How far can you stretch an article about climate change? Below, you’ll find my attempt to stretch it all the way to baseball, which… let’s say the elastic band on this pair of wedgied underwear has just about snapped. As always, this column appeared first at RandBall, your home for the Olympics.

There’s a new study in Nature magazine, as reported by The Economist, that I think has big implications for baseball. Oh, sure, if you actually read the study or the article, you’d conclude it was about climate change, but I think we all know the real truth: it’s about baseball, and specifically about people like Joe Morgan.

The upshot of the study is that increasing scientific literacy does nothing to increase whether people believe, like the overwhelming majority of scientists, that climate change is a real thing. In fact, for people with a “hierarchical, individualistic worldview” – i.e. Ted Nugent – an increase in scientific literacy actually makes people less likely to believe that climate change is real. In the words of writer David Roberts, “Getting smarter, in other words, only makes us better at justifying our own worldviews.” We sports fans can recognize the type. All of us, no matter what sport we follow, have at some point covered our ears with our hands as an otherwise-expert commentator spouts some half-baked opinion that grates on our ears.

I’ll give you an example – and this is not to pick on the commentator, only as an illustration. Bert Blyleven is the color guy for the Twins. He is a Hall of Fame pitcher and threw perhaps the best curveball in baseball history; all available evidence shows that he’s one of the few to master the art of throwing the baseball so that players can’t hit it. He is, by almost any definition, a baseball expert. If you replace “scientific literacy” with “baseball literacy” in the above paragraph, Bert would score far higher on the scale than you or I would. And yet, I heard him the other day say the following, about a player he was trying to compliment: “He’s like a Nick Punto, or a Denny Hocking-type player.”

Now, I could have launched into a whirlwind of statistics, pointing out that both Punto and Hocking were equally likely to get hits if they held the bat upside down, such was their lack of offensive talent. But literacy here isn’t the problem; worldview is the problem, and as the study shows, education – which in this case would take the form of long, number-filled screeds – won’t actually change anything. It’s a change in worldview that would be required. And honestly, I don’t think there’s any changing that, unless you can invent a time machine and go back in time to replace batting average, RBI, pitcher wins, and other such old-fashioned baseball statistics with newer, more-useful stats.

On with the links:

*The Vikes Geek is, to put it mildly, unhappy about the public obligations as part of the Vikings stadium deal.

*Eric Nusbaum educates us all on Dodgers catcher A.J. Ellis, who is the greatest folk hero you’ve never heard of.

*In Florida baseball news, Charlie Pierce checks in with the Rays, the most fun team in baseball, while Aaron Gordon reviews the Marlins’ new stadium.

*Last Sunday was the Indy 500, the race formerly known as The Crown Jewel Of American Racing. (Proof it’s not: for the eighth time in nine years, it lost to the evening’s Coca-Cola 600 in the ratings.) Despite this, Mark Titus was at his usual place in the Turn 3 infield, and he’s fully of the opinion that it’s still the best party in America.

*Brian Phillips thinks that the US Men’s soccer team is turning a corner, for real this time, not like the 4,378 corners that the team has turned over the past ten years or so.

*And finally: Here’s this week’s entry in the “Oh ESPN, you used to be cool, what happened?” file.

Monday at Twinkie Town, I compiled a list of some do’s and don’ts for fans of a terrible baseball team – in this case, the Twins.

Keep this list handy – as Grantland points out, this list could be useful for quite a number of years.

I’m taking on that thing that’s on everybody’s mind this week – financial results in English soccer! (This seems about par for the course for me.) As always, these links appeared first at RandBall, your home for great baseball road trips.

This week, The Guardian published a story about the profits of soccer teams in England’s Premier League. The talking point was that despite being in the world’s most popular sports league, eleven of the 20 teams lost money in 2010-11, the most recent year for financial results. The absolutely shocking thing was that two teams lost nearly unreal amounts of money; Chelsea lost $106 million, but this paled in comparison to Manchester City, which lost a staggering $308 million.

The two clubs are able to do this because of filthy-rich owners. Chelsea is owned by Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, while Manchester City is owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan of Abu Dhabi’s ruling family, and both owners have enough oil dollars to regularly use hundred-dollar bills as Kleenex without feeling any financial pinch. Not surprisingly, the clubs’ new-found ability to spend any amount of money has been successful for both; Manchester City just won its first title since 1968, and Chelsea won its first European championship one week later.

