Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Knicks Beat Lakers With Familiar Strategy

The Way I've Always Heard It Should Be

And no, I'm not slamming the White Sox here, in fact, that's intended as a compliment.

The atmosphere at the Cell was electric last night; fans were jumping up and down screaming for their team even during the pre-game warmups and announcements. They saved their biggest boos for their opponents, the Angels, particularly Vladimir Guerrero, the Angels' best player. Their cheers got louder and louder for their heroes, the loudest for the manager, Ozzie Guillen.

I happen to be a sucker for pre-game playoff hoopla; I love when the players line up along the foul lines, and some medium-to-largely famous musician sings/plays the National Anthem (OK, so it's arguable how famous Alice Peacock, who sang last night, is outside of Chicago, or even IN Chicago, for that matter). They set off a few fireworks after the anthem, and that revved up the crowd even further.

And looking around, I kept thinking:

"Man, I wish this was us."

It hasn't been that long -- only two years -- since it WAS us, right there in a league championship series, so yes, I do remember how it feels when your team is the one on whom you hang your emotions on every pitch.

For me, and Mark (whose only other postseason game was, um, this one -- you know the one, I don't think I need to mention which one any further), it was just a chance to soak in that atmosphere, to watch a ballgame and be part of another important day in Chicago sports history.

I'd never seen the lower concourse at the Cell so crowded; we walked over from our LF bleacher seats to where Mark's friend Mitchell was sitting with his dad in the lower boxes down the RF line, and then tried to make our way through thousands of people milling around in the food lines. That took about 15 minutes, far longer than it would on a "normal" day. In fact, when we stopped to get some food, Mark, observant kid that he is, noticed the concession workers wearing Miller Park caps. Why? Sportservice, the concessionaire, had brought some Brewers employees down from Milwaukee to help out on this busier-than-usual night.

We ran into Mike; this time it wasn't possible to switch seats so he could sit with us, and his seat was in the right-field lower reserve.

Which is why I'm still waiting to hear back from him as to how close he was to Garret Anderson's second-inning HR that gave the Angels the lead they would wind up never relinquishing, and the supposedly-jet-lagged Angels beat the White Sox 3-2, taking a 1-0 lead in the series.

UPDATE [2005-10-12 09:16:13 by Al]: Mike e-mailed me about the Anderson HR:

Fairly close, actually. Three rows down, about three seats right. Believe me, if I'd caught the darn thing, you'd have heard about it by now.

That home run, and the two runs the Angels scratched out off Jose Contreras in the third inning, took the crowd right out of the game. It shouldn't have -- 3-0 isn't an insurmountable lead -- but for some reason, it got more quiet than it ought to be at a playoff game.

There was a fine mist falling at game time and it continued to fall off and on throughout the game, but it was never hard enough to stop play, or even be noticeable, for that matter; most of the time, you'd never even have known it was raining if you didn't look up into the lights and see the "mist-drops" reflecting off the light. The game-time temperature was 61 degrees and from our seats, we were fairly well blocked from the wind, and for mid-October it was actually quite a comfortable evening.

Despite this, the White Sox sent out vendors with hot chocolate, and since I wouldn't let Mark get cotton candy (he tried to negotiate his way out of that by saying it was "Magic Floss", which is what it said on the bag, but I wasn't having any of it), he talked his way into having one of those.

I asked him whether he was cold, or just wanted the chocolate. Got an honest answer, too: it was for the chocolate, of course!

Meanwhile, the crowd was awakened, however briefly, by Joe Crede's home run that was the White Sox' first hit off Paul Byrd.

I've seen Byrd throw against the Cubs before, since he spent the bulk of his career in the NL with the Mets, Phillies and Braves (and not very well, either -- 1-3 in 10 games with a 9.64 ERA), but I didn't remember him with the old-fashioned, Milt Pappas-style windup, with his arms flailing down to his knees, then up over his head.

This seemed to have the White Sox off-balance for most of Byrd's six innings, and he might have stayed in longer (he threw only 73 pitches), except that his seventy-third pitch hit Aaron Rowand to lead off the seventh, and apparently Mike Scioscia decided that he'd trust his bullpen.

