h1

Pitch Perfect (2012)

May 25, 2015

Starring: Anna Kendrick, Brittany Snow, Anna Camp, Rebel Wilson
Director: Jason Moore

Bottom Line: I’m not going to waste of bunch of time thinking about what I want to say about a movie that came out three years ago, so I’ll be quick: I liked Pitch Perfect. I’m a fan of well done musicals (think Moulin Rouge or Chicago) and I even enjoyed the first season of Glee. Pitch Perfect feels like a mashup of those two worlds along with the common cinematic theme of a group of ragtag wannabes overcoming their differences to achieve greatness. It’s funny, the musical numbers and singing are well done, the acting is… mostly decent and, by gosh, you actually want to root for these girls. Anna Kendrick has been mostly forgettable to me up to this point in her career, but Pitch Perfect propels her to star status as I loved her in this movie. Rebel Wilson is also great. Consider me a fan and sign me up for the sequel.

Replay Value: Fun movie that could be seen again.
Sequel Potential: In theaters now…
Oscar Potential: None.

Grade: 6/10 (Recommended)

Posted in movie reviews | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

h1

The Gambler (2014)

May 24, 2015

Starring: Mark Wahlberg, Brie Larsen, John Goodman, Jessica Lange
Director: Rupert Wyatt (Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes)

Bottom Line: “One man, two lives.” More like no life. And there’s very little life in Rupert Wyatt’s remake of 1974’s The Gambler starring James Caan. Mark Wahlberg plays a college literature professor who not only seems to get off on gambling for high stakes, but also on belittling the people that deal the cards. He treats his mother like she’s another loan shark and makes sure his students know they are unimportant in the grand scope of the world. He borrows money liberally and paying it back is of little concern to him – he’d rather borrow more and take a shot with it. And his style of betting is pretty detrimental. If you bet everything you have and then double your bet every time you win, there’s only one possible outcome: eventually you will lose it all. Because of this, there is very little tension during the gambling scenes. You know what’s going to happen and, even worse, you want it to. Because this is a man that no one could possibly ever want to root for. You want a good, tense gambling scene? Watch In America and wait for the family to go the fair.

I find Mark Wahlberg’s acting to be pretty hit or miss and, for me, The Gambler was a miss. Perhaps it’s a function of a weak script, but I had a really hard time taking his character seriously in this movie. The performance pretty much amounts to strutting around with a smirk on his face and acting like he’s better than everyone else. This guy is at rock bottom and you’d never know it if you were an outsider. He asks someone in his class “do I look happy?” and even though the answer is supposed to be an implied no, he actually seems pretty content with his situation. As one character says to him: “you want to lose” and it sure seems true.

As someone that has had gambling and alcohol dominate their life to the point of bottoming out on multiple occasions, The Gambler just didn’t feel very authentic to me. I can relate to the compulsion of gambling my last dollar and I can even relate to borrowing money to gamble while worrying about how I’ll pay it back later. But what I can’t relate to is a man with no glimpse of humanity. There isn’t a second in this film where they show you even a morsel of someone with a soul. I just never got the feeling that he felt the true gravity of his situation or that he even cared. And if he doesn’t care, why should we?

Replay Value: I can’t imagine watching this again.
Sequel Potential: None.
Oscar Potential: Shut out at the Oscars.

Grade: 4.5/10 (Forgettable/Watchable)

Posted in movie reviews | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

h1

Gotham Season One

May 23, 2015

I just finished season one of the Fox television series Gotham and as one of the world’s biggest Batman fans, I feel compelled to share my feelings on it. Spoilers below.

I can’t say I loved the idea of a Batman show without Batman, so although intrigued, I was mostly skeptical about how Gotham was going to turn out. I felt like the first season was very up and down. It started out a bit corny – Jada Pinkett Smith as Fish Mooney was borderline intolerable at first – but somewhere around midseason it picked up and became the show I was looking forward to watching the most… and then it got a little lackluster towards the end again.

