Rare buzz

[Theoldmole]

I know it's a waste of breath to complain about the Times coverage, but I've got plenty of breath, so...

Today's Times online. First three baseball stories, Yankee stories. An ex-Yankee pitcher is trying to make a comeback. A current Yankee pitcher has them dreaming of big things, even though last year he was shit. C. C. Sabathia is trying to make a comeback, even though last year he was shit.

And farther down the page, if you scroll far enough, the fourth story:

Matt Harvey�s Return Brings Rare Buzz to Mets Camp

As opposed to the hot Yankee buzz about pitchers who were shit but now might not be.

[Theoldmole]

And while I'm wasting breath, from the article --

Harvey is a headliner, a star, and that is why they are, in part, finally relevant again.


Does that mean that Harvey's star quality is part of the reason they're finally relevant again, or that Harvey's star quality makes them partly relevant again?

[Lefty Specialist]

They're not going to be relevant and get more space in the Times until they're better than the Yankees. This might be the year that happens, more because the Yankees are so screwed up than it is because the Mets are so good....

[Edgy MD]

They're relevant to somebody. Me, certainly.

Better than the Yankees? Feh. They're competing only against themselves, to gain the unworthy attention of the foolish and the modish.

[ashie62]

They are competing against the NL.

[Edgy MD]

Well, I'm speaking to the pursuit of this strange standard of "relevance."