I said this would be coming: a morning when I don’t do a full ATH recap. Today it’s not because I have some other commitment. It’s just that Jake Arrieta‘s no-hitter is clearly the story of last night and my movie quotes and bad jokes aren’t really gonna add too much. Bill covered the heck out it, by the way. Go check his Arrieta stuff:
The Cubs are gonna be scary this year. I mean, Rizzo and Bryant aren’t even really raking yet and they will. Just imagine what they’re gonna do if the pitching keeps rolling like it has been.
Anyway, here are the rest of the scores:
Mariners 10, Indians 7
Dodgers 2, Braves 1
Marlins 5, Nationals 1
Rays 12, Red Sox 8
Twins 8, Brewers 1
Angels 3, White Sox 2
Diamondbacks 6, Giants 2
Orioles 3, Blue Jays 2
Athletics 7, Yankees 3
Cubs 16, Reds 0
Royals 4, Tigers 0
Rangers 7, Astros 4
Pirates 11, Padres 1
Law school text books are basically just casebooks. Books filled with influential appellate court legal opinions about any given area of the law. Contracts, torts, criminal procedure and the like.
The cases themselves aren’t necessarily thematically similar, however. In contracts you might have a case about hairy palms in one part of the book, one about Hedy Lamar’s nose in another and one about what is or is not a chicken in yet another. The facts of the cases are all over the place. The idea is to teach basic concepts within each area of the law.
But there are some thematically coherent books for more specialized law classes. And one that may be of interest to some of you just came out. It’s a casebook in which all of the cases are baseball-related. Cases like Fleer Corp. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc., Selig v. United States, and State of Illinois v. Cicotte. There are A-Rod and George W. Bush and Hank Aaron-related cases too.
The idea is for law school courses aimed solely at baseball law. One wonders what the purpose of such courses may be — take labor law or media law or something if you want get into sports law — but law schools have never been short of ideas about how to make a buck.
Nor are the authors of this casebook, it seems. $120 a pop for this bad boy. Which reminds me how much I hated going to the law school bookstore back in the day. Still, if my bosses are reading this and they’d like to get me a gift. Well: hint hint.
While I reference music I like here once in a while, I don’t go on and on about how certain artists are uniquely important to me or influential to me. Friends of mine who are themselves artists or musicians or for whom certain music plays a significant role in their lives understandably feel differently in that regard, but for the most part I’m just a music fan. I’m the sort of person whose life has only been truly influenced by musicians to a limited degree, even if I’ve enjoyed their work and listen to a wide variety of stuff.
Prince pushes the limits of that stance, however. Prince, his music, his image and his videos hit big at a perfect time in my life and it’s hard to overstate how much of a gateway drug he was for white suburban kids whose parents didn’t like cool stuff. To the extent a lot of dorks my age ever got into funk or soul or other black music in the early 80s, it was more likely that it came via Prince first. He snuck onto MTV with some radio-friendly rock hits and then fans could go backward in his catalog to some more funky things and then go along with him into the future for the more adventurous things he’d eventually do. Oh, and there was a LOT of sex which came with that whole package. Between him and Madonna, a whole generation of early MTV watchers were catapulted into late adolescence with a very sexy quickness.
I don’t care a lick if it Prince had nothing to do with baseball. His death today is one of the few times an artist’s death has truly knocked the wind out of me and made me think hard and deep about how important he was to me. Cobain. Bowie. Prince. So far that may be it.
But definitely Prince. Prince ruled.
If you need a baseball excuse, fine: