6 baseball books for mid-season reading

These new releases should provide a good selection for summer reading.

4. ‘The 50 Greatest Players in Boston Red Sox History,’ by Robert W. Cohen

Ranking the all-time greatest players on any pro sports team is a tricky, if a fun-to-debate, exercise. But it is an especially difficult task when the team’s history is as long and storied as that of the Boston Red Sox. Seeing which 50 players baseball historian Robert W. Cohen places among the franchise’s top 50, and in which order, makes for a page-turner and argument starter. It probably shouldn’t surprise anyone that Ted Williams tops Boston’s chart, followed by Carl Yastrzemski, Pedro Martinez, Roger Clemens, Cy Young, Wade Boggs, Jim Rice, Jimmie Foxx, Tris Speaker, and Bobby Doerr. In case you’re wondering about World Series hero David Ortiz, a desgnated hitter, he ranks 11th. Regardless of the ranking order, however, there are extensive career reviews of the entire top 50, including 50th-ranked Jim Lonborg, a pitching star on the 1967 Impossible Dream Team.

Here’s an excerpt from The 50 Greatest Players in Red Sox History:

“2 - Carl Yastrzemski: Following a legend is never easy. That is something Carl Yastrzemski discovered after he inherited the Boston Red Sox left field job from Ted Williams at the start of the 1961 season. Yastrzemski played well for the Red Sox his first six years in the American League, winning a batting title and being named to three All-Star teams. Nevertheless, his inability to perform at the same lofty level that Williams reached during his remarkable career often left Yastrzemski feeling frustrated, dejected, and reviled. Frequently booed by the Fenway faithful, the young outfielder led a rather turbulent existence his first few years in Boston, failing to gain full acceptance by Red Sox fans until 1967, when he captured the American League Triple Crown and put together one of the finest all-around seasons in league history. From that point on, Yaz reached a level of popularity in Boston that few other athletes have ever approached.”

4 of 6

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.