Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login

The Most Anticipated Arrival



This week one year ago, Stephen Strasburg was drafted #1 by the Washington Nationals out of San Diego State. He set a new precedent of media hype that reached a whole different level than anyone before him. Now, Strasburg was clearly the best player in the First-Year Player Draft of 2009, but I had serious reservations as to just how much everyone was gushing about him. I wrote that nobody--not even the most hyped prospect in baseball history--was worth the millions that the draft pick payment scale mandates. Strasburg signed for $15.1 million right before the deadline in August, and was officially a National. I became even more critical after the franchise committed so much to invest in a 21 year old prospect with no guarantee of panning out. I was annoyed that for the next 8 months until his debut we'd have to hear all about how legendary Strasburg will be, see the same San Diego State bullpen videos on loop, and receive instant updates on all his minor league starts against 30 year old baseball lifers.

Well, in a sport where living up to the hype is so statistically rare, Strasburg met and exceeded it in his first start for Washington on June 8. His final line: 7 IP, 4 H, 2 ER, 14 K, 0 BB. Read that again....14 strikeouts!!!!!!!!!!!!! In his first major league start!!!!!!! This guy looks so good that he needs zero adjustment time to major league hitting. Granted, he pitched against the Pirates, but he was completely overpowering with his triple-digit fastball, 90 MPH changeup, and filthy slider.

Not only did he have the repertoire to be dominate, but he seems to know how to use it. This is just as important as raw talent, and is what makes a baseball player so dang hard project. You can have all the speed in the world like Rafael Furcal, but if you're injury prone or can't get on base, speed is worthless. You can be blessed with great size and arm strength like Kerry Wood and Mark Prior, but without the right mentality and toughness, you'll flame out. You can be the most gifted with the glove and the bat like B.J. Upton and J.D. Drew, but without a competitiveness and drive to get better, you will underachieve.

Strasburg has the physical brilliance like the above names and countless other MLB hopefuls. What separates him from the crowd, however, is a maturity level, an intelligence, and a toughness that seem to characterize a rare brilliant few. In any game, but in baseball especially, the intangibles and mental skills are every bit as vital to success as the tangibles and physical skills.

Needless to say, I'm sold on Strasburg. I'm not usually one to make snap judgments about things, and would typically need to see a little bigger sample size to make an evaluation on a player. Strasburg is different. He is transcendent and utterly dominant at 21 years old. Ladies and gentlemen, Stephen Strasburg has arrived, and he is ready to own the CY Young race for the next 10 years.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
65
Vote
   


Baseball's a Funny Game

The young Braden tossed the 19th perfect game in Major League history


The irony of Oakland A's starter Dallas Braden's perfect game was almost palpable on Sunday. On a day when children celebrate and spend time with their mothers, Braden had none to do either. His mother passed away from cancer when he was a senior high school.

On a day that undoubtedly carried much pain for Braden, he got the ball. On a day that reminded him of such a huge missing piece in his life, Braden was perfect and lacking nothing.

Braden was in the baseball headlines weeks before his historic performance. A few weeks ago, he got into a verbal spar with the insufferable Alex Rodriguez over a violation of one of baseball's unwritten, unspoken rules. After making an out on April 22, A-Rod made his way across the field back to the Yankee dugout. On the way, however, he journeyed over the pitcher's mound, which is cause to fight for pitchers. Braden, who was pitching that game, did not take kindly to A-Rod, who later said "I was tired. It's really not that big of a deal. I've done that maybe a few dozen times. It's the shortest route." Implicit in Braden's anger is the recognition that the mound belongs to the pitcher. No other player comes near the mound while the game is in session.

This is rule is part of the baseball code, which is what makes the sport unique. No other sport has rules so arbitrary, so stringently followed, and so unspoken. If you're not a pitcher, don't walk over the mound. Never step on the chalk lines. Don't steal signs. Don't walk in front of the catcher and ump when approaching the plate. These are just a few of the guidelines that all players instinctively know and abide by. Baseball, a game rife with superstition, mixes unofficial rules with wide held superstition to produce some truly bizarre norms. Baseball players are just a different breed, and this is one of the reasons why. In what other sport will you find anything of this nature?

Braden has been the victim of two code violations recently. The A-Rod incident was the first, and Evan Longoria's plate appearance in the 5th inning of Sunday's game was the second. With Braden halfway into a perfect game, Longoria tried to lay down a bunt for a hit with his team trailing. Longoria is the #3 hitter in the AL's best offense, and one of the top 10 power hitters in the game. There is controversy over a move like this during a perfect game, especially from a major power hitter.

There is some argumentative clash on this play: do you do everything you can to break up a perfect game, or do you show the pitcher some courtesy by playing for the win, not simply to break up his gem? This isn't so much a baseball taboo as it is a norm, which is to say that there is some gray area involved and that the context dictates whether it is right or wrong. If you're Braden, you definitely don't appreciate having to focus up to face one of baseball's best hitters to preserve your perfect game, only to have him drop down a bunt just to foil your day. Various baseball people will fall on different sides of this issue, but there is no absolute right or wrong here.

I'll tell you two things: first, Dallas Braden may not have made a scene about Longoria's bunt try, but he will not forget it. Second, baseball will always have the best sporting atmosphere and culture, thanks in no small part to "the Code."
Add CommentsAdd Comments
50
Vote
   


All Things Spring Part II

(This is the continuation of Friday's back-and-forth between me, the Guru, and the Sport Maharishi).


Maharishi: There you go with the Ewing Theory again. I'll admit though Michigan State is a perfect candidate for it. Losing Kalin Lucas is a huge blow, but Korie Lucious has filled in nicely. And if you're going to be a Ewing Theory candidate, who better to coach you than Tom Izzo right?

I think I'll let you take baseball since you know a great deal more than I do. For now let's discuss some NBA. If you had one year to build a team, and you had the first pick, who do you take? I think you are like me in that you pick Kobe (who by the way just signed a 3 year deal, I know you're excited about that), so there is no use hashing that out.
Who do you take right now, Kobe or LeBron?
But what if you were given more than a year and a chance to actually build a franchise, then who do you pick? I think the consensus is to take LeBron, the guy can do it all. Me? I'd take the Durantula. He's a much better shooter than LeBrick is or ever will be. At 6'10 I'm confident he can develop into a dangerous passer with his ability to see over defenses. It seems like his teammates enjoy playing with him as much as LeBron's do in Cleveland. And on top of it his post-game isn't too shabby either. That isn't to say LeBron can't improve his shooting or post game, but I think in the long run Durant might be a better option. (The sound you just heard was Kevin Pritchard dousing himself in gasoline and striking a match). Thoughts?

Come Tuesday I'll be fully invested in the NBA and I couldn't be happier. Your turn.

Guru: I'm not sure what you mean by "if you had one year to build a team." Every player is available and you get to build your team now? I tell you what, I'm a Laker die-hard through and through, and I've been with Kobe forever. I took his side in the Shaq-Kobe breakup, I maintain that Shaq is a bigger jerk and more disruptive force than the public realizes, and I suffered through the 2005-2007 seasons when the Lakers were a dumpster fire, largely because of Kobe.

All that said, I have to trust my eyes and put my bias away. My pick for a team now and a team 5 years from now is LeBron. He is unparalleled physically and athletically, and he's learning bit by bit how to make his teammates better, how to kill an opponent on the ropes, and just flat how to win. This very well could be his year to win finally. Kobe's extension is wonderful for all parties in my opinion, but the fact that remains he's now 31 years old. I can unscientifically prove that Kobe has the legs of a 34 or 35 year old right now. Kobe has currently played almost 44,000 career minutes at 31 years old. By comparison, Michael Jordan, with a similar playoff resume in terms of games played, played around 48,000 career minutes. At the current rate, Kobe will pass Jordan in minutes played after next season. All things considered, I'm taking LeBron. No one makes an NBA basketball court look likes a Little Tikes court like LBJ.

Kevin Durant is a close second. I saw this guy play from 5 rows back against the Clippers last month, and he is as good as advertised. I was blown away by his calm, even, plodding demeanor and how he deals with his teammates. He scores points in bunches, but still manages to put up the quietest 29.7 points this side of MJ. When Durant sat to start the 4th quarter of that game against the Clippers, the Thunder actually extended their lead, nearly putting it out of reach while Durant sat. Scotty Brooks wasn't afraid to let his team play with Durant on the bench, and the team didn't let up without their star. I think this is a product of how Durant treats and empowers his teammates while he is on the floor with them. Again, this is heretical, and I've already taken some flak for it, but I think the Durantula is the 2nd best player in the league. And Kobe isn't first. Durant and LeBron will fight each other for the next 10 League MVP trophies without a lot of other competition.

I want to talk about MLB's discussion about realignment of the divisions. Some pinpoint the AL East's bilateral dominance, both competitively and financially, as poisonous to parity and league health. No one else in the AL East has a chance from Opening Day to succeed because the Yankees and Red Sox are so far ahead. Realignment may be needed because a salary cap and increased revenue sharing will never happen, for reasons outlined in this Ken Rosenthal piece. I don't know much about this plan yet or lots of details. What do you know about this? What's your take on it? Thoughts on the start of the 2010 season?

Maharishi: I envy you getting a chance to see the Durantula up close. I've seen Kobe, I haven't seen LeBron or KD. Maybe if LeBron joins the Clippers I'll get my chance next year.

I'm glad you brought this baseball issue up. I read a piece a few months ago detailing how a realignment would work. Basically you'd be placed in a division reflective of your spending and winning percentage. The Sox and Yanks would be in the same division, but a team like the Orioles would be moved in with the Indians. The Rays, though they have a small budget, would still be in the same division as the Sox and Yanks because they have had some recent success. You get the idea. Then essentially there would be re-leaguing every 3-4 years to maintain competitive balance. While the Sox and Yanks and Rays battled it out, teams like the Orioles and Royals would have a better chance to make the playoffs because they'd be in separate divisions. At least that's what I gathered.

Personally I hate this idea. When I was in high school I loved the Yankees-Sox playoff battles, despite having no affiliation or attachment to either team. They had the best players, and the games were wildly entertaining. Who can forget Joe Buck's memorable call "We'll see ya later tonight" after Ortiz hit a walk-off in game 4? When the Cubs and Marlins battled out a thrilling 7 game NLCS in 2003, I was riveted. I think the average baseball fan, like myself, enjoys seeing the power teams so to speak making the playoffs. Sure we enjoy a feel-good story like the Marlins or Rays making a run every few years, but give me a Sox-Yanks ALCS and the Dodgers or Cubs making a run in the NL and I'm happy. I don't want to see the Pirates in it because they played in a crappy division and won with a 78-whatever record. The good people of Pittsburgh may disagree, but thats just me. (They may root for the Pirates even more now given Big Ben's inability to not violate women). And since the MLB and every other sports league in the country operates solely on what their bottom line looks like, I don't see re-aligning happening. Sure maybe the regular season would be competitive, but I'd rather have a great postseason with the best teams any day. That's just me though, your average, unaffiliated fan. You, on the other hand, have a team to root for- the Angels. And you guys spend a lot of money too. How would you feel about re-alignment? And what if they placed you with teams like the Yankees and Sox, or even the Dodgers? It wouldn't be the same as plowing through the 4 team AL West every year.

I'll give you a chance to rebuttal, but I have something for you on the topic of sports and their bottom lines. Can you believe the NCAA wants to expand to 96 teams? Could their be a worse possible idea. I feel there are so many negatives to this that it could be a series of e-mails on it's own. If they are really concerned about making money, in all seriousness, drop the women's tournament coverage. I apologize to all female readers out there, but ESPN is losing money on that thing. I wouldn't be surprised if the NCAA is paying ESPN to broadcast it. You realize the UCONN women's team has won 75 straight games? 75!! That's incredible. And nobody knows or cares. ESPN wants the rights to the men's tourney. They should drop the women's tourney, offer the NCAA a nice package (seriously NCAA, $6 Billion over 11 years isn't enough money???) and let us enjoy the best thing about college sports- a 65 team field that allows the regular season to matter, allows conference tournaments to matter, and crowns a true national champion. All of that would change if we let 96 in. I know you agree with me on this, I just want to see what arguments you bring to the table because expansion is absurd. Ok, I need to calm down.

Guru: I'm not sure how I feel about floating realignment. The problem is the huge gap between the haves and have-nots. I'm not sure that any realignment proposal truly closes the competitive gap--on the field and financially--and it seems like everyone has their own idea of how to do it. As an example of this, the plan I read about was different from the one you just relayed. In the one I read, some teams would be switching leagues, like the Mets, Nats, Pirates, Reds, Dodgers, Giants, Red Sox, Rays, Royals, White Sox, and Rangers. That's almost half the teams moving to the other league. What this proposal does, sensical or not, is get it right geographically. Teams that are from the same region are grouped in the same divisions, for the most part.

As I moused over the proposed divisions on this map (insert Rosenthal link), I noticed something: half the league's teams currently stink. All this plan does to me is this: group teams geographically, break up the Red Sox and Yankees, and move all the crappy teams around. So there's that. As an Angel fan, I don't want the Dodgers and Giants to replace the Rangers. That makes the division a lot more competitive, and why would I want more of a challenge for the Angels to make the playoffs? With only 2 possible spots to earn in the playoffs, the chances are already low from the start of the season that they'll make it. We've stumbled onto a more easily solvable problem: the format of the playoffs.

There are 30 teams in Major League Baseball, and 8 get to play in the postseason. That's roughly 30% of the teams. What if we added another wild card to each league to make 5 postseason teams in each league? The two wild card winners play each other in a best-of-three weekend set to advance into the the Division Series. We make the Division Series a best-of-seven instead of five, and start the season 4 days earlier in April. It goes against tradition, but who cares? Tradition only makes you outdated, and that's what the current system is. Now my idea isn't perfect, but what system is? Does the Maharishi have any ideas about realignment or the playoffs?

You hit on the NCAA's study of expanding the men's tournament field. I like this from an upset standpoint. Logically, the more teams that make the tournament, the longer you let them hang around, the better the chances for big upsets. Imagine an 18-seed upsetting a 7-seed in the first round. How epic would that be? This aspect, and the fact that the NCAA could make a few more yacht-loads of money and withhold it from its constituents, are about the only positives. If you're trying to foster upsets, this is the way to go. The NCAA, though, hates upsets. It doesn't care if the tourney is predictable; they want Duke, UCLA, UCONN, North Carolina, Indiana, Kansas, and Georgetown in the Final Four every year because those are the teams that drive TV ratings and ticket sales. All this does is let more undeserving power conference teams in. It would ensure that each of the major conferences would get their next 3-5 teams in.

An example of why this is a bad idea: the 2010 PAC-10. The conference had a horrible year, only securing two bids to the Dance. With a field of 96, you would have had the pleasure of seeing 22-11 Arizona State, 16-15 Arizona, and a 16-14 USC (with no self sanctions). What a crapfest. Why do we think this is a good idea again? So the NCAA can make even more money on its signature event? You mentioned in the MLB realignment discussion that what every major league-wide decision comes down to is the bottom line: Will a change/amendment bring in more revenue for the league. This is really all that Bud Selig, Gary Bettman, David Stern, and Roger Goodell care about when their heads hit the pillow every night. In the end, we can be confident that whatever decision the NCAA makes will be "well-researched and studied" and will help them maximize revenue and mitigate cost.

I completely disagree about the women's tournament. What isn't good about one team winning 75 games in a row and being as close to unbeatable as any team in any sport for the last 50 years? What isn't good about everyone knowing who will win that championship from Day One? What's not good about girls getting their big shot on TV, then dribbling the ball off their knee out of bounds in front of 2000 in a 20% capacity arena? How else are these girls going to get the exposure they need to improve or solidify their WNBA Draft status? Oh wait, doesn't ESPN have a contract with the WNBA to televise their games too? Hmmmmmm.

I hope it was clear that the previous paragraph was chock full of sarcastic rhetorical questions. It was clear? OK, just making sure.


Maharishi: I like you're idea of a new playoff format. I was never comfortable that only 4 teams from each league made the playoffs. It just seemed like a tragically low number.

I disagree with your notion that more rounds=more upsets. I think the little guys stand a chance because of the way the tournament is set up now. If you add byes and more games, I think you are hurting the smaller schools' chances of advancing. There's no way Northern Iowa beats Kansas if they are playing their 3rd game in 5 days. The bigger schools generally have bigger, stronger, and faster athletes. Lengthening the tournament favors those teams and I think would be bad in the long run. Sure first round upsets would occur, but I think the days of a Cornell going to the Sweet 16 would be pretty much over. That's just my opinion though.

Overall you're right, it's a horrible idea. I hope the NCAA isn't blinded by their own greed.

I know you must be happy your Dukies came through today. I know I said West Virginia had the better athletes and defensive prowess, but Duke made them look average on nearly every front. Losing Da'Sean Butler didn't help, but the game was out of reach at that point anyway. At least I got the Butler pick right.

It's been fun arguing with you. Maybe we'll have to hash this out again when the summer months roll around and we can discuss what it'll be like to have LeBron on the Knicks and why the Angels are struggling to win the West. Until then, enjoy having your column back Guru, I've enjoyed my time here.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
32
Vote
   


All Things Spring Part I

Hard to put a picture up for this post because there are so many things covered in it. The Sport Maharishi is back for a one-on-one, back and forth forum on all things spring in the world of sports--the Final Four, Tiger and the Masters, the NBA, and MLB Opening Day.

Forgive some rough transitions and references to earlier topics and try to connect it all. As always, thanks for your audience and time. We'll start things off with the Maharishi...


Sport Maharishi: Ay yo Guru (sorry, just had to channel my inner Jay-Z this morning, I'm also assuming you have a multi-racial fan base).

We are in the midst of what might be the greatest two-week stretch in sports. The NCAA Tournament is still going strong on the brink of the Final Four, Opening day is a mere 3 days away, the NBA is winding down and teams are jockeying for playoff positions (and LBJ and The Durantula are gunning for the scoring title), the Masters and the Tiger Woods comeback are a week away. To top it all off, the weather is getting nice, girls are wearing less (and more importantly are starting to have the bodies to do so) and the days are longer. This trumps the end of October (World Series, NBA and NHL season starts, NFL mid season, Halloween, shorter days, out of shape and pale girls, and colder nights). But I digress.

How excited are you for the Final Four? My favorite weekend in the tournament is probably the Sweet 16 and Elite 8, I feel there's a little less pressure and you are more likely to see a great game

And do you really think your Dukies have a chance to win this thing? I like Duke, I really do, but I'm not naive enough to believe they can put 2 really good games back to back. They are ove-rreliant on shooting, they don't have the athletes to hang with West Virginia, and I really think they are just happy to finally be here.
Can DaSean Butler get his team past Duke?
West VIrginia looks like a team with something to prove, Da'Sean Butler is an absolute stud who can carry a team, and the supporting cast I think is bigger (pause) and tougher than Duke's. I'll be rooting for Duke, but I just don't think they can get it done.

Sport Guru: Many happy returns to the Maharishi! Its good to have you back in the column, if only for the significant readership boost I get from your writing.

I am giddy about the Final Four, mainly because Duke gets to play. Yeah, the Final Four is usually fun to watch, but its hardly been appointment television for me the past couple years. But now I'm invested emotionally, and financially (you know, if gambling were legal). If you don't think Duke can win, you're blind. Look who else is in this thing! Who else has the inside/outside balance that Duke has? I think your assessment of Duke is outdated: they do rely heavily on shooting, but its not to the point anymore where they're shooting themselves out of games because of the presence they have inside. Say what you want about Brian Zoubek and Lance Thomas, these guys are legit threats to reckon with inside, at least on defense. Here's my argument. Duke hasn't had this kind of presence on the defensive glass and in challenging shots since the Landlord Shelden Williams. Because of the ability to change shots and clear the boards, Duke doesn't have to score as much or be as hot from the perimeter to win games. I gave some statistics about Duke's rebounding and defensive scoring ranks in my last post. They've been great defensively all season, and are one of the best defensive rebounding teams in the nation--much credit to Thomas and Zoubek for their improvements this season.

I love the leadership that Jon Scheyer brings to this team as the point guard. In the NCAA tournament, you have to have an elite guard who can lead your team if you want to win. You cannot win this thing without one. Scheyer wasn't ready to lead last year, and the Duke guards just got blitzed by Villanova's great backcourt in the Sweet 16. This year is a different story, the maturity in Scheyer and in Nolan Smith has been dramatic. These guys have turned into legitimate scorers who know how to get their points aside from standing on the 3 point line launching wide open jumpers.

You say they don't have the athletes to hang with WVU, which is indisputable. I would contend that West Virginia is going to have a tough time scoring because (a) Truck Bryant isn't going to play and (b) they don't have anybody who can shoot the ball. Duke is already tough on defense; if you thrive on getting into the paint and scoring a lot from close range, you're going to struggle against Duke's bigs (I have to harp on this. I never know when Duke will have good big men again). The win over Kentucky was impressive, but in a similar type of situation against a much more experienced team, I don't know if they can pull it out. West Virginia seems kind of temperamental to me. They seem like the kind of team that is high risk/high reward, and I never know if they'll shoot themselves in the foot to lose a game, or if they'll execute perfectly and dominate. Believe it or not, I think Duke is more of a sure bet (if gambling were legal) in the semifinal.

What do you think about the other semifinal game?

I disagree with you on the best time of the sports year. I'm glad we disagree on this just to get a different perspective, but if we're talking about sports, the female talent argument, if you will, is irrelevant. I agree that this may put April over the top against the end of October, but it has nothing to do with sports. And this is a column about sports. I think.

I evaluate this on the feeling I get. The feeling I get during MLB playoffs, NBA tip off, NASCAR Chase for the Cup, college and pro football...I don't have that feeling during March Madness. At no other time of the year do you get as many sports leagues at crucial points of their seasons as in mid/late October. There is literally an appointment TV game on every single night in October. What's going on right now? The most boring part of the NBA season, yes, the Final Four, and the end of spring training. Remember, Opening Day shares a Monday with the end of college basketball, so there's very little overlap. Maybe I'm being too nitpicky with specific dates and such, I don't know. I'm still partial to October. Let's move on.

What are your thoughts on Tiger's imminent return to the links at the Master's?
Does he systematically destroy everyone? If so, does he start doing so on Thursday as opposed to Saturday or early Sunday? Could the media firestorm and personal turmoil be enough to shake even the most apparently confident and swaggerized (??) golfer in history? What happens when he hears that first boo or verbal dagger from the gallery, aside from that person getting stalked and immediately banned from the tournament?

I haven't the slightest idea how he is going to react. Remember, he hasn't played in months (allegedly), and he'll inevitably be rusty. The question is, how long does it take him to shake off the rust, and will he still be in striking distance in order to make a run? I don't think he'll pace the field all weekend long. If he wins this thing, I think it will come in the form of a furious comeback, something like a 7-under back 9 on Saturday, or a hole in one on the 12th and subsequent booming drive off at 13 to cap Amen Corner. I don't know how well Tiger blocks out personal distractions or failures or the fact that everyone knows his darkest secret to have tunnel vision on his game. We've never apparently seen him have to do that before, but now he will.

Maharishi: Whoa, slow down Guru. Ever heard of the expression 'less is more?'

In response to your Duke-related soap box: Really, Sheldon Williams-Parker is your benchmark for good big men? He went to 3 Sweet 16s and one Final Four, not exactly stellar if you are at Duke. He was embarrassed by Tyrus Thomas his Senior year. He has been a complete bust in the NBA. I'd venture that the only thing he's known for is being Candace Parker's husband. And I'm supposed to get all excited because I think Zoubek and the Plumlee brothers can match his talent and defensive presence? I'll pass.

I think you are overlooking Da'Sean Butler's ability to rise to the occasion and lead his team. They had no business beating Kentucky, a team with 4 first round draft picks. And personally I don't think the game was really that close, West Virginia was in control the whole game. Butler can shoot, Ebanks can get to the rim, and while I don't think Mazulla is going to go off for 17 pts again, you still have to respect him.

In the other semi-final, I like Butler, and it's not just because they are the 'underdog' or feel good story, I really think they are the better team. They have a bona-fide NBA player in Gordon Hayward (which is huge this time of year). Heck, Shelvin Mack might even be a first round lock the way he's playing. They have a solid big in Matt Howard, a slew of guys who can flat out shoot, and a coach who never seems to get rattled. I know Tommy Izzo is Mr. March, but they really struggled to get here- they struggled with New Mexico State, needed a buzzer beater to get past Maryland, had trouble with Northern Iowa (I still don't want to talk about it),
The sight of Ali Farokhmanesh gives the willies to the Maharishi
and needed a defensive collapse on Tennessee's part to reach Indy. Not exactly resonating victories. Butler on the other hand, with the exception of the Murray State game, outplayed all their opponents, including 2 very popular Final Four picks in Syracuse and Kansas State. They will have some pressure playing at home, but judging how they haven't lost since DECEMBER, I think Brad Stevens and his squad will more than rise to the occasion. Plus Butler is 8-2 when playing on Saturdays this year. How's that for gambling information?

But enough about basketball, let's talk Tiger. I don't think there's ever been a situation in sports when the debated outcome of a performance is so polarizing. He could sack up and tune out all the distractions and just say "F it, I'm winning this thing." Or he could crack (like most people would), get all bothered and completely choke. I tend to side with the latter. Golf, and maybe your favorite sport NASCAR, are unique in the sense that they are affected by so many variables that have a much greater impact on the outcome. For example, if Kobe is having an off night shooting, he can still get to the basket, shut someone down on defense or find teammates for open looks. (Whether or not they hit them is a different story, the Laker bench is horrible). When he came back from alleged rape charges I'm sure it affected his game. But there were still other areas he could contribute to that wouldn't be as affected by someone yelling "Pull out!" every time he shot the ball. If Pujols is having an off night at the plate he could pick up his defense, maybe draw a few walks and run the bases really well. Plus, just having him in the lineup strikes fear in pitchers and maybe changes the way the pitch to Holliday and the rest of their lineup. In football, individual players can step up and directly impact the outcome of a game. Shoot, Dexter Jackson won Tampa Bay the Super Bowl as a safety. I rest my case.

Golf is not the same. Let's say the people booing really gets to him on his putting. Can he 2 and 3 putt and still win the Masters? Absolutely not! Even if he kills his drives and is silky on his short game, poor putting will kill his chances. Maybe his putting is great but he shanks a few drives because someone yelled out "Cheater!." In golf, each subsequent shot is directly affected by the previous shot. He has to be on his game for 250 strokes. You know how hard that is? Yes he's Tiger, yes he's done some amazing things before. But playing through pain is completely different than playing through criticism and ridicule. I think he has a fair showing and maintains his composure, but on the inside it'll mess with him and I don't think he can block it out for 5 days. I don't care what kind of restrictions Augusta National have, people will still talk, and it will get to him. I know you're probably in the camp that thinks he can win, care to defend your side?

And don't try to downplay the importance of Opening Day. Yes it falls on the day of the National Championship, but it's still a big deal. Plus the Sox and Yanks open on Sunday with no major sporting events to compete with. Admit it, you're stoked baseball is back in your life. From a fan and fantasy standpoint, I think you are just giddy inside.

Guru: Don't waste your breath. You spent an entire paragraph refuting something completely unrelated to what I asserted about Shelden Williams. I never said anything about his tournament record or his individual hacks against anyone else.
Not the prettiest face
The only thing that I would agree with is the whole Candace Parker bit. She married down.

A few thoughts on Butler-Michigan State before I address Tiger. Firstly, I want to establish that there's some serious Ewing Theory operating with the Spartans. Our previous Ewing Theory team was Purdue, but now they're gone after overachieving. The loss of Kalin Lucas' positive effect on Izzo's squad cannot be understated. Add that extra motivation to the unparalleled way that MSU handles the tourney every year, and I'm not shying away from declaring them my favorite in Indy IN SPITE of the presence of Duke. Don't take this as a slight to Butler. I can't say enough about Butler and the way that Brad Stevens has motivated his team to topple the Goliaths Syracuse and K-State. They have the makeup of a giant killer, but I think that the run stops here. The logical pick is Butler, but I've learned to never go against the Ewing Theory. Mark it down: Duke-Michigan State for the title on Monday night.

Back to Eldrick. I agree with the notion that its easier to compound one mistake in golf than in any other game. Also, golfers don't compete against each other. They compete against a course and then compare to each other. If Tiger were playing a game against a competitor, I think it would be easier for him to regain his dominance. It will be harder for him to get his game back against an inanimate, natural opponent that doesn't do anything to motivate or piss him off. Again I'll say it, I don't think he wins at Augusta. The more he plays, the better he'll be, but he has no lead up and not a lot of tournament preparation to the Masters.

What's next?
Baseball preview, NBA stretch run, LeBron vs. Durant
Your pick Maharishi....

(Stay tuned for Part II to come soon).
Add CommentsAdd Comments
37
Vote
   


NASCAR: the Ultimate Non-Sport Sport

Denny Hamlin just won a race on a torn ACL


Some of you may not be aware that it is NASCAR season. Heck, I'd venture to say that its possible that some of you don't even know what NASCAR is. If you fall into the latter category, I am amazed that you manage to tiptoe through the Internet as a sports fan, doing things like reading the Sport Guru, but somehow manage to be oblivious to the most popular and watched sport in America.

Funny that I used the word "sport" to categorize NASCAR, because of how critically its merits as a sport are weighed by most. I have one argument to add to each side of the NASCAR: Sport or Not A Sport? debate.


NASCAR: Sport

In the endless pursuit of determining whether certain athletic endeavors are sports or not, a friend of mine came up with a pretty simple definition of sport. Basically, anything that has self-determined results--basketball, football, baseball, hockey, curling, cricket, etc--is, by definition, sport.
Sorry Shawn, gymnastics is not technically a sport
Anything that is subjectively judged by an independent evaluator or group of evaluators--gymnastics, figure skating--is not sport, but is "athletic competition." I like this definition because it is simple, divides ground adequately, and does not require the separation of athletic and non-athletic competition. To provide a helpful image, I would separate sport and competition under the common umbrella of competitive athletics.

So, technically, NASCAR is a sport. Drivers compete against each other to be ahead of the pack when the laps run out. The outcomes bears itself out in the performance of the participants, no judging or deciding necessary.


NASCAR: Non-Sport

On Monday's rescheduled running of the Sprint Cup Series at Martinsville, Denny Hamlin came from a few spots back on a green-white-checkered restart to grab the lead and notch his first win of the young 2010 season. There is nothing out of the ordinary about someone coming from behind to win, the race itself, or the fact that Hamlin won. What makes this such a compelling story is the fact that Hamlin has a torn right ACL, stemming from a pickup basketball injury sustained in January. The fact that Hamlin can jump in his car, strap on the belt, and compete with the best drivers in the world--all with a torn ACL--is where anti-NASCAR enthusiasts will insert their argument.

The big knock on NASCAR drivers is that there is thought to be no athletic ability requisite in mastering the sport. Sure, there are elements present that every athlete must have, like endurance, focus, strategy, hand-eye coordination, and split-second decision making, but all of these surface while the agent is sitting in a seat, driving a car. Certainly there is nothing athletic about that, which is the basis for many arguments that NASCAR is not a sport. Some of these guys couldn't hit a baseball or score a basketball if their lives depended on it. How can something that does not require running, jumping, catching, throwing, balancing, or footwork, possibly be a sport?

These are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to for/against NASCAR arguments, I just thought Denny Hamlin's win was an appropriate time and place to add some fuel to the fire.

Add CommentsAdd Comments
103
Vote
   


A Timely Exit



The good times and easy smiles at USC are over for Pete Carroll and the Trojan faithful. A reign created from the stuff of college football legend (9 years, 2 national championships, 7 consecutive Pac-10 titles, 3 Heisman winners, a near-.900 winning percentage) ended in two abrupt days. With one phone call from an NFL team, Pete Carroll was gone quicker than a Reggie Bush 40-yard touchdown run. After 9 years, Carroll decided it was time to move on and try something new, and walked out the door on USC.

"Walking out" is a convenient way to put it, given the present climate at USC-- 77 and sunny. Just kidding. The Trojan athletic department is undergoing multiple investigations for possible violations in both football and men's basketball. The basketball investigation has found some amount of closure as the program imposed sanctions on itself just weeks ago. This implies a recognition of wrongdoing, as well as a ploy to get a lesser penalty if/when the NCAA brings the hammer down. The fate of USC's then-head coach Tim Floyd? Resigned amidst a flurry of criticism and allegation.

Sounds familiar, right? Long-time coach makes a timely--if not conspicuously sudden-- exit while his program endures recent allegations of impropriety, leaving the athletic department, staffers, players, and the new coach to pick up the pieces? Seems to me that there is a common thread at USC: when the going gets tough, the coaches quit. Everything came easy to Pete Carroll after arriving in Los Angeles: top-ranked recruits flocked to SC to stock the lower rungs of the depth chart, wins piled up as SC demolished opponents, Heisman winners and other stars graduated to the NFL, and a rabid, dormant fan base came alive in support of its juggernaut. Pete Carroll became a celebrity, even an idol, in the shadows of Hollywood. Life was good, recruiting was easy, and success met the Trojans over and over again.

Everyone saw Pete Carroll at his best during these times, but in recent years, his team has slowly and increasingly met with failure on the field. The crushing loss to Texas in the 2005 National Championship game, the home loss to 41-point underdog Stanford in 2007, the single loss to Oregon State in 2008, then the stain of 2009's 9-4 record. Things got tough for Pete Carroll, and once again it rang true that difficult times reveal a man's true character. He walked out on his team and the program that he built when it needs him the most.

ESPN's Ivan Maisel wrote an insightful article about the meaning and implications of Carroll's shocking exit. Maisel chronicles the deep competitiveness of Carroll that originated his incredible success. This competitive drive, though, disappeared when the Trojans fell down the mountain. Instead of digging in, hunkering down, and sucking it up to pick his program off the mat, Carroll decided it was too much for him and bolted, leaving a trail of carnage, confusion, shock, and insecurity in his wake. This is really the first time USC has been vulnerable since Carroll arrived, and he couldn't handle it.

This all doesn't even venture into some questionable personal character of Carroll's, we don't want to touch that. This is strictly about his professional character, although it is hardly logical to compartmentalize a person's character. Carroll is the master of portraying himself as the good, easy-going, accessible, and approachable football coach. Naturally, supporters will harken back to memories of him and see these things, causing them to buy the explanations that his departure is not about the investigation of his program and that he's guilty of nothing, when all I will remember is a guy weaseling out of a tough spot with a lot at stake, and leaving his former employer to deal with the fallout.

You say that you "know where [USC football] stand[s]," and you "fought hard to do right", Pete? You stated that your abdication is not in the least about the possible penalties? Excuse me, but I just don't believe you.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
25
Vote
   


Mike Leach's Bizarre Firing



There is no shortage of drama or controversy in Lubbock, Texas this holiday season. Two days after being suspended from coaching his team in the Alamo Bowl, Texas Tech's Mike Leach was fired Wednesday in a rapid chain of events. Instead of focusing all their attention on Saturday's bowl game, the Red Raiders must deal with the distraction of the hailstorm around its former coach, and one of their teammates, receiver Adam James.

Word broke on Monday that Leach was suspended from coaching in the Alamo Bowl when reports told of an alleged wrongful treatment of an injured player by Leach and his staff earlier this month.
James, a sophomore WR, filed a complaint that upon being diagnosed with a mild concussion on December 16, he was confined to an electrical closet in darkness, and later an equipment room, for hours while the team practiced. It is unclear what Leach's intention was in ordering James' solitary confinement, but it is very possible that he wanted to send a message to a player with a questionable work ethic and lack of respect toward the coaching staff. Reports in defense of Leach hold that coaches had on several occasions questioned James' work ethic in practice and received criticism and disrespect from the wide receiver. Original reactions from within Leach's circle indicated that the news report was one-sided, sympathetic to James, and designed to portray the coach as the attacker.

Wait: did I forget to mention that the player is the son of a well-known TV football analyst for the biggest media power in the world of sports? Yes, ESPN's Craig James is the player's father, and undoubtedly wielded his influence to smear the coach and possibly get him fired. After all, Leach did mess with his son. There is little doubt in my mind, because this whole thing just smells of foul play. Leach decidedly lost this battle in the court of public opinion, and did not seem to get a chance to defend himself by either the media--most notably, (surprise) ESPN-- or the university. I am of the opinion that were a different player involved instead of James, that this story would barely have made Sportscenter, much less warranted any disciplinary action.

What James was forced to do did not cause him harm or exacerbate his concussion symptoms. Was it bizarre, unprecedented, and mostly useless? Yes. Dangerous? Not in the least. This did not seem to factor into the disciplinary action and subsequent firing of Leach. The implication is that maybe there was more going on under the surface than this sequence of events lets on. A bigger rift between Leach and his team, Leach and James, or Leach and the university feels evident, at least from my perspective. The firing seems like retribution for a series of other questionable coaching methods that never made the news rather than for this isolated, innocuous, and unharmful event.

If Leach indeed was sending a disciplinary message to James regarding his insubordination and poor work habits, then this should be treated as the equivalent to a benching, verbal lashing, or any other of a variety of disciplinary techniques. Just because a coach has never stuck a player in a closet for a couple hours does not mean it is a better or worse tactic than a good tongue lashing. Its just a different tactic. Worthy of a one-game suspension and investigative review? Absolutely. Worthy of a dishonorable firing? Not for me. Leach's reaction to his suspension told me a lot: he did not apologize for anything, and immediately planned to appeal the suspension. He represented himself as having done nothing wrong and having nothing to hide. What would someone who is guilty of wrongdoing do/say in this situation? Attempt a cover-up with complex excuses and elaborate statements in the press. Leach made no show, but simply said he was appealing the suspension and accused Texas Tech of dealing "in lies" and "fabricating a story...which includes, but is not limited by, the animosity remaining from last year's contract negotiations." This statement is an unwavering declaration that the relationship between school and coach had soured long before Adam James complained.


In a new story that continues to develop, it seems to me like Mike Leach is the real victim, not Adam James. There is no doubt in my mind that the sports media is not telling the whole story, knowingly or not, and the damage to Leach's reputation is irrevocable because of it. Whoever rolls the dice and takes a "gamble" on Mike Leach next will find themselves with an innovative, smart, and successful coach.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
19
Vote
   


The Hot Stove Is Hot



I'm back! Sorry, again, I'm a busy college student. Going to a very expensive school mandates my academic diligence, lest I upset my wonderfully supportive parents. The Guru would like to apologize for the long silence and thank you, the reader, for your continued readership and audience.

Let's get to the sports.....


If you felt a little unsatisfied with the amount of activity at last week's MLB Winter Meetings in Indy, feel free to join the club. The week was marked by a few ho-hum signings, minor deals, and one "blockbuster" trade involving (guess who?) the Yankees, Tigers, and Diamondbacks, that disappointed those of us waiting on the edge of our seats and hitting the refresh button on mlbtraderumors.com. Much speculation, rumoring, and prediction surrounded superstars like Roy Halladay, John Lackey, Jason Bay, and Matt Holliday. Nothing concrete transpired with any of them at the meetings, and most remains unresolved. Monday's news, however, brought clarity and closure to the questions about where Halladay and Lackey would end up.

Halladay, long known to be a major trade piece with an expiring contract for the Blue Jays, was dealt to the Phillies in a 3-team deal that included Philly ace Cliff Lee being sent to the improving-by-the-day Mariners. Halladay to the Phillies comes as no surprise to anyone who follows baseball, but the Lee/Mariners component startled many. The Phillies and Blue Jays most likely needed a 3rd team to make the deal work because of the inability to match up players on their own. Many highly rated prospects are involved in the deal, which is still being finalized and hashed out. According to ESPN.com, the Mariners will send top prospects pitchers Phillippe Aumont and Juan Ramirez and outfielder Tyson Gillies to Philadelphia for Lee. For Halladay, the Phillies will send a couple touted prospects of their own, outfielder Michael Taylor, top minor league hurler Kyle Drabek, and catcher Travis d'Arnaud to Toronto. Along with Halladay, Toronto sends $6 million to the Phillies.

First impressions of the deal suggest that Toronto greatly reduced its asking price for Halladay based on their previous demanded returns. In essence, they receive the player they want the most in Drabek, but not incredibly much more. No top outfield prospect Dominic Brown. No J.A. Happ. This package is significantly less than what Toronto wanted at last season's trade deadline, when teams in the heat of the pennant race might be willing to fork over a little more than they should. Throw in the extra $6 million that Philly receives, and you've got one big question mark and lots of disappointed confusion for Blue Jays fans.

The "3-way" trade actually amounts to two separate trades that only involve 2 teams. There are no indications that Seattle and Toronto are exchanging anything in the deal, either directly or through Philadelphia. Writers and columnists are lauding the Mariners for the acquisition of Lee for, even though they will lose their two premier pitching prospects. The irony of Lee's tradability is his status as one of the top few starting pitchers in the league. He's been traded now twice since July, just one season removed from winning the AL Cy Young award while pitching for Cleveland. On paper, this looks like a fantastic swap for Seattle, but I am skeptical that the move has the Mariners' best long-term interests at heart.

The surprise inclusion of Lee in this deal is rooted in a fear that Lee would leave Philly when his contract runs out after 2010, or at least demand C.C. Sabathia money upon free agency. Philadelphia may not have improved itself markedly with Halladay over Lee, but they did assure themselves more than one year Cy Young caliber pitching with Halladay's fresh 3 year/$60 million extension. In summary, the Mariners are looking STRONG for 2010, but time will tell whether they mortgaged the future of their rotation for a fling with Lee.

It looks to me like the Phillies are the only team that (a didn't create more question marks for themselves or b) didn't make itself ostensibly worse in the short term. They kept a current member of their big league rotation (Happ) while not having to give up the guy that Toronto really wanted--and Philly's #1 fielding prospect (Brown). The Phillies can now throw out Halladay, Cole Hamels, Happ, Joe Blanton, and Jamie Moyer in the traditionally light-hitting National League. My imagination is running wild as to what Halladay will produce in the NL: his dominance of potent AL East lineups was clear. I can only dream of what kind of video game numbers this guy can put up while getting to face hitting pitchers 3 times per start.




Another large transaction of a frontline starter took place Monday, in John Lackey's sellout abdication money grab signing with the Boston Red Sox. (I'm not a bitter Angel fan or anything like that). My initial reaction was despair and disappointment, mixed with a little anger. Then the figures of the signing came out and my despondency turned to relief and sympathy for Boston. The final agreement: 5 years/$85 million. EIGHTY-FIVE!!!!! I don't have the adjectives to describe how outlandish that contract is for Lackey, which is why I'm now thankful the Angels abstained like they did. If anything, I'm glad that Boston now has that egregious commitment on their hands.

My mathematic training tells me that Lackey will earn $17 million per year all the way through his age 36 season. My intuition (and eyeballs) scream to me that Lackey isn't worth $12 mil, much less 15, much less 17. Boston overpaid by about $25 million over the 5 years, in my estimation, for a guy who has 1 season with more than 14 wins, one season with an ERA under 3.56, nary a 200 strikeout year, and 2 consecutive seasons began on the DL with forearm trouble in his throwing arm. To me, these are gigantic red flags and caution signs. To everyone else, apparently, they are anomalies that are easily overlooked right before committing $85 million to a 31 year old pitcher with a poor career line at Fenway Park.

Let me be clear once again: I'm absolutely ecstatic thathe got paid as much as he did, there are no negatives for me or my Angels. Either Lackey will not earn his contract on the mound, which he arguably will not, or the Red Sox will be saddled with a bloated contract that they can't wait to get off the books in the fall of 2015. Best case scenario? Both of those scenarios come true, which is 58% likely at this point in time. Let me repeat: I LOVE THIS SIGNING. I now have a new favorite player to hate in baseball, a position that A-Rod has unsatisfyingly occupied for the last few years. Boston: enjoy your glorified #2 starter who makes just $4 million less than your other top 3 starters combined.

Just a couple quick facts: John Lackey earns $6 million more than Josh Beckett for 2010. John Lackey earns $16 million more than Jon Lester for 2010. John Lackey earns roughly $2 million more than C.C. Sabathia for 2010. John Lackey earns $9 million more than Cliff Lee in 2010. John Lackey earns $13 million more than Felix Hernandez in 2010. Get the point? Here Red Sox Nation, read this and weep John Lackey's career stats
Add CommentsAdd Comments
44
Vote
   


A Titanic Fall Classic

You'll have to pardon me while I write. Fresh off the the completion of the ALCS with the Yankees' closeout of my Angels, I'm in a bit of a despondent sulk. For the record, the Yankees were the better team all series long, but the Angels shot themselves in the foot (or feet) at several crucial points throughout the series that dramatically altered the outcome. Alright, I got that out of the way, now on with the World Series preview.


The Yankees, when the starting pitching clicks, look virtually unbeatable. If C.C. Sabathia and Andy Pettitte replicate their performances from the ALCS, then we are in for a fascinating clash of giants. Sorry, I screwed up the ALCS prediction. I stand by my pick. The Phillies simply undressed the Dodgers in the NLCS, just as I thought they would in 5 games, giving away the one game they dropped in Los Angeles. When that vaunted lineup mixes correctly with the unmatched starting rotation, the Phillies look virtually unbeatable. Both teams' hitting orders are second-to-none. One perfectly fulfilled my pick, the other perfectly foiled my pick. A few other factors might determine who will take the crown late next week. Let's break it down.


Offense

We know that this is the biggest strength of both clubs. Indeed, there may not be two more balanced lineups in all of baseball. Both teams have postseason experience and a winning attitude, although the Yankees haven't been on this stage in 6 years. The Phillies have no holes and have incredibly versatility with speed and power at the top, power and average in the middle, and whatever they need at the bottom. Playing in the National League may cause this team to focus in a little more on making the most of their opportunities, which is something the Yankees do not have. There is no doubt that the Phils will make the transition to the AL game much smoother than the Yankees will go to the NL game. The Yankees may have fewer easy outs in their lineup, and I don't want to downplay the potency of this lineup, but my eyeballs tell me the Phillies look stronger and more balanced.

Advantage: Phillies


Starting Rotation

I'll save the histrionics and intrigue of this pick. By going out and getting better at the deadline in picking up defending AL Cy Young winner Cliff Lee, the Phillies established their starting rotation as the best in baseball. Lee, Hamels, Blanton, Pedro Martinez, Jamie Moyer, and J.A. Happ are as tough and deep 1-6 as you will find anywhere. They showed how good they can be in holding the Dodgers to less than 5 runs in every game except for one during the NLCS. Lee's Game 3 8-inning shutout was masterful. For the Yankees, its basicallly Sabathia's brilliance and then crossed fingers. You can never know whether you'll get 7 shutout innings from A.J. Burnett or 4 walks in 5 innings with 5 runs allowed. Andy Pettitte is a gritty and experienced starter who will not be spooked by the spotlight. He may not have the best stuff of his career, but he makes up for a lot of that by knowing how to pitch in the World Series. After Pettitte, there are many question marks: Will Joe Girardi go with the same 3-man rotation that he did in the ALCS? If he adds a 4th starter, will it be Joba Chamberlain or Chad Guadin? Either way, the Phillies are much, much deeper and frightening when their starter takes the ball in the 1st inning. The Yankees cannot afford for Sabathia to be anything less than dominant in his 2 starts.

Advantage: Phillies


Bullpen

The Yankees certainly didn't impress me in front of Mariano Rivera in the ALCS, blowing leads in Game 2, Game 3, and Game 5. Rivera was brilliant aside from his slip up in the clinching game's 2-inning save. Phil Hughes was not good in his outings, and Phil Coke sounds like he should be working for a certain major drink corporation. Chamberlain was pedestrian at best, and Damaso Marte couldn't hold the Angels either. Once again, the Yankees must have the lead when they get to Rivera to be confident that they can shorten the game. The good news is, the Phillie bullpen is equally bad, or worse. Their saving grace may be having Moyer and/or Happ available to pitch in every game because they won't be in the rotation. Brad Lidge looked good in his short work, collecting a save and a win in 2 scoreless LCS innings. Still, no lead is safe with him on the mound in the 9th, especially against New York. The long and middle relievers and setup guys look like a complete wash to me, and the Yankees have a better closer.

Advantage: Yankees


Fielding

I have to be honest: I watched no more than 3 innings of the entire NLCS. I was that confident in my prediction that the Phillies would prevail. I can't speak specifically about the Philadelphia defense, but I do know that Shane Victorino is fantastic in centerfield and that Jimmy Rollins and Chase Utley are slick in the middle infield. I know Carlos Ruiz is a good defensive catcher. They always say that you'll be good on defense if you're competent through the middle of the field, and the Phillies definitely fit that criteria. I did get a chance to watch the Yankee defense. I got the chance to watch Mark Teixeira, Derek Jeter, and the corner outfielders rob hit after hit from my Angels. Teixeira is unmatched at first base. Jeter's demise at short may or may not be drastically exaggerated. Swisher and Damon are just not-bad enough to play the field everyday. This series could be determined by the glove work, because we know that both defenses will be busy.

Advantage: Push


Manager/Coaching

Joe Girardi did nothing to change my opinion of him. In fact, he just confirmed to me that he overmanages his team in certain situations, and ends up burning his pitchers and bench players too early. If he can't figure out how to correctly manage a National League game, he's going to find himself in a situation desperately needing a guy he already burned in a double-switch or something. This double-switch, National League style of game cannot be understated for a visiting American League manager. I'm not wild about Charlie Manuel either. He looks like he's ready for pudding pops and "Murder, She Wrote" reruns at the retirement home, not his 2nd consecutive World Championship. So who's got the upper hand on the coaching staff? Beats me. The Yankees used to have Don Zimmer and Donnie Baseball as coaches, right? Oh, I love Tony Pena's mustache, too. We'll go with that.

Advantage: Yankees


Intangibles

It's hard to beat the Yankees in this category. Jeter, Pettitte, Sabathia, Rivera, Posada. All these guys have been here a handful of times and know what it takes to win this thing, minus Sabathia. Jeter's talents are clearly shown in his career statistics, but he's even better with the unexplainable stuff. He's just always in the right place making the flash bulb play in the field or working that full count to a tough base hit or whatever. The Phils aren't short on these things, either. Ryan Howard seems to have that knack for big spots as well, and a big sense of clutch, too. Rollins has all the tools, Victorino is a relentless scrapper, and Jayson Werth will kill you if you focus too hard on the top 4 hitters.

Here's the kicker: the Phillies won it last year, so they know what it takes to win. Their team is virtually the same as last year's champions, so they have know each other and have the chemistry. The Yankees haven't been here since 2003. Things have changed, Jeter, Rivera, Pettitte, and Posada are the only holdovers from that team, and they're old. Still productive, but old. Against a lesser foe, I'd take the Yankees here, but if anyone besides the Bombers knows how to win a World Series, its these Phillies.

Advantage: Phillies

Prediction: I'd love to be diplomatic and not offer one. Really, I'm scared to pick between the true best team from each league because they're both so good. However, I know that people love the predictions, that the predictions are polarizing and fun to argue or agree with. Let the arguing or agreeing begin: Philadelphia in 7
Add CommentsAdd Comments
52
Vote
   


NLCS Preview



The 2009 National League Championship Series has fulfilled its purpose, just like its American League counterpart has done. The first round of the playoff has produced the two best teams in a best of seven for a shot at the World Series. Cardinals fans could argue that their team was the best of the regular season and simply had a bad series against the Dodgers, but the reason the Dodgers won so handily is because they are a better team. LA's matchup against Philadelphia is shaping up to be a very compelling series.

So let's break it down just like we did with the ALCS. Let it be read that I don't know yet which team I think will win. Rest easy, though, because I will have a prediction by the time my preview is done.

Offense/lineup

The Phils are stacked. The Dodgers are stacked. Philadelphia might have the most balanced speed/average/power combination in all of baseball, including the Yankees. With 30 steals and power at the top in Jimmy Rollins, followed by the Flyin' Hawaiian Shane Victorino, Chase Utley, Ryan Howard, Jason Werth, Raul Ibanez, and so on. The Dodgers are a little thinner and less dependable at the top with Rafael Furcal, and Joe Torre seems unable to find a lineup he likes enough to stay with. Andre Ethier, Man-Ram, and superstar Matt Kemp form a substantial 3-4-5, if Torre situates them there. The bottom also thins out in the LA lineup, with the corpse of Russell Martin, Ronnie Belliard/Orlando Hudson, and Casey Blake. If that comparison does not favor Philly enough already, the fact that every hitter in the top 7 slots is either left handed or switch-hitting. That creates matchup problems that will only make things worse for the thin Dodger rotation.

Advantage: Phillies

Starting Rotation

The Dodger rotation, for better or worse, looks a lot different now than it did in April. Chad Billingsley looked like a Cy Young candidate at the start, but can't seem to get anybody out these days. At present, he's not even scheduled into the rotation, but will come on in relief instead. He's handed over the staff ace reins to Clayton Kershaw, who may just be ready to have his coming out party on the big stage in this series. He will take the ball in Game 1 with huge pressure to win at home. The midseason pickup of Vicente Padilla has paid off for the Dodgers, but they will be sorely disappointed if they count on Padilla to pitch well in a must-win game. Randy Wolf and Hiroki Kuroda both pitch well in stretches and can be downright dominant on any given night. Overall though, the Dodger rotation is nothing to be feared by the potent Philly hitters.

The Phils on the other hand have competent starting pitching coming out of the woodwork. Cole Hamels will lead them into Game 1, with Pedro Martinez, Cliff Lee, and Joe Blanton to follow. The Dodgers get no breaks because the Phillies have trot out 4 guys capable of throwing a shutout at any time. Hamels especially likes facing LA, posting a 2-0 record, 1.50 ERA, and 26 K in 30.0 innings in his career against them.

Advantage: Phillies

The Pen

Both teams have good arms in the bullpen, but the Dodgers are a cut above the Phillies and the rest of the National League for the year. The emergence of Ramon Troncoso and Ronald Belisario was a nice surprise for Torre all year long. With Billingsley and situational lefty Hong-Chi Kuo, the Dodger relief is well capable of shortening any game. Any game that the Dodgers lead is essentially over in 7 innings before setup man George Sherrill and closer Jonathan Broxton take the ball. The Dodger starters must keep them in the game while the offense scratches some runs together or else they will lose the advantages they gain at the back of the bullpen. The Phillie bullpen has had surprising success while being a revolving door of roles all season long. The specifics of their relief do not compare with the stock in the Dodger bullpen, and Charlie Manuel should cross his fingers that his offense produces multi-run leads for closer Brad Lidge to enjoy, because he is about as dependable to close games as your local weatherman is to predict the weather.

BIG advantage: Dodgers

Manager/Coaching

Charlie Manuel has done a great job with his team over the last two years, but had a wealth of talent from the start. Even the immortal John McCloskey (sort by W-L%, click twice) could manage this roster to the NLCS in consecutive years. Joe Torre's roster isn't exactly chopped liver either, but I don't think even the most blindly loyal Phillie fan would say that his guy is better than Torre at his job.

Advantage: Dodgers

On paper, or in a shorter series, I really like the Dodgers, but you can't trot out a rotation of Kershaw, Padilla, Wolf, and Kuroda and expect to see Game 6 against Philadelphia. Not when the other team has Hamels, Martinez, Lee, and Blanton. There's no large Dodger advantage aside from the bullpen, and you can't use that advantage if you don't have the lead. As much as my heart is screaming "FREEWAY SERIES," I have to go with my better judgment on this one.

Phillies in 5 games
Add CommentsAdd Comments
51
Vote
   


ALCS Preview



The above photo represents the majority of what you need to know about the 2009 ALCS: A-Rod will choke at the plate (as he presumably just did in the image), or he will come through and significantly increase his team's chances of advancing to the Fall Classic.

A-Rod's Yankees will have to go through the one team they probably wanted to see the least: the Angels. Something about the way that the Angels play simply confounds the Yanks, to the tune of the only winning record of any Yankee opponent over the last 10 years or so. In the past 6 seasons, the Angels have owned the Yankees with an impressive 35 wins against 23 losses. Let's break down the series by category....

Offense/lineup

The Yankees have the best lineup in baseball, hands down. No one can match the power AND contact threats in the top of this lineup with Jeter-Damon-Teixeira-Rodrigue z. If A-Rod, a perennial postseason deadbeat, can build on his ALDS power surge in the clutch, the Angels are going to have to be near perfect on the mound to keep the Yankees down. Rodriguez's playoff struggles are well documented, showing a shocking power outage in a frustrating playoff career.

The Angels pounded the ball all season long to the surprise of most, and made no exception for the Red Sox in the ALDS. This lineup is virtually identical to last year's ALDS version, with the subtraction of Mark Teixeira and the additions of Kendry Morales and Bobby Abreu into the everyday lineup. It is Abreu who is credited with the exceptional turnaround of the Angel hitting philosophy of taking pitches and being more selective. His 4 walks in Game 1 against the Red Sox are a testament to that fact. His importance to this lineup cannot be understated. The continual emergence of Kendry Morales and the consistency of Torii Hunter in the heart of the order give the Angels a formidable rival to their Yankee counterparts. Sunday's amazing 9th inning rally, sparked by 9-hitter Erick Aybar, shows that there is not one easy out in the entire Angel lineup.

Advantage: Yankees

Rotation

This is where the Angels have their best shot to win the series: the Yankees have nary a dependable starter after ace C.C. Sabathia. One could argue that #2 starter A.J. Burnett is a shutdown starter--he certainly has the potential and talent--but he is erratic to the point that manager Joe Girardi might never know what he's getting from Burnett. After Burnett, the Yankees will trot out grizzled playoff veteran Andy Pettitte, who is still capable of tossing a postseason gem when needed, and Joba Chamberlain, no better than a question mark at this point.

The front of the Angel rotation shone bright in the division series, with John Lackey and Jered Weaver combining for 1 earned run and 6 hits over nearly 15 innings of work in shutting down the potent Boston lineup for 2 wins. With Scott Kazmir and Joe Saunders rounding out the ALCS rotation, the Angels provide no relief at any point for Yankee hitters. Kazmir and Saunders have both had their struggles this season, but each threw a few outstanding games in August and September. If they can continue the momentum, and probable shut down work from Lackey and Weaver, the Yankees could struggle to score in bunches and take the momentum.

Advantage: Angels

The Pen

There is one component that elevates the Yankee bullpen from the Halo pen: the immortal Mariano Rivera. This guy comes about as close to doing his job perfectly as any player who has ever played the baseball. What is scarier you ask? That as masterful as he is during the regular season, he raises his game to a new level in the postseason. The career postseason numbers are absurd: 121 IP, .74 ERA, 8-1, 100 K, 17 BB. The guy has played in 14 postseasons and given up 10 earned runs. His baseball-reference stats page just makes my jaw open and my head shake. The rest of the Yankees pen is so pedestrian that Joe Girardi will cross his fingers that his starter can get him into the 8th (and Rivera) with a lead in every game of the LCS, because anyone else down there is apt to blow a lead to an opportunistic and clutch Angel lineup.

The Angel pen is deep, young, inexperienced, and improving all at the same time. They have dependable arms with some nasty pitches in Ervin Santana, Jose Arredondo, and Darren Oliver. Kevin Jepsen has a nasty repertoire as well, and looks to get better every time he gets the call. Jason Bulger was the most consistent reliever during the regular year, but may be a non-factor in the LCS because he is just coming off an injury. The closer, Brian Fuentes, causes ulcers for Angel fans every time he pitches. It's that simple. He led the AL in saves, but that total is mostly the product of closing for the Angels, and his peripheral stats are crummy. The Angels have the potential to shorten every game depending on how good the bullpen is that night, and if they can pick up that night's starter. Look for at least one unnecessary bullpen adventure against the deadly New York lineup in this series.

Advantage: Angels if leading by 2 or more; Yankees if leading at all

Manager/Coaching

No need to discuss anything here. Mike Scioscia is the best manager in baseball and there is very little argument that he will routinely out-coach Joe Girardi at key junctures in this series.

Advantage: Angels

The stage is set for the AL's best to do battle in the next installment of a series belonging to the Angels this decade, with 2 ALDS series wins over the Yankees in 2002 and 2006 in addition to the regular season success. The clutch hitting of Alex Rodriguez and the competence of the starting rotation will go a long way in determining whether or not the Yankees can overcome their adversary from the West.

Prediction: Angels in 6 games. Saunders and Kazmir have both pitched especially well in their careers against New York, and will start Games 3 and 4, respectively, at Angel Stadium. Sabathia and one other Yankee starter will each win once, but the disparity in starting pitching will give the pennant to the Angels.
Comments (1)Comments (1) Add CommentsAdd Comments
34
Vote
   


Tale of the Tape: Urb vs. Lane



The recent bad blood between the New England Patriots and New York Jets is headline news in the NFL. The lead into their Week 2 matchup was full of smack, predictions, arrogance, and fantastic drama. A Week 2 game, that for all intents and purposes was meaningless, drew the media attention of a playoff game. What is so compelling about this situation is the future ramifications it has: the rivalry immediately intensifies, personnel instantly hates the other team's personnel, and the two teams will now get their rival's best effort every time they meet. Everything about this relationship is captivating to me.

As good as Pats-Jets is, University of Florida coach Urban Meyer and Tennessee coach Lane Kiffin have taken "rivalry" and "bad blood" to a new level. This blossoming hate fest has everything of the Pats-Jets feud, but to the nth degree of intensity and passion. You can track the proceedings with these links in chronological order of cheating accusations and unnecessary but necessary postgame smack.

That second link is the official comeback blast of Urban Meyer. The rivalry is officially back on between the former SEC powerhouse Vols and the perennial conference champion Gators. Since Kiffin's classless accusation of recruiting indiscretions in the spring, Meyer has been unresponsive, presumably waiting for the calendar to turn to Vols-Gators gameday. Urb's squad systematically dismantled Kiffin's Vols en route to a 23-13 victory. Although everyone's prediction that the Gators would run up the score in response to Kiffin's antics did not come to fruition, Meyer made certain he'd get the final punch in this year's battle, whether on the field or off.

Meyer essentially claimed to have watered down his game plan because it didn't appear to him that Kiffin was trying to win, given the execution of his game plan. Meyer tacked on that a handful of his key players were battling the flu and deemed it unnecessary to run it up on Tennessee.

Kiffin's response is why I and everyone else outside of Knoxville utterly despise him. Apparently he didn't learn the childhood lesson of "put up or shut up." He's not aware that you can't keep talking after you are defeated, unless you want everyone to hate you and consider your words to be punchless. Lane keeps digging himself a deeper hole with comments like "I don't know. I guess we'll wait and after we're not excited about a performance, we'll tell you everybody was sick." Urb's Gators, partially ill or not, beat the Vols fair and square. Kiffin's audacity to keep running his mouth reflects an arrogance that we've rarely seen in recent years.

Sometimes a resume of success can lend credibility to an individual, essentially granting a pass to talk trash. But Lane doesn't get off the hook here because he's HAD no success thus far as a head guy. He was fired after one season as head coach of the Oakland Raiders, going 4-12 and completely alienating himself from everyone he needed to please, namely owner Al Davis. He had a handful of good years as offensive coordinator at USC under the tutelage of Pete Carroll, but the prosperity of the Trojans preceded Kiffin and lives on after his departure.

Its too early to evaluate Kiffin's work at Tennessee, but if the effort against Florida is any indication, one could see Kiffin getting the most out of his players and putting together some impressive seasons to come. As for now, Lane should think about reigning in his tongue, because the last thing a coach wants to do in the hyper-competitive SEC is give conference foes bulletin board material when Tennessee rolls around on the schedule.

Watch your mouth, Lane, before you alienate yourself from everyone, lose another coaching job, and suddenly find yourself unemployed.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
20
Vote
   


More Angel Homer Coverage

As advertised, I'm back to conclude my thoughts about the Angels, this time with a succinct look ahead to the playoffs and how the revamped Angels might respond in October.

The adage of playoff baseball is that good pitching always beats good hitting and that a dominant top of the rotation will typically carry a team a long way. The Angel teams of the past had the DNA to win in the playoffs: the best rotation in the majors and a top 3 bullpen, above average defense, and versatility. Ironically, these things have translated to early elimination and disappointment every year, with the exception of the fluky 2002 World Series run. If there were a team that you would pick to be successful in the postseason based on those certain criteria, the Angels would be at the top of the common sense pile.

The 2009 Angels, as we've said, are the polar opposite of their predecessors. Explosive, opportunistic offense, patient at the plate, working counts, and cashing in on the big home run while the rotation struggles to stay in games and the bullpen uncharacteristically coughs up leads. The very things that got the Angels bounced out of October the past few years--spotty defense, unclutch hitting, senseless mental cramps, and an incredible mental block with the freakin' Sawx--are no longer glaring problems. These things have been the Angel strength in 2009, and are what the radical change in results can partly be credited to. In other words, if the Red Sox take out the Angels once again, it will not be due to an offensive, defensive, or mental letdown by the Angels. Not this year.

The good news is that the Rangers are inexplicably leading the AL Wild Card and keeping the fading Red Sox on the pressure cooker. Every misstep will, in theory, cost Boston a shot at stealing the Wild Card and sneaking into October's back door because there is no way they are catching the Yankees for the AL East this year. The Angels may be fortunate enough to avoid the inevitable two-team AL East playoff format where the Red Sox always find a way to match up with the Angels. A meeting instead with the AL Central winner--Detroit or Chicago--would be a walk into the ALCS for Los Angeles of Anaheim (I hate thinking, saying, and writing that).

The bad news is that I see no way the veteran, tested, and talented Red Sox succumb to the Rangers with the pressure on in September. I foresee the solid Texas rotation withering in the heat of Arlington while the Red Sox regain their groove and make the push to the playoffs. Based on current records and the fact that two intradivision teams cannot meet in the Division Series, a Wild Card berth for Boston would pave the way for another Boston chance to rip my heart out. I realized today that even though the AL West race is still alive (though on life support), the most productive and prudent thing for me to do is root like gangbusters for the Rangers to stay hot. So that is what I'm doing from now until the conclusion of Game 162.

If baseball piques your interest, rest assured I will be back to provide you with my take on the playoff picture as the pennant races heat up in September. And if you hate baseball? Make sure to open the story anyway and click to vote......
Add CommentsAdd Comments
28
Vote
   


Heavenly Halos



I give up, I can't resist any longer. Up to this point I had successfully abstained from gushing over my beloved Angels (mostly because there was nothing to gush about) so as to not appear to be a biased homer. At the three-quarter pole of the season, however, my Halos have forced me to break my silence regarding their excellence.

Through August 19, the Angels held the second best record in baseball, 73-45, and are just 1.5 games behind the AL leading New York Yankees. The Angels are 24-8 since the All-Star break, and have played .750 baseball over the 40 games since Independence Day.

The elite record and mid-summer hot streak are not surprises. Teams around the league and media alike have come to realize that the Angels are a force to be reckoned with every year, a club that no one can afford to take lightly. The run of success, however, is unique this year, as the offense is due most of the credit instead of stellar starting pitching and league's best bullpen work.

The pitching staff, the very facet of the game for the which the team is feared, has been uncharacteristically poor this season. Ranking 11th or worse in the AL in nearly every major stat, Mike Scioscia's arms have been hampered by extensive injuries to their front of the rotation horses and by an unsteady bullpen--also hit with several injuries. The Angels have sent a major league high 14 starting pitchers to the hill this season, a testament to the fluidity of the rotation.

Scioscia's offense has picked up where the pitching has failed. Known for an attacking, small-balling, productive outs, 1st-to-3rd approach, the Angels have morphed into a power hitting, high-average and slugging juggernaut. Typically a middle of the road or bottom third lineup in run scoring, the Angels lead all of baseball in runs scored this season. With 159 home runs last year, the Angels ranked a pedestrian 18th in the league; this season, the team is just outside the top 10 and is already just 25 big flies short of last year's mark. The Angels are far and away the best hitting team in the league, with a staggering .291 team average. The Yankees, at a distant .279, are the closest follower.

A huge reason for the radical change in offensive production can be traced directly back to the front office decision to let free agent first baseman Mark Teixeira walk. This allowed Kendry Morales to finally step into the starting job he'd been groomed for at first, and gave General Manager Tony Reagins the money to re-sign outfielder Juan Rivera, while acquiring rightfielder Bobby Abreu at a bargain price, and closer Brian Fuentes. Criticized by 98% of all Angel fans in the handful of months following the decision (including myself, of course) Reagins has proved to be a shrewd talent evaluator and a capable personnel manager in the mold of his predecessor, Bill Stoneman. Half a calendar later, I (and Halo fans everywhere) could not be happier.

Abreu has been nothing short of stellar all season long. Known as a patient hitter and among the elite in consistent production, Abreu has earned much more than the bargain $5 million the Angel payroll allots him. Because we all know that fantasy baseball is the best way to measure a player's relative worth, lets consider that Abreu is ranked 19th overall in 2009 based on Yahoo! Sports ranking system, and 12th among hitters. That's right, Bobby Abreu's value is rightly compared to names like Pujols, Ramirez, Braun, Fielder, Utley, Morneau, Jeter. For the fantasy challenged, Abreu has marched to the tune of 74 runs, 11 HR, 81 RBI, 26 SB, .308 AVG, and .402 OBP. Abreu's importance in the Angel lineup cannot be overestimated.

Several Angels are concurrently having career seasons, including shortstop Erick Aybar (.312 AVG), Juan Rivera (19 HR, .306 AVG) and the fully emerged Kendry Morales (.303 AVG, 29 HR, 79 RBI). Morales should be a top 3 or five AL Most Valuable Player candidate based on full season projected numbers.

Because I'm so full of confidence and joy in this team, I'll soon release a Part II to discuss the playoff implications this new found offense holds for the Angels.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
32
Vote
   


The Veteran vs. The Prospect


This man is J.D. Drew. He plays right field for the Boston Red Sox, and is the poster boy for one of baseball's major cautionary tales.

Professional baseball is unique among the major American sports for many reasons. The lack of a salary cap, minor league farm systems, and a player's union dominated by foreign players are just some of the bigger things that differentiate baseball from basketball and football. One of the more uniquely compelling aspects of baseball is the can't-miss prospect. This is the player with so much talent and potential that success at the major league level is a, well, can't miss proposition. One blog's top 40 list of 2009's top prospects can be found here, just to give you an idea of who all the trade deadline talked centered around last week.

Baseball offers a unique trade deadline experience, with sellers trying desperately to shed high-paid stars for the alluring young prospect (or a collection of prospects). An infusion of hard working, young, and cheap talent is welcome in every organization. Every team has a different philosophy when it comes to personnel; some teams, like the Yankees, Mets, and Red Sox are not afraid to gut their farm system of hot prospects to acquire a big name player. Other teams (Marlins, Indians, Angels, Dodgers, and Twins) guard their homegrown prospects with double-barreled shotguns, C4, and a Howitzer at deadline time. Trades are the primary reason that some of the latter teams continually rank among the best kept farm systems in baseball, and why the former teams typically have the weakest. Its a polarizing component of strategy, with few times riding the fence. Most organizations either buy big names and surrender their touted prospects, while some teams abstain from the impact veteran and opt for patience with their prospects.

For the longest time, I couldn't figure out where I stood in this tension. I saw the merit and motivating reasons behind both strategies, but lacked the historical wherewithal to accurately determine which better serves a team in the long term. However, a close study of last week's trade deadline and a close half-decade following of my Angels' best prospects has made up my mind for me. My conclusion: prospects are "prospects" for a reason, they are no sure thing. When faced with a decision to trade a prospect or three for a perennial All-Star like Miguel Cabrera in December 2007, Alex Rodriguez in 2008 free agency, or Roy Halladay at this year's deadline, Jason Heim's Angels are trading the prospects every time.

(climbing onto my Angel soapbox...give me a second)


Why wouldn't we trade Brandon Wood and Howie Kendrick and Erick Aybar and Joe Saunders and the late Nick Adenhart for a chance to land a potential Hall of Fame player in his prime- ESPECIALLY with no salary cap? I'm sick and tired of watching Wood rot in the AAA Salt Lake Bees' cleanup spot while never getting a fair shake to prove himself in the majors. His only fate is to be blessed by a change of scenery via trade; his split with the Angels is inevitable. Didn't the same thing happen with can't-miss third baseman Dallas McPherson 4 short years ago? Even guys who get their chance don't always pan out, like these guys.

The big market, high payroll teams like Boston, New York, and Philadelphia always get ridiculed for decimating their farm systems in high profile trades. I always snickered at them while watching my Angels continue to hoard and stockpile limitless potential. Guess what? Those 3 teams have won 7 of the 14 World Series' since the 1994 player's strike, and the Yankees lost two other times in the World Series in that time. Up until now, the joke was on me. No more. The results are so clearly in favor of the teams who mortgage the future to win while they can. I can't defend the Angel way anymore. Buy, buy, and buy a little more, Arte Moreno. You won't regret it.

Which leads to something that makes baseball so horribly unique: widening competitive imbalance. But that's a conversation for a different day.



Add CommentsAdd Comments
62
Vote
   


Deadline Discounts

Its trade deadline day in Major League Baseball, and Blackberries and email inboxes are on overload throughout the league. Potential blockbusters are on the proposal table, including the likes of Indians C Victor Martinez, Toronto ace Roy Halladay, and Padre 1B Adrian Gonzalez. All three have astronomical asking prices, which makes their trades (especially Halladay and Gonzalez) increasingly unrealistic.

I'm here to discuss deals done, not any prospective deals between now and the 1 PM Pacific time deadline. Specifically, I want to comment on how discounted the bigger names have been in the trades of the last 7 days. Exhibit A is...

Reigning AL Cy Young winner Cliff Lee and OF Ben Francisco to Philadelphia for P Carlos Carrasco, SS Jason Donald, P Jason Knapp, and C Lou Marson

The Phillies made out like jewel thieves in this deal. They get an ace lefty to pair with Cole Hamels. The two of them will make 4 out of 7 starts in any playoff series, and 3 of 5 games in the first round. Just for the sake of comparison, let's examine the price the team would have had to pay for Blue Jay Roy Halladay. Toronto would accept no less than Philly's top pitching prospect Kyle Drabek, top outfield prospect Dominic Brown, major leaguer J.A. Happ, and possibly one more prospect. Toronto had several suitors for Halladay, and was asking for a ridiculous price of each club's top 5 major league prospects in return. I think that price is WAY high for Halladay, and Toronto knew it the whole time. They wanted to be sure they didn't lose Halladay for one penny less than what he's worth. Back to Lee. The Phillies acquired Lee, who is a bona-fide rotation anchor, for maybe 60 cents on the dollar of the Halladay price. They kept Drabek, Brown, AND Happ while getting their coveted top of the rotation starter. The Indians basically gave away their best pitcher and got barely anything in return. Deplorable job by Cleveland in using the leverage that Toronto created in the trade offers. How can you trade last year's best pitcher in the AL and not get ANY of the prospects that Toronto was asking for Halladay?

2007 NL batting champion Freddy Sanchez to the Giants for AA pitcher Tim Alderson
I'm wondering what the fire selling Pirates are thinking on this one. I get the picture that they are trying to shed salary, reduce cost, and stockpile prospects for the future, but they virtually gave away their best player and a former batting champ. I guess the silver lining is that the Pirates weren't going anywhere with or without Sanchez. Why not bolster that AA rotation for next year, right?

Just off the wire, the Red Sox acquire All-Star C Victor Martinez from the Genius Indians in exchange for P Justin Masterson, #3 ranked prospect Nick Hagadone, and another prospect.
Really? You trade your best hitter (a switch hitting catcher, no less) for a disappointing reliever, an overlooked pitching prospect, and another prospect who hasn't even been named?
You didn't manage to grab everyone's man crush Clay Buchholz or the very promising Daniel Bard? Once again, I understand the need to shed payroll and cut costs given this economy, but these teams are giving away their best players. Giving them away. I'm going into a coma.

All these payroll shedders have something in common: when you have the opportunity to trade your best players and get back no major league talent and several no-guarantee prospects, you have to do it. Hey, at least the owners will be a little happier when they have to cut salary checks.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
52
Vote
   


The Genius of Joe Torre



The Los Angeles Dodgers are the best team in baseball. Loads of young talent. Good and improving starting pitching. Great athleticism. Manny Ramirez. Outstanding bullpen. Joe Torre. Wait, Joe Torre? Yes, Torre's genius is an integral part of the Dodger success this season. I mean, who else could have conjured the brilliance of hitting superstar center fielder Matt Kemp in the 7th or 8th spot everyday? Torre has so much going for him on offense that he's created MLB's first bi-modal offense: one offense revolving around Manny hitting 3rd, and the other centered on Kemp at the bottom. No manager has ever done this before, and putting his best offensive player in the bottom third of the order has paid huge dividends for Torre.

Everyone is raving about Torre's strategy with Kemp. Fantasy owners, such as myself, LOVE opening up the Dodger box score everyday to see their presumptive best hitter batting 7th. I know it warms MY heart. Kemp's stats on the season are among the league's best in rotisserie formats: .321 AVG, .385 OBP, 12 HR, 53 RBI, 20 SB, 53 R. Personally, I couldn't be happier about this stat line. Why would I want Kemp hitting 4th behind Ramirez, where he could have, say 10 more homers and 20 more RBI this season? Casey Blake and James Loney both protect Manny better than Kemp ever could. Maybe the Dodgers could have 3-6 more wins this season with Kemp hitting 4th or 5th, but why get greedy? I know a team is an offensive dreamboat when its 7th hitter bats .321. That's pretty darn good.

The media also loves this move by Torre. Over the last 2 months, when it became clear that Torre's lineup tendencies were permanent, critics were silenced by the numbers that the Dodger offense put on the board and by Kemp's thriving in the 7-hole. Many theorize that Kemp's improvement at the plate could only have been realized by hitting where he is hitting, and that his career trajectory would have been seriously hampered by a more prime spot in the lineup. Agreement is unanimous. Dissension is non-existent.

To Dodger fans and fantasy owners: keep supporting Joe Torre's lineup card and ride your team's offense into October. Think about where your team would be were it not for Matt Kemp and his familiar 7th and 8th spots. Every time he comes up, root for a frozen rope single, a double in the gap, or a stolen base while visualizing his name at the top of the lineup in place of the incomparable Rafael Furcal, Juan Pierre, and Orlando Hudson.

To Joe Torre: This is a marathon, not a sprint. Keep up the good work. Don't change anything, just assume a holding pattern until adjustments are needed for the playoffs. Blake and Loney have protected Manny the best that their ability will allow, you're doing the right thing.

Joe Torre is brilliant, isn't he?


Add CommentsAdd Comments
51
Vote
   


Jeremy Mayfield: Tales of the Bizarre



The wacky story of NASCAR driver Jeremy Mayfield took a steep plunge into completely bizarre territory on Thursday when Mayfield fired back at his stepmother's revelation from earlier this week.

Mayfield is reported to have tested positive for methamphetamine on July 6, just a month after news broke of the initial positive test. Accompanying this second positive test was a statement from Lisa Mayfield, the driver's stepmother, claiming she witnessed her stepson use meth upwards of 30 times in the past.

Just like that, the fuse was set and lit for the Mayfield time bomb. You can read the full story here.

I'm not here to offer a boring summary of this story, but to offer my take on Mayfield and on a broader issue. Mayfield himself appears to be completely out of control, in his apparent drug use and recent comments alike. Further, it doesn't seem like he has a real good grip on reality or logical thinking either.

I'm no attorney or logic specialist, but here's my train of thought if I'm Mayfield.

1. I've tested positive for meth twice. Denial doesn't work anymore. Instead of mistrusting the testing and slinging allegations of lying at everyone, maybe I m the one who's lying.

2. Responding to my stepmother's claims by calling her a whore and accusing her of killing my father and trying to steal money from me doesn't exactly give off the impression of innocence. It makes me look like desperate, defensive, and deflective.

3. Instead of opening up major lawsuits in public against NASCAR and my stepmom, maybe I should focus on getting myself right and working through the accusations against me and my own troubles.




What really gets me is Mayfield's audacity to deny all responsibility and wrong doing, all the way down to his double positive drug tests. His incapability for introspection is appalling. Its like he has a perception of himself as immaculate and fully blameless when everyone else can see some glaring faults. Was he born without that part of his brain (or heart for that matter)?

Next, why do we have a need to assign blame in our society? Why does every bad/negative event, statement, gesture, and implication require a scape goat? Are we that insecure and egotistical that we ourselves are so good and incapable of wrong? When you are accused of something or find yourself in some controversy, critique yourself instead of closing your eyes and pointing the finger. Novel concept isn't it? Somebody stepping up and accepting blame--without making excuses--is something seldom seen in America.

Jeremy Mayfield was accused of--and proven to--having taken meth. He responds by saying NASCAR's testing is wrong, CEO Brian France has no credibility, and calling his stepmom a whore and accusing her of murder. Not one vague and ambiguous apology, not one admission of guilt, not one conciliatory statement.

Something doesn't add up here. There's a disconnect between Jeremy Mayfield's mind and reality. Hopefully he can prolong his denial through all the trouble he has heaped on himself. He's got a long way to go.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
61
Vote
   


Everything Is Wrong with Professional All-Star Games

There are many problems with the MLB All-Star Game that subtract from the Midsummer Classic's credibility, but the one that takes the cake for me (and almost everyone else) is the fan vote.

Why? In short, fans are stupid. They are biased, emotional, and agenda-driven; instead of seeing the best player at every position, they continue to vote for popular players who don't deserve to start, much less be on the team, like Derek Jeter. Ichiro is a heck of an outfielder, but there are a handful of AL reserves who are much more deserving of the starting spot he was voted into. This is because Ichiro is simply more popular than the likes of Carl Crawford, Torii Hunter, or Adam Jones.

Feel good stories create sentimental favorites for All-Star voting. Exhibit A: Josh Hamilton. Hamilton is a great outfielder and superb hitter, but there is absolutely no reason he should be on the AL All-Star team. Hamilton's numbers are nothing special on a per game basis, and he missed about a month of action with an injury. Does Hamilton, or teammate Michael Young, REALLY deserve to be an All-Star over mashers like Miguel Cabrera or Ian Kinsler? This is not subject to opinion. The answer, based on facts and figures, is no, not a chance.

I propose an overhaul of the All-Star selection system. I think the manager of each league should be presented with a list of all the top producers at each position over the first half of games. The top 2 from every position (or 4 for the outfield and 3 starting pitchers) get an invite. Its that simple. This method eliminates the ridiculous popularity contest that goes on, which is incredibly influenced by biased and agenda-driven media outlets. It also eliminates former superstars who are still popular but are no longer productive (Jeter, Miguel Tejada), and ensures that injured/suspended players don't win votes they shouldn't get (Hamilton, Manny Ramirez).

Most importantly, it keeps players like Tim Wakefield from EVER getting chosen as an All-Star. Oh wait, he got his first bid this year based on lies, perception, and being on a good team? Sounds like a little ESPN has been successful with its East Coast propaganda. There is a reason players like Wakefield don't make the All-Star team: because they're not good players. But with the fan vote, literally ANY player in the majors has a chance to start for its league's All-Star team.

Every year, the talking heads always go over the rosters and say who got snubbed and who doesn't belong. With my system, there wouldn't BE any snubs because the most deserving players would be selected. My system also returns the significance to being an All-Star. Current All-Star rosters carry 34 players from each league. My system would streamline teams, cutting down rosters to 21-25 players. Simply stated, it would be harder to be an All-Star. Also, I would eliminate the requirement that every team be represented on the All-Stars. This way, managers wouldn't have to waste a spot on Justin Duchscherer (2008), Freddy Sanchez (2006 and 07), Mark Redman, David Eckstein, and Jose Lopez (all in 2006).

The current system allows mediocre players to put "All-Star" on their resumes, many for having one exceptional half season. It diminishes the meaning of being an All-Star caliber player. My system restores the accolade of being an All-Star, making it an accomplishment to truly be proud of. No more are the days of "Player X: 1 career All-Star appearance."

All of this we owe to the fan vote. But baseball's All-Star festivities are not the only ones tainted by the fan vote. The same applies to the NBA, although with less egregious mistakes made by fans. I think the fans shouldn't be allowed to vote for ANY All-Stars.

Finally, the MLB All-Star game is a walking, talking, money-making spectacle of a contradiction. Since 2003, the game has "mattered" instead of simply be an exhibition. The winner of the game would be awarded home field advantage in the World Series, which is a very real incentive to play for. The players play to win, the managers manage to win...but the fans still get to put sub-par players on the field in a very crucial, meaningful, and intense situation. Before 2003, it didn't matter. Now it does. The game should either return to being an exhibition, or the fan vote should be abolished. The contradiction cannot continue.

What is MLB afraid of? Does it fear that keeping the fans from voting will reduce the compelling nature or fan-friendliness of the event? If anything, having the best players in each league go head-to-head makes the game MORE compelling and MORE fan-friendly. Sometimes (ok, most of the time) I fail to understand Commissioner Bud Selig's logic.

So next Tuesday when you tune into the game, think about who got snubbed this year and who doesn't belong on that field in St. Louis. Think about how much the level of the game is brought down by players who are in over their heads. Consider all this and think about a perfect system without flaws.

All you have to do for 2010 is not vote.
Add CommentsAdd Comments
36
Vote
   


Major League Baseball First Half Recap

As pro baseball takes its annual midsummer pause for the All Star festivities in St. Louis next week, its time to look back on the first half that was, and prospect a little on what the second half holds.

It's hard to recap anything in the majors these days without firstly discussing the immortal Albert Pujols. His first half brilliance looks like this: .336 avg, 31 homers, 82 RBI, 66 runs scored, 10 stolen bases, and a robust .460 on-base percentage.
In the major leagues, those totals rank 3rd, 1st, 1st, 1st, 47th (very good for a slow guy who never steals bases), and 1st. There are several more sortable statistics that Pujols easily paces, but to mention all of them is unnecessary; there is simply no one in this guy's galaxy, much less anyone better.

There were several surprises early in the year, most notably the hot starts of the Toronto Blue Jays and the Texas Rangers, and the slow starts of the Chicago Cubs, New York Yankees, and New York Mets. Toronto held baseball's best record for nearly the whole first month while leading the league with its blistering offensive numbers. The Rangers were not far behind, jumping to a surprise AL West lead for most of the first half before a healthy LA Angel team took over.

The Cubs and Mets have been ravaged by key injuries to pivotal offensive stars, and look to return to form if and when they get their heavy hitters back. The Yankees, as usual, struggled out of the gate while getting used to their new lavish digs and waiting for the return of Alex Rodriguez from hip surgery. The pitching staff seems perpetually in shambles as they continually add big bats. This offseason, New York added star pitchers C.C. Sabathia and A.J. Burnett, spending extravagantly in an effort to bolster the starting rotation. Sabathia and Burnett have shown flashes, but neither has been good or lived up to the amount of zeros on the end of their contracts.

The Philadelphia Phillies have been struggled only slightly less than the rival Mets have, in spite of an absolutely smoldering first half from offseason acquisition Raul Ibanez, who went to the DL with a groin injury in late June. Before leaving the lineup, Ibanez stroked 22 homers and 59 RBI, far surpassing the organization's expectations for his numbers. Ibanez will be a mainstay in the middle of the Philly order when he returns shortly after the All-Star break.

Several of the usual suspects on the mound got off to their typical unhittable ways early: Roy Halladay, Tim Lincecum, and Johan Santana were statistical wonders coming out of the gate. But newcomer and AL Cy Young leader Zack Grienke redefined what it means to be unhittable. Grienke has 10 wins in 17 starts, going at least 5 innings in all but one start. He didn't allow a run for 25 innings to start the season and did not allow an earned run until his 32nd inning of work. He has thrown 4 complete games, 2 of which were shutout victories. His numbers don't stand far above those of Dan Haren or Lincecum at this point, but there is no better pitching performance of the first half than Grienke's.

As June heated up, hot starts faded, surprises returned to Earth, and the better rosters began to rise to the top of their divisions. The Rays, Red Sox, and Yankees pace the AL East in the most competitive division in baseball, which only can be described as riveting. The Detroit Tigers are probably the class of the AL Central, and have begun to play like it. The Angels, another squad decimated by injuries early, have turned white hot as they've gotten healthy, with strong performances by Chone Figgins and the emergence of Juan Rivera. The Angels caught the streaking Rangers in late June and should only move up and away as starting pitching becomes vital during the dog days.

No surprises in the senior circuit as the Phillies, Cardinals, and LA Dodgers lead their respective divisions. The Dodgers look to be the best team in baseball this side of Boston, with loads of young talent spread all over the field and on the mound. The Dodgers, at a major league best 52-30, withstood the estrogen-laced drug suspension of superstar Manny Ramirez by going 29-21 sans their best hitter. Pretty impressive first half for the Dodgers, who are a clear favorite to represent the National League in the World Series at the break.

More second half predictions and All-Star team reactions to come soon

Add CommentsAdd Comments
44
Vote
   


Moderated by Jason Heim
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]