Rumor is the new coach could be announced as early as tomorrow. Hopefully not, so I can write about the possible replacements.
Until then, I'm studying over 1000 drugs for my last final tomorrow.
Go State.
Beat Iowa.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
ISU Blues
What an exciting, wait, shitty weekend, to be a Cyclone. Not only do we lose a FB coach but we also get owned in Iowa City in Men's Basketball.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Chizik Departs
Disclaimer: I've been 1000+ miles removed from Ames for the past four years, so my impressions have been gathered only sporadically. I was at the Iowa State-Army game in '05 when Jamie Pollard was announced as the new AD and I was certainly excited, impressed, and hopeful that he would ensure the 'clones could put together a Big XII North title. When McCarney was shown the door, my impression was that the "Cyclone nation" would be eternally grateful for Coach Dan's leading the program out of the wilderness and, especially in the absence of the previously-smothering Nebraska and Colorado programs, this new rising star would take us to the next level.
Chizik's lackluster first year was more than understandable. Unlike any other team in the Big XII North, we play Texas and Oklahoma (and TX Tech) on the same rotation. 2007's opponents were the hardest we would ever have, but the upside is the 2-year hiatus where we can strike the soft underbelly (?) of the south (with no disrespect to OKie State, who would have played in the conference championship or won any other conf. outright this year).
But we got worse.
Deep in the heart of SEC territory, the only game I was able to watch was the Iowa matchup. We held up well enough in the first half, but we didn't make a single clean tackle the whole game. I would have loved to see the 'yards gained after contact' stat, it probably accounted for 75% of Iowa's total offense.
I only heard about the close UNLV OT loss, gripping defeat from the jaws of a victory over Kansas, and the embarrassing meltdown against whipping-boy-no-more Baylor. I'm assuming this is the first time ever (I hope) that we've gone winless in the conference, and the "rising star but needs time" coach narrative isn't fitting very well.
When I heard Chizik was interviewing at Auburn, I told my roommate there's no way they'd hire him and all this will do is leave a bad taste in Cyclones' mouths, much worse than Tim Floyd. But the worst part is he'd still be our coach.
Now the news that he's gone (I bet Auburn's getting a helluva deal, Chizik might get paid in Applebees gift certificates), I'm not reading any Cyclone fans distraught about losing some great talent and waving goodbye to future success, I'm reading elation at a chance for a do-over. After this especially damning account, we should be thanking Auburn for giving us a fresh start *and* a $750K infusion into our athletic budget.
Chizik's lackluster first year was more than understandable. Unlike any other team in the Big XII North, we play Texas and Oklahoma (and TX Tech) on the same rotation. 2007's opponents were the hardest we would ever have, but the upside is the 2-year hiatus where we can strike the soft underbelly (?) of the south (with no disrespect to OKie State, who would have played in the conference championship or won any other conf. outright this year).
But we got worse.
Deep in the heart of SEC territory, the only game I was able to watch was the Iowa matchup. We held up well enough in the first half, but we didn't make a single clean tackle the whole game. I would have loved to see the 'yards gained after contact' stat, it probably accounted for 75% of Iowa's total offense.
I only heard about the close UNLV OT loss, gripping defeat from the jaws of a victory over Kansas, and the embarrassing meltdown against whipping-boy-no-more Baylor. I'm assuming this is the first time ever (I hope) that we've gone winless in the conference, and the "rising star but needs time" coach narrative isn't fitting very well.
When I heard Chizik was interviewing at Auburn, I told my roommate there's no way they'd hire him and all this will do is leave a bad taste in Cyclones' mouths, much worse than Tim Floyd. But the worst part is he'd still be our coach.
Now the news that he's gone (I bet Auburn's getting a helluva deal, Chizik might get paid in Applebees gift certificates), I'm not reading any Cyclone fans distraught about losing some great talent and waving goodbye to future success, I'm reading elation at a chance for a do-over. After this especially damning account, we should be thanking Auburn for giving us a fresh start *and* a $750K infusion into our athletic budget.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
G. Harrell Gets Hosed...
Not only did his team get the a bad rap after a bad loss to Oklahoma (they did come back and beat a very good Texas team...short memory I guess), but now G. Harrell is not even invited to the Heisman Ceremony.
Like I mentioned, I do not think he deserved to win, but regardless, he deserved to be recognized.
Tim Griffin sums it up nicely here.
Also - check out this x-ray for his hand against Baylor.
Iowa State Sports
At this current juncture, there is a lot concern over the state of Iowa State Athletics. The basketball team lost a game they had won last night and the football team appeared to take a step backwards from a promising 1st season under Coach Chizik.
My opinion, get over it.
The state of college athletics is very competitive right now. Money can equal victories. Pay Nick Saban enough and he'll get you a 11-1 season. But the danger of such success is people expect that at every school. But that would be a grave mistake to assume such a thing.
Iowa State is building a two great programs. The football team took a step back because they lost a strong senior class (See A. Bowen, A. Rubin) that keep the defense competitive. The offense has the playmakers to be great as does the defense. But success in the trenches takes time to build with a poor program like Iowa State. We're not nationally known and nor do we command national respect like Alabama. You'd be dumb not to play there if you were an incoming freshman. But Iowa State is building the framework for long term success. It takes time (see Mizzou, Kansas) and they'll get there.
As far as the basketball team, I'd like to find a team with more turnover in the first few years as McD has had the past 3. Again though, the program is building the right way. Young talent that plays hard and disciplined. Young teams make mistakes though. The reason W. Morgan was let go was that his veteran teams made silly mistakes. So I expect the basketball team to be 1-2 years away from a great season, but we'll have many more successful years (and continued success).
So Cyclone Fans, be patient. Our time is coming...
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Heisman Thoughts
To put off Pharmacology studying a bit longer, I thought I would way in on the Heisman race.
As I see it, it comes down to 4 QB's. And unless you're a delusional Hawkeye fan (which is most Hawk fans), Shonn Greene.
Unlike the BCS, the Heisman should be awarded for your body of work through the whole season. To be the best player in college football (which is kind of joke anymore with the Heisman), you've got to bring it week in and week out. So Colt McCoy, relax, you won't get snubbed on this one.
So now how do you pick? Is it based on huge numbers, because Bradford and Harrell can give you those, but McCoy also had great stats while leading his team in rushing. Tebow took a team on his back and willed them to BCS title game after they lost to Ole Miss. Tebow played well when it counted down the stretch, but McCoy didn't get an opportunity to prove himself on a big stage the last few weeks. (Minus the A&M game)
If I were picking right now, I'm going to ignore Tebow because we saw how great he can be last year and he fell off a bit from then. Harrell produced astronomical numbers, but part of that is the system (though mostly his gun and play making ability).
So to me, it comes down to McCoy and Bradford. And because of the BCS, we saw Bradford showcase his talent in bigger games down the stretch. So I got to go with Sam Bradford. His numbers were great, and he played best when the games mattered most. I don't always buy the head-to-head arguments because the season is an ebb and flow process. You can judge a team by the first few weeks because the games changes. But Bradford knew against Tech he needed to produce and boy did he.
So the Heisman goes to Bradford. The media should eat this up if he wins. Native American, Heisman vs. Heisman in the Title game? Sounds pretty great.
Plus McCoy will be back next year, so I give him the edge next year.
I hope this sparks a lively debate because I think any of these 4 players deserve the award and I will probably change my mind by tomorrow.
You bet!
Thursday, November 20, 2008
The BCS: It Ain't So Bad
Since everyone and their president-elect is weighing in on this subject, it can't hurt the blogosphere to pack in one more post about the BCS system. I used to think it was a crock of shite, being highly in favor of a playoff. Now I'm not so sure, and here are some reasons why...
1) The BCS gives us something to talk/debate/argue/stick a fork in each other's throat about.
I know you've heard this before, most likely from your least favorite televised sports analyst. (Without the BCS I'm convinced some of those guys wouldn't have a job.) But you've got to hand it to them, it's true. A guilty pleasure of any sports fan is debating the quality of one team over another and who is over/under ranked. The reason this point of the NCAA football season is so interesting is because we can't wait to see who can keep themselves in pristine position for the biggest of bowl games. All season long every team shares this one goal and attempts to persuade the masses they are indeed the best football has to offer. People won't be anxiously tuning into the OU-TX Tech game tomorrow night to find out who will snag the #3 seed and who will drop to the #7 seed. Saturday will have major championship implications. It adds more drama, it opens things up for discussion, it makes conference debates more intriguing knowing only two can represent, it brings me to my next point...
2) Hearing about who got snubbed at #3 is far more interesting than who was unfairly left out at #9 (or #17 or #33).
Look at NCAA basketball: is there anything more annoying come March Madness than having to hear all the whining from those half dozen 19-11 teams about having to unjustly sit out of The Dance? There will ALWAYS be a handful of "deserving" teams that will be the odd men out once the dust settles. I'd rather participate in a debate about the top two teams in the country than compare a one-loss WAC team, a two-loss Big Ten team, and the loser of the ACC championship that's "still darn good." Widening the net may actually increase controversial subjectivity, shifting the scope from number of losses to the less quantifiable dispute of comparing losses. This makes losses suddenly seem less important, resulting in...
3) A playoff would diminish the importance of the regular season.
The college football regular season is the most interesting in all of sports. In professional sports, teams make a push to barely make the playoffs knowing anything can happen post-season. Who has the ambition to monitor the volatile NCAA basketball polls when it doesn't mean diddly-squat as to who is going to win The Tourney? Every Saturday the football games have *real* impact to the title race. Every Sunday we check ESPN.com for the new standings knowing they can make or break the season. Think about how many great games this season wouldn't have been near as spectacular knowing both teams were going to the playoffs regardless of the outcome. A playoff would steal a bit of pride from the underdogs, the magnitude of the Standfords beating the USC's would take a hit. There is a bit of truth to whoever said the NCAA has a 15-week playoff. Not to mention, expanding the season would cause a dilemma...
4) The schedule doesn't allow for a lengthy playoff format.
I recently heard a football coach voice support for a 32-team playoff. I wonder if he realized he was proposing a 31% increase in yearly games played for the finalists, in addition to extending the season three weeks. For those who often forget, these are students playing football. I know, it may not always seem like it, but the football schedule indeed fits around the class schedule. The regular season ends the week before finals begin and the two-week bowl season falls between the week after finals end and the week before the next semester begins. A more sensible 8-team playoff still extends the season two weeks because I imagine all the non-BCS bowls would still be played. The only solution would be to kick the bowl season off with the first round and fill in the smaller bowls between first-second rounds and second-NC, making the BCS bowls anticlimactic.
Now I'm not completely sold on the "if it's not broke, don't fix it" methodology -- there are solutions that meet in the middle. Here is my proposal:
Format: Four-team playoff
Stipulation 1: Undefeated teams receive an automatic berth.
Placement 1: Current BCS rankings still exist and strictly determine seeding.
Contingency 1: If less than four undefeated teams, remaining berths are open.
Stipulation 2: Eligible teams for open berths must be conference champions.
Placement 2: Highest ranked eligible team in current BCS fills open berth(s).
Seth, I've come around. Three years ago I would have argued Boise State didn't belong in the national title picture. With four teams given the chance, I say unblemished records voice the loudest claim. If the season ended today, allow Ball St, Boise St, or Utah have a shot at TT and Alabama. (I realize we currently have 5 undefeated teams, but it is extremely rare to have more than four undefeateds by year end.) A two-round playoff -- one that utilizes the current BCS formulas -- avoids the problems created by all of the above bullets. My format would also eliminate some of the biggest complaints about the current system: a mid-major undefeated team never gets a shot, teams that haven't even won their own conference get into the NC game, et cetera.
I'd like to know what others think about this proposal...or the BCS in general. (Overall, I really don't think think it's a terrible system.) I'd like to hear how an advanced, objective playoff format would work, but don't just show up with statements like "let them settle in on the field", "a playoff is more fair", or "computers shouldn't be involved when deciding national champions". Those arguments have been beat to death.
So it goes.
1) The BCS gives us something to talk/debate/argue/stick a fork in each other's throat about.
I know you've heard this before, most likely from your least favorite televised sports analyst. (Without the BCS I'm convinced some of those guys wouldn't have a job.) But you've got to hand it to them, it's true. A guilty pleasure of any sports fan is debating the quality of one team over another and who is over/under ranked. The reason this point of the NCAA football season is so interesting is because we can't wait to see who can keep themselves in pristine position for the biggest of bowl games. All season long every team shares this one goal and attempts to persuade the masses they are indeed the best football has to offer. People won't be anxiously tuning into the OU-TX Tech game tomorrow night to find out who will snag the #3 seed and who will drop to the #7 seed. Saturday will have major championship implications. It adds more drama, it opens things up for discussion, it makes conference debates more intriguing knowing only two can represent, it brings me to my next point...
2) Hearing about who got snubbed at #3 is far more interesting than who was unfairly left out at #9 (or #17 or #33).
Look at NCAA basketball: is there anything more annoying come March Madness than having to hear all the whining from those half dozen 19-11 teams about having to unjustly sit out of The Dance? There will ALWAYS be a handful of "deserving" teams that will be the odd men out once the dust settles. I'd rather participate in a debate about the top two teams in the country than compare a one-loss WAC team, a two-loss Big Ten team, and the loser of the ACC championship that's "still darn good." Widening the net may actually increase controversial subjectivity, shifting the scope from number of losses to the less quantifiable dispute of comparing losses. This makes losses suddenly seem less important, resulting in...
3) A playoff would diminish the importance of the regular season.
The college football regular season is the most interesting in all of sports. In professional sports, teams make a push to barely make the playoffs knowing anything can happen post-season. Who has the ambition to monitor the volatile NCAA basketball polls when it doesn't mean diddly-squat as to who is going to win The Tourney? Every Saturday the football games have *real* impact to the title race. Every Sunday we check ESPN.com for the new standings knowing they can make or break the season. Think about how many great games this season wouldn't have been near as spectacular knowing both teams were going to the playoffs regardless of the outcome. A playoff would steal a bit of pride from the underdogs, the magnitude of the Standfords beating the USC's would take a hit. There is a bit of truth to whoever said the NCAA has a 15-week playoff. Not to mention, expanding the season would cause a dilemma...
4) The schedule doesn't allow for a lengthy playoff format.
I recently heard a football coach voice support for a 32-team playoff. I wonder if he realized he was proposing a 31% increase in yearly games played for the finalists, in addition to extending the season three weeks. For those who often forget, these are students playing football. I know, it may not always seem like it, but the football schedule indeed fits around the class schedule. The regular season ends the week before finals begin and the two-week bowl season falls between the week after finals end and the week before the next semester begins. A more sensible 8-team playoff still extends the season two weeks because I imagine all the non-BCS bowls would still be played. The only solution would be to kick the bowl season off with the first round and fill in the smaller bowls between first-second rounds and second-NC, making the BCS bowls anticlimactic.
