankees so many times.

The upshot of all of this for the Twins is simply that, despite their nearly identical won-lost record to that of the Yankees, they may not really be competitive at the same level as the Yankees are.

The Final Out

And so, after considering all of the above, after speculating wildly on the evil plottings of Bud Selig or the sinister ambitions of Joe Girardi, after ripping on our hometown hero and giving more credit to a fake Ron Gardenhire than the real one, after facing the harsh possibility that maybe the AL Central really is only AAA-quality compared to the AL East, I’m left with one conclusion: it doesn’t matter if the Yankees did engineer a postseason matchup with the Twins in order to better assure their continued success. The Yankees wouldn’t want to face the Twins if the latter could figure out how the hell to beat them.

The Twins have no one to blame but themselves for failing, year after year, to win against the Yankees. As for us fans? Well, we probably just need to face that fact and blame them too.

Underdogs? I believe as much as anyone that it’s good to be the underdog. I’ll continue to root for the Twins… and probably relish their underdog status. But you still have to want to come out on top, at least once in a while.