That was a smart move, and it's one of the things that has brought the Angels this far -- they have an excellent bullpen. Scot Shields got out of the inning with a fielder's choice, and then something happened that, when the history of this series is written, may turn out to be the key play of the entire series.

A. J. Pierzynski, who has to be one of the slowest players in the game, and who has stolen six bases in his career in nineteen attempts (and no SB since 2003), took off for second base, and was thrown out easily by Bengie Molina.

During the post-game press conference we listened to on the radio driving home, Guillen confirmed what Mark and I (and all the fans sitting around us) thought: that someone, likely Pierzynski, missed a sign. That had to be a blown hit-and-run, though Guillen also suggested that Pierzynski might have been "trying to make something happen" and just went on his own.

Not too smart, if that was the case.

The White Sox made some noise in the 8th inning too, with a pair of singles, and with Paul Konerko up, the crowd came alive for what would turn out to be the last time. Konerko slapped a couple of sharp foul balls and then hit a lazy fly ball to Steve Finley in CF.

I was shocked to see what happened next. People started leaving the ballpark. I couldn't believe it. A one-run playoff game, that actually was moving along fairly quickly -- it was barely past 9:30 at the time -- and you're leaving? There were large blocks of empty seats in the upper deck for the 9th inning.

Speaking of which, I was surprised to see Jose Contreras sent out to start the 9th; props to Contreras, who threw another nice game. After the Angels made it 3-0 in the third, Contreras retired 11 in a row until Darin Erstad's single in the seventh. When Bengie Molina singled in the 9th, on Contreras' 102nd pitch of the day (see, I told you guys last week -- Contreras seems to turn into a pumpkin right around 100 pitches), Neal Cotts came in and kept the White Sox in the game. Contreras left to a standing ovation, including applause from Mark & me -- he did a terrific job.

It wasn't enough, because the guy known as K-Rod from his great 2002 postseason, Francisco Rodriguez (and think about it -- he's a World Series hero, and one of the game's top closers for three full seasons, and he just turned 23) -- came in to finish it off, and the White Sox played right into his hands. After Chone (and how on EARTH can you figure a way to pronounce that name "Shawn"?) Figgins booted Carl Everett's leadoff grounder, Rodriguez got two easy outs and then up came Crede... who not long ago hit an extra-inning, game-winning homer against the Indians.

Rodriguez is known as K-Rod because, well, he strikes out a lot of guys (322 in 243 career innings), and he throws 97-MPH fastballs.

And Crede is a dead fastball hitter.

And Rodriguez wouldn't give him one. He kept bending off 81-MPH breaking balls; nearly had Crede struck out on a 1-2 splitter, and then got him on the 2-2 pitch. Gutty pitching, actually.

The White Sox, thus, have lost four in a row to the Angels, dating back to a three-game sweep the Angels put on them in early September at the Cell, and with it they also lost their home-field advantage in the series.

Finally, I should note: I didn't hear one "Cubs suck" comment, and only a scattered anti-Cub piece of clothing spotted around the park.

Credit to the Sox fans. That's the way it should be -- they were passionate for their team, and into the series.

Comment 48 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

as to AJ's SB attempt
the replay clearly showed him looking back to the batter right when he took off. As we've all heard many times, and the announcers stated again, that's usually the sign of a hit and run. So the speculation was that someone did, in fact, miss a sign.

Great report, Al! I'm so jealous! I've never been to a playoff or world series game.

The Dumbass

by Scott @ Bleed Cubbie Blue on Oct 12, 2005 8:48 AM CDT reply actions  

That is, of course...
... an advantage you have watching at home -- replays, and close-up replays. We thought it was obvious a sign was missed; thanks for confirming it.

by Al Yellon on Oct 12, 2005 9:33 AM CDT up reply actions  

Quiet
That home run, and the two runs the Angels scratched out off Jose Contreras in the third inning, took the crowd right out of the game. It shouldn't have -- 3-0 isn't an insurmountable lead -- but for some reason, it got more quiet than it ought to be at a playoff game.

I noticed that.  I get the impression that Chisox fans are worried their team is made of glass.

The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

by scareduck on Oct 12, 2005 10:34 AM CDT reply actions  

Pierzynski
Harold Reynolds (I think) said on Baseball Tonight that you don't hit-and-run on an 0-1 pitch, which the pitch to Crede was.  I have never heard of this, but it makes sense: 0-1 is not a great hitter's count, and Crede probably wasn't going to get a fastball there.  But BT also showed that Pierzynski had a horrible lead, even though Erstad was playing off the bag; he wasn't even to the cut-out of the dirt without being held on.  So if Ozzie called a hit-and-run, that probably wasn't the best pitch, but if Pierzynski was running on his own, he needed a bigger lead, especially with Erstad playing off first.

And as far as the Sox go, for a team that proclaims to play small-ball, they sure hit a lot of home runs, and their lack of bunting skills last night made them look a lot like a certain team on the other side of town.

Matt

by gauchodirk on Oct 12, 2005 11:55 AM CDT reply actions  

You hit the nail on the head...
... they have this "grinder rules" thing that implies they are a small-ball team, but the Sox do live and die by the long ball, and that's by (accidental) design -- the park, after they lopped off 1/3 of the upper deck, is now a launching pad.

If Konerko doesn't hit, they may have a lot of trouble scoring runs.

by Al Yellon on Oct 12, 2005 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions  

I think..
what they should be worried about is the fact that they aren't the first half team anymore.  Everyone knows they were playing way over their heads.  

The fact is that their pitching is amazing, but their offense is streaky.  They just went through a hot streak, so I guess it is very probable that they go through a slump now.

I don't think they are really a small-ball team much because of the homers.  But they should be worried about Scott Podsednik because right now he can't hit, get on base, bunt, or steal because of his health.  

Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Oct 12, 2005 4:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

Where is...
Drcrawdad at today??

Doesn't he usually come on here and talk about teh White Sox after every playoff game??  I wonder why he did not come by and visit this blog last night or today yet.  Hmmm??????

by mannytrillo on Oct 12, 2005 12:08 PM CDT reply actions  

Thanks for the concern.
As I mentioned BEFORE the game, I was busy last night and then had to work early, then just got home.  Thanks for the concern though.

Were you one of the guys who's attacked me for posting about the Sox here?  

Well, it seems to me that Cub fans should retire that tired old line about Cub fans not being concerned or caring at all about the Sox.  The voluminous posts about the Sox prove that Cub fans do indeed have interest in the Sox.

And for those who've said that my posts here are examples of why they hate Sox fans, I suggest that you take a moment to see the examples of the vile things some Cub fans spew...

http://tinyurl.com/9mjyb

And finally, I have absolutely no reason to be ashamed of anything I've posted or said in advance of the Sox vs. Angels ALCS.  

The Angels are a very good team.  If the Sox lose, I won't be happy about it, but neither will I be ashamed.

Now, keep talking about White Sox baseball!

by DrCrawdad on Oct 12, 2005 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

Well...
... it seemed pretty quiet from the start for a game of such magnitude. Perhaps this was just my perception watching on TV. Regardless, it was a hell of a ball game to watch and this is going to be a good series. Sox fans likely now realize that this is not going to be the cakewalk that the Boston series was and I'm left wondering how a Red Sox team with such a mediocre pitching staff made it to the playoffs.

DmL

by dmlichte on Oct 12, 2005 12:23 PM CDT reply actions  

that's the thing I noticed too
Sox fans, from a tv perspective, seemed as if they were watching a funeral.  It's was eerily quiet.  When they fell behind early, I think they folded their tent knowing this team just isn't really good.  Offensively, they are just bad.  Their catcher, jeez, can't throw.  Seen a better arm on a chair.  And for all the props to Ozzie and how his team executes, those were some of the lamest bunt attempts I've ever seen.  And people in here get on Dusty for the Cubs lack of fundamental play?  Gimme a break.  The Sox were a disgrace last night and their fans were brtual too (again from a tv perspective).

I do think the Sox win tonight.  Although I wouldn't mind seeing Buehrle get pounded.  A couple of Vladdy 3-run bombs would be nice!

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 12:32 PM CDT reply actions  

Dude... c'mon
The White Sox are just bad?!

They won 99 games.  No Cubs team since 1935 (or was it 1932) (someone will correct me if wrong) has done that.  

They didnt bunt well last night.  No one has ever said their offense is great.  It's the pitching that is great on that team.

We can argue and/or debate the merits of the White Sox and reasonable minds can disagree... but to watch the Sox lose their first game in the past, what 9 or something, and then declare that they are a bad team?!

If the White Sox are a "bad team", what the hell are the Cubs?  Or the Red Sox?  Or the Royals?

Who exactly do you think is a "good team"??

NLBallClub

by NLBallClub on Oct 12, 2005 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions  

Please re-read my post
I wrote OFENSIVELY they are bad.  I stand by that.  They are a bad offensive team.  They don't have 1 .290 hitter in their line-up.

And game 1 reinforced the point that they are bad.

If you don't agree, then tell me why they are good and don't point to # of games won as an indicator of their offense.

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions  

Re-read
I guess I was referring more to your comment that the crowd folded it's tent b/c they realized the White Sox were just not really good.  When you followed that up with "offense is bad", I read that as a pretty strong indictment of the whole team, not just the offense.

The White Sox are a good team.  Primarily due to their pitching.  The offense was in the lower half of the American league in runs and almost every offensive category (they did lead the league in sacrifices).  

The White Sox are certainly not the 1927 Yankees.  But I stand by my comment that they are a good team.  Only 4 teams are left, and they are all good teams.

NLBallClub

by NLBallClub on Oct 12, 2005 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions  

of course
they are a good team.  They are flawed and thsoe flaws are exposed when it's the Final Four.

The 162 game season separates the men from the boys.  It's the ultimate test to see who is the best team.

I think Sox fans are really nervous because the offense is bad and they don't have confidence in coming from behind.  Pitching carried them and to give up early runs is deflating.

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions  

and
how can Reinsdorf allow concessionaires to don Brewers caps?  It shows you what a lousy organization they are.  I'd rather be under-staffed, then allow that to happen in my park on my dime.

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 12:34 PM CDT reply actions  

Well...
... how does hiring extra help say that you are a lousy organization? Maybe they didn't have any extra uniforms on hand.

by Al Yellon on Oct 12, 2005 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions  

details Al
"attention to details" is what separates the wannabes from the class of organizations.  You need to know your staffing requirements for the given size of a crowd.  They didn't and failed.

That cannot happen, EVER.

Would ABC allow their Democratic Covnention coverage to be run by CBS?

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions  

Couldn't Reinsdorf...
at least sprung for White Sox caps for them helping??

by mannytrillo on Oct 12, 2005 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions  

That's not really comparable, is it?
Maybe they DID know their staffing requirements and didn't have enough uniforms. Or maybe the hiring was done by Sportservice, outside the control of the Sox.

I don't think this is such a big deal, really.

by Al Yellon on Oct 12, 2005 2:18 PM CDT up reply actions  

no, it's not a big deal
but it's an embarassment to their organization and a slap in the face to their fans.

If I walked up to get my beer at the '03 NLCS and some jamoke was wearing a Sox or Brewer or Cardinal hat, I'd have a problem with it.

The comparison was "attention to detail" and it is something to be addressed prior to those situations taking place.  Obviously it wasn't on the Sox management group.

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions  

Frankly..
... this is idiotic.

Were I at an LCS game following my team, I wouldn't even CARE what the beer vendor was wearing (unless the vendor was Jessica Simpson, in which case she should be wearing a smile and little else).

What I WOULD care about is the SCORE!

Sheesh.

by Ivychat on Oct 12, 2005 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions  

we already addressed
the relevance.  Thanks for chirping in birdie.  Al obviously gave it some thought to include it in his game diary.

Because you weren't offended, doesn't mean it was right or handled properly.  The world doesn't revolve around you and your view on life.

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions  

Just to make it clear...
... it wasn't a Brewer cap, it was a Miller Park cap. They were wearing uniforms provided by Sportservice, the concessionaire, not the Brewers. They also had their Miller Park work ID's on.

by Al Yellon on Oct 12, 2005 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions  

Agree with Socialbob
This isn't a huge deal but you better believe that if the Yankees needed to bring in extra venders, they wouldn't be wearing Citizens Bank Park caps. The Cards would never let workers into Busch Stadium wearing Kauffman Stadium caps. I don't understand how someone from the Sox front office didn't realize this and go grab a few dozen Sox hats for these guys to wear. The great organizations do the big things right as well as the little things.