Now I'm not completely sold on the "if it's not broke, don't fix it" methodology -- there are solutions that meet in the middle. Here is my proposal:
Format: Four-team playoff
Stipulation 1: Undefeated teams receive an automatic berth.
Placement 1: Current BCS rankings still exist and strictly determine seeding.
Contingency 1: If less than four undefeated teams, remaining berths are open.
Stipulation 2: Eligible teams for open berths must be conference champions.
Placement 2: Highest ranked eligible team in current BCS fills open berth(s).
Seth, I've come around. Three years ago I would have argued Boise State didn't belong in the national title picture. With four teams given the chance, I say unblemished records voice the loudest claim. If the season ended today, allow Ball St, Boise St, or Utah have a shot at TT and Alabama. (I realize we currently have 5 undefeated teams, but it is extremely rare to have more than four undefeateds by year end.) A two-round playoff -- one that utilizes the current BCS formulas -- avoids the problems created by all of the above bullets. My format would also eliminate some of the biggest complaints about the current system: a mid-major undefeated team never gets a shot, teams that haven't even won their own conference get into the NC game, et cetera.
I'd like to know what others think about this proposal...or the BCS in general. (Overall, I really don't think think it's a terrible system.) I'd like to hear how an advanced, objective playoff format would work, but don't just show up with statements like "let them settle in on the field", "a playoff is more fair", or "computers shouldn't be involved when deciding national champions". Those arguments have been beat to death.
So it goes.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Great Year for the Big XII
What an amazing start for the Big XII. Going into week 7, an unprecedented 5 teams were unbeaten. Two of the five had to lose, but each contest was played literally until the final minute of the game, or OT for Texas Tech. The top ranked Sooners fell three places after a hard-fought match against the now-#1 Longhorns; Mizzou dropped out of the top 10 but their OK State opponent rose from #17 to #8. Tech remains at #7.
The teams account for four of the top five (six of top ten) scoring offenses. The Heisman watch is simply a cut and paste from the list of Big XII QB's (that list shouldn't change: Bradford threw 5 TD's, although Daniel dished out 3 picks...) Coaches Mark Mangino, Gary Pinkel, Mike Leach have been at their schools for 7, 8, and 9 years, respectively, with barely average records before breaking out into national prominence.
The B12 is the reason this college season is interesting to watch.
There are some negatives:
It's hard to win *every* week. The Longhorns' next three games are Mizzou, OK State, and Texas Tech. Holy shit. Oklahoma is going to make damn sure they don't lose again. The Cowboys and Red Raiders have to face the whole south half yet and I can't see one of these two fresh faces having the poise win out in such a bruising environment. Mizzou has the easiest path, but still a long road.
Clearly at this point in the season it looks like the BCS championship should be the B12 vs. SEC champs, but the caliber of the two conferences can easily become a curse. Unlike the reigning champs, a two-loss team won't make it all the way this year and a one-loss team better have a great showing in Kansas City on December 6. Will only one loss and a final convincing win be enough? USC blew off their own foot and have no chance at redemption with their pillow-fight remainder of a schedule, but weak-scheduled Penn State and BYU/Utah could win out with more of a claim to meet Alabama or Georgia than last year's Hawaii Warriors.
The BCS standings will begin next week and give a better idea of what one loss might do to a team with off-the-charts strength of schedule. On the other hand, maybe an 8-team playoff isn't such a bad proposition...
I have been vocal about the unquestioned dominance of the SEC, but I'm very happily having to reconsider. The biggest reason why the SEC still reigns is that even their weakest teams are formidable. The two 2-4 SEC teams got their scars from playing Florida, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Georgia Tech, UCLA, and LA Tech, not a set including Iowa, UNLV, Arkansas State, Miami OH and Baylor.
Here's hoping the 'clones start to pull their own weight. On one hand, it's getting tougher to win as the conference becomes Heisman Central but hopefully playing in such a marquee conference helps Gene Chizik field some great recruits.
The teams account for four of the top five (six of top ten) scoring offenses. The Heisman watch is simply a cut and paste from the list of Big XII QB's (that list shouldn't change: Bradford threw 5 TD's, although Daniel dished out 3 picks...) Coaches Mark Mangino, Gary Pinkel, Mike Leach have been at their schools for 7, 8, and 9 years, respectively, with barely average records before breaking out into national prominence.
The B12 is the reason this college season is interesting to watch.
There are some negatives:
It's hard to win *every* week. The Longhorns' next three games are Mizzou, OK State, and Texas Tech. Holy shit. Oklahoma is going to make damn sure they don't lose again. The Cowboys and Red Raiders have to face the whole south half yet and I can't see one of these two fresh faces having the poise win out in such a bruising environment. Mizzou has the easiest path, but still a long road.
Clearly at this point in the season it looks like the BCS championship should be the B12 vs. SEC champs, but the caliber of the two conferences can easily become a curse. Unlike the reigning champs, a two-loss team won't make it all the way this year and a one-loss team better have a great showing in Kansas City on December 6. Will only one loss and a final convincing win be enough? USC blew off their own foot and have no chance at redemption with their pillow-fight remainder of a schedule, but weak-scheduled Penn State and BYU/Utah could win out with more of a claim to meet Alabama or Georgia than last year's Hawaii Warriors.
The BCS standings will begin next week and give a better idea of what one loss might do to a team with off-the-charts strength of schedule. On the other hand, maybe an 8-team playoff isn't such a bad proposition...
I have been vocal about the unquestioned dominance of the SEC, but I'm very happily having to reconsider. The biggest reason why the SEC still reigns is that even their weakest teams are formidable. The two 2-4 SEC teams got their scars from playing Florida, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Georgia Tech, UCLA, and LA Tech, not a set including Iowa, UNLV, Arkansas State, Miami OH and Baylor.
Here's hoping the 'clones start to pull their own weight. On one hand, it's getting tougher to win as the conference becomes Heisman Central but hopefully playing in such a marquee conference helps Gene Chizik field some great recruits.
Friday, October 03, 2008
MLB Playoffs Log 10/2
ALDS Game 1: Rays 6, White Sox 4
Looks like there is a new team of destiny this year. In their first playoff game ever, the Rays looked experienced in their win over the Sox. Timely hitting and solid defense will make them tough to beat. And just hand over the Rookie of the Year trophy to Evan Longoria already. Home runs in his first two playoff at-bats? Crazy good.
Chicago had its chance, though. Down 6-3 in the seventh, they loaded the bases with one out only to watch Uribe and Cabrera strike out. Trotting out Mark Buehrle for Game 2 should bode better than Vasquez for Chicago. Buehrle has the playoff experience to get a win. It's also good to see Konerko having good at-bats. I expect this series to head to the South Side tied at 1-1.
NLDS Game 2: Phillies 5, Brewers 2
The Brew Crew has been leaning on Sabathia the past month and it looks like their last leg just gave out. Probably due to exhaustion (4 starts in a row on short rest), CC didn't have his usual stuff, pulling a Dempster by walking two to load the bases and giving Victorino a grand trot around the bases. The second that slider was torched over Braun's head, everyone knew this series may be over. When I predicted the Phillies winning in four, I was counting on the Milwaukee ace taking this hand. Now they're in big trouble and they had better find their big bats to start outslugging the Phils or they are headed to Milwaukee for a longer stay than anticipated.
I do think Dave Bush can outpitch Jamie Moyer, but he's gonna need some support. (Yes, I'm talking to you Prince "Hitless" Fielder.) Again, I think it's a different series if they could have marched Ben Sheets out there tonight and given CC two more days of rest. But that's the way it goes...
