BTI Hates Them Some Mark Cuban

Bleed Tribbie Ink hates them some Mark Cuban. This is fairly well-documented, but recent traffic there has pushed me too far. The general level of discourse hit yet another low this past Saturday: It seems like a great pick and in hindsight will probably look better than Mark Cuban The difference is Mark Cuban isn’t really a Cubs fan and I don’t think has the passion that Rickett’s displays to win a World Series here in Chicago. I think he’ll definitely open up his wallet to help fund for payroll, renovations, etc. Erm, well if we are going to call Milton Bradley nicknames, mine is Fischer Price: yes, you heard it here first.. by Chanman25 on Jan 24, 2009 8:16 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs This is from the comments to the aptly named “The Speculation On The Tom Ricketts Era Begins [sic].” http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2009/1/24/735366/the-speculation-on-the-tom?login=1232928214 In the body of the article, Herr Al of course makes the most banal, predictable statement imaginable: “Sounds perfect to me. We are about to embark on a new Cubs era, where ‘one of us’ is in charge.” Some Random Thoughts Directed at the Above Comment: 1. “I think he’ll definitely open up his wallet to help fund for payroll, renovations, etc.” Ricketts has never owned a sports franchise, much less a cornerstone franchise of a major professional league. You have no flipping idea what he is going to do, unless you somehow believe that a certain baloney-gobbling cretin possesses the uncanny ability to read the hearts of men. 2. “The difference is Mark Cuban isn’t really a Cubs fan and I don’t think has the passion that Rickett’s displays to win a World Series here in Chicago.” Wow. Where do I start? Do these morons actually think that Mark Cuban grew up with a burning desire to purchase the Dallas Mavericks? Since he was born in 1958 and the team wasn’t formed until 1980, that would be an awfully neat trick. Before Cuban, only the existence of the Clippers prevented the Mavericks from being the laughingstock of the NBA. On the rare occasions they drafted a decent player, he would typically ruin his career by snorting more coke than Al Pacino in Scarface. Dallas was consistently at the bottom in attendance, cable marketing, and merchandising. Only Charlotte prevented the Mavericks from having the ugliest uniforms in the history of the NBA, which didn’t help matters. Before Cuban the Mavericks had a 40% winning percentage and a playoff record of 21-32 (also 40%). In the eight seasons that Cuban has owned the Mavericks, their winning percentage has climbed to approximately 70%, and the Mavericks have made the playoffs every year. This led to the first Finals appearance for the franchise in 2006, which eneded in a controversial loss to the Miami Heat in Game 6. (Not to mention controversial losses in Games 3-5.) More importantly, Cuban has proven that he is willing to sink his own money back into a team. The NBA has a “soft” salary cap and luxury tax, meaning a team can exceed the cap if it is willing to invoke a penalty (millions of dollars in luxury tax). Cuban has consistently sacrificed the bottom line in favor of competitiveness. For example, the Mavericks were liable for $19,613,295.00 in luxury tax for 2007-2008. Again, Ricketts has shown blazing passion up until this point. I believe he is even on record saying he wants to win with the Cubs. Basically, Ricketts is saying what every prospective team owner has said since the days of Spartacus. Hell, even McPhail never admitted to being an economic caretaker first and foremost. Some Random Thoughts Directed at the Article Itself: 1. “Sounds perfect to me. We are about to embark on a new Cubs era, where ‘one of us’ is in charge.” You mean a self-satisfied schmuck who believes that season tickets in the bleachers equals moral superiority? Self-awareness is not a strength, or even a core competency, for Mr. Yellon. Again, this is amply documented at BCB and elsewhere. However, it amazes me that NOTHING seems to be a real strength for this chronic nincompoop. Certainly, literature, art, or popular culture aren’t real strengths, either. Why do I say this? It is generally a good idea not to use the phrase “one of us.” See Tod Browning’s Freaks and The Ramones’ “Pinhead.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabba_Gabba_Hey 2. “The Speculation On The Tom Ricketts Era Begins [sic].” Count the grammatical and capitalization errors in this simple, eight word title. I came up with three clear errors and two questionable choices of style. Am I being a DB to play the grammar police role? Probably, but that’s ridiculous from a supposedly mainstream site. Cheers, and good night!