DmL

by dmlichte on Oct 12, 2005 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions  

Also agree
FWIW, I have noticed Citizens Bank Park beer vendors circulating around RFK -- including in the closing series against the Phillies.  I assume the guy got really good tips from the Philly fans in attendance for the extra service.

This issue is simple -- they only get issued one uniform, and I just assume that the contractor (probably rightly) doesn't think it's worth the expense for extra duds.

by 08Cubs on Oct 12, 2005 6:49 PM CDT up reply actions  

That is not right...
Why would they leave?  I would rarely leave a game early even if my team was losing 12-3.  I would only leave if I had something important to do, so I really hope those fans had something they had to do.  But in the end, it is their choice.
Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Oct 12, 2005 4:54 PM CDT reply actions  

Well Sparkles...
... I guess you are just a better person than those leaving early.  MLB thanks you for your committment, I am sure.
NLBallClub

by NLBallClub on Oct 12, 2005 5:27 PM CDT up reply actions  

Yup..
They even sent me a thank-you note to my house with tickets for next year. :)

I think that if you are really a fan of baseball and you're team, you shouldn't leave.  Unless like I said, you have something important to do.  I also said it was everyone's choice, and I was simply stating mine and my opinion.

Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Oct 12, 2005 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions  

to play Devil's Advocate
have you been to The Cell after 9:30 PM?  :-D

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions  

Actually...
no.  As a matter of fact, I haven't been there at all.
Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Oct 12, 2005 5:53 PM CDT up reply actions  

don't go
Since you are a high school girl, it's not a place you need to be unless accompanied by your family after dark.

I was just playing--there IS a reason to leave that ballpark early.

by socalbob on Oct 12, 2005 5:59 PM CDT up reply actions  

I know..
you were playing, I was just pointing something out.  

I would go to The Cell, but obviously not by myself.  But nobody in my family likes baseball, it is hard to go to Wrigley, and even tougher to go anywhere else let alone The Cell.  

That is why I'm jealous of Mark because Al takes him to a lot of games. My parents don't like baseball, although my mom actually learned that St.Louis' color is red and that they are a bird.  I felt very proud of her. And one of my dad's friends used to watch the Cubs all the time but he died, and my dad learned some baseball from him.  

Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Oct 12, 2005 6:09 PM CDT up reply actions  

The Cell is not dangerous.
The area around The Cell is NOT dangerous, well not anymore or less dangerous than other parts of Chicago.  

I am not going to get into a Wrigley vs. The Cell argument, 'cos I've been to both and I've NEVER been harmed or threatened around either park.  However, if you believe that Wrigleyville has less crime or safer than around The Cell, then I seriously doubt that you've honestly looked at things.  That's simply not true.

Of course, if you're a reader of the Chicago Tribune, then of course you'd be led to believe that you should be in fear around The Cell.  

by DrCrawdad on Oct 12, 2005 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions  

Must be fun...
...to make stuff up.

http://www.chicagocrime.org/map/

No murders in the Wrigley area in the last 100 days.   No so for  Violent crime lower in district 9 (Comiskey) than Belmont 19 (Wrigley).  Total number of crimes is lower, too.

The web is a great resource.  Use it.  So much more accurate than making stuff up.

by Ivychat on Oct 12, 2005 7:35 PM CDT up reply actions  

Lies, damned lies and statistics...
... you can quote anything you want, Chuck, but the fact is, that the neighborhood around the Cell -- at least the part west of the Dan Ryan -- is perfectly safe, no matter what time of day.

At least, I have found it just as safe as walking around Wrigleyville after night games. I have been to many, many night games at the Cell and have never, ever had a problem there.

by Al Yellon on Oct 12, 2005 8:59 PM CDT up reply actions  

Draw a 1 mile circle...
...around each park.  Crime is WAY higher in the Cmosikey neighborhood.  (Note: I love the "at least the part west of the Dan Ryan" part -- go about 30 feet from the park and you are east!)

Now, you want to say that, due to heavy police and security patrol, on event dates, your risks are similar at both parks?  Fine.  I might be willing to accept that.

But don't pull crap out of your ass and say that the crime rates in both areas are the same.

by Ivychat on Oct 12, 2005 9:53 PM CDT up reply actions  

The facts, and nothing but the facts...
A one mile circle is ridiculous, at least as far as The Cell is concerned seeing that nearly all the parking is within 1/4 mile of the park.  And for someone claiming that simply going to a game at The Cell is more dangerous you need to look at where people are likely to venture.  

So, here are the facts of crime 1/4 mile around each park, from 7/8-9/15:

TOTAL CRIMES:
Wrigley 166, The Cell 53

BATTERY:
Wrigley 23, The Cell 12

ROBBERY:
Wrigley 8, The Cell 2

CRIMINAL SEXUAL ASSAULT:
Wrigley 1, The Cell 0

ASSAULT:
Wrigley 8, The Cell 0

WEAPONS VIOLATIONS:
Wrigley 1, The Cell 0

SEX OFFENSE:
Wrigley 3, The Cell 0

"But don't pull crap out of your ass and say that the crime rates in both areas are the same."  

You're right.  It's not even close, the area directly around Wrigley is much more dangerous.

If you'd like to compile the actual crime rates for 1 mile, here's where you can get the stats, rather than out of your ...

http://12.17.79.6/ctznicam/ctznicam.asp

by DrCrawdad on Oct 12, 2005 10:44 PM CDT up reply actions  

Proof again...
that stats are soooo two sided.  That is why people who rely on stats miss much of the argument.  Stats in many instances, like the one about crime here, can be skewed to support your argument.  Funny!!

by mannytrillo on Oct 12, 2005 10:48 PM CDT up reply actions  

forgot one
game theft 10/11/05:

Wrigley 0, cellular 1

by mike bornemann @ Bleed Cubbie Blue on Oct 12, 2005 10:50 PM CDT up reply actions  

Gosh...
I seem to be in the middle of starting long interesting discussions lately.  I think I'm going to stop posting now.

Just kidding Al, I love your site and would never stop posting.  Keep posting everyone just keep it nice.

Cubbie blue always sPaRkLeS in my eyes.

by sparkles721 on Oct 12, 2005 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions  

1 mile
14 day cycle.

29 crimes at Wrigley, 5 batteries.

26 crimes at Comiskey.  4 Batteries, 3 assualts.

So, 5 of 29 at Wrigley involve personal harm.

7 of 26 at Comiskey.

You site or mine, Comiskey has more violent crime.

Maybe next time you won't give me a barrel with fish and a gun.

by Ivychat on Oct 12, 2005 10:59 PM CDT up reply actions  

No, your argument has too many holes...
One mile from the parks, "(Your) site or mine, Comiskey has more violent crime."

How does your pulling stats for areas (one mile away) where almost no one attending a game at The Cell would venture proof that Comiskey has more violent crime?

So, maybe you could directly answer me this, if you venture a 1/4 mile or less from each ballpark, which one has more violent crime?

But even if you answer that, Al, who is a die-hard Cub fan disagrees with your premise.  

If you honestly believe that going to The Cell is dangerous, then continue on in your ignorance.  I'm done with this.

Best wishes to you.

by DrCrawdad on Oct 12, 2005 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions  

Ch Ch Ch Changes
You are making a new argument now.  Your original line was: "The area around The Cell is NOT dangerous, well not anymore or less dangerous than other parts of Chicago."

Key phrase - THE AREA AROUND THE CELL.

Now, you say, "If you honestly believe that going to The Cell is dangerous..."

I never said that going to the Joan was more or less dangerous.  I was disputing your neighborhood point.

As to the 1/4 mile range, you should note that a 1/4 mile perimeter from the Joan is comprised of about 40% parking lots.  This is rather untrue of Wrigley.  The total population within 1/4 mile of Wrigley is higher than at 35th and Shields.  Also, with the higher number of night-oriented businesses, one would expect crime across the street from Wrigely on a potential 365 days per year.  Not so at the Joan.  Who's gonna be in the South Lot in November?

by Ivychat on Oct 14, 2005 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions  

Thank you...
Quoting crime stats for the district where the Cell is located and where Wrigley is located is misleading.  Sure, if you walk a mile or two east on 35th it might be dangerous.  But why would someone going to a Sox game ever do that?  