One of the biggest problems with Gotham is that the creators don’t seem very prepared with the grand scope of the show. I get the feeling they are making it up as they go and really have no idea where it’s headed. Most of Batman’s rogues gallery exist because he exists – but on Gotham, most of his major villains are going to be fleshed out long before Bruce Wayne ever dons the cape and cowl. Bruce is maybe 12 years old in this show – a good seven to nine years before Batman might make his first appearance – but by the end of season one, the Penguin is already the crime boss of Gotham City, Carmine Falcone is retired, and Sal Moroni is dead. So the latter two characters – crucial to Batman’s world – are already out of the game; and Bruce is 12.

Obviously the show must take some liberties with the Batman mythos to function as something watchable, but that’s why it was a problematic concept in the first place. Bruce and Selina Kyle already have a strong friendship and some attraction towards each other. In Gotham, Catwoman won’t be a product of Batman’s existence, she’ll be a lifelong friend – and Bruce will never wonder about her true identity. Tommy Elliot, a childhood friend of Bruce’s that eventually becomes the supervillain Hush, is merely a school bully that inspires Bruce to ask Alfred to teach him how to fight. This is a pretty strange gloss over considering this is one of the relationships Gotham could have fleshed out without rubbing purists the wrong way. How about The Riddler working with the GCPD? Again, when The Riddler comes to fruition, the whole police department will know who he is.

And then there’s Jada Pinkett Smith’s Fish Mooney or as the the trailers for the show described her: “the mother of all villains.” But is she though? Somehow every Batman comic, movie and television episode had managed to be written up to this point without the existence of Fish Mooney. Something tells me Oswald Cobblepot could have become The Penguin without her. I have to say I hated the character at first. Jada was giving a really over-the-top performance for the first several episodes and it was unbearable. Now, I can’t say if I got used to her acting as the show progressed or she actually toned it down as the season went on, but Fish Mooney grew on me. Still, I can’t help but feel that this character exits because the showrunners felt compelled to include something original, but when Fish plummets to her presumed death at the end of season one, you have to wonder: what was the point?

Gotham did plenty of things well in its first season. I really like Ben McKenzie as Jim Gordon. He’s the focal point of the series at this point and the writers have done a great job of making him the hero even though we know who is waiting in the wings. Robin Lord Taylor crushes his role as The Penguin, who is by far the most interesting villain on the show. The Penguin is the perfect antagonist for a pre-Batman Gotham, as his rise to crime boss has very little to do with The Caped Crusader. Taylor does a great job of toeing the line with The Penguin – he can be helpful, cunning, feign weakness, cold-blooded, back-stabbing – and shows no limits as to what he’ll do be Gotham’s top boss. Sean Pertwee as Alfred and David Mazouz as a young Bruce are amongst the other cast highlights.

Season one of Gotham wastes little time introducing core Batman characters. Off the top of my head, season one included appearances from Batman, Catwoman, The Penguin, The Riddler, Poison Ivy, The Joker, The Flying Graysons, Two Face, Scarecrow, Hush, The Red Hood, The Dollmaker, Victor Zsasz, Copperhead, The Electrocutioner, and possibly some others that I’m overlooking. Season two plans for even more introductions. It all seems like too much too soon and Bruce is simply too young. Most of Batman’s rogues gallery is going to be completely fleshed out by season 3 or season 4 and Bruce will probably be in his mid-teens at that point, pre-Batman.

Overall, I enjoyed watching Gotham but the show feels rushed and unorganized. I’m curious to see how everything is handled in the future because it seems like the writers haven’t thought it through entirely. I just have a hard time imagining all the Bat-villains roaming Gotham long before Batman ever shows up.