Obviously, this financial disparity is patently unfair. Imagine if the New York Yankees were able to spend $500 million on player salaries, and you’d have some idea of the unbalanced playing field we’re talking about here. For all of the complaining that we baseball fans do about revenue disparity – and I’ve done plenty – we should thank our lucky stars that baseball doesn’t have oil gazillionaires owing teams. But at the same time, it’s worth mentioning that for all of the unfairness, this is exactly how most fans want their team’s owners to act.

Every off-season, the Twins have a rough idea of how much they want to spend on payroll. And every offseason, this number gets out, and the team is roundly excoriated for not having a larger payroll. Many fans seem to feel that the Pohlad family should lose money every year, out of some implied and possibly stadium-related social contract. Some will tell you that they wonder why $10 million more isn’t plausible; some seem angry that the Twins didn’t sign both Albert Pujols and Prince Fielder this year, no matter how much this might cost. Many of these fans might also tell you that they hate those rich Yankees and Red Sox, but it’s clear that if the Twins somehow generated the financial wherewithal to have a $250 million payroll, those people wouldn’t feel guilty at all.

Ultimately, I’d rather be a fan of a non-oil-soaked soccer team. I’d think I’d feel impossibly guilty celebrating the victories of a team with unlimited finances, just like I think I’d feel guilty if I was a Red Sox or Yankees fan in baseball and my team had the resources to spend double what most other teams could spend. But I know both Manchester City fans and Chelsea fans, and as far as I can tell, not one of them feels this way. Maybe the truth of fandom is this: we just want our teams to win, and we don’t particularly care how that’s accomplished.

On with the links:

*Steve Adams of Twinkie Town looks back at two Twins trades that were frustrating at the time, including the Scott Diamond trade that everyone hated.

*Speaking of soccer finances, Brian Quarstad at Inside MN Soccer interviewed Minnesota Stars GM Djorn Buchholz after the latter had to make the tough decision to sell the rights to a home game to an MLS team.

*Joe Posnanski has a daughter who doesn’t like sports, really, but loves NASCAR, and Joe is as confused as everyone else.

*I don’t care at all about Justin Bieber. But I like Drew Magary, so when he writes a profile of Bieber, I’m fascinated all the same.

*And finally: the joy of sports, captured in one photo. (That’s Ireland rugby captain Brian O’Driscoll visiting a fan in the hospital last year with the Heineken Cup, and I’m not ashamed to say this photo always makes me teary-eyed.) And if that’s not enough, here’s a portrait of Anthony Davis made entirely out of Kix and Reese’s Puffs.

Drew Butera, he of the weak bat, pitched in a major-league baseball game. This is surprising.

He threw a fastball in the low 90s and changed speeds effectively, striking out former Twin Carlos Gomez and pitching a scoreless inning in the process. This is even more surprising.

I took the time to write a screenplay in which Butera’s father Sal – like his son, a major league catcher – wouldn’t allow young Drew to pitch because “Buteras are catchers, not pitchers.” This is a dumb idea, and so is not surprising, because it was Monday at Twinkie Town and dumb ideas come to the forefront at these times.

If you need more, you’re also welcome to read my preview of the upcoming Twins week, in which I tell you what to watch out for this week. Because, you know, I’m a noted Twins expert*. (*Warning: not true.)

The Norwegian people are free from those Swedish jerks! In celebration, let’s learn something about Norway:

Well, that was… edifying.

This week at Twinkie Town, I invented the top Google searches for a bunch of Twins players. This is as off-topic as it sounds.

If you’re looking for on-topic, I also looked at the week ahead for the Twins, in a weekly post that’s turning out to be the most critical thing I write. In my defense, it’s hard not to be fatalistic right now.

There’s a book review in this edition of the weekend links. How literary. As always, this column appeared first at RandBall, your home for the genesis of weird dreams.

I’ve just finished reading “Out of My League,” the new book from relief pitcher and author Dirk Hayhurst, and I have to tell you: I now feel really bad for Danny Valencia.

Hayhurst’s first book, “The Bullpen Gospels,” was the story of his trips up and down the minor-league ladder. It was entertaining, and it made the nonfiction bestseller list from the New York Times, but it was kind of a mixed bag – more a collection of anecdotes than a book. “Out of My League,” on the other hand, almost reads like a novel, and is the better book of the two for it. However, the chapters in which he goes to the big leagues for the first time – and nearly loses it completely – are a harrowing read. After spending five years kicking around the minors and keeping baseball in perspective, barely a month in the majors is all it takes to nearly drive Hayhurst around the bend.