NLDS Game 2: Dodgers 10, Cubs 3
The Cubs just enjoy proving me wrong -- when I claim they will lose, they win and when I (rarely) argue they're in line for a win, they lose. Another NL Central team in a 0-2 hole. Noone saw Zambrano giving up seven runs or the Cubs defense playing that terrible. Watching guys like DeRosa and Lee scrambling around after the ball in the dirt reminded me of a Little League game. All four infielders committed an error! I'd be interested to see how many times that has happened in playoff history. It's almost comical that Piniella is playing Fukudome to have the "best defensive lineup", meanwhile in the batter's box he's 0 for 8 with four K's and five men left on base.
But don't get me wrong, the Dodgers look great. Billingley pitched strong and the front third of that linup was red-hot. With Manny on fire, LA will be tough for anyone to beat. We'll see how they fare against Harden on Saturday.
Looks like there is a new team of destiny this year. In their first playoff game ever, the Rays looked experienced in their win over the Sox. Timely hitting and solid defense will make them tough to beat. And just hand over the Rookie of the Year trophy to Evan Longoria already. Home runs in his first two playoff at-bats? Crazy good.
Chicago had its chance, though. Down 6-3 in the seventh, they loaded the bases with one out only to watch Uribe and Cabrera strike out. Trotting out Mark Buehrle for Game 2 should bode better than Vasquez for Chicago. Buehrle has the playoff experience to get a win. It's also good to see Konerko having good at-bats. I expect this series to head to the South Side tied at 1-1.
NLDS Game 2: Phillies 5, Brewers 2
The Brew Crew has been leaning on Sabathia the past month and it looks like their last leg just gave out. Probably due to exhaustion (4 starts in a row on short rest), CC didn't have his usual stuff, pulling a Dempster by walking two to load the bases and giving Victorino a grand trot around the bases. The second that slider was torched over Braun's head, everyone knew this series may be over. When I predicted the Phillies winning in four, I was counting on the Milwaukee ace taking this hand. Now they're in big trouble and they had better find their big bats to start outslugging the Phils or they are headed to Milwaukee for a longer stay than anticipated.
I do think Dave Bush can outpitch Jamie Moyer, but he's gonna need some support. (Yes, I'm talking to you Prince "Hitless" Fielder.) Again, I think it's a different series if they could have marched Ben Sheets out there tonight and given CC two more days of rest. But that's the way it goes...
NLDS Game 2: Dodgers 10, Cubs 3
The Cubs just enjoy proving me wrong -- when I claim they will lose, they win and when I (rarely) argue they're in line for a win, they lose. Another NL Central team in a 0-2 hole. Noone saw Zambrano giving up seven runs or the Cubs defense playing that terrible. Watching guys like DeRosa and Lee scrambling around after the ball in the dirt reminded me of a Little League game. All four infielders committed an error! I'd be interested to see how many times that has happened in playoff history. It's almost comical that Piniella is playing Fukudome to have the "best defensive lineup", meanwhile in the batter's box he's 0 for 8 with four K's and five men left on base.
But don't get me wrong, the Dodgers look great. Billingley pitched strong and the front third of that linup was red-hot. With Manny on fire, LA will be tough for anyone to beat. We'll see how they fare against Harden on Saturday.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
MLB Playoffs Log 10/1
The MLB Playoffs *officially* started today and, even though my Cardinals were left out of the fray, I intend on watching as much baseball as I can the next few weeks. To get back into the blogging practice, I've decided to keep a playoff journal full of updates, predictions, and a humble opinion of what I see throughout October.
NLDS Game 1: Phillies 3, Brew Crew 1
Two words: Cole. Hamels. Eight innings pitched, two hits, nine K's, no runs. Hamels had a great season, surely good enough to sit on the fringe of Cy Young talk, but there was one stat that blew him out of contention: his win-loss record. However, it was a direct result of receiving terrible run support, and it looked like that may be the case again today...until the error. Maybe the play was harder than it looked, maybe it was jitters, maybe it was playing for a club that hadn't tasted October since four days after my birth. Irregardless, Mike Cameron misplayed a flyball that lead to all three of the Phillies unearned runs. Game over.
Alright Milwaukee fans, which do you want to hear first, the good news or the bad news?
The good news: Brad Lidge looked human. After not blowing a save all season long, it took Lidge 35 pitches to get through the ninth. Ryan Bruan struck for one run, then while waiting on second base he watched Prince Fielder take a wild swing at ball four to strike out; a Fielder walk in that situation changes the game. You'd have Hardy and Hart coming up with two on and one out and if Hardy still would have walked, it would have been bases loaded and the real pressure would have been on Lidge. Again, most likely playoff-rookie jitters, but if Fielder lays off that one pitch, we may have had a different outcome. Then again, maybe it's that one pitch that makes Brad Lidge that good.
The bad news: in my opinion, the story overshadowing Hamels' dominance is the news that Ben Sheets is out for the playoffs. That alone is what made Milwaukee so dangerous in a short series, they had the best 1-2 punch of anyone. Now you don't have Sheets, you lost the opener, and CC may only get one start. You heard it here first: the Brew Crew won't live to see a Game 5.
NLDS Game 1: Dodgers 7, Cubs 2
Don't worry, Cubs fans, it's just one game. Unlike the Brewers, I'm not ready to announce Chicago's demise. I have a feeling this series will go the distance and the Cubs will represent the NL Central in the NLCS. But that doesn't mean the North Side faithful shouldn't have any concerns. (Of which they do, considering how on edge the Wrigley crown appeared last night. The color men in the booth kept referring to the palpable uneasiness they sensed from the crowd, as if they are waiting for something bad/disappointing to happen. But how can you blame them?)
First of all, that James Loney grand slam wasn't a fluke, or at least not entirely. During the first four innings Ryan Dempster looked pretty good, but at times he struggled with his command. After the second walk he handed out in the fifth, I thought for sure they were going to pull him -- at that point he had already walked six batters and thrown 98 pitches. Yet he was left in to walk the next batter and then give up the home run. Dempster will rebound in his next start. It's Piniella's best impersonation of Dusty Baker that would have me concerned. In the playoffs, you have to know when to make pitching changes.
Secondly, this may be a glimpse of what's to come for Manny Ramirez. No doubt he's been hot since joining LA, but that power golf stroke to the bleachers in left field may be the beginning of a big post-season for Manny.
All in all, the Cubs aren't in a hole of which they can't dig out. Big Z will have a big game tonight against Chad Billingsley and get the win. Chicago has too good an offense to keep down. And this is coming from a Cardinals fan.
ALDS Game 1: Red Sox 4, Angels 1
I only watched two innings of this game, so I don't know much more than what I read in the box score. Looks like Jon Lester turned out a gem. Jacoby Ellsbury was a spark in the lead-off spot. Jason Bay is still doing his best Manny impression by providing the offense. Sportscenter highlights showed plenty of Boston defensive plays, which is surprising because they aren't usually known for their defense.
Looking at the hearts of the lineups, it looks like the Angels should have had the advantage: their 2-5 hitters went 8 for 15 (.533) while the BoSox 2-5 went 2 for 16 (.125). If this trend keeps up, the Angels will find success in this series.
