In a sense — and as much as I have loved them since childhood — I don’t know why they bother with these print editions anymore. You know a good portion of the information will change by the end of spring training, if not sooner, rendering some of the speculation and predictions useless. For example, if the Cardinals decide to trade Albert Pujols to the Yankees for CC Sabathia (extreme example, I know), wouldn’t that change not just the individual team’s dynamics, but the divisions and leagues as well?
Having said that, I humbly offer an assessment of USA Today‘s ($7.99) first attempt (I believe) at a glossy baseball annual (the publication still produces Sports Weekly).
* * *
Features
Since every publication basically rehashes the same info in its team analyses, it’s the features that can set it apart from the competition.
There are eight regional covers, but the stories are the same. The lead article considers the ten top questions for 2011, which is already out-of-date. It refers to Derek Jeter’s contract squabbles, but not the Albert Pujols situation (of course).
There’s also a look at the dark horses of 2011; five rookies to watch; over- and underrated players; the pitiful Pittsburgh Pirates; and whether Pujols is, in fact, the best first baseman of all time.
A separate section, “Taking Sides,” considers “some of the pressing issues in the game in 2011” as interpreted by various baseball writers. Topics include whether the Giants can repeat; whether Jeter can recapture past glory; the Phillies’ fortunes; Carlos Gonzalez (a pair of writers weighing in on his fantasy value); the continuation of the Cubs’ curse; and the future of Aroldis Chapman (by the two writers who chatted about Gonzalez).
Preceding the team profile section are the predictions of six UT writers for team finishes and award winners.
Fantasy baseball
And, of course, there’s in mandatory inclusion of fantasy baseball. (This is another sad point for me. When I picked this one up at my local Barnes and Noble today, there were about 10 magazines exclusively about FB and just three general baseball annuals. As you know, I don’t play FB, but is there really a need for so many? Just sayin’…)
Team Profiles
All baseball annuals offer similar components in their team sections: rosters, prospects, statistics, scouting reports, etc. The difference is in the presentation.
A typical two-page team profile in USA Today 2011 includes a schematic of the stadium, a capsule profile of the manager; a look at defense (no offense or pitching); “prospects to watch”; changes to the playing personnel; a roster analysis by position; 5-year win trends; 2010 total team batting, pitching, and fielding stats; spring training site info; a “2010 rewind” (team record and finish); a “numbers game” (statistical factoid); Bogdog.net World Series odds; and a prediction for the team’s record and finish. One new item of note is a pick of three “key series” for each team.
The analyses also include the following categories, not all of which appear for each club:
- breakout player
- money matters
- clubhouse leader
- hot seat
- position battle
The team section is followed by individual pitching and hitting stats by team; schedules; and MLB power rankings.
But will someone tell me: if you absolutely have to include Alyssa Milano modeling in an ad for the USA Today sports shop, can’t you at least have her in baseball attire, rather than the football gear? How hard would it have been to photoshop a baseball team logo or name instead of the Saints?
Consensus
Overall, the presentation is graphically attractive, not too busy, with photos and is quite readable. I just wish they had found away to include those cute infographic snapshots for which USA Today has become famous.
is available on Amazon.com,
{ 2 comments }
I agree with you Ron, there’s so much better stuff on line and free.
I consume that but have to admit I am also a sucker when the glossies come out. I bought Athlon’s but it could have been any of them. It’s something baseball, I like to look at it in the reading room, ha, ha. Some of the articles are decent.
Another factor is it’s just fun. Rob Neyer posted about this, saying yea the projections are early, but fans love to talk about it anyway. The sabermetricians love laughing at the non-sab analysis, but then again, who picked the Giants last year??
I have that one, too, as well as The Sporting News annual and will pick the Sports Illustrated and ESPN baseball preview issues (which will be much more up-do-date when they come out). I probably won’t buy Lindy’s. MLB used to publish its own version, but I haven’t seen it in a couple of years.
Comments on this entry are closed.