In my 41 years of attending games at The Cell, I've NEVER been the victim of a crime NOR have I seen one.  Have crimes occurred?  Sure, no doubt.  But when people make these silly arguments about how it's dangerous to go to a game at The Cell they're just usually talking about fear, unreasonable fear IMHO.

I generally park outside a friends home at 37th and Normal.  The area is frankly very, very nice.  

Sometimes if I don't want to bother my friends, I park between 26-29th Street and Princeton, just outside the locals only parking ban.  That's quite a walk.  I've done it with my now 4 year old daughter.  It's actually nice.  People sitting on their porches say hello.  

My daughter and I attended the 9/14/04 Marlins game at The Cell.  We parked at 29th and Princeton.  On the way home we met this gentleman.  I even have photographic evidence.  Note the guy's Cub's hat.

http://tinyurl.com/c7dux

My point is NOT that Wrigley is so dangerous that I wouldn't go.  It's not.  But both ballparks are in metropolitan areas.  If you are reasonably cautious you will probably NEVER encounter trouble attending games at either park.  To suggest that The Cell is dangerous is ludicrous.  

by DrCrawdad on Oct 12, 2005 11:03 PM CDT up reply actions  

Not to nit-pick...
But if you walked two miles east on 35th, you'd be awfully wet.

by bison on Oct 13, 2005 12:16 AM CDT up reply actions  

WAHAHAHAHA!!
Thanks for the laugh of the day!

by Al Yellon on Oct 13, 2005 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions  

man, sparkles....
that's harsh....my mom isn't a big fan but I still have my dad who's a huge cubbie fan I can bounce stuff off of.

I feel for ya.

I'm not going to play because I can, know what I mean? I'll play because I deserve it. -Greg Maddux

by priorpwnz on Oct 12, 2005 6:34 PM CDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bleed Cubbie Blue, the Chicago Cubs blog for the SB Nation, created on February 9, 2005 by Al Yellon

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Jazz Up Your Recs!
Img_0001_small
Value of Various Plate Approaches
284_small
Cubs' Fantasy Camp 2012 as seen by a Player's Wife
P7200073_small
Randy Hundley Fantasy Camp 2012

Recent FanPosts

Small
Arguably OT: Aussie Baseball Finals Go To Decisive Game Three
Small
New Cubs draft strategy player development
Jeffnewwork_small
What I Expect From The Cubs In 2012
Wrigley_scoreboard_small
What To Do With Alfonso Soriano
Small
A quick update from the 2012 concessions orientation
Caray_small
Is there any FA left worth going after?
Marvin_the_martian_small
Thoughts On Gerardo Concepcion: Trust The Scouts
Star_small
What if Hendry were still our GM instead of TheoJed?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Nice article about Ernie Banks
Yankees Hire Jim Hendry
Dale Sveum Meets Early Arrivals At Camp Buss

Recent FanShots

The Rickettsification of Wrigleyville has begun!
Marlins' Cespedes Offer 6 years, under $40M (MLBTR Link)
BCB Fantasy Baseball 2012
Former Cubs Blogger Interviewed on The Score
Cubs vs. Rangers In Las Vegas Tickets On Sale Monday 2/13
Hoyer driving to Spring Training with his dog
Hoyer-Soriano likely a Cub to start 2012, Garza extension talk a possibility
Law's Top 100 prospects
Ranking the Farm Systems
WGN Releases Season Schedule

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

Featured Poll

Poll
How many games will the Cubs win in 2012?

  308 votes | Results

It Is Only...

It Is Only...

Cubs By The Numbers

Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.

Click here to order your copy, available now!

Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges


Managing Editor

Alyellontoppscard_small Al Yellon

Front Page Contributors

Primary_fc_small Josh Timmers

Marvin_the_martian_small Shawn Domagal-Goldman

Other Contributors

Dsc_0139_small David Sameshima

Toonmike_small Mike Bojanowski