NLDS Game 1: Phillies 3, Brew Crew 1
Two words: Cole. Hamels. Eight innings pitched, two hits, nine K's, no runs. Hamels had a great season, surely good enough to sit on the fringe of Cy Young talk, but there was one stat that blew him out of contention: his win-loss record. However, it was a direct result of receiving terrible run support, and it looked like that may be the case again today...until the error. Maybe the play was harder than it looked, maybe it was jitters, maybe it was playing for a club that hadn't tasted October since four days after my birth. Irregardless, Mike Cameron misplayed a flyball that lead to all three of the Phillies unearned runs. Game over.
Alright Milwaukee fans, which do you want to hear first, the good news or the bad news?
The good news: Brad Lidge looked human. After not blowing a save all season long, it took Lidge 35 pitches to get through the ninth. Ryan Bruan struck for one run, then while waiting on second base he watched Prince Fielder take a wild swing at ball four to strike out; a Fielder walk in that situation changes the game. You'd have Hardy and Hart coming up with two on and one out and if Hardy still would have walked, it would have been bases loaded and the real pressure would have been on Lidge. Again, most likely playoff-rookie jitters, but if Fielder lays off that one pitch, we may have had a different outcome. Then again, maybe it's that one pitch that makes Brad Lidge that good.
The bad news: in my opinion, the story overshadowing Hamels' dominance is the news that Ben Sheets is out for the playoffs. That alone is what made Milwaukee so dangerous in a short series, they had the best 1-2 punch of anyone. Now you don't have Sheets, you lost the opener, and CC may only get one start. You heard it here first: the Brew Crew won't live to see a Game 5.
NLDS Game 1: Dodgers 7, Cubs 2
Don't worry, Cubs fans, it's just one game. Unlike the Brewers, I'm not ready to announce Chicago's demise. I have a feeling this series will go the distance and the Cubs will represent the NL Central in the NLCS. But that doesn't mean the North Side faithful shouldn't have any concerns. (Of which they do, considering how on edge the Wrigley crown appeared last night. The color men in the booth kept referring to the palpable uneasiness they sensed from the crowd, as if they are waiting for something bad/disappointing to happen. But how can you blame them?)
First of all, that James Loney grand slam wasn't a fluke, or at least not entirely. During the first four innings Ryan Dempster looked pretty good, but at times he struggled with his command. After the second walk he handed out in the fifth, I thought for sure they were going to pull him -- at that point he had already walked six batters and thrown 98 pitches. Yet he was left in to walk the next batter and then give up the home run. Dempster will rebound in his next start. It's Piniella's best impersonation of Dusty Baker that would have me concerned. In the playoffs, you have to know when to make pitching changes.
Secondly, this may be a glimpse of what's to come for Manny Ramirez. No doubt he's been hot since joining LA, but that power golf stroke to the bleachers in left field may be the beginning of a big post-season for Manny.
All in all, the Cubs aren't in a hole of which they can't dig out. Big Z will have a big game tonight against Chad Billingsley and get the win. Chicago has too good an offense to keep down. And this is coming from a Cardinals fan.
ALDS Game 1: Red Sox 4, Angels 1
I only watched two innings of this game, so I don't know much more than what I read in the box score. Looks like Jon Lester turned out a gem. Jacoby Ellsbury was a spark in the lead-off spot. Jason Bay is still doing his best Manny impression by providing the offense. Sportscenter highlights showed plenty of Boston defensive plays, which is surprising because they aren't usually known for their defense.
Looking at the hearts of the lineups, it looks like the Angels should have had the advantage: their 2-5 hitters went 8 for 15 (.533) while the BoSox 2-5 went 2 for 16 (.125). If this trend keeps up, the Angels will find success in this series.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
NCAAF Ranking Bull
#1 USC loses to 1-2 Oregon State by one possession at Corvallis and #3 Georgia loses to #8 Alabama by two possessions in Athens. Who drops to #9 and who drops to #11?
Both teams recovered from first-half shutouts to make the final quarters interesting. Both teams had top-notch talent, one team had an opponent with roughly equal talent.
Even on the road and in a closer game, I don't understand how coaches and sportswriters could punish UGA more than USC for losing to an opponent who now perhaps has the best shot to play in the BCS championship.
It's not all bad, I think Georgia will do better with lowered expectations and has plenty of opportunities to rise again (Tenn, LSU, Florida, Auburn, Vande?!) whereas USC plays...teams like Iowa State.
P.S. For a good laugh, watch Pete Carroll complain "the PAC-10 is ridiculously hard" here.
P.S.S. Congrats to Oklahoma, their #1 ranking is the 96th time they've occupied the top spot in the AP poll, tied for first with Notre Dame. And three of the top five ranked may be a first for the Big XII, you bet.
Both teams recovered from first-half shutouts to make the final quarters interesting. Both teams had top-notch talent, one team had an opponent with roughly equal talent.
Even on the road and in a closer game, I don't understand how coaches and sportswriters could punish UGA more than USC for losing to an opponent who now perhaps has the best shot to play in the BCS championship.
It's not all bad, I think Georgia will do better with lowered expectations and has plenty of opportunities to rise again (Tenn, LSU, Florida, Auburn, Vande?!) whereas USC plays...teams like Iowa State.
P.S. For a good laugh, watch Pete Carroll complain "the PAC-10 is ridiculously hard" here.
P.S.S. Congrats to Oklahoma, their #1 ranking is the 96th time they've occupied the top spot in the AP poll, tied for first with Notre Dame. And three of the top five ranked may be a first for the Big XII, you bet.
Sunday, August 03, 2008
Schlitz is back!
So, if anyone has been on msn.com today, they may have already read the great news about the Milwaukee beer getting back on the shelves!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25970479?GT1=43001
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25970479?GT1=43001
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Larry Eustachy, anyone?
John Kerry's Senate office put out a statement about these pictures, saying:
"The caption on this TMZ gossip website is completely erroneous and insulting, and it should be immediately corrected. As Sen. Kerry and two friends left dinner at the Straight Warf [sic] restaurant on Nantucket and walked down the dock, a large group on a boat recognized Senator Kerry and asked if they could have a photo taken. The group came off the boat and onto the dock, took a photo with Sen. Kerry and his friends, and then Sen. Kerry and his two friends immediately walked away. End of story."
I guess "immediately walking away" means standing around while the friend with a camera snaps off half a dozen photos of you in various poses with some mid-20's sizzluts. What a guy.
H/t: James Taranto
"The caption on this TMZ gossip website is completely erroneous and insulting, and it should be immediately corrected. As Sen. Kerry and two friends left dinner at the Straight Warf [sic] restaurant on Nantucket and walked down the dock, a large group on a boat recognized Senator Kerry and asked if they could have a photo taken. The group came off the boat and onto the dock, took a photo with Sen. Kerry and his friends, and then Sen. Kerry and his two friends immediately walked away. End of story."
I guess "immediately walking away" means standing around while the friend with a camera snaps off half a dozen photos of you in various poses with some mid-20's sizzluts. What a guy.
H/t: James Taranto
Monday, July 21, 2008
Cards-Cubs In The Onion
Chalk one up for the Cubbies...
July 17, 2008
Base Runners Agree Albert Pujols Most Awkward First Baseman To Talk To
ST. LOUIS—A recent survey conducted by the Elias Sports Bureau shows that 98 percent of all National League base runners agree that Cardinals first baseman Albert Pujols is the "weirdest" and "most uncomfortable" first baseman to talk to. "There's nothing more painful than getting a leadoff single when that guy's covering first," said Houston Astros centerfielder Michael Bourn, noting that Pujols' palms are always noticeably sweaty whenever they shake hands. "The guy never looks you in the eye, and he never has anything good to talk about. Sometimes it's so uncomfortable when neither of you talk for like eight or nine pitches that even though you know you're gonna get caught, you just go for the steal to get the hell out of there." The same survey implicates that the Chicago Cubs have given up the fewest doubles in the league, which may be due to the fact that players rarely leave first base in order to spend as much time as possible with Derrek Lee.
