The Raaaaiiiiiiders!

I have something I feel I need to come clean about... I am a Raiders fan. I also live in Kansas City. I not only have the privilege of being a part of the Chiefs and Raiders rivalry, I also feel like an insider in the long running contest to be the worst sports franchise of all time. My beloved Raiders or my hometown Kansas City Royals. The Royals are bad, but clearly here, the Raiders, continuing on an NFL record worst 6 year span are surging ahead. Raider Nation is the only fan base hoping during every game that their team's owner will soon pass. It's not that we hate Al Davis, we just realize he's the problem. Talk to any Raider's fan and they will sooner or later say, "Just wait until Al Davis dies." The Raiders are one of the few teams in any major sport that can at the same time have one of the highest payroll's in the league and continually finish at the bottom of the barrel. I think one thing the Raiders could do to help themselves out immediately is realize that they are the Raiders. So what if Tom Cable broke one of the coach's jaw? He denied it and didn't want to discuss it. The Raider coach I love would've said, "You're damn right I broke his jaw." He sleeps 300 yards away from.... and you can't handle the truth. The Raiders aren't like everyone else. They're mean. They cheat. They bite. They win. Their mascot is a pirate after all. It's no different than your local drugdealer trying to get a job in the cube next to you. It's just not going to work. I watched in vain Monday night... only to regret that I stayed awake. I did notice one thing... the Raiders were dropping Chargers like Enron stock. So they blew it at the last minute. It was gut wrenching, but maybe they will realize they are the Raiders. They are America's team... that America really doesn't want to claim. Watch and you'll see as the opposing teams injuries go up so will the Raider's wins. So here's to the hope that the Raiders can get back to their old ways and stop embarrassing me at work. Since I'm about two more consecutive 10 loss seasons away from disowning them, I'm making an optimistic prediction. Watch and see... 2009 Raiders 7 wins 9 losses back on their way to the top.

Motherfuck, is it football season?

My Hawkeyes are horrible. I'm going to the Iowa State game tomorrow. It promises to be deliciously terrifying. I'll try to post something excellent tomorrow.

Fast Food

I recently took a one-day road trip with a good friend. We set out early and were promptly pulled over by a highway patrolman. Luckily, we were pulled over in a construction zone so the fine got bumped up. Somebody’s got to pay for this stimulus stuff. As soon as we pulled out of the driveway, my compadre started in about a particular fast food joint he felt we would need to stop at on the way there. We decided to wait until we got out into BFE to stop. After all, this particular restaurant is ubiquitous. After being on the road for a few hours, we find one in a decent area near a truck stop. I use the term “decent” in the loosest of senses. Anyways, we stroll in, and the joint is packed – with employees. You know the type: disheveled, nearly toothless, looking like they’ve been on a lifelong bender. And that’s it. No one else is in the place. Well, there was some lady in there, but she was driving a Smart Fortwo with Canadian plates so with that double whammy, she gets left out of the fast food chain census. I’m getting hungry. Before we order up, I decide to wash up. To my surprise, there’s a gentleman in front of the bathroom (What, these things get cleaned?), and he is gathering 10 to 15 mini cardboard boxes up. He keeps trying to pick them up, and he keeps dropping them. I think to myself, “Why?” Why the boxes? Why right here? He makes several guttural sounds and grunts something. I can only nod. I assume he went back into the kitchen and immediately placed his hands on some food. He was not cleaning. I’m getting hungrier still. By the way, have you ever been to a fast food joint where the employees are skating around in the kitchen? I’ve seen a few of these, and apparently, the floor is so slippery from grease, you have to either slide around or risk bodily injury. I wonder if there are non-slip fast food joint shoes out there to buy that neutralize the slippery floor, endorsed by Michael Jordan or somebody. I’m really hungry now. I’m so hungry after I come out I order a couple things off the dollar/value menu, and of course, my friend spends like $15 on their garbage. He gets like 3 biscuits, some burritos, and a gallon and a half of orange juice in a giant cup with a tiny bottom designed to fit in your classic ‘89 Geo Metro cupholder and next to your giant muffin top (and I’m not talking about food). I’m worried for him and for me. We eat. I am disgusted, and I love it. My friend rations his out over what seems like the next hour. Apparently, he is savoring every bite, putting salsa and spicy mustard on everything and doing the whole “hmmm” and licking the fingers bit. I feel sick for him. Our meal inevitably leads to later discussions about how awful we feel. But at this point none of the depth charges have exploded. I am thankful. The small size of my depth charges will hopefully lead to little or no collateral damage. My compadre, on the other hand, has a much more difficult road ahead. He is either okay or making Jamie Lee Curtis proud without having eaten even one spoonful of yogurt. I hope it is the latter rather than the form. Or should it be the other way around?

Money Buys Championships

The underlying premise of one of the previous post seems to be that a higher payroll will result in more championships or playoff appearances. I tend to think the same way. But, I wondered just how much you needed to spend so I took a look at the wildcard era and compared the teams that made the playoffs against their payroll rank, which are based on opening day rosters. So, for instance, a midseason trade for C.C. Sabathia would skew the numbers a bit and I didn’t take that into account.