Posted in TV Shows | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

h1

The Imitation Game (2015)

May 17, 2015

Starring: Benedict Cumberbatch, Keira Knightley, Matthew Goode
Director: Morten Tyldum (Headhunters)

Bottom Line: It was interesting timing for me to watch The Imitation Game considering I just watched director Morten Tyldum’s excellent Headhunters last week and a few weeks before that I saw Ex Machina, whose plot is largely centered around something called a Turing Test, which evaluates if a machine can exhibit intelligent behavior similar to that of a human being. I knew nothing of The Imitation Game plot prior to watching it so it was a pleasant surprise to discover it is the story of Alan Turing, a highly regarded British mathematician and cryptanalyst for whom the Turing Test was named after.

Benedict Cumberbatch gives his typical wonderful performance as Turing, a man whose awkward genius and social ineptitude isn’t that far removed Cumberbatch’s Sherlock Holmes portrayal on his BBC series. He plays Turing with a touch less narcissism and quite a bit more vulnerability. Indeed, Turing was a homosexual in a time (the 1940s-1950s) when such a thing wasn’t just frowned upon, it was prosecutable. While the film spends time detailing his arrest for gross indecency and flashes back to his schooling as a youth and the formation of his first meaningful relationship with another boy, the majority of the film highlights his time at Bletchley Park, a British codebreaking centre, working with a team of fellow geniuses and trying to crack Enigma, a machine used by Nazi Germany to send coded military messages.

The Imitation Game is an amazing and heartbreaking story, in which one of the greatest (unknown) heroes of World War II is later vilified by his country for something we now view as socially acceptable. The film combines drama and humor exceptionally well. Turing is portrayed as a flawed, often self-centered human being, but still someone that is quite easy to root for. Cumberbatch is worthy of his Oscar nomination and Keira Knightley is also great as one of his fellow codebreakers and continues to solidify her status as what I consider to be The Next Kate Winslet.

The Imitation Game delivers on all levels with a great story and top notch acting. Alan Turing is a man whose time and contributions to our world should never be forgotten. The posthumous pardon he was granted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2009 was long overdue.

Replay Value: This is definitely a film worth watch again and probably worth owning.
Sequel Potential: N/A
Oscar Potential: Won Best Adapted Screenplay. Cumberbatch and Knightley received acting nominations, Tyldum a directing nom, and the film was also nominated for Best Picture, film editing, production design, and score.

Grade: 8/10 (Excellent)

Posted in movie reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

h1

Fifty Shades Of Grey (2015)

May 14, 2015

Starring: Dakota Johnson, Jamie Dornan
Director: Sam Taylor-Johnson (Nowhere Boy)

Bottom Line: I have to admit: Fifty Shades Of Grey is a worthy homage to Twilight but… that’s not a good thing. Bella Swan is the worst character I’ve ever encountered in literature and the Twilight series as a whole did nothing but bore me, so when I heard that Fifty Shades Of Grey initially started as Twilight fan fiction – the resulting books and this film never had a chance.

It’s hard to believe that a movie that is essentially all about sex could be so boring, but Fifty Shades Of Grey lacks balls – literally. There is no envelope-pushing here. I’m not even sure the film is rated a hard-R. In between relatively tame sex scenes – all things considered – we get an absurd amount of mundane dialogue.

And very little makes sense in this film. Anastasia Steel is a virgin? Really? But even more importantly, why? Does it make things even remotely more interesting? I feel like it’s a detail meant to spice things up, but it feels contrived, and the script forgets this little factoid soon after it is mentioned. Christian Grey talks himself up as a womanizing monster, but all he does is treat Anastasia with respect the entire film. Also, like Twilight, I don’t get how either of these characters are interesting or likable. Jamie Dornan’s Christian Grey is a permanent scowl and little else. I’d be curious to see what Charlie Hunnan would have done with this role – I can only imagine his casting would have boosted the movie’s draw considerably – but Hunnan is better off having not been involved. Dakota Johnson’s Anastasia at least has a hint of charm and humor, but I certainly don’t get why she’s attracted to someone like Christian Grey. There is zero depth in this film.

Fifty Shades Of Grey amounts to little more than high quality soft core porn… and you can find that for free on the internet… if that’s your thing.