July 17, 2008
Base Runners Agree Albert Pujols Most Awkward First Baseman To Talk To
ST. LOUIS—A recent survey conducted by the Elias Sports Bureau shows that 98 percent of all National League base runners agree that Cardinals first baseman Albert Pujols is the "weirdest" and "most uncomfortable" first baseman to talk to. "There's nothing more painful than getting a leadoff single when that guy's covering first," said Houston Astros centerfielder Michael Bourn, noting that Pujols' palms are always noticeably sweaty whenever they shake hands. "The guy never looks you in the eye, and he never has anything good to talk about. Sometimes it's so uncomfortable when neither of you talk for like eight or nine pitches that even though you know you're gonna get caught, you just go for the steal to get the hell out of there." The same survey implicates that the Chicago Cubs have given up the fewest doubles in the league, which may be due to the fact that players rarely leave first base in order to spend as much time as possible with Derrek Lee.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
The Big XII Football Challenge
I know it's early, but I can't help but start looking ahead to the 2008 NCAA football season. There's just something exciting about beginning a new season with every team tied for first place. I'm sure there is more to come on the current state of affairs in the Ames practice arena, so I'll start with a simple friendly competition.
According to the Vegas Insider, here are the early over/under win total predictions for the Big XII:
*Totals are regular season victories only, no bowl games.
According to the Vegas Insider, here are the early over/under win total predictions for the Big XII:
*Totals are regular season victories only, no bowl games.Leave a comment with your over/under picks and I'll compile them. After all, with March Madness eight months away we need something to bet on...
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
KG's 2008 MLB All-Star Ballot
If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times: MLB all-star balloting starts way too early! Mine was submitted tonight a good 25 seconds before the deadline as to ensure I could make the most educated decision. Below is my ideal 2008 all-star team.
American League
1B: Justin Morneau, Twins -- An ex-MVP who is doing it all this season. In the top three in AVG, RBI, HR, Runs, and OPS among first baseman, he is one half of the dynamic duo keeping the faith alive in Minnesota. Not to mention his first class defense; he has only committed two errors en route to a tie for the best fielding percentage.
2B: Ian Kinsler, Rangers -- Who? The question should be, "Who is the only player in the AL in the top ten in AVG, RBI's, Runs, Steals, and OPS?" That would be one Ian Kinsler. Throw in home runs and he is miles above second basemen in every catagory. Hiding in the shadow of Josh Hamilton, Kinsler is having a well-rounded, breakout year. Sure, his defense is bad (15 errors, worst fielding % among regular 2B), but I'll allow one defensively-challenged player on my ballot. This pick may be the easiest vote I cast this year -- a no-brainer in my book.
SS: Michael Young, Rangers -- This might be the second easiest pick on my ballot. The field of AL short stops isn't particularly strong. Young leads the pack in just about every offensive catagory, as well as fielding percentage.
3B: Alex Rodriguez, Yankees -- I found myself searching far and wide for a more unique pick, trying my hardest to overlook him...but I couldn't. A-Rod -- even though he has missed almost 20 games -- is putting up the best numbers once again. Also, the best defensive tenents of the hot corner aren't having notable seasons offensively. Here are his ranks against the other AL third basemen: AVG (1st), HR (1st), RBI (5th), Runs (2nd), Steals (2nd), and OPS (1st). Can't hardly argue with that.
OF: Josh Hamilton, Rangers -- Replaces Rick Ankiel as the newest Hallmark story of the MLB. The guy leaves baseball for four years, battles drug problems, gets clean, and returns to lead the league in home runs and RBI's. Whether or not he can maintain this production through the entire season remains to be seen, but at the halfway point his name is certainly in the MVP arena.
OF: Carlos Quentin, White Sox -- He's the engine that makes the Sox offense go. Yet another candidate for "Most Surprising Player of the Year", Quentin's power game has led Chicago to the top of the division. First in home runs, third in RBI's, and fifth in OPS. Despite a batting average lower than I usually vote for in an outfielder (.284), I deemed him worthy of a write-in vote.
OF: Grady Sizemore, Indians -- Not having the best year average-wise, but his power numbers are up as he leads the majors in home runs, tied with the two men chosen above. In addition, he's on pace to set a career high in stolen bases. If you haven't seen him on Web Gems, you aren't watching enough -- his defense is spectacular.
C: Joe Mauer, Twins -- Like Young, Mauer is the most sensible pick due to his performance above the remainder of the field at his position. The other half of the Twins' powerful 1-2 punch; see Morneau.
National League
1B: Lance Berkman, Astros -- I (reluctantly) pushed my bias aside. Berkman is one of my most disliked players, mainly because of what he has done to my Cardinals the past few years. However, he barely edges out Prince Albert. I had planned on voting for Pujols because he doesn't sit amid a cushy lineup that includes the likes of Carlos Lee, Miguel Tejada, and Hunter Pence. Guys like Ankiel and Ludwick get big numbers because Pujols is pitched around, which is not the case with Berkman. (Look at what happened to Ludwick's numbers when Pujols went out with injury.) Regardless, I reward players for what they've accomplished this season and Lance has surpassed Albert in damn near every catagory.
2B: Chase Utley, Phillies -- Looks like the "U's" have it. Ultey or Uggla? Uggla or Utley? This was the toughest choice of the night. They're tied for the MLB lead of 23 HR. The only second baseman Uggla trails in RBI's and runs is Utley. Utley is batting nine points higher than Uggla. Sorry, Dan, gotta take a back seat. Too bad they couldn't leave one at 2B and stick the other at SS...
SS: Hanley Ramirez, Marlins -- ...which brings us to Han-Ram. (Yes, I just made that nickname up.) The field of short stops hasn't been very impressive in either league, but Ramirez stands above in most offensive areas. On the flip side, he leads the NL short stops in errors. I hate endorsing defensive liabilities, but I have little choice.
3B: Chipper Jones, Braves -- Chipper's best impersonation of Teddy Ballgame alone grants him a spot on this roster. Throw in 16 home runs, 46 RBI's, and 36 years of age and you've got a bonafide veteran all-star. Who wants to take the over on the season o/u of .400?
OF: Ryan Braun, Brewers -- Forget Prince Fielder. Braun is the real MVP of that team from the land of sky blue waters. Like Quentin, his batting average could use improvement, but he's hit the second most home runs and RBI's of all NL outfielders. He has played 80 games and not committed a single error. His clutch hitting is an intangible that boosts him into The Classic.
OF: Carlos Lee, Astros -- They're like Chazz Michael Michaels and Jimmy McElroy -- if Berkman's the steak, Lee's the sizzle. Berkman gets on base and Lee brings him home. If only they could get more consistant, Houston might currently be in the dog fight for the NL Central.
OF: Kosuke Fukudome, Cubs -- This pick is not as statistically supported as the rest, but Fukudome has made a better adjustment to the U.S. bigs than I thought he would. He is hitting for average, scoring a lot of runs, and patrolling the outfield like a veteran (one error in 77 games). Besides, the Cubs need at least one starter to represent their success to date.
