high expectations

For a decade the niners were terrible. They had no leadership. Had no stars and had a rotating door of coordinators, coaches and one and done free agents. Than Jim harbaugh was signed  turned a morbid offense into an intelligent well run efficilent offense led by Alex smith. In his first year the nineers went to the NFC championship game. Next year super bowl appearance and third year NFC championship game. This year the expectations were extremely high. Kaps third year, revamped offense, solid defense and favorable schedule all were reasons to believe this was finally the year they won their 6th championship. A string of injuries to star players, questionable play calling, poor play and locker room drama ends with the niners at 8-8, coachless and future unknown. What's the point of this post? For a decade I had nothing but low expectations for this team and after having high hopes for this year only to see them unfulfilled it leaves a weird feeling in my stomach. Haven't felt it for awhile. What is it?

My ballot

I'm about to start getting busy with other things, so in that theoretical parallel universe where I stuck with the journalism career track, leveraged the sports background into a reporting gig, wound up in a position that qualified me to weigh in on these things, and gave me enough credibility that some people actually care about my thoughts, my 2015 Baseball Hall of Fame ballot would be:

Randy Johnson 

Pedro Martinez 

John smoltz

Edgar Martinez 

Craig biggio

Mike piazza

Tim Raines 

Curt schilling

Jeff bagwell 

Mike mussina

Just off: Barry bonds and roger Clemens. Not a priority on this ballot, though if I had more space I'd have no problem voting for them. But I also couldn't vote for one and not the other. Alan trammel is also close, without the complications. 

Kent y Delgado

Anybody think Jeff Kent or Carlos Delgado should be in? I feel like there was a lot of talk toward the end of Kent's career about how he was qualified, but I'm not sure I was ever really convinced. Obviously he provided a lot of offense (in every sense of that word) for a few years, but that seemed to be his only distinguishing feature, and even that seemed overvalued. Delgado strikes me as one of those guys who pretty much gets dismissed (well, maybe overlooked is a better word) because he didn't provide the overwhelming numbers some other sluggers did, but who was nonetheless very good for a decent amount of time. I suspect we'll all agree these guys were good players who aren't Hall of Famers, but maybe somebody has a more interesting argument to make.

Bryan Bulaga is not a whale

I tried to post this in the first half, but the website wouldn't let me for some reason.  David Diehl is the color guy for the Packers vs. Bills broadcast, and he has repeatedly called Bryan Bulaga "Bryan Beluga."  Mark Schlereth used to do this a lot.  I haven't heard Diehl say it since the first quarter.  This is how I imagine the conversation with the producers went:

Producer:  "Mr. Diehl, his name is pronounced 'Bulaga'"

Diehl: "That's what I said: Beluga

Producer: "No, no.  'Bu-la-ga'"

Diehl:  "That's what I freaking said! Beluga! Don't make me punch you.

Producer:  "My mistake sir, please just refer to him by his number from now on."  Shakes head.

Being cynical

Ah yes, the article about how great athletes' preparation is what keeps them great through what used to be their declining years. Haven't we seen these kinds of discussions in some other sport before? [I was looking for similar on Bonds and Rodriguez, but couldn't find them and I'm busy--we all know they're out there.]

No, I have no evidence, and I'm not really that suspicious--Peyton is doing the same thing, and I think it all has more to do with officiating and league rules and schematic changes anyway. But I'm cynical, so I have to toss it out there.

Love watching Drew Brees suck

Drew Brees loves the camera.  He lost me as a fan during the lockout when he got in front of the camera at every opportunity to word-vomit nearly every thought that came to mind. So much fun to watch the Panthers make him loo terrible.

Interesting take on the Fox pregame show by Howie Long (I think it was Howie)

The Fox pregame crew was discussing who they would take now to lead their team between Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers.  There was a split, of course, and it mostly centered around the athleticism of Rodgers and the assumption that all of the mental stuff was pretty much a wash.  Then Howie Long made a great point that I had never considered.  He suggested that Tom Brady was much more willing to have his team run the ball 40 times to win and that Aaron Rodgers was not.  I think I agree with this.  Rodgers is much happier when he is throwing the ball.

Contrary to that idea, however, is the simple fact that Rodgers throws the ball far less than other top QBs.  He is typically in the 8-15 range for pass attempts each year.  This is in stark contrast to Peyton Manning and Drew Brees, who pretty routinely throw the ball 40-50 times per game.  I think I'm going to do a little bit of research and see if this is due to Rodgers typically high YPA numbers, or due to the Packers running the ball more than I appreciate.  However, I do find it interesting that last week was the first time Eddie Lacy carried the ball more than 17 times in a game.  Rodgers has complete authority to audible out of runs.  Hmmm...

Mike Trout in Coors Field 1998-2001

Unlike some military historians (who seem to like to talk about mistakes and what commanders should have done) and the general readers who consume their works, I abhor counterfactual history. Counterfactual history is incapable of accommodating the infinite contingencies that could have effected events had they proceeded in slightly different ways, and there is simply no clean way to project alternative outcomes with any degree of certainty. That's why we try to anchor analysis in what we "know" did happen--it's already messy enough. However, I will make an exception for exercises that try to translate the statistical production of this generation's most transcendent baseball player into the video game atmosphere of turn-of-the-century Coors Field. Holy heck.

Rodgers "vs." Brady

The game this weekend is not Rodgers vs. Brady, but I'm excited to watch the game.  If the Packers are a legit contender, they should be able to win a tough home game.  I'm also excited to see a game with both of these QBs.  They are the two most efficient QBs in terms of interception percentage in NFL history.  Both have done amazing things with offenses that had clear deficiencies (Packers had no running game until last year and a bad defense most years, Patriots have rarely had anything resembling an NFL receivers unit).  This year the Patriots may have their best defense in a decade, and the Packers may have their best overall offensive talent since the mid-90's.  This could be an epic game. I'm very excited and I plan to not get too wrapped up in the result and just enjoy the game.

HoF season

Today marks the beginning of one of my favorite seasons of the year: Hall of Fame debate season. When we can argue about Bert Blyleven and Edgar Martinez and Jeff Bagwell and Curt Schilling and Mike Mussina and Gary Sheffield and Tim Raines. As always, Sports on Earth has a good rundown of the essentials here, and SI's Jay Jaffe has some Burning questions about this year's ballot. While I find Jaffe's commitment to JAWS scores a bit annoying (but hey, it's a stat he developed specifically to evaluate players for the HoF, so it's fair), I love his series of profiles on EACH AND EVERY PLAYER ON THE BALLOT--biographical background, career highlights, total statistical overviews, etc. As he points out, even guys who should be one-and-done on the ballot deserve a retrospective in recognition of their careers.

A proposal, gentlemen: we weigh in on these players. Start with your no-doubters, and then we can move on to more contentious guys. Eventually I think we should get our top 10 listed.

My automatics (as in, I think there should be no debate):
Randy Johnson
Pedro Martinez

Being Faithful

A few months back, I joined a group on facebook called "49ers Faithful." Most of the posts are from "fans" that will just grandize the niners and the players. I am a huge fan but a realistic fan, or any team. I put a post up saying that kaepernick has seem to have regressed this year. His numbers are up to the naked eye, but the intangibles that made him such a viable weapon have seemed to vanish.  Eric this may hurt, but he's single handedly destroyed Green Bay with his legs, this year outside of a few plays that part of his game has decreased dramitically. My post on this groups page was "Kaepernick has overthrown/underthrown/missed a wide open receiver 7 times this game, regression?" I had 53 comments telling me that i'm not faithful, that i'm not a fan, I should leave this group etc etc and it got me thinking...why being a "faithful fan" means I can't criticize a team or a player. Which after calling the people commenting bozo's, shit for brains etc, I had a thought. What am I a fan of? The team? a player? I love Patrick Willis, Gore, Davis but if they left, would I continue to root for them? I would have a hard time saying no. I think with players leaving teams for more money, more publicity and ultimately more exposure, why can't I as a fan, root for players even if they are on a team I ultimately have been "taught" to dislike. I don't like the cowboys, but I'd be hardpressed to say I'm not week in and week out rooting for Demarco Murray and Jason Witten. I used to root against the Packers every single week? Why? Because they always seemed to beat the Niners and Brett Favre was usually the culprit. Now they have a QB who went to a cross town high school in the city I grew up and went to the college I rooted for and is a top 3 or 4 qb in the nfl. Green Bay has Jordy Nelson who went to Texas who I root against every week. So what the hell is going on?? Am I getting soft in my old age? I believe I have an answer. I am not any less faithful because I can hate a player that's on a team I root for. Just as much as I can root/love a player that plays for a team I hate. Just because I cheer on a particular player, does not make me love the team. With players moving all over THEY don't love the name on the front of their jersey, just the name on the back.

Pissed off at Peyton Manning

I'm not the Manning (well, Peyton... Not a big fan of Eli) hater that Brennan is, but he has really pissed me off this year.  First, he calls out a scoreboard operator.  I wish Peyton had to do a menial job like that to make ends meet so he could realize how great he has it.  Second, that choreographed game of keep-away when he broke the touchdown record was ridiculous.  I'm pretty sure Manning was always kind of a diva, but it all came pouring out this year.  The only solace I can take is that the Broncos are folding when it counts and they will likely get knocked out in the first round of the playoffs.

Adrian Peterson

YAY!!! He's closer to returning to the football field! Glory be to the almighty!!! Peterson he beat the living shit out of his 4 year old son can now get his life back and start playing football again, the sport he loves, and put this incident behind him. Thank heavens!!! Peterson has pleaded guilty to a plea bargain and lesser charge of misdemeanor reckless assault and avoid jail time. Isn't that great?!?! Now that my moral compass has been righted I don't feel guilty inserting him back into my starting fantasy lineup.
He learned his lesson right? He still never said he did anything wrong, just somehow found justification in whipping his kid with a tree branch by saying that was how he was punished when he was younger and he turned out just fine. So perfect! Lets move on, I mean those scars that will permanently be on his childs legs will be a constant reminded of how much his dad, cared and loved him, by spending time with him twice a year, but he he has 3 other kids that he's ignored so he should be happy that his dad at least spent time with him.
While most of us would have been in jail, or facing large fines this great football player earned just south of 5 million doing nothing. Through 9 games his team has bled, sweat, hurt and helped eachother doing their jobs while peterson did nothing. He sat around, doing nothing, probably never giving much thought to why he wasn't on the field, why people are angry with him and why he wasn't in jail. Adrian Peterson essentially got paid 5 million for beating his child, oh excuse me for recklessly assaulting his 4 year old.
While I wish A.P. nothing but the worst of fortunes for his sorry excuse of a human being I am so happy for the fans of the Minnesota Vikings for getting their all-pro player back. So happy you can start rooting for him while he inevitably runs for 100 yards on most sundays again. Have fun.  

Dynasty

Hats off to the Royