Guy A: 4 1/3 IP, 3 R, 2 ER, 1 BB, 5 K, 1 HR
ESPN.com headline - (Guy A) goes 4-plus innings to help (Guy A's team) dump (perennial basementeer).
Guy B: 5.0 IP, 3 ER, 4 BB, 2 K, 1 HR
ESPN.com headline - (Guy B) struggles but emerges with (not to be disclosed at this time) win of season.
Guy A = Joba Chamberlain
Guy B = Barry Zito
The worst part of it all is that the "WWL" actually had "Joba" in the headline, rather than "Chamberlain." Fuck, I get it. He's a hot semi-prospect pitching in New York, and it's hard to expect the MSM to really choose a Zito win over a Chamberlain no-decision, but. come. on. The giant Yankee cock-fondle is absurd. The headline on ESPN.com's front page (!) reads, "Joba posts solid start as Yanks down K.C." There are so many things wrong about the dichotomy regarding coverage. In how many cases is a pitcher who doesn't pitch long enough to qualify for a win and leaves the game with his team trailing considered helping the team? In how many cases is an effort that did not even reach quality start status considered solid? I guess when he looked like a runny turd his last time out. Seriously, the headline reads, "Joba goes 4-plus innings to help Yankees dump Royals." Had he gone 4-plus in relief, I might buy the whole thing. Hey, did you know Joba plays for the Yankees? Did you know he wears a crown of thorns? Did you know Jim Caviezel played him in a movie once?
You can sure as shit bet had Zito lost there'd have been some snarking bullshit about getting to 10 losses quicker than Ol' Lefty "Always Loses" McIntyre back in 1894. I know that there is a marked difference in each pitcher's game and what they mean to their teams. Zito is a weight. Chamberlain is the future. He certainly had a pitch count and maybe could have gone 17 innings while wearing a hula-hoop. It was a much better start than his last outing. But Jesus, can't we expect at least some effort to pretend sports coverage to the left of the Mississippi isn't the equivalent of the Florida and Michigan delegates at the DNC?