C: Yadier Molina, Cardinals -- This is where I make up for the defensive lacking of a couple of my previous votes. Yadi cracks the top ten in AVG, HR, RBI, and runs, but it's his arm, not his bat, that earn him a selection. Although he has committed more errors than usual so far this season, since 2005 he has picked off more base runners and caught a higher percentage of base stealers than any catcher in the game. His leadership has been instrumental in the success of a young St. Louis team, providing an exceptional knowledge of his pitching staff that has allowed them to exceed expectations. Besides, much like the Cubs, the Cardinals have played well enough to warrant a starter.
American League
1B: Justin Morneau, Twins -- An ex-MVP who is doing it all this season. In the top three in AVG, RBI, HR, Runs, and OPS among first baseman, he is one half of the dynamic duo keeping the faith alive in Minnesota. Not to mention his first class defense; he has only committed two errors en route to a tie for the best fielding percentage.
2B: Ian Kinsler, Rangers -- Who? The question should be, "Who is the only player in the AL in the top ten in AVG, RBI's, Runs, Steals, and OPS?" That would be one Ian Kinsler. Throw in home runs and he is miles above second basemen in every catagory. Hiding in the shadow of Josh Hamilton, Kinsler is having a well-rounded, breakout year. Sure, his defense is bad (15 errors, worst fielding % among regular 2B), but I'll allow one defensively-challenged player on my ballot. This pick may be the easiest vote I cast this year -- a no-brainer in my book.
SS: Michael Young, Rangers -- This might be the second easiest pick on my ballot. The field of AL short stops isn't particularly strong. Young leads the pack in just about every offensive catagory, as well as fielding percentage.
3B: Alex Rodriguez, Yankees -- I found myself searching far and wide for a more unique pick, trying my hardest to overlook him...but I couldn't. A-Rod -- even though he has missed almost 20 games -- is putting up the best numbers once again. Also, the best defensive tenents of the hot corner aren't having notable seasons offensively. Here are his ranks against the other AL third basemen: AVG (1st), HR (1st), RBI (5th), Runs (2nd), Steals (2nd), and OPS (1st). Can't hardly argue with that.
OF: Josh Hamilton, Rangers -- Replaces Rick Ankiel as the newest Hallmark story of the MLB. The guy leaves baseball for four years, battles drug problems, gets clean, and returns to lead the league in home runs and RBI's. Whether or not he can maintain this production through the entire season remains to be seen, but at the halfway point his name is certainly in the MVP arena.
OF: Carlos Quentin, White Sox -- He's the engine that makes the Sox offense go. Yet another candidate for "Most Surprising Player of the Year", Quentin's power game has led Chicago to the top of the division. First in home runs, third in RBI's, and fifth in OPS. Despite a batting average lower than I usually vote for in an outfielder (.284), I deemed him worthy of a write-in vote.
OF: Grady Sizemore, Indians -- Not having the best year average-wise, but his power numbers are up as he leads the majors in home runs, tied with the two men chosen above. In addition, he's on pace to set a career high in stolen bases. If you haven't seen him on Web Gems, you aren't watching enough -- his defense is spectacular.
C: Joe Mauer, Twins -- Like Young, Mauer is the most sensible pick due to his performance above the remainder of the field at his position. The other half of the Twins' powerful 1-2 punch; see Morneau.
National League
1B: Lance Berkman, Astros -- I (reluctantly) pushed my bias aside. Berkman is one of my most disliked players, mainly because of what he has done to my Cardinals the past few years. However, he barely edges out Prince Albert. I had planned on voting for Pujols because he doesn't sit amid a cushy lineup that includes the likes of Carlos Lee, Miguel Tejada, and Hunter Pence. Guys like Ankiel and Ludwick get big numbers because Pujols is pitched around, which is not the case with Berkman. (Look at what happened to Ludwick's numbers when Pujols went out with injury.) Regardless, I reward players for what they've accomplished this season and Lance has surpassed Albert in damn near every catagory.
2B: Chase Utley, Phillies -- Looks like the "U's" have it. Ultey or Uggla? Uggla or Utley? This was the toughest choice of the night. They're tied for the MLB lead of 23 HR. The only second baseman Uggla trails in RBI's and runs is Utley. Utley is batting nine points higher than Uggla. Sorry, Dan, gotta take a back seat. Too bad they couldn't leave one at 2B and stick the other at SS...
SS: Hanley Ramirez, Marlins -- ...which brings us to Han-Ram. (Yes, I just made that nickname up.) The field of short stops hasn't been very impressive in either league, but Ramirez stands above in most offensive areas. On the flip side, he leads the NL short stops in errors. I hate endorsing defensive liabilities, but I have little choice.
3B: Chipper Jones, Braves -- Chipper's best impersonation of Teddy Ballgame alone grants him a spot on this roster. Throw in 16 home runs, 46 RBI's, and 36 years of age and you've got a bonafide veteran all-star. Who wants to take the over on the season o/u of .400?
OF: Ryan Braun, Brewers -- Forget Prince Fielder. Braun is the real MVP of that team from the land of sky blue waters. Like Quentin, his batting average could use improvement, but he's hit the second most home runs and RBI's of all NL outfielders. He has played 80 games and not committed a single error. His clutch hitting is an intangible that boosts him into The Classic.
OF: Carlos Lee, Astros -- They're like Chazz Michael Michaels and Jimmy McElroy -- if Berkman's the steak, Lee's the sizzle. Berkman gets on base and Lee brings him home. If only they could get more consistant, Houston might currently be in the dog fight for the NL Central.
OF: Kosuke Fukudome, Cubs -- This pick is not as statistically supported as the rest, but Fukudome has made a better adjustment to the U.S. bigs than I thought he would. He is hitting for average, scoring a lot of runs, and patrolling the outfield like a veteran (one error in 77 games). Besides, the Cubs need at least one starter to represent their success to date.
C: Yadier Molina, Cardinals -- This is where I make up for the defensive lacking of a couple of my previous votes. Yadi cracks the top ten in AVG, HR, RBI, and runs, but it's his arm, not his bat, that earn him a selection. Although he has committed more errors than usual so far this season, since 2005 he has picked off more base runners and caught a higher percentage of base stealers than any catcher in the game. His leadership has been instrumental in the success of a young St. Louis team, providing an exceptional knowledge of his pitching staff that has allowed them to exceed expectations. Besides, much like the Cubs, the Cardinals have played well enough to warrant a starter.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Bubble It Up!
When I heard the Stanley Cup was dented while making a tour of local Detroit restaurants and bars, I joked that some boozehound must have dropped it. My friend Danny (on the far left) up in Detroit emailed me this photo of him and Red Wings defenseman, Chris Chelios, to verify my assumption:
I wonder if it's anything like drinking out of the Ruby Cup...
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Re: The Streak Ends!
I realize it's been a few months, but I rediscovered this amusing article from ESPN "Page 2" from when the Houston Rockets went on the unbelievable win streak. It concerns the greatest streaks of all-time, including this little gem:
234. Chicago Cubs: 99 years without a World Series title
Did you know the Cubs didn't really become The Cubs until 1984? By that we mean a slightly less obnoxious version of the Red Sox. Before that season, nobody cared about the Cubbies -- not even Cubs fans. Other than a slight upturn in attendance from 1969 to 1971, the Cubs ranked in the bottom half of NL attendance all but four seasons from 1948 through 1983. From 1953 through 1967, they never drew a million fans. So, no, the Cubs haven't been lovable losers throughout their history; they've mostly just been losers.
234. Chicago Cubs: 99 years without a World Series title
Did you know the Cubs didn't really become The Cubs until 1984? By that we mean a slightly less obnoxious version of the Red Sox. Before that season, nobody cared about the Cubbies -- not even Cubs fans. Other than a slight upturn in attendance from 1969 to 1971, the Cubs ranked in the bottom half of NL attendance all but four seasons from 1948 through 1983. From 1953 through 1967, they never drew a million fans. So, no, the Cubs haven't been lovable losers throughout their history; they've mostly just been losers.
Monday, June 23, 2008
The Fix Is In!
The year was 2002. The Sacramento Kings were the most dominant, fundamental, and purely entertaining team in the NBA. They were far and away the most likable: Vlade, Peja, Webber, Christie, Bibby, Jackson, even Hedo Turkoglu and Scot Pollard. Their big men could pass, every player could shoot, they played ridiculously unselfishly, they had fun playing basketball the way it's meant to be played. They were on the doorstep of toppling this Shaq-Kobe title run that aggravated 95% of the NBA-viewing public.
After The Great Chicago (Bulls) Fire of 1998, this was the fourth season I had endured of my team struggling to win 20 games and found myself straying to a new seductress come playoff time. How could I not root for the Kings? They were fun, modest, and had personality -- all the things the Lakers didn't. I hated that Phil Jackson betrayed the Chicago faithfuls and jumped on the Shaq train. I hated that the Lakers ran only two plays: 1) pass the ball into Shaq so he could bulldoze over his defender and either complain about the offensive foul called or complain about the defensive foul that wasn't called and 2) Kobe dribbles around recklessly until he forces a fading, closely defended jump shot that has a 30% chance of going in. And most of all, I hated that the Lakers were about to threepeat as champions.
I remember watching that Western Conference Finals so vividly. With all the buzz about Game 6 it's easy to forget just how controversially about every game was called. (Hell, we would not have even got to Game 6 if it weren't for an after-the-halftime-buzzer three-point prayer awarded to Laker Sumaki Walker in Game 4!) The sixth one was the only game I didn't watch in full, as I was at Joel Norton's wedding and couldn't get to the hotel bar tv until the second half. I did, however, watch most of that ghastly 4th quarter and it's parade of free throws. What a sick joke. Twenty-seven fourth-quarter free throws? They sure didn't do a great job of masking the league's agenda. The NBA is all about the benjamins and they were hitting near record audience numbers. It was fixed, plain and simple. (And deep down in a place they don't like to talk about at parties, Lakers fans know this to be true.)
I remember the personal agony this caused me. I almost pulled my hair out over this shit. At the time I would have bet my life savings the referees fixed the game and I finally have a shred of evidence. Finally, vindication! And David Stern has not proved this otherwise, but instead has leaned on a weak defense of "Donaghy is a felon." Noone's arguing that, Mr. Stern -- sounds like a straw man to me. If the NBA has any thread of integrity left, it will admit it's crimes and do something to remedy it.
UPDATES IN THE NEWS:
*David Stern claims to have made a "thorough investigation" into the accusations that Game 6 of the WCF were influenced by referees. Bob Delaney, one of the three refs on duty that night, made it public that he has never been contacted by the NBA or federal officials.
*The NBA has prohibited any referees from speaking to the media. Why the need to silence the refs if there is nothing to hide?
*Phil Jackson has recommended employing referees from an organization not associated with the NBA. He believes the refs should not be under the control of the NBA and it would provide more credibility. I completely agree.
*Lamell McMorris, NBA Referees Director, has hinted that Donaghy's entire career as an NBA referee has been clouded by poor judgement and dismissed the claims of Game 6 as unreliable because "Tim Donaghy has had honesty and credibility issues from the get-go." Wow. I don't think it helps your cause to admit you've been sending a ref out there who is known to have credibility issues. Almost makes the whole organization look suspect...
After The Great Chicago (Bulls) Fire of 1998, this was the fourth season I had endured of my team struggling to win 20 games and found myself straying to a new seductress come playoff time. How could I not root for the Kings? They were fun, modest, and had personality -- all the things the Lakers didn't. I hated that Phil Jackson betrayed the Chicago faithfuls and jumped on the Shaq train. I hated that the Lakers ran only two plays: 1) pass the ball into Shaq so he could bulldoze over his defender and either complain about the offensive foul called or complain about the defensive foul that wasn't called and 2) Kobe dribbles around recklessly until he forces a fading, closely defended jump shot that has a 30% chance of going in. And most of all, I hated that the Lakers were about to threepeat as champions.
I remember watching that Western Conference Finals so vividly. With all the buzz about Game 6 it's easy to forget just how controversially about every game was called. (Hell, we would not have even got to Game 6 if it weren't for an after-the-halftime-buzzer three-point prayer awarded to Laker Sumaki Walker in Game 4!) The sixth one was the only game I didn't watch in full, as I was at Joel Norton's wedding and couldn't get to the hotel bar tv until the second half. I did, however, watch most of that ghastly 4th quarter and it's parade of free throws. What a sick joke. Twenty-seven fourth-quarter free throws? They sure didn't do a great job of masking the league's agenda. The NBA is all about the benjamins and they were hitting near record audience numbers. It was fixed, plain and simple. (And deep down in a place they don't like to talk about at parties, Lakers fans know this to be true.)
I remember the personal agony this caused me. I almost pulled my hair out over this shit. At the time I would have bet my life savings the referees fixed the game and I finally have a shred of evidence. Finally, vindication! And David Stern has not proved this otherwise, but instead has leaned on a weak defense of "Donaghy is a felon." Noone's arguing that, Mr. Stern -- sounds like a straw man to me. If the NBA has any thread of integrity left, it will admit it's crimes and do something to remedy it.
UPDATES IN THE NEWS:
*David Stern claims to have made a "thorough investigation" into the accusations that Game 6 of the WCF were influenced by referees. Bob Delaney, one of the three refs on duty that night, made it public that he has never been contacted by the NBA or federal officials.
*The NBA has prohibited any referees from speaking to the media. Why the need to silence the refs if there is nothing to hide?
*Phil Jackson has recommended employing referees from an organization not associated with the NBA. He believes the refs should not be under the control of the NBA and it would provide more credibility. I completely agree.
*Lamell McMorris, NBA Referees Director, has hinted that Donaghy's entire career as an NBA referee has been clouded by poor judgement and dismissed the claims of Game 6 as unreliable because "Tim Donaghy has had honesty and credibility issues from the get-go." Wow. I don't think it helps your cause to admit you've been sending a ref out there who is known to have credibility issues. Almost makes the whole organization look suspect...
Legally Speaking, Duke Football Sucks
Duke and Louisville agreed to a four-game football schedule contract in 2002. The agreement said that if Duke backed out they would be fined $150,000 per game if Louisville could not find a replacement team "of similar stature." Louisville sued Duke after Duke bailed on the contract following their 40-3 loss in 2002. The Duke lawyers argued that since Duke is so terrible, literally any team would work as a replacement and the judge agreed:
At oral argument, Duke (with a candor perhaps more attributable to good legal strategy than to institutional modesty) persuasively asserted that this is a threshold that could not be any lower. Duke's argument on this point cannot be reasonably disputed by Louisville.
Ouch.
At oral argument, Duke (with a candor perhaps more attributable to good legal strategy than to institutional modesty) persuasively asserted that this is a threshold that could not be any lower. Duke's argument on this point cannot be reasonably disputed by Louisville.
Ouch.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
What if the I-Cubs Won and No One Came?
Because that's exactly what happened today. The I-Cubs decided to play their home game this Saturday even though the City of Des Moines would not lift their evacuation orders for downtown. Strange.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)