Replay Value: So boring… no way.
Sequel Potential: I can’t believe there is three books of material here. There wasn’t even two hours of material in the first film. I don’t want to see more. With apologies to Rhianna, whips and chains do NOT excite me.
Oscar Potential: I’d bet on Razzie awards. Dakota Johnson might escape unscathed, but I doubt anyone else does.

Grade: 1.5/10 (Torture Material/Horrible)

Posted in movie reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

h1

Headhunters (2011)

May 10, 2015

Starring: Aksel Hennie, Synnove McCody Lund, Nikolaj Colste-Waldau
Director: Morten Tyldum (The Imitation Game)

Bottom Line: My parents have been hassling me to watch Headhunters for months, bringing it up every time I see them and posting on my Facebook page, so I was going to have to raise hell if it wasn’t any good. They’ve been known to put some staunch praise on questionable films (see: August Rush) so it’s not like Headhunters was a lock to be awesome.

I am happy to report that it is – very awesome. It’s a 2011 film that hails from Norway and is directed by Morten Tyldum, whose The Imitation Game was recently nominated for Best Picture. Aksel Hennie, who looks like a Norwegian cross between Billy Crystal and Christopher Walken, stars as Roger, a short man that works as a headhunter – someone that recruits suitable candidates for open positions at various corporations – and steals valuable paintings in his spare time. I say he is short because the whole film seems to revolve around this insecurity. He states at the beginning of the film that he “overcompensates in other ways,” and uses the extra income he gets from stealing paintings to project a lavish lifestyle he otherwise could not afford. It all helps make him feel worthy of his trophy wife played by Lund. It’s a system that seems to work for Roger until he steals a highly valuable painting from Jamie Lannister (of Game Of Thrones), who quickly turns Roger’s world upside down by having an affair with his wife and trying to kill him.

From there, Headhunters quickly becomes a game of cat and mouse (and dog), with Roger on the run for his life. And it gets absurd – fantastically absurd. Part of the reason Headhunters works so well is because it doesn’t take itself too seriously. It’s listed as a crime thriller, but comedy could easily be added to its genre specifications. As awful as the situation was at times, I couldn’t help but laugh at Roger’s elusive tactics. There’s a scene that involves an outhouse that makes the one in Schindler’s List seem tame by comparison.

Headhunters is smart, funny, and plenty entertaining. The acting is good in general, but Hennie is particularly amusing as Roger, although he probably wouldn’t make the best poker player. For someone with so many secrets, he wears his displeasure plainly on his face whenever he is unhappy about something – such as running into a law enforcement agent who is tracking art thieves. I’m not surprised that this film propelled Tyldum to Hollywood success. It’s an enjoyable ride and somewhere in this crazy movie there’s a message about being yourself, but it’s difficult to take away anything serious from such a fun film.

Grade: 7.5/10 (Must See/Excellent)

Posted in movie reviews | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

h1

Avengers: Age Of Ultron (2015)

May 7, 2015

Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Mark Ruffalo, Jeremy Renner, James Spader
Director: Joss Whedon (The Avengers, Serenity)

Bottom Line: Few would envy Joss Whedon’s task of following up the mega blockbuster and critical darling that was the original The Avengers movie, but his Age Of Ultron manages to deliver the kind of popcorn fun we’ve come to expect from the high quality Marvel/Disney films.

Age Of Ultron starts off fast and furious – with The Avengers fighting their way through a snow-thick forest towards the base of the last known HYDRA agent, a man that has Loki’s scepter from the last film. Whedon gives us a single shot highlight of all The Avengers causing damage much like he did in the finale of the original film. It’s a quick call back that reminds us how and why we love these heroes. Yes folks, he still remembers how to do this. The team secures the scepter, Tony Stark ponders the idea of using it to create an AI as a means of protection against future threats from space, and soon the conscience of Ultron is born… and he doesn’t share the same values as The Avengers. He’s a little more into human annihilation and world domination.

Age Of Ultron is a fun movie. For summer blockbuster fare, it’s top notch, but I didn’t leave the theater feeling giddy like I did after watching the first one. Still, there is plenty of high level action, humor, and, somehow, Whedon is able to find a way to give all the players involved their moment to shine – a remarkable feat considering the core team now consists of nine members with the addition of Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, and The Vision. For a movie that could easily feel bloated, Whedon displays a tremendous amount of balance.

The returning cast is solid as usual, but James Spader steals the show as Ultron, whose wit and sense of humor unsurprisingly mirrors that of his creator, Tony Stark. Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen are a bit jolting as the Russian Maximoff twins – the accents are pretty ehh… – but Olsen at least proves to be a capable actress.

Age Of Ultron is a satisfying follow-up to The Avengers. Fans of the genre will no doubt be satisfied. I don’t think it is as good as the original, but I may change my mind upon multiple viewings.

Replay Value: These kind of movies tend to be best the first time around, but I will almost certainly see this again in theaters.
Sequel Potential: Marvel has solo Avenger movies lined up for the next several years before culminating with the Avengers: Infinity War two part finale. I am particularly looking forward to Captain America: Civil War which will pit Cap against Iron Man and introduce Black Panther and Spider-Man into the fold.
Oscar Potential: This may get some visual effects and sound nominations, but that’s probably it.

Grade: 7/10 (Must See)

Posted in movie reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

h1

Franchise Four – New York Yankees

May 6, 2015

I have to say the New York Yankees were probably the team I was looking forward to the least – it’s simply an impossible task to narrow down the list of great players to a mere four. Babe Ruth makes one of the choices really easy – and so does Lou Gehrig – but it gets extremely difficult after that. Was Derek Jeter a better player than Mickey Mantle or Joe DiMaggio? Was Yogi Berra better than any of them? Can we possibly exclude the greatest closer of all-time, Mariano Rivera?

Babe Ruth

The Argument: This is an easy one. We’re talking about the most dominant hitter in the history of the game. Before Babe Ruth came along with his 714 career homeruns, if you could hit double digit homers you were a monster. His presence completely changed the game – no one has ever stood so far above their peers than Babe Ruth did. The Babe is the Yankees all-time leader in runs scored, homeruns, walks, batting average, slugging, and on-base percentage. His 1.164 career OPS is the highest mark in history. The Great Bambino is also arguably responsible for making the Yankees the marquee franchise they have become today, helping them to their first of 28 World Series titles back in 1923. The Yanks went on to win four World Series with Ruth and perhaps his presence in New York helped attract many of the franchise’s future stars. For all his game-changing accomplishments, Ruth was part of the first ever Hall Of Fame class.

Lou Gehrig

The Argument: Gehrig ranks in the top 3 of virtually every offensive category in Yankees history. The Iron Horse was the first legendary Yankee to spend his entire career with the club, finishing with a .340 batting average, 493 homeruns, 1995 RBI, and a 1.080 OPS. Gehrig played his entire career at his peak and basically never took a day off before the disease that would eventually be named after him slowed him down one year before retiring at age 36. Another Hall Of Famer, Gehrig won two MVP awards and six World Series with the Yanks.

Joe DiMaggio

The Argument: DiMaggio is another Hall Of Fame Yankee lifer, albeit over a smaller career size than most legendary players at just 13 seasons. To be fair, like Ted Williams, DiMaggio missed three full seasons in the middle of his prime due to military service. The Yankee Clipper’s career numbers are impressive: 2214 hits, 1390 runs, 361 homers, 1537 RBI – numbers that all rank within the top 6 on the Yankees all-time lists – but it’s his 162-game averages that astound: .325/.398/.579, 130 runs, 207 hits, 34 homeruns, 143 RBI; his average season would easily win the MVP most seasons these days. DiMaggio did win the AL MVP in 1939, 1941, and 1947 and the 56-game hitting streak he put together in 1941 may never be matched (actually, this is a record that probably will be). Joltin’ Joe’s Yankees reached the World Series 10 times in his 13 year career and walked away with 9 titles during that time. He was also an All-Star every year of his career.

