Tuesday, September 30, 2014

The Boys of October, By Doug Hornig

As you can guess from the cover, this book is about the classic 1975 World Series match-up between the Boston Red Sox and the Cincinnati Reds. I’m sure most of us thought they’ve read all they could on the subject. Which makes the slightly different angles in this book all the more welcomed. There is certainly plenty to talk about when it comes to this series full of characters and Hall-of-Famers. Memorable moments and moments you’d like to forget.

This book follows a relatively standard format when it comes to books about single games, or series. It follows the series play by play, while adding anecdotes about the specific participants as they come up. This one has the slight twist that it almost reads like a biography of the author as well. It talks about what he was thinking or doing during the games. It discusses the interviews he performed with the participants while researching the book, what came of them, how they were arranged, and what went on during the interviews. It made it feel more like the story of writing a book about the World Series as much as simply a book about the World Series. As you went along, you not only got wrapped up into the story of the series, but the story of the author as well. It made the narrative much deeper than it would have been otherwise. This book definitely grew on me as I read it. Things, like the personal stories from the author, that caught me off guard at the beginning ended up being enjoyable. Makes me wonder what the rating would be if the 1975 Series was a best of nine. 

One of my favorite parts is that this book was published in 2003. Obviously, that was right before the Sox won the World Series. Every time I read a reference to the doom and gloom of waiting for tht elusive championship, it made me smile a little bit. My, how far we've come!

Rating: 3 bases

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Derek Jeter Live

Back when I was buying my scorecards instead of using my own, they often came with places in the back to compile season stats. So, of course, I kept track of the Red Sox players back there. Or, at least the regulars…depending on the space provided. I didn’t do it for the visitors, since I didn’t usually see any particular player more than once or twice a season. I did actually think at one point that it might be fun to keep career stats for the visitors. Compile a list of every player I’ve ever seen, and how they did in games when I was there. Obviously, that’s a big undertaking, but it could at least be started. Frankly the biggest thing stopping me was keeping track of players as they switched teams. Sure, I knew that the “Ortiz” in Minnesota became the “Ortiz” in Boston. Or, that the “Ramirez” in Cleveland was the same “Ramirez” that showed up years later in Chicago. But, everyone else? Which Martinez was witch? Is this a different Johnson, or the same one on another team? It would be a nightmare.

But, with all the hubbub over Derek Jeter this week, I thought it might be fun to do the career stats for Jeter in games I’ve been to. Especially since I’ve probably seen him play enough to make an interesting sample size.

As it turns out, I found scorecards for 24 games I was at from 1999 to 2012 where Derek Jeter played. I know this isn’t every game I’ve seen him, just the ones I kept score at. I can think of a couple others I didn’t keep score at for one reason or another.

How did Jeter do in those games? Glad you asked.

Those 24 games work out to 97 at-bats. About 15% of a season for Jeter. His stats? Lets’s start with the percentages.

AVG .247
OBP .311
SLG .351

Yuck. Not exactly superstardom there. In fact, if you pro-rate his numbers over a full season, he ends up with a .247/14/68 slash.

Does that mean anything? Probably not. It’s not a big sample size, after all. But, it includes games from every part of the season. It has night games and day games. So, it’s at least a good cross section of his career. It certainly argues against the common belief that Red Sox fans hate Jeter because he always killed us. A .662 OPS isn’t anything to shudder at. It’s lower than David Ross and Will Middlebrokks had last season.

So much for the fear.

To be fair, I didn’t check to see how many of these games were facing Pedro Martinez. I probably should. That could skew things a little bit. It’s possible that he since didn’t hit well at Fenway (which, he didnn’t) the numbers are low. Or, I kept catching him on bad days. For whatever reason, he wasn’t great when I saw him.

This makes me want to try this exercise with other people I’ve seen. Maybe if I start with the stars that I can follow from team to team, I can get a good list going. Maybe see how that Rodriguez guy did while I was in the park as he moved from Seattle to Texas to New York.

That might be fun.

Friday, September 26, 2014

Collecting the Sox: Jeter Infestation

As people have been yammering on about Derek Jeter this week, a question came to my mind.

Do I have anything Jeter in my collection?

Obviously, I wouldn’t seek out anything Jeter to add. But, by accident? Maybe he shows up somewhere with a Red Sox player, forcing me to add him?

As it turns out, it has happened three times.

This 1999 Topps card is the first. I was annoyed at the time that I needed to include Jeter in my Nomar binder. I’m annoyed now that I had to add ARod and Jeter. My how times have changed. I’m actually surprised that I don’t have more cards of the “shortstops” which contain Jeter. This is the only one of the trio. With all that star power, I’m amazed companies weren’t popping out cards like this in every set. Which, I suppose, they might have. They’ve just managed to escape my grasp.

The second one is this 2004 Topps AL Batting Leaders card. Jeter just snuck onto the corner of the card. I guess if I’m forced to have him on a card, it’s nice to have him so completely overshadowed by two Red Sox players. I was initially surprised that I didn’t have more of Jeter on similar league leaders cards, where he was stuck on cards with Red Sox players. Then I remembered that Jeter didn’t usually lead the league in anything important, so it probably shouldn’t have been surprising at all.

Finally we have this 2009 WBC walk-off card. As I’m looking at it, I notice two things. First, now that Victorino is on the Sox, this card has two Red Sox players on it. Second, I’m not sure this card belongs in my Red Sox binder. Wouldn’t this be similar to the College Cards post from a little bit ago? Nobody on the card is listed as a member of the Red Sox. The Card is clearly a “Team USA” card. The only thing it has going for it that the 1992 Topps Traded Nomar doesn’t is that Youkilis was actually a member of the Red Sox the year this card came out. I wonder if that’s enough? Especially now that he’s moved on to two other teams since his time in Boston. Maybe I should rid myself of this Jeter card on principle.

That’s it. I was pleasantly surprised when that’s all that came from the binders. Three cards are easy to pass by when needed.


How often has Derek Jeter infested your Red Sox collection?

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

I Scored!

August 1, 1999

Naturally I usually show the Red Sox portion of the scorecard when I do this. As you may notice almost immediately, I didn’t do that this time. I figured with everyone celebrating Derek Jeter finally retiring, I’d show his side of the card. How did he do in this game? See for yourself.

But first, the rest of the team. Whenever I do a scorecard from 1999 I am amazed at the line-up the Red Sox threw out there. Especially since that team made it to the ALCS. Well, the Yankees in 1999 won their second of three consecutive World Series. How do they look?


Maybe the Red Sox side has some merit after all. That bottom of the order looks inept to me. It certainly looked it on this day. The rest of them are probably only household names because they played for the Yankees.

How about the player of the game? In a losing effort. I think it’s pretty clearly Bernie Williams. He went two for three on the day, driving in three of the four Yankees runs. Isn’t that exactly what you’re looking for out of your clean-up hitter? Get people on in front of him, and he’ll drive them home.

The goat? Well, there are a few choices, I suppose. Four players went hitless on the day. Tino Martinez, Jorge Posada, and Shane Spencer all went 0-4. Which makes Williams’s performance even more impressive since he had Tino popping out after him all day long. But, really, you expect o-fers from the bottom of your line-up. You shouldn’t be getting them from the top of your line-up. That’s exactly where Derek Jeter was batting when he went 0-5. Yup, five times to the plate from your number 2 hitter, and five times outs were made. Struck out twice, and didn’t even advance a runner. You need more than that!

And, that might have been the Yankees downfall that day. With Bernie hitting the lights out, an extra base runner, or an extra runner in scoring position, might have made all the difference in a one-run game. Knoblauch had two hits leading off, and O’Neill had three hits in the three-spot. The lack of production in the two-hole could have led directly to a Red Sox win.

And the scorecard shows how it happened.

Monday, September 22, 2014

From the Pedro Binder

2004 Topps Own the Game

Wowsers! If style is not a substitute for substance, nobody told Topps when they were designing this card. It’s been a while since I’ve seen as much flair for the sake of having flair as this card presents.

First, the whole name is weird. Own the Game. Who are they talking to? Do I get to own the Game? Does Pedro Own the Game? I suppose he owns every game he pitches. Is that what they meant?

OK. The elephant in the room. What is with the graphics? Are they trying to go retro? The big star/baseball graphic? I’d say it was too ostentatious, but that would be ignoring the rest of the card’s lack of subtlety. What’s with the shiny swirly behind Pedro? Or the swirly stars? Or the checkerboard? Then the really strange part. Those graphics don’t take up the whole card. The top is left clean for the Topps and Red Sox logos. On a big thick blank stripe. Huh? If you’re going to give me a visual headache, might as well go the whole way, right? Maybe they did it so that I could pick out Pedro. Since his head sticks out into the border, I can actually find him.

I get it. It’s an insert card. They’re trying something new. They want to make the insert stand out in the pack. I certainly knew I got this card when I pulled it.  I’m just not sure that should be their only goal when designing the card.

And to think, this was before the Topps monopoly. 

Friday, September 19, 2014

Parallel Universe

I opened up my first blaster of Topps Chrome the other day. Don’t worry, this isn’t going to be another one of those box break posts. You’ve all seen them before. It’s more about this card that I pulled from one of the packs.

Yup. It’s one of those fancy colored refractors that Topps included in the set. No, it’s not a great hit. It wasn’t the best card in the box. As a Sox fan, the Xander Bogaerts RC was a much better pull. But, this is still a fairly rare card. It’s numbered to 75, after all. Even though I don’t love  it, somebody must…right? There have to be 75 Diamondback fans out there, right? Maybe even 100? Wouldn’t they be happy to add this to their collection? Shouldn’t I somehow get it into their hands?

This isn’t even specific to this card. The advent of parallel sets has done a couple things to the team/player collection. No matter what team or player you collect, there are suddenly rare cards to chase. 25 years ago, if you collected Jody Reed, you had four or five cards every year to get, and none of them were all that hard to find. Mike Greenwell had a few more, since he would be included in an all-star subset or two. As the insert sets came around, the difference grew. Reed still got his five base versions, but Greenwell would be in subsets, and insert sets. He might be into double digits. Or higher. It left Reed collectors in the dust. Where’s the fun in collecting if you can get every card in about ten minutes? There’s no chase.

Parallel cards have put an end to that. Now, every player has cards that will take some effort to chase. There’s a numbered parallel of everyone from David Ortiz to Stephen Drew.

Which makes me feel a little guilty holding onto cards like this one. I have to assume that somebody is looking for it. Along with all the other parallel cards  have sitting around. So, I ask you…

What do you all do with them?

I could try to throw it up on the bay and find a collector that way. But, it’s not like this is a Mike Trout card. I’m not sure that even in its shiny numbered glory it would earn enough to make it worth the effort.

It would be easier if it were a Phillies card. The PhilliesRoom gets all of those from me. So Jim will be getting two of the other refractors in the box, at some point. But, I don’t send all my Diamondbacks cards anywhere. Do other people have lists of collectors from every team? When you get a card like this, do you run to the list and find all the different collectors who would like it? “So-and-so collects the Diamondbacks, but so-and-so is collecting a Sepia set…” Do you have a destination for every team? Do you hang onto them, on the off chance that five or ten or fifteen years from now someone announces that they are looking for all the chrome cards of NL West teams? As I’ve mentioned, I only keep non Red Sox non stars for ten years. So, I’d have a time limit of that sort of opportunity. I could just hold onto them until the ten years is up, and hope I can find a team collector by then, I suppose.

Do you do a periodic “Things I have to trade” post, and show off all the low-budget hits you’ve accumulated over the last few months? All the jersey cards of former Brewers closers taking up space in your collection?

Is there a method to your madness?

How do you find a home for this guy?

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Keep Moving Forward

Rusney Castillo is set to make his first Red Sox appearance tonight. Whenever a new player is added to a line-up, whether by call-up, trade, or signing, there’s certain anticipation. Where will he play? Where will he bat? What happens to all the other players in the line-up as a result? This is especially interesting since Castillo is added to an outfield that is already pretty crowded with fairly recent additions and holdovers. I can imagine that it’ll be a jumbled mess of things for a bit. Which, probably means we’ll be seeing everyone bat and play everywhere over the next week and a half.

But, what about next year?

When your team is out of it, like the Sox are, the focus often turns to next year. Whether it’s simply more interesting, or slightly more optimistic. I know I can’t help but think, “How great will the line-up be next year with all these guys in it?” I even started trying to write out a few potential line-ups. That’s where I ran into trouble.

I had no idea where there players should bat.

I had no idea who the players would even be.

I’ve said it before. The roster right now will look nothing like the one on Opening Day. It can’t. There’s too much duplication. You want your outfield to be Cespedes-Castillo-Bradley? Fine. What are you doing with Betts, Victorino and Craig? Betts is doing a pretty good job right now in centerfield, and the lead-off spot. Both of those roles are expected to belong to Castillo very soon. What does that mean? I have to either just sit back and wait to see what happens, or just start making stuff up in dreamland.

Which do you think I do?

Exactly. What do I think could, or might happen? Are there any sure things? Of course not. But, I feel safe assuming that Xander Bogaerts will be at short on Opening Day. David Ortiz will be DH. The rest? I bet it depends on what they can get in a trade, and who gets them the best value. I don’t think anyone is untouchable, if they get the right return. I only think Bogaerts is safer because there’s not an obvious replacement breathing down his neck. So, what would I like to see? Using players currently on the team?

How about a Craig-Castillo-Cespedes outfield, leaving Bradley Jr as a great fourth guy and defensive replacement. I like the three C approach that must beg for a nickname. I envision Middlebrooks and Napoli at the corners, giving Middlebrooks one last chance to lose his job. Up the middle, Xander and Betts form the double-play combo that will star at Fenway for the next five years. Again, B-B is just asking for a nickname. Vazquez gets to catch a pitching staff that is suddenly rich with the talent acquired from all the players I just traded away.

What does that do to the line-up? I’m assuming that Castillo was signed to lead off. Works for me at this point. I’m tempted to just slide everyone down from there. That would put the order something like: Castillo-Betts-Bogaerts-Ortiz-Cespedes-Napoli-Craig-Middlebrooks-Vazquez. I like the looks of that. You could take Betts and make him that “second leadoff” thing and bat him ninth. But, that’s just semantics at this point. I like it. It puts Bogaerts in a pretty good spot for success, and forms a pretty decent meat of the order. Yup. Let’s go with that.

What do you think?

Monday, September 15, 2014

From the Pedro Binder

1999 UD Choice

It’s weird, sometimes, how the simplest cards end up being the best.

Take this card. There’s nothing to it. It’s not flashy. It’s not high end. There’s really nothing going for it. But, it ends up as an almost perfect card.

Look at all the information on the card. Player name, team, position. Even Pedro’s number. What more could I ask for? And, look at the UD choice logo. It’s nicely tucked away in the corner. In fact, all the information is stuffed in the bottom of the card, allotting the picture to have full reign over the top. The information isn’t crammed, either. It’s nicely laid out with colorful graphics. Well done.

I like the border to. It’s stupid, but the two rounded corners really add something for me. It’s a little bit of attractiveness, that’s barely noticeable. Those are the best kinds of additions. Ones that you don’t even realizes that you’re enjoying.

The picture itself is nothing special, but it doesn’t need to be either. It’s tightly cropped to make Pedro the main focus. This is clearly a Pedro Martinez card.

And a darn nice one at that.

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Collecting the Sox: Collegiate Cards

I have an  unopened set of 1992 Topps Traded in my card cabinet. I’m sure I’m not alone in that. After all, many collectors jumped on those sets when they came out for one big reason.

The Team USA cards.

Everyone missed the boat when  Topps released Olympic cards in 1985. We almost all had it figured out in 1988. By 1992, we knew what we were doing. So, I’m sure any number of you either had, or still have this set. The weird part is why I still have this set.

As I’ve mentioned many times, I keep cards for ten years. Well, I keep non-Red Sox, non-star cards for ten years. After a decade, they get cleared out to make room for the new releases. So, when the 2014 sets were released, out got the 2004. Some went to the Phillies Room, some went to other places. Some will find their way to the trash heap. (As few as humanly possible will end up there) So, why haven’t I opened up this set that’s more than 20 years old, taken the Red Sox and gotten rid of the rest?

Because of two cards I don’t know what to do with.

Two Team USA cards.

Of course, I’m talking about the cards for Jason Varitek and Nomar Garicaparra. Two Red Sox icons had their first cards in this set, as members of Team USA. I can’t decide whether or not to put them in my Red Sox binder, so I’m avoiding the issue. It was easier when Nomar was still on the Sox. As a Red Sox lifer, it was easy to include the Team USA in the binder for the only team he’d ever played for. But, that’s not true anymore. It’s not like the Red Sox could lay claim to every card he ever appeared on.The Varitek was even tougher, since he started with the Mariners organization. By rights anything before he was a pro should be a Mariner card, right? But it’s Tek! He’s the Captain. Does anyone think of him as anything but a Red Sox?

It’s not just those two who have questions in my collection. I have a Mo Vaughn card from his days in the Cape Cod League. Obvously, like Nomar, we was drafted by the Red Sox on his way to a stellar career in Boston. But, like Nomar, he then left. Played for a couple other teams. The Mo card used to be in my Red Sox collection. But now?

Obviously, if it’s a minor league card, it belongs to whatever organization the card is from. So, any Varitek minor league cards would not make my Red Sox collection. But, items from his college years are without official affiliations. So, it’s a judgement call. I just don’t know what that call is.

Would a college card make your team collection?

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Picture Pages

This was an absolute banner weekend for submissions of Section 36 Pix. I thought it made for a great opportunity to show everyone who might not look at the pages every day what they’ve been missing.

One of my favorite pages is the Pix in 36 page, showing pictures of people enjoying a game in Section 36. Recent additions include:

Submitted by Pita

Submitted by Jack
A bit camera shy? That’s OK. People also this weekend sent in Pix from Section 36. Like this great shot:

Submitted by Yakily
Another great page is the Pix with 36 page. It’s not always possible to get seats in Section 36. There’s a finite number, after all. And, I know it’s not always easy to get over to Section 36 during the game. You want to stay in your seat and see all the action. But, it doesn’t mean you can’t show your support of the best section in the park! Recent additions to this page have included:

Submitted by Ariane
Sometimes, you can’t even make it to Fenway. I know, life gets in the way. That doesn’t mean you wouldn’t rather be there. Pics with a “I’d Rather be in Section 36” sign can be the most creative. Like this latest addition:

Submitted by Celia
So, as you can see, there’s no reason not to check out the great submissions to Section 36 Pix every day. And, go “like” the Section 36 FB page so you can see even more all the time. A big thank you to everyone who submitted pictures this weekend, or any other time!

After all, we all love great looking pictures!

Sunday, September 7, 2014

From the Pedro Binder

2001 Pacific Private Stock - Game Used Gear

I love this card for one specific reason. Don't you hate getting relic cards that don't give you any information on the relic contained in it? Where did it come from? Where was it used? That's not the case with this one. The back of the card clearly sates it's from an Adirondack bat that Pedro used in 2000. Not only does it say what season it's from, it tells you the type of bat! How much more specific can it get? It even mentions that, as a pitcher, Pedro is more known for taking the bat out of opponent's hand than putting it into his. How clever.

But, since Pedro is an AL pitcher, I wonder how many times he would have batted in 2000? Maybe I can pinpoint the exact game. A quick check tells me I was right. He didn't bat much in 2000. In fact, he never stepped to the plate that season. (A fact that was especially annoying to me, if you remember)


So, when, exactly, was this Adirondack bat "used"? How was it "used"? Was it a Spring Training bat? Would Pedro have batted in a Spring Training game? Did he take batting practice with it? The card says the bat is "game used." Batting practice would be a bit of a stretch, right? I guess the card doesn't say how it was used. Maybe he was holding it in the dugout? Was he mocking someone's batting stance between innings with it? Did he use it to keep the flies away?

Specific details aren't as nice when they're flat out wrong. Or even more confusing than non-details.

Wonder what the bat is from.

Friday, September 5, 2014

Shut Him Down

That’s what I heard a lot on twitter last night. When Koji came into the game, there were actually questions. People were hoping he’d close it out…but were wondering if it would be better to just shut him down. Then, he gave up that first home run, and people were now pretty sure he should be shut down. Then along came the second home run. People weren’t pretty sure anymore. It was definite. Shut him down for the season. Sounds like the Sox are agreeing with them.

I have to wonder why.

Oh, sure, it’s pretty obvious that he’s struggling. It’s just an interesting dynamic since there’s just the month left in a lost season, and he’s a free agent.

What are they resting him for?

Sure, he’s a human. Not a piece of machinery you use up before you throw it away. But, by shutting him down, the Sox are basically making sure he’s in good shape for another team to use him, right? The way Sox consider closers, I can’t imagine they’d match any offer that another team would give Koji. Much like letting Papelbon walk, I’ve always assumed this was Koji’s last season. Since I assume there’s no injury, and he’s just exhausted, there’s probably no reason not to just use him up and see what you get out of him.

Unless, I suppose, the Sox just eliminated all other bidders. I doubt it was officially their game plan. But, it might have been a side benefit. Did they just cut all the offers in half for an old closer who struggled in his final appearances before needing to be shut down? Did they just emerge as the only team willing to even make him an offer?

Not that there aren’t other benefits to shutting him down this season. The Sox don’t need him. The loss yesterday didn’t mean a thing to their season. So, is this a chance to try some other guys out? With the bigger September roster, shutting down Koji means one fewer guy to try to find work for. Or, is this a chance to test out closers of the future? Are there any young guys who can close down a game for you?

So, I can understand why the Sox kept giving Koji a chance. There was no good reason not to. If they thought he could pitch, resting him was helping no one. Now?

That might not be true anymore.

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Do Beat Writers Serve a Purpose?

I’ve been watching a lot of Red Sox DVDs these days. (What better way to escape a losing season than watch DVDs celebrating their World Championships?) These have a lot of “behind the scenes” action, which show a lot of beat writers and sideline reporters doing their job. Whenever I see them, I can’t help but feel sorry for them…and wonder what exactly their purpose is supposed to be.

You’ve all seen them. Huddled around a player in the locker room. Each of them extending a microphone, or tape recorder, or iPhone, or whatever. Stretching and reaching trying to grab a quote from the player. When the player makes a lame joke, they all chuckle in unison. They all nod their heads as the player says the team played well, or poorly, as if it was validating their own opinion. As if it was actually an opinion in the first place.

Or they’re on the field, butting in during batting practice. Catching little quips as players brush past. Ortiz says he’s sore, but feels good. Middlebrooks agrees that obstruction is a weird way to end a game. Begging for a little nugget to insert into a story.


Are they adding anything to the story? I reminded of someone who said whenever they wrote a story when they were working the beat, they tried to make it sound like they needed to be there. That they got something from being there that I couldn’t get by not.

When was the last time that happened? Does the quote, “John Farrell said the bullpen really pulled it out tonight.” Do anything for you? If you saw the game, you know that the bullpen did a great job. If you didn’t see the game, was that adding any insight? Couldn’t the reporter just have said the bullpen did a good job? Does it really matter that Farrell said it? And, that’s assuming that the quote from Farrell was an actual quote from an interview. It’s just as likely that a reported passed Farrell and mumbled, “Bullpen did great tonight, eh?” To which Farrell responded, on his way to the can, “Yup. Really pulled it out for us.” That’s not an opinion. That’s small talk. It’s discussing the weather.

Isn’t this all just grabbing stuff to fill column inches? Isn’t a simple recap enough? None of it’s exclusive. None of it is revolutionary. What if the Sox just did a press release after every game with comments? John Henry said, “Job well done.” Pedroia said, “Look how awesome I was! Did you see the dirt on my uniform?” Wouldn’t that be enough? Then they wouldn’t need all these people clogging the clubhouse?

What’s their purpose? 

Monday, September 1, 2014

From the Pedro Binder

2001 Fleer Focus

I like it.

Even after my scanner decided to have a mind of its own, I like it. It’s clean. It’s crisp. It doesn’t yell at you, it calls to you.

Sure, there are some things I don’t like. That god-forsaken gold foil shown up again. Seriously, who though this was a good idea? For every set?

The Fleer Focus logo is a bit more obvious that I’d like, but it’s not nearly as bad as many sets.

What do I like? I like how all the information I need is there. Name, team, position. And, it’s tucked away at the bottom so it doesn’t interfere too much with the picture. And, you know I’m a sucker for the player’s picture coming out into the border. I have no idea why, but I get a giddy when I see that. The only way Fleer could have improved that is if Pedro’s back foot was trimmed to the border. Then it would have looked like Pedro was stepping through the border as he pitched. But, I’ll take that I can get.

The picture itself is pretty standard Pedro fare. Mid-windup, ready to make another hitter wish he never stepped to the plate. On Pedro’s face, you can read his determination.

And, of course, his focus.

What people are reading this week