In the wildcard era, the average payroll rank for World Series winners was 7.36. For League Championship winners, it was 8.44, and for Division Series winners, it was 9.02. Playoff teams had an average rank of 9.95. During the timeframe I looked at, only 13 teams ranked 20 or lower made the playoffs. But in recent years, it seems that more teams from the bottom half of the payroll rankings are making the playoffs.

So, to win a World Series, it looks like you’ll have to sit somewhere in the top 10 in payroll. The outliers are Philadelphia (12th), St. Louis (11th), the White Sox (13th), Florida (25th), and the Angels (15th). Yet, even 4 of those 5 are in the top 15. Looking at the numbers, it seems you’ll have better luck with a small payroll in the NL. But on average, NL teams don’t spend as much anyways. It also helps that some of the big spenders are concentrated in divisions like the AL and NL East. Thus, ISBJ’s beloved Royals might get lucky one year in the AL Central sitting somewhere towards the bottom in payroll.

For some reason all these years, I have been under the impression that the Braves and Angels won by spending less and getting the most out of the talent they found. In the 11 years the Braves went to the playoffs, their average payroll rank was 5 (Boston’s was 6). In the 5 appearances the Angels made, their average payroll rank was 6.4. The Athletics (5 playoff appearances, average rank of 25.20) and the Twins (4 playoff appearances, average rank of 20.75) get the most for the least.

Getting back to ISBJ’s post, the teams he listed probably will not win a World Series in the next century. But contrary to his assertions, the Royals did not make any deadline moves because they are pretty much talentless, their farm system is in disarray, and management continues to make terrible personnel moves. They stink, not because of their payroll, but because they stink. If they’re lucky, they’ll find their way to 100 losses.

Fun Facts No. 1

I'm not sure if it's the full time job, 3 kids, and professional fantasy sports career or the 4 Boulevards I have in me, but whatever the reason I can't think of anything clever or witty enough for this blog. So, I thought I'd just share any interesting trivia question for pondering that I heard at the local baseball card shop yesterday. Then either tomorrow or during my second wind between Boulevards 7 and 9 I'll post the answer. Who am I kidding, I can't afford nor handle 9 Boulevards.

Q: What are the only 2 days of the year when no major professional sports games take place (Baseball, Football, Basketball, or Hockey)?????

A: The day before and the day after the MLB All-Star Game.

Is this thing On?

I was happy to see there wasn't an out pour of negative comments by all of our fans about my guarantee that Roy Halladay would be traded. So this is just my afterthoughts on the trade deadline. Mostly I just have a lot of questions and observations. I though Roy Halladay getting traded would have made perfect sense. A team that is not contending should trade away veteran players for prospects in hope to contend in the future. It also makes sense to trade end of the year free agents who tell you up front that they won't sign with you for any reasonable amount of money. What doesn't make sense to me is how separated the level of competition is around the league. I saw Andrew McCutchen hit 3 home runs in a game shortly after the break and I envisioned him getting traded in 2 or 3 years at the deadline for prospects. I think we are headed down a road for the next 20 or 30 years where bad teams trade away all of there good players for prospects every 3 or 4 so that they can't make the fans believe they are still trying to win. When really what they are trying to do is make a profit. I understand that, but I like to see good competition. We wouldn't pay decent money to see the Yankees play a good minor league team, but yet day in and day out we pay decent money to see the Padres play the Phillies. What's the difference? It's like watching a 5A football team play a 1A football team. The Phillies pick the best players that $110 million can buy. The Padres put the best team on the field that $35 million can buy. Whose going to win time after time? Then we have to deal with the fact that the Kansas City Royals have to pay a guy like Gil Meche $55 million to come to KC. Small market teams are further handicapped because guys want the ultimate top dollar contract they can get to go somewhere that they know they are going to lose. I was proud that Kansas City didn't sell out like the Indians and Pirates, because they want to contend in the near future. But when Alex Gordon finally starts to pop off, Greinke becomes a free agent, and Billy Butler demands high dollar, are they really going to pay for all these people? No. They are going to let one or two of there top guys go for the big paycheck then when they realize they can't compete, they are going to trade the remaining guys for prospects... and the cycle continues. I don't think the owners should rake in all the benefits from a $95 million salary cap, but how about we keep ticket prices reasonable, impose the cap and see much better competition? We won't see this. There are plenty of MLB and owners publicist / commentators out there telling you why its bad for the league. But here's my next prediction... if we don't impose some sort of cap or maybe even take another root of a salary floor of $50 million, then the Padres, Royals, Mariners, Pirates, Brewers, Nationals, Indians, Twins, and even the Devil Rays, Marlins, and Rockies will not win a World Series this century. Obviously the Rays and Marlins have the best shot in the next few years, but once Jeff Nieman, Evan Longoria, David Price, Jason Bartlett, and Jorge Cantu start demanding their fair market value the Rays success will go out with a few of these players.

Take a Halladay

I think there's been more hype about the MLB trading deadline this year than any I can remember. It could be just that I'm currently in first place in my 19 team pay fantasy league and I could really use an outfielder so I'm paying extra attention looking for backups that trades may force into the lineup. Of course the prize of this mid season contest is Roy "Doc" Halladay. The guy's been my #1 fantasy pitcher all season so I think I can speak for him. He wants to be in Philadelphia, he needs to be in Philadelphia. The same can actually be said for Milwaukee. The real question around is whether this is a good trade for either of the sides to make. The answer: its a no-brainer for both sides. To get Milwaukee out of the picture, the logic they used last year should be more than enough to justify that they should make this trade. Does it make a difference that they are already short Matt Laporta from the C.C. deal? I don't think so. This is a better deal (we'll get to that). The Cardinals got them self a Holliday today and if the Brewers don't offer half the farm they'll be taking their holiday in October this year. With the best back to back hitters in the league in Ryan Braun and Prince Fielder they definitely have enough offense to make Halladay a 25 game winner next year as well as move them past the Cardinals this year. From what we've heard the Phillies are the more likely candidate but won't part with Kyle Drabek. What? We won't trade our really good double A pitcher to get your Cy Young pitcher when we have likely the best offense in the league? That's more bullcrapously ridiculous than Barry Bonds being the all-time homerun leader. So why would they say this? Only because, they are hoping they won't have to. This hope is fueled by the idea that this trade is good for the Blue Jays too. Why? Because they suck. Well, actually, because they have no chance of winning the AL East anytime soon unless they have 6 minor league studs all coming up at the same time in addition to a few all-star veteran's. How can they make this happen? Trade Roy Halladay. The irony in it all is if they trade for Kyle Drabek and a true stud outfielder they might actually have a chance at signing Roy Halladay as a free agent after next season, because then they might actually have a chance at contending with those guys and Doc and the rest of their current players. I think Doc is a better deal this year than Sabathia was last year. First of all I think Doc is a more consistent pitcher. On their best days they might be on the same level, but day in and day out you want Roy Halladay. He just allowed 4 hits over 9 innings and fanned 10 while I was writing this, of course for the reward of a no decision. More importantly he has another year on his contract and I get the feeling that if you go to postseason two years in a row with him, he's likely to stick around and finish out his career. J.P. Ricciardi is bluffing when he says this deal isn't going down. The Jays benefit from trading him and the other teams definitely want him. This deal is going down or these people need to step down and give me or "That's it" their job. The Blue Jays are going to get there best deals on the table and there going to accept one either right before the imaginary July 28th deadline or on the 31st. I'll stake my lack of reputation on it.

What did I miss?

This is a post about posts. Its basically just an idiotic bunch of thoughts I've had when I was researching the post on winners and losers by watching my son's little league season. It just finished tonight and I'd have to say never been more proud of my oldest son as when he started crying after the loss. It wasn't that pussy crying either, it was that manly grimace that says just because tears are rolling down my face doesn't mean I'm crying. So he lost and he cried and as a first year player at age 8 (which to my surprise is a bit of a rarity now) he did bat towards the end of the lineup. Seems like a loser to me by the accounts of one "That's It." I consider myself pretty self aware and if my kid was a loser I think I could admit that, particularly with the defense that it would in this case be mostly his father's fault who's honed his son's Halo skills much more than his long ball. So I may lose the friendship of "That's It" by saying this, but surprising even to me, I support the trophies for everyone idea (to a point). I support telling everyone they are a winner if they go out there and really give it their best. I know what it means to be a winner and a loser, maybe one more than the other. The thing is we know who the best players on the team are. We know who the worst players on the team are. We don't necessarily needed to be reminded before the high school years. I was appalled by this everyone's a winner idea when I first heard about it. After one season of little league I realize the real losers are the coaches that our look like their heads our about to burst like a super volcano as they are screaming at their 8 year old kids for missing a ball even though he's obviously the best player on the team because he practices 2 hours everyday. In my boat that coach is in the same league as the kid (loser) I saw laugh after every swing before whiffing at the 6th strike (yes 6!!!) and then laughed all the way to the dugout. So if my son is crying because he can't play baseball anymore this year, well that in itself makes him a winner in my book. So long as he doesn't make everybody at the ballpark look at me.

Sign of the Apocalypse

I am currently in not 1, but 2 fantasy fishing leagues. I don't know shit about fishing.

Pujols and the Triple Crown

Here is a chronological list of players who have won the triple crown:

1. Paul Hines (NL) - 1878
2. Tip O'Neill (AA) - 1887
3. Hugh Duffy (NL) - 1894
4. Nap Lajoie (AL) - 1901
5. Ty Cobb (AL) - 1909
6. Rogers Hornsby (NL) - 1922 & 1925
7. Chuck Klein (NL) - 1933
8. Jimmie Foxx (AL) - 1933
9. Lou Gehrig (AL) - 1934
10. Joe Medwick (NL) - 1937
11. Ted Williams (AL) - 1942 & 1947
12. Mickey Mantle (AL) - 1956
13. Frank Robinson (AL) - 1966
14. Carl Yastrzemski (AL) - 1967

All but Paul Hines and Tip O'Neill are in the baseball hall of fame. Excluding those 2 players, of the 12 remaining, only Mantle, Williams ('42), Gehrig, Hornsby ('25), Cobb, and Duffy lead the entire league in the triple crown categories. As you can see from the above, no one since 1967 has won the triple crown. The last player I can remember coming close to the feat was Larry Walker in 1997. Of course, I have my doubts about the real value of simply looking at batting averages, runs batted in, and home runs. In the age of intentional walks, a player's batting average becomes a generic statistic that tells you very little about a player. If you're measuring a player's offensive value, it goes without saying that his OBP or OPS are better yardsticks. I'm sure there are better metrics out there than even those 2. For all the reasons everyone else has cited, e.g., he'll see 2 or 3 different pitchers a night, he'll be pitched around and walked, and he'll have to rely to on some average players to be on base when he steps to the plate, Pujols will not win the triple crown. In any event, it's interesting to follow so I thought we might keep tabs on Pujols to see if he can win the damn thing. Pujols as of 7/22/09:

• BA - .328 (2nd behind Hanley's .348)
• HR - 34 (in 1st and 2nd place at 25)
• RBI - 90 (in 1st and 2nd place 86)

Is winning at a young age more imporant? A retort...

Let's start with a few background facts. 1) "That's It" and I are former classmates. 2) I consider "That's It" to be one of my best friends. 3) "That's It" is the single most competitive person I've ever come into contact with. 4) I consider myself to be the 2nd most competitive person on that same list. 5) I've had to bite my tongue numerous times when competing with "That's It," or risk saying something I would regret. Keep those in mind as I "argue" with the point "That's It" brought up in his most recent post. The origination of this point comes from a time when "That's It" and I were playing a game of Madden against one another. "That's It" is good at Madden. At the time, I had never played. "That's It" used his best team, while I chose a team I thought would be decent. It wasn't. Or, at the least, "That's It" ensured that it wasn't good enough. In the first quarter, I threw 3 INT's. He led, 28-0 (or so). I was getting frustrated, and it was showing. After one run where I managed (not skill, but pure luck) to get into scoring position, I got up to use the restroom while the replays were going on the game. When I came back, to my surprise, it was now 1st and 30, because "That's It" didn't hit start for me. Instead, he allowed the play clock to run out over and over again, with the included 5 yard penalty, all while laughing hysterically. (As an update / reminder: it was 35-0 at this point and not yet halftime; I had never played before, and "That's It" was using his best team). After that, I quit. I felt it was poor sportsmanship to play that way, that it was cheap, especially against a friend who had never played again, and it wasn't something I wanted to experience again. In short, I was angry. "That's It," on the other hand, said that it wasn't his responsibility to hit start for me, that it was my job to keep him from scoring, and that it wasn't his fault that he could score at will. While all of those are true, it begs the question: is winning more important? Or is there a point where sportsmanship should take precedence? "That's It" brings up the idea that in life, there are always winners and losers. Always. This is a valid point. There is always a group who is "cool" as you grow up, and there is always a group of "losers." One may argue that teaching kids this well-known fact is important as they age, so they aren't quite so devastated when they aren't picked for kickball over recess. Yet there is also the point that sports, at least at a young age, should be about learning the game, having fun, and growing a sense of camaraderie amongst your peers. Beating the bejesus out of a 5-year old isn't proving anything, only that the losing 5-year old isn't as coordinated as the winning one. "That's It" has a point in that at some point during a child's upbringing, children understand that they are better than another child. Similarly, many parents see that their child is either much better or much worse than the next, and there comes a time when the two groups should split. But unless they are old enough to understand that baseball is still a game, or that football won't be their career, should winning ever become the end-all in a child's game? Not to say that coaches shouldn't get in the teenager's face, to remind him that a blown assignment can cost the team a game, but is winning 100-0 in basketball proving anything? Should a child, or a teenager for that matter, ever be in the position to face that prospect? My point is this: in life, surely there are winners a losers. In sports, there are also winners and losers. But in sports, winning is often about one's athletic ability, about one's ability to play a game. In life, those two rarely come into play. So why should we put kids in the position to pull themselves up from a beatdown, purely for the lesson that life has winners and losers? Won't they learn that elsewhere? As for "That's It" and myself: I kicked his ass in ping pong not long after that. We still don't play Madden, but at least I had some sort of bragging rights after having my ass handed to me in that stupid game.

Lawyers vs. Car Salesmen: A Comparative Analysis

Car salesmen think pinstripes make a suit look expensive and generally wear excessive amounts of jewelry, including gold bracelets. Lawyers think pinstripes make them look like partners, sometimes wear excessive amounts of jewelry, and buy watches that are worth more than their suits so they can look at them constantly though they have no particular place to be. Car salesmen often have weird haircuts. Lawyers often have weird haircuts. Popular styles include comb-overs, toupees, frosted tips, femullets, man-perms, and dapper dan oil slicks. These are the kinds of guys who carry combs in their pockets. Car salesmen are notorious liars. Lawyers notoriously twist facts. Not much of a difference. Car salesmen overvalue the vehicle your buying, and in the appropriate case, do the same for your trade-in. Lawyers overvalue your case and try to convince you that it was the judge's fault when their strategies fail. Car salesmen try to convince you not to leave the dealership without making a deal. They're willing to say or do almost anything to keep you on the lot. Lawyers try to convince you not to disregard their asinine arguments. They're willing to put almost anything in a brief. Most car salesmen are borderline arrogant. Lawyers are. No borderlines. More often than not, arrogance is part of the car salesmen's hustle. You won't buy anything from him unless he can convince you he's giving you the greatest deal ever and knows just about everything there is to know about the car. Lawyers are arrogant because they think a post-graduate degree clearly means they are more intelligent than the next individual. Most everyone dreads buying a car because they'll have to deal with the salesmen. Everyone hates having to deal with a lawyer. It doesn't matter what the circumstances are. The above brings to mind the line from an old country song: "Momma's don't let your babies grow up to be [insert lawyers, car salesmen, or cowboys]."

Mike Vick

Why, oh why, are people so hung up on Mike Vick returning to the NFL? What did he do that is so wrong? And spare me this pity-party on how he killed a bunch of dogs. I've heard that all before. Instead, what I'm wanting to know is why his transgressions are suddenly so horrible that we need to ban him from the NFL suddenly. What about those players that own snakes? When they feed a snake a mouse, do we ban them? What about those players who beat their wives? Do we ban them? Are we really judging one life, that of a dog, as more valuable than another animal? Aren't dogs pets anyways? Listen, what Vick did was horrible. It was a really, really bad thing to do. But this guy's been put in jail, he's paid his debt to society, and now it's time to give him his second chance. Period. I say we let Vick come back, continue to be a joke at the QB position (he's what, a 50% career passer?), and move along in 3 years when he's finally cut for good because he's not actually that great. What's so wrong with that?

Where's My Medal?

Very quickly and before I get started, I wanted to point out that FearBobSanders (FBS) calls me retarded and then, almost in the same breath, improperly uses the word “adieu.” Yes, adieu is French for “farewell.”* So, without further farewell (??), FBS launches into his MLB predictions. I think he meant “ado.” In any event, I prefer imbecile, half-wit, moron, idiot, cretin, or changeling over “retard.”

* FBS, in your DVD collection of musicals, re-watch The Sound of Music very closely and listen for the proper usage of adieu.

I recently had an exchange with a friend who described his sister’s recent graduation from high school. At some point in the conversation, he noted that there were 10 or so “valedictorians” for the senior class. Everyone that took a couple of weighted courses* and achieved a GPA above 4.0 was a “valedictorian.” * Presumably, these courses were not shop, woodworking, AutoCAD or some other course for people who are interested in practical pursuits and not calculus, art history, or business management.** ** I’ve found that the people that focused their attention on woodworking, shop, and auto mechanics seem to be more successful than others who got a degree in finance or business management from Schlub U. and work in the usury department at [insert the name of your favorite banking institution here] printing out forms and hounding people into consolidating their debt or refinancing their mortgage. Anyways, I’m sure all of the kids knew who the true valedictorian was. Having 10 valedictorians sort of cheapens the whole valedictorian thing, particularly if you’re someone who has worked hard at being the best and showing that you are the brightest. Let’s face it, high school is mainly about proving how cool, athletic, or smart you are. It is not about socializing and making friends although sometimes more friends is the end result of being cool, athletic, or smart. Put more simply, it is about being better than others.* The same can be said of video games and jobs. * This multiple valedictorian thing got me thinking about youth sports and leagues that don’t keep score, don’t let players strike out, let everyone bat every inning, etc. Life is the same. It is about being better than others at something. With almost everything we do in life, we are either successful or unsuccessful. In other words, we either win or we lose.* Even in times of success, I think it is important to realize there’s still room for improvement and there’s still room for work to be done.** * The best real world example I can think of is the competition for a job or jobs. Our record in that type of competition is usually 1-?. We all hope we end up in the 1-for-1 category but most of us are hitting somewhere way below the Mendoza line. ** Lazy professional athletes please take note. If you reached the highest level of play, wouldn’t you then be working towards the Hall-of-Fame or being talked about as the best ever? With some athletes, I get the sense that they are simply pulling down a paycheck, but that view could be too cynical. Although it may sound trite, even in times where we are either entirely or partially unsuccessful, there are certain things we can learn about ourselves. Part of being a decent human being is being able to handle defeat both outwardly and inwardly. By way of recent example, LeBron probably failed to outwardly handle defeat in a professional manner. But more importantly, I’m sure he has newly resolved to improve his game so he can win with those stooges in Cleveland (or maybe elsewhere).* * Maybe stooges is too nice. They were more like useless piles of skin stealing much needed floor-level oxygen from LeBron. This theory explains why he spent so much time during the Orlando series bent over holding his shorts. While there’s room for debate, I think the benefits of establishing a pecking order outweighs the detriment of having everyone feel good about themselves. For everyone in the middle, i.e., for those who win some and lose some, keeping score and declaring a winner doesn’t create problems. I can see if people are continually beaten down, there’s some inherent unfairness in the way teams or players are selected, or someone is artificially placed at the top due, for example, to nepotism that problems can arise. But, there is nothing particularly evil about competition. Pantywaists.

Kobe Sucks

Here's the deal you either agree with the title of this or you disagree. So I'll explain why Michael Jordan is awesome and Kobe Bryant sucks. First, were the title to be Jordan Sucks, you would have to either disagree or be an idiot, whereas with Kobe you can agree. Okay, Kobe Bryant is good at basketball; he doesn't suck. However, I'll just provide a quick analogy why this championship does nothing to put Kobe Bryant on that all-time great level in my mind and shouldn't yours. Can we just imagine for a second, which players the Orlando Magic would have represented on a mid 90's Bulls team... Given how Dwight Howard basically only played defense this series... I don't think its to much of a stretch to compare his performance to Dennis Rodman. Here's an easy and offensive one...Turkoglu most reminded me of Toni Kukoc. Rashard Lewis played so poorly I'd have to relate him to Scottie Pippen with a bum ankle. You can basically amount the rest of the players to the likes of B.J. Armstrong, Steve Kerr, John Paxson, and Gortat will be played by Bill Wennington. Pietrus played well enough to account for Pippen's ankle. So we have as a starting five Pippen, Rodman, Kukoc, Kerr, and Armstrong. This is a par team and that's who Kobe beat. He wouldn't have and won't next year beat a healthy Celtics team (even though they won 2 in the regular season this year). In what universe would this Lakers team have beat Stockton and Malone even once. Here's the real reason Kobe Sucks... I was not entertained. I wanted to turn off my new Vizio tv when I saw that face in game 1. It said to me, "I'm a jerk who happens to be better than anyone currently on the court and I want to be remembered for something, so here's what I came up with." When kids stuck there tongue out in the 90's to be Like Mike everyone laughed. When kids put on their Kobe face out now, they're going to get slapped in it. When Jordan put his hands up it awe of himself it said to me, "I can't believe it either" and we were connected. Half of all the so-called haters like myself are going to jump ship now and talk about how awesome Kobe is. Its a sad day for me. Ironically though, I did imitate Kobe's game 1 face when I realized the Lakers had clinched.

"That's It" is retarded, and other musings

My compatriot recently predicted the fate of all 6 MLB Divisions, along with the Wild Cards, to come up with a prediction for this year's World Series. Thankfully, more time has passed, and I can officially declare the Cubs dead before dealing with the remaining teams. I had planned on writing a retort considerably sooner than this, but with work and all, writing took a back seat. Yet without further adieu, here goes: AL West Texas Rangers. I think the Angels are a better team, and they may very well win the thing, but their pitching staff took a huge hit when Adenhart was killed. And now that they're 4 1/2 games back, I don't know if they have enough to overtake Texas' firepower. It could happen -- like I said, I think they're the better team -- but I don't see it. AL East New York Yankees. With apologies to Boston, who seem to have lost David Ortiz to the H1N1 virus, and also can't seem to find a SS that knows what a baseball even is, the Yanks have the offensive firepower to get them into the postseason as the AL's #1 seed. Not to worry, however; their core is still averaging 35 years of age, so they won't do much once in the postseason. It isn't like C.C. knows how to pitch after August anyways. AL Central Can I go with "Who Cares?" No? Ok, then Detroit. I seem to remember that last year at some point in time, Detroit was supposed to score ~1000 runs, have starters with sub 3.00 ERA all across the board, and the Tigers were to run the table with their eyes closed. What happened to that squad? Other than losing limbs to their entire pitching staff and having every single one of their bats run cold for an entire season? My guess is a chemistry problem. Regardless, I don't see how Detroit can go from choking bitch to World Series threat in one year. Detroit is the pick here, but they lose to the Yanks in round 1. AL Wild Card Boston. Too much pitching, too much chemistry, just enough bats, and smart players throughout. They may pull it off to win the division, but even if they don't, they make the playoffs. NL West L.A. Dodgers. This may be the only team that could compete in the A.L. East and not lose 100 games -- but it's the only NL winner that has that right. The Dodgers have good, young pitching, and plenty of bats (especially when Manny comes back). NL East N.Y. Mets. If this team can stay near .500 while they figure out how to put their band-aid'd team back together, they have the chance to go on a run. Philly's ace is hurt, their 2nd best pitcher is gone for the season, and Ibanez can't possible continue to out-hit Ryan Howard. Point is, they can't maintain this, and the Mets can't continue to be this hurt. NL Central I'm picking the Cubs here. Granted, they are floundering right now, but D-Lee can't play this badly much longer, Soto can't play that badly much longer, Soriano is playing well (again), and Ramirez should be back any day. If Bradley ever bothers to shut up and hit the ball, this offense could be scary. I'll throw some kudos to the Cardinals for outplaying their ability for this long, but their charade must stop at some point, the Brewers don't have enough arms to make it serious, and the Reds are about a year away. So Cubs it is. NL Wild Card Philly. Everything I said above about the Mets could never happen, and those two teams could switch places. Either way, both teams are making the postseason. AL Winner Boston. This team has enough in its stable to make a big trade, and I see them buying another bat to put in their lineup, and that will be enough, along with their pitching, to put them back in the Series. NL Winner L.A. Dodgers. They have everything, and they should roll to a World Series bid. World Series Champ Boston. The Dodgers are good, and Manny will bat ~.600 for the series, but ultimately, they are just a half-step short of Boston in every category. They may make a series of it, but ultimately, Boston's talent level wins out.

There's an NBA game tonight

I love Lebron James. Its taken me a while to realize that he's not Michael Jordan, but he's still young and I really didn't watch the NBA until Jordan had been in the league 6 or 7 years. The Jordan-like quality he does hold is me. Yes he holds me. I actually enjoy watching the NBA when he's on the court. I give it the same respect I give the other 2 major sports and make sure my wife keeps her babies quite so I can concentrate. I'm extremely excited about an NBA game for the first time in a while (I was mildly excited last Finals w/ the LA-Boston matchup). Lebron has gotten better every year and now he has his back to the wall facing elimination from a lower seed and the NBA championship slipping away. I hear everyone saying that Lebron needs to follow Kobe's lead last night and shoot less.... there's one problem... Lebron's teammates really aren't any good. Other than Mo Williams and maybe Z, they would all be bench players on many teams around the league. I will cede that Lebron really isn't much more than an average shooter, and give Lebron the advice I'm sure he's waiting on-line to hear. Take the ball every single time, and without getting a charge, run straight down Dwight Howard's face. I wouldn't even try to score so much just concentrate on getting Dwight Howard off his feet... then do the same thing when Howard leaves the game or fouls out, but this time just dunk the ball on the far inferior defender. If Lebron doesn't have at least 30 free throw attempts tonight... I'll be disappointed. If he shoots 9 times and the team loses, I will not watch him for 1 solid year. But I'm going to pull a Mo Williams and guarantee the CAVS win by 10 tonight.

Fans of the World Unite!

I was almost done writing what I thought would be a somewhat irrelevant article about steroids when MannyGate started. I was going to write something about the idea that Aroid took steroids in high school and in New York. Then I was going to say who cares, then answer my own question as follows: I do and every fan and young aspiring MLB wannabe should. Saying steroids aren’t a big deal anymore, or something we should quit talking about them is like saying that gloves aren’t a big deal. Why are there so many people saying it’s a sad day for baseball that a cheater, Manny, got caught? I diagnosed his personal health issue too… it’s called old age. The only medical conditions they give you a drug that restarts testosterone production for is your body needing, or your ego wanting more testosterone. I just wish baseball would quit saying how unfortunate it is that this happened and instead say how unfortunate it is that this guy cheated. In 1919 baseball did the unthinkable, not in banning elite players for life, but for giving absolute power to a commissioner to rule and oversee baseball for the best interest of the game. So why, is the darkest issue of baseball from 2002 is the most darkening issue in baseball in 2009 and likely to be in 2015? Why isn’t this absolute power being used for the best interest of the game? We all know this one. It’s the same reason why your dad got laid off his factory job six weeks before retirement. It’s called greed. However, it’s only 80% about money. The other 31% is pride, power, and the greedy desire to be respected by the masses. If Bud Selig had any sort of plan at all, you would have seen it by now. Sure, the 50 game suspension for a first offense will go a long way to prevent future use, but what about the integrity of the game that has been lost as a result of all this. Do we not deserve a refund for every game we paid to watch the best talent in the world, but because of steroids the best talent was often times sitting on the bench while a 39 year old roid raging Rafael Palmeiro played instead? I guess I just feel like we are all being hoodwinked by the biggest collusion of the commissioners, players, and owners ever. The only hopes we really have are the clean players, maybe the sports writers, and ourselves. Personally, I don’t want any of these guys to make the hall of fame. I hope you don’t either. I think we should blackball all these guys. Don’t believe there lies, boo them at the games, and don’t buy there memorabilia. Maybe there should be a steroid factor in the record books instead of asterisks. If you used steroids and hit 500 homeruns, then you now have 375 career home runs (no asterisk). If they can’t prove it some will get lucky, but lets put this behind us for real. Make a decision in the best interest of the game, make it preserve baseball’s righteous numbers and actually move on instead of waiting for people to forget it happened. I just ask baseball to do something significant, even if it hurts the game temporarily. Manny did more to hurt baseball with this than Pete Rose ever did, and all that’s really happening to him is the loss of one vacation home and he’ll end up with the 6th most homeruns all-time instead of the 5th. Can't we tar and feather just one guy? How unfortunate.

2009 NFL First Round (Picks 1-10)

Here are my thoughts on the top 10 players taken, and brief look at the rest of the first round.

1. Lions - Matt Stafford (QB) - I'm not sure why he is so highly regarded. Even though he was surrounded by some very talented players at Georgia, he never did anything. A strong arm and good size will only get you so far, just ask Ryan Leaf and Josh Freeman after Tampa Bay discards him. I am quite sure he is no Matt Ryan, who was surrounded by marginal talent at BC.
2. St. Louis - Jason Smith (OT) - Over the past few years, I've watched quite a few B12 games, but I never noticed this kid. To be honest, I don't typically notice offensive lineman anyways. Because he used to play some tight end, I would expect him to be pretty athletic.
3. Kansas City - Tyson Jackson (DE) - In the 2001 draft, the Chiefs took Eric Browning (DT) with their first pick of the draft in the third round. In 2002, they took Ryan Sims (DT) with the #6 pick. In 2004, they took Junior Siavii (DT) with their first pick (#36 in the second round). In 2006, they took Tamba Hali (DE) with the 20th pick. In 2007, they took Turk McBride (DE - 2nd round, 54th overall) and DeMarcus Tyler (DT - 3rd round, 82nd overall). In 2008, they take Glenn Dorsey (DT) with the 5th pick. In 2009, you guessed it, they take Tyson Jackson (DE) with the third pick. Enough already with the defensive linemen. It's not working you lame dicks.
4. Seattle - Aaron Curry (LB) - They were probably thinking WTF?!? when this guy fell to them. I expect him to be solid but not spectacular. Maybe a few pro bowls and some all-pro teams.
5. NY Jets - Mark Sanchez (QB) - After giving up almost all of their picks for the next decade to move up, the Jets took Sanchez. The 2009 version of Matt Leinart.
6. Cincinatti - Andre Smith (OT) - This guys a schlub. He'll fit right in with the circus in Cincinatti. This pick guarantees that this will be Marvin Lewis' last year.
7. Oakland - Darrius Heyward-Bey (WR) - You think they might take Crabtree or Maclin? Nope. The circus continues.
8. Jacksonville - Eugene Monroe (OT) - Now, if they only had a QB for him to block for.
9. Green Bay - B.J. Raji (DT) - For some reason, I just don't see defensive linemen, and in particular defensive tackles, being the pillars of a defense. If I were a general manager, I would never take defensive lineman with a top-20 pick. See the Chiefs discussion above for a recent success story.
10. San Francisco - Michael Crabtree (WR) - He will take a few years to develop. Hopefully he doesn't sign a deal for more than 3 years. Without a decent QB to throw to him, he will become a malcontent.

None of these guys will be worth the money teams have to spend on them. An exception may be found in one or both of the OTs taken (Monroe & Smith). Apart from Crabtree, I doubt we'll be hearing much about any of the skill players taken in the top 10 three years from now. I liked Denver picking Moreno, but then I remembered Shanahan is gone. With Maclin, Philadelphia either got Rocket Ismail or Eric Metcalf. I liked Indy's CT pick. Overall, there seemed to be a lot of defensive players picked and way too many defensive linemen went in the first round. What is it about defensive linemen? I don't understand it. I think 5 years down the road Donald Brown could be seen as the best player that came out of the first round. But, I am probably completely wrong and Darrius Heyward-Bey will already be a first ballot hall of famer.

MLB Predictions

Although the NFL draft is great and all, the topic has recently been covered, albeit with a B10 focus. Of those mentioned in that post, I think Shonn Greene will provide the best value wherever he lands in terms of contract money and production. While I'm not suggesting he will turn out to be LT, I think he will be the most productive player coming out of the mid-to-late rounds. I envision him landing softly with a good team and getting some playing time. Furthermore, he doesn't strike me as someone who will have character or work ethic problems in the NFL even if some of those problems lurk in his past. I think he will have something to prove. I also thought about talking about the NBA playoffs. But is there really anything to say when it seems nearly every NBA team gets into the playoffs? Instead of March Madness, the NBA has April, May, and June Madness. Can you really consider it a good season when you have a losing record and still make it into the playoffs? I dunno, but Stern seems to be flushing this thing (league) down the toilet. But what do I know, I only watch the NBA on Thanksgiving and Christmas. The league does not otherwise exist for me. So, here are my MLB playoff predictions based on almost one month of play. AL East - BoSox AL Central - ChiSox (but who cares really, it's the AL Central) AL West - LAngels (if their injured pitchers return to form and Fuentes holds steady) Wildcard - Seattle NL East - Philadelphia (FL is first two letters in fluke) NL Central - Cards (sort of like the AL Central for me) NL West - Dodgers Wildcard - Cubs DP Winners - BoSox, LAngels, Cards, Dodgers CS Winners - BoSox, Dodgers WS Winners - Dodgers