Sports have too much fucking money, vol. 1,369: feat. the New York Mets

I’m not going to pretend like I pay a tremendous amount of attention to baseball news these days, but I know enough of what’s going on to know that the Mets are dumping a tremendous amount of money to try and become a championship contender.  I knew they already had Max Scherzer, and that they were paying him an inordinate amount of money for a guy that effectively plays once every five days, so it was somewhat head-scratching when I heard that the Mets went out and “won” the Justin Verlander sweepstakes, signing him to a 2-year, $86-million dollar contract, I’m thinking damn, the Mets are really locking up $86 mil a year on just two pitchers?  I’m pretty sure the Oakland A’s entire payroll next year isn’t $86 mil.*

*at the time I’m writing this, 11 teams don’t have a payroll that cracks $86 mil including of course, the Oakland A’s

Of course, on paper this has all the pundits thinking the Mets are now the odds-on favorite to win it all, seeing as how they have two of the game’s best pitchers, even if they’re going to be paying them an entire team’s payroll on top of the other 38 guys on the roster they’ll have to pay, including the $54 million to two other players in Francisco Lindor and the freshly re-signed Brandon Nimmo, so if we’re keeping count already, the Mets are paying $140 mil to just four guys for 2023 alone.

[Repeat the title of this post with me here]

They won 101 games in 2022 without Justin Verlander, and if not for an epic, late-season collapse against the Braves, should have won the division, but that still didn’t stop them from choking in the first round against the Padres.  Regardless, the addition of a talent like Justin Verlander theoretically should make a good team like the Mets even better in 2023.

Who knows, maybe the 2023 Mets, in spite of the criticism of their historic $300M+ protected opening day payroll will win 102 games, win the division and avoid having to play in the wild card round and actually have a successful playoff run?

But who are we kidding, this is the New York Mets we’re talking about, they of the LOLMets meme of history.  They could have Max Scherzer, Justin Verlander, Clayton Kershaw, Nolan Ryan and Sandy Koufax as their starting five, and they’d still probably find a way to fuck things up and fail, as they always do.  They could spend $500 million dollars and have 4+ WAR players in every position in their lineup, but they’ll still find a way to shit the bed in the playoffs and get bounced by the Cardinals or Padres or Phillies.

And the biggest thing is that teaming Verlander and Scherzer up is no guarantee, because as many casual baseball fans probably might not be aware of, this has already happened before, as both of them were on the Detroit Tigers together between 2010 and 2014.  Five years of Verlander and Scherzer in the same rotation, and zero World Series rings to show for it.  They even had help from guys like David Price and a resurgent Anibal Sanchez in some of those years.  Sure, they made the playoffs four times, but the one time they made it to the World Series together in 2012, they got swept by the vastly less-talented Giants, getting victimized by guys like Pablo Sandoval and Marco Scutaro.

What I think is funny is how just about everyone the Tigers once had all achieved success outside of Detroit.  Max Scherzer got his ring with the Nationals in 2018, Justin Verlander won twice with the Astros in 2017 and this past year, and even David Price got a ring in Boston and Anibal Sanchez was also lights out for that 2018 Nationals playoff team.

So the point is, if a young and spry Scherzer and Verlander couldn’t get the job done ten years ago, Father Time is kind of betting against 40-year old versions of Scherzer and Verlander doing it, especially when they’ll be trying on a team as accursed as the New York Mets.

If me writing about it is a temptation of fate and I end up being completely wrong, hey I’ll be glad to revisit this if I notice and care in the future and admit being wrong, no shame in that.  But if I’m a betting man, I’m siding with Father Time, and going to take the bet against the Mets.  I know you have to spend money to make money, but, and I hate to sound all corporate Braves-ey, but allocating as much money that the Mets are to just two and four players just doesn’t sound what’s best for business.

Re: Lensa, AI artwork and theft

In most cases, I don’t have much idea of what’s going on in the world other than what I see people talking about on social media.  I simply don’t go out of my way like I used to, to seek out information and the happenings in the world as I occasionally did in the life before children.  However, over the last few days, the topic of some AI art generator, Lensa, has been noticeably a hot topic as far as my digital eyes can see.

Mostly because it’s been determined that Lensa’s art database in which it pulls its art generation from has been built up from billions and billions of images of photos and artwork from the internet, mostly with no sense of consent or permission, which ultimately concludes with the notion that they are using a fuckload of stolen artwork to feed the database.

In this debate, I’ve noticed that there are two very prevalent sides, both of which like in so many cases, have their feet firmly implanted in the mud and neither seemingly willing to yield a single digital e-inch on their opinions.  There’s the side of the creators, the people who have been creating, artwork, or rather content, whose creations have been absorbed and usurped into Lensa’s database without any sort of authorization, and feeding a machine that is spitting out AI-generated results at the beck and call for its increasing base of users.  This is the side of the equation that is unhappy, angry and calling for the cancellation of a service that has stolen the work and creations of countless artists, for use in a, for now, trendy art generator.

On the other side are, what I like to call, are the consumers.  These are the people who have been using Lensa to entertain themselves by creating all sorts of modified images of themselves or whomever they want to process through the Lensa AI.  All of these people are pretty much completely okay with Lensa and where they get their content from, and wish for people to leave Lensa alone and let them have their fun photo generator, regardless of negative perception of what their database is being fed from.

From what I’ve been witnessing, creators are furious because in most cases, many of them can cite examples of their work having already been fed into the Lensa database.  Understandably, they are very unhappy with some AI hoovering up the things they’ve created, and really wish that people, including their friends who fall into the other side to stop using Lensa, and try to educate them to why they shouldn’t.

However, the consumers, are in no rush to stop being Lensa, because regardless of education and regardless of how their artist friends may feel about it, they’re in no rush to stop using it.  It’s giving them entertainment, it’s giving them amusement, but most importantly, it’s giving them content in the form of digitally altered images of themselves in fun and kooky ways, in a variety of art styles generated by AI.  I’ve noticed that these people aren’t the types to just quietly use Lensa and hope nobody judges them for it, but instead are usually the ones who defend it, tell their artist friends to let it go and chill, and we all know how well that goes with people, especially on the internet.

If it wasn’t obvious, I’m of course on the side of the artists.  Out of curiosity, I floated some example images of photos of mine that I’ve known are pretty well seen, and sure enough, they’re populating in the Lensa, which means that I’m also “a victim” of AI theft.  I don’t want to delve deeper, because I know of the thousands of photos and images that I’ve uploaded onto the internet over the last 24 years, lord only knows just how much of my shit has already fed some AI.

I’ve concluded that it’s not really a situation where it’s artists versus Lensa, but really artists versus the narcissism of consumers, and when the day is over, that’s truly an unwinnable battle for those who create.  It’s like cockroaches, you can kill 99 out of 100 roaches in a home, but as long as that 100th cockroach lives, infestation is inevitable to occur again.  Artists can beg and plead with all of their friends and followers to stop using Lensa, but as long as they have the few people who will quietly use it, they’re never going to get any sense of victory in the matter.

Because that’s really all it is, at the root of things.  Consumers like getting fun pictures of themselves and they don’t really care where they’re coming from, and Lensa has, whether by design or not, tapped into a human behavior that is their biggest ally in getting their service off the ground.  The consumers are doing the defense for them, and the artists are exhausting themselves screaming into the aether, and Lensa is quietly growing and spreading without any consequence.

Whether it was intentional or not, it is an ingenious, albeit shithead execution.