Derek Jeter

The Argument: Mickey Mantle had enough talent to be the best baseball player of all-time. Unfortunately, he likely tore his ACL during the World Series of his rookie year and never had his knee surgically repaired, playing the rest of his career with an injury that would sideline most players indefinitely. Alas, The Mick did suffer that injury – and battled alcoholism – and was never able to play to his full potential, and since this is a list of what players did accomplish, Derek Jeter becomes the somewhat difficult choice. Jeter may not have the gaudy power numbers of Mantle or the ten World Series rings of Yogi Berra, but no player better represents the face of the Yankees franchise than Derek Jeter. For starters, no one played more games (2747) or had more hits (3465), doubles (544), or stolen bases (358) for the most storied franchise in baseball. Jeter batted a remarkable .310 for his career and, considering he played 20 seasons, posted a very respectable .817 OPS. The 1996 Rookie Of The Year was a 14-time All-Star, 5-time Gold Glover, and finished in the top 3 of the AL MVP voting three times. After being a perennial World Series winner from the 1920s to the early 1960s, the Yanks managed just two titles from 1963 to 1995 before winning four times in Jeter’s first five seasons (he would add a fifth in 2009). Perhaps the most important reason Jeter is so revered and why he belongs on this list before some Yankees that were arguably better players, is the amount of class he displayed both on and off the field. Few players carried themselves with more grounded charisma than Derek Jeter.

Posted in baseball | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

h1

Birdman (2014)

May 3, 2015

Starring: Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, Emma Stone, Amy Ryan
Director: Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu (21 Grams, Amores Perros, Babel)

Bottom Line: Birdman is a brilliant piece of filmmaking from director Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu and his cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki. It’s shot and edited in a way that makes it seem like the first two hours of the film were done entirely in one take. While the reality is a bit different, this format still required several long takes and tedious acting and timing from the film’s performers. What results is a seamless journey through a New York theater and the mind of a former Hollywood action star named Riggan – played wonderfully by Michael Keaton – as he tries to reinvent and endear himself to the masses by writing, directing, and starring in a Broadway show.

While Birdman isn’t my favorite film of 2014, it’s easy to see why the Academy and critics seemed to agree that it was the best one. From a technical standpoint, they are probably right. It’s also a great character study, as Keaton’s Riggan is quite mystifying – it can be difficult to tell reality from fantasy. What is clear is his desire to break free of the character that made him famous years before, as Riggan is in constant battle with Birdman’s voice in his head. Riggan is certainly more focused on his relationship with his “celebrity” than he is with those in his own personal life. He barely notices his daughter (Stone) even though she works with him in the theater and his love affair with one of his co-stars hardly seems to register with him. This is a man that is highly self-involved. He’s too entrenched with his own demons to notice anyone else’s.

Birdman gives us great performances across the board. It’s the best performance I’ve ever seen from Keaton – by a large margin. It’s hard to imagine that Riggan could have been played by anyone else. Edward Norton gives the film’s best performance, however, as Mike Shiner, an established Broadway star that is hired at the last minute to replace one of the show’s actors after an unfortunate “accident.” Shiner is a difficult person and wastes little time in making an enemy of Riggan – suggesting changes in dialogue during his first read through and insisting on drinking real alcohol during rehearsals. Norton plays the role gleefully and provides numerous laughs in the film. The rest of the ensemble cast is sharp and everyone does well with the difficult shooting format.

I thought Birdman was a great film. It’s one that is tough to digest after one viewing and requires a bit deeper thinking, so it’s possible I could one day view it as a masterpiece. The one take style is unique and adds to the film’s wonder instead of coming across gimmicky. Keaton and Norton give stunning performances. I don’t think Birdman is for everyone – it’s a bit grimy and plenty difficult – but for serious filmgoers, it’s a clear must see.

Replay Value: Multiple viewings required.
Sequel Potential: None.
Oscar Potential: Crushed the Oscars, winning statues for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, and Best Cinematography, while being nominated in five other categories, including acting noms for Keaton, Norton, and Stone. Interestingly, Birdman did not receive a nomination in film editing, which kind of boggles my mind.

Grade: 7.5/10 (Must See/Excellent)

Posted in movie reviews | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

h1

Franchise Four – Boston Red Sox

April 30, 2015

I have to admit, I’m quite fascinated by MLB.com’s Franchise Four campaign, in which people are encouraged to vote on the four players that best represent each franchise. Since I love baseball and I like sharing my opinion, I’ve decided to not only participate in the voting, but to share my thoughts on my blog. The aim here is to make my picks for one team a day for the next month, so stay tuned and we will see who the voters picked at the All-Star game in July.

Ted Williams

The Argument: Teddy Ballgame is quite easily the greatest Red Sox player of all-time and is always one of the first names you think of when you talk about the greatest hitters to ever play the game. Williams played his entire 19 year career with the Red Sox and slashed a ridiculous .344/.482/.634 and hit 521 homeruns and had 1839 RBI during his tenure, numbers that are even more mind-boggling considering he missed three full seasons during his prime while serving in the military during World War 2. His career OPS was 1.116 – a number no player has reached in a single season since Barry Bonds did it all the way back in 2004. His career .482 OBP is the highest of all-time and he’s also the last player to hit .400 for a full season. He won the AL MVP in 1946 and 1949, was a 17-time All-Star, and, of course, was inducted into the Hall Of Fame. The only thing missing from Williams’ sterling resume is a World Series title.

Carl Yastrzemski

The Argument: Thanks to Ted Williams’ three years in the war, Carl Yastrzemski is the Red Sox all-time leader in at bats, hits, runs, and RBI. He also slugged 452 HR and is the only player to rope over 3,000 hits in a Red Sox uniform. Yaz won the 1967 AL MVP when he hit for the Triple Crown by batting .326 and hitting 44 HR to go along with 121 RBI. Yaz is a Hall of Famer, 18-time All-Star, and won 7 Gold Gloves during his career.

Pedro Martinez

The Argument: Roger Clemens and Cy Young might have the most wins in Red Sox history and both pitched more innings, but Pedro Martinez is the best pitcher to ever wear a Boston uniform. Many would argue that Pedro’s 7 year stretch with the Red Sox is the most dominant by a starting pitcher in the history of baseball. Not just for the gaudy numbers – we’re talking 117 wins, 2.52 ERA, 5.44 K:BB ratio, 10.9 K/9 IP, .206 batting average against – but for the fact that he did it right smack dab in the middle of what we now call The Steroid Era in the brutal AL East where far more than half the games were being played at Fenway, Yankee Stadium, and the Sky Dome, all parks that heavily favor the hitter. He won four American League ERA titles and 3 strikeout titles. For his efforts, he was the recipient of two Cy Young Awards (and four more top 4 finishes) and was inducted into the Hall Of Fame in 2015.

David Ortiz

The Argument: David Ortiz has become so ingrained as the face of the Red Sox that most casual MLB fans would probably be stunned to learn that he actually played parts of six (6!) seasons for the Minnesota Twins. During his time with the BoSox Ortiz has clubbed 412 HR and posted a .289/.386/.566 triple slash line. Big Papi is a 9-time All-Star and has finished top 5 in the AL MVP voting five times. What probably endears Ortiz to Sox fans more than anything else is his role in their run to the 2004 World Series title, when he seemed to single-handedly will the Sox past the Yankees in the ALCS after losing the first three games to their hated rival. Not only did Ortiz play a huge role in ending one of the longest championship droughts in all of sports, but he also won rings in 2007 and 2013 and has hit .455 in the World Series for his career. After looking like he might be declining in his early 30s, Ortiz resurrected his career and has continued to bash well into his late 30s and should make a strong case for a Hall Of Fame DH when he becomes eligible within the next 10 years.

Posted in baseball | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

« Newer Entries
Older Entries »