I never really realized how much of a difference there is between Triple-A and the big leagues – in how players are treated, how they treat each other, and so forth. To paraphrase a player in the book, once you’re in the majors, you realize it’s the only level where you can have an impact – everything else is just glorified practices. I’d always assumed that AAA ball, while a major step down, was at least something comparable – that someone in Triple-A had an accomplishment to be proud of. But judging by the attitudes of the players in the book, Triple-A is to the majors as the front steps of your house are to Everest. No comparison. None.

And so now I’m left feeling terrible for Valencia. He hasn’t played in the minor leagues for almost two years. He’d been a mainstay for the Twins at third base for virtually that entire time. He must have felt like he’d made it. He must have felt like he belonged, like he was no longer a serf in baseball’s feudal system. And now he’s got to go back down and start all over. He’s got to look across the great chasm that separates the majors and the minors, and try to cross one more time, knowing all the while that the guys on the other side already kicked him out once. What a cruel, cruel game.

On the other hand: he did have the OPS of a typical National League pitcher. On with the links:

*At the Classical, Mark Dent looks at the between-the-legs shot in tennis, which is apparently known as “the tweener” – and why Andy Murray is ruining it.

*Sports Media Watch looks at the TV ratings and declares, for the first time since Sports Illustrated famously devoted its cover to the subject, that once again the NHL is hot and the NBA is not.

*This may be 16 years old, but is still worth it: Nationally-renowned humor columnist Dave Barry writing about baseball, his own career, and hating the Yankees.

*Spencer Hall went rallying, by which I mean “went driving through the forest at insane speeds on a dirt road.”

*Charlie Pierce, writing over at Grantland, looks at the beginning of the end of homophobia in sports, through the lens of Nebraska assistant football coach Ron Brown’s recent decision to speak out against an anti-gay-discrimination law in Omaha.

*Parker Hageman looks at the hitting charts, and thinks that Joe Mauer might not be slumping – he might be hurt.

*And finally: though this has nothing to do with sports, I really enjoyed Shawn Fury writing about bodegas in New York City.

(SCENE: An anonymous Chipotle restaurant in the Twin Cities. The staff busies themselves with the same tasks that they’re always doing at Chipotle – grilling four thousand pounds of meat, preparing enormous vats full of rice, and that sort of thing. Up to the counter step Minnesota House of Representatives Speaker Rep. Kurt Zellers, R-Maple Grove, and House Majority Leader Rep. Matt Dean, R-Dellwood.)

CHIPOTLE EMPLOYEE: What can I get for you?

KURT ZELLERS: Well, I’ll tell you, I’m just not a fan of burritos.

EMPLOYEE: Uh, I’m sorry? Perhaps you would like tacos, or one of our bowls?

ZELLERS: No, you’re not getting this. I want a burrito, but I am not a fan of burritos.

EMPLOYEE: What?

ZELLERS: I don’t know how I can make this clearer: I do not want you to make me a chicken burrito. Black beans. Thank you.

EMPLOYEE: Uh… so you want a chicken burrito?

ZELLERS: NO! Jeez, do I have to spell everything out for you? I want you to make me exactly what I don’t want. Is that clear?

EMPLOYEE: Frankly, no.

MATT DEAN: Ma’am, let me explain. The Speaker wants a burrito for lunch, but the Governor also likes burritos. And so we can’t have it getting around that the Speaker wants a burrito too.

EMPLOYEE: Why not? That makes no sense. Can’t you both like burritos?

DEAN (agitated): Listen, we didn’t come to St. Paul to eat the same lunch the Governor eats!

ZELLERS: Actually, Matt, you used to run a restaurant, right? What do you think I should have for lunch?

DEAN: I think you should get a cheeseburger. Nothing better than a cheeseburger for lunch.

EMPLOYEE: We don’t sell cheeseburgers. We sell burritos.

ZELLERS: HOW DARE YOU. MATT DEAN USED TO DO THIS FOR A LIVING. I DEMAND THAT YOU BEGIN SELLING CHEESEBURGERS IMMEDIATELY. I AM INTRODUCING A BILL TO REQUIRE ALL BURRITO RESTAURANTS TO SELL CHEESEBURGERS.

EMPLOYEE: You want a cheeseburger from a burrito restaurant?

ZELLERS: Matt Dead used to be a restauranteur, madam. That means that he’s an expert in all foodstuff production of any kind, and MATT DEAN SAYS YOU NEED TO SELL ME A CHEESEBURGER.

DEAN: Unless the Governor likes cheeseburgers. Then you can’t sell them ever.

EMPLOYEE: I’m going to have to ask you guys to leave.

ZELLERS: Yeah, we hear that a lot nowadays.

*To be totally clear, I’m not criticizing people who are anti-stadium; just Kurt Zellers, for waffling and saying things like “I can’t support the bill” but “I hope it passes,” and then trying to claim later that he didn’t mean the things he said. Also, I should note that I first published this in the FanPosts section of the Daily Norseman.
*

Everyone likes to have an original opinion – to see something that others don’t see, or be able to explain it in ways they can’t. With this in mind, I’ve come up with a few Twins opinions – for your own personal use, if you wish – that absolutely nobody, I mean nobody, is going to be using.

Also, if you want to know what the week has in store for the Twins, I’ve got that covered too.

This week, I tell the story of my trip to Vegas, which I think bored people. They’re just lucky I didn’t put in a more complete explanation of how I came to win a bet on NASCAR, a sport I know virtually nothing about. As always, these links appeared first at RandBall, your home for Minnesota’s abysmally depressing major sports.

When I stepped off the plane in Las Vegas, I heard other people saying, “Vegas, Baby, Vegas!” They had been programmed to say this by movies and television, where Las Vegas is portrayed as the world center of excitement and debauchery of all stripes, as a place where people come to ride dinosaurs while discharging rifles and drinking from open chalices of molten lava. Or whatever. I can’t say that I had a clear picture in my head of what Vegas would be like, a confusion that was doubled by the fact that the Las Vegas airport is completely anonymous, like the Denver airport with a few rows of slot machines.

There are things that are allowed in Las Vegas that are not allowed anywhere else, like smoking lavishly indoors, or carrying a drink wherever you go. (In this way, it’s a little like being at a convention of alcoholics in about 1989.) Vegas also has sports betting, something that is banned across the United States, and is the worldwide leader in “enormous hotels that look like other places, as long as you have a very bad imagination about what other places look like.” But other than those slight differences, it looks surpassingly like Tucson – same desert climate, same acres of abandoned lots and disused asphalt, same general gripping fear of being stabbed no matter where you go.

The truth is that Vegas – like everywhere else – is defined by how you act while you’re there, not by the place itself. And it’s true that more than most cities, it’s designed for you to act like an idiot; it may be the best place in the world to get drunk and lose a lot of money, with the possible exception of western Minnesota farm auctions in the summertime, and then you at least usually have an inoperable decades-old combine or two to show for your big day out. It’s exciting because people are conditioned to do exciting things while they’re there, not because the town demands that you re-enact things from “The Hangover.”

So let me tell you about my first-ever trip to Vegas. I won three dollars fifty-five cents from a Star Wars slot machine that I couldn’t begin to understand; I saw one of my friends win over two thousand dollars at blackjack; I won thirty-five dollars betting on a NASCAR race; and I got a big cut on my shin from diving into a moving limousine at an In-N-Out Burger. Some of these things I could have done in Minneapolis, and some of them I couldn’t. But I probably wouldn’t have done any of them here, and I suppose that this is the magic that Las Vegas provides.

On with the links:

*I really enjoyed Matt Kallman’s story of his grandfather’s career in the early days of pro basketball, which is a great look into how things were back in the old days.

*Spencer Hall may be the only writer in the world that could imagine Ryan Leaf and Peyton Manning in the year 2028 and come up with this: the latter fighting with an A/V system and the former living in the woods and named The Pancake Man.

*Military terms are used far too often in football, but SB Nation’s Matt Ufford – a former Marine – knows that in Junior Seau’s case, at least one comparison may be an apt one.

*I really enjoyed Amy K. Nelson’s featurette on former Royals star, current Royals coach, and convicted drug abuser Willie Mays Aikens. It’s over ten minutes long – that’s 37 hours, translated into internet terms – but I recommend it anyway.

*And finally: Bulls fans have have figured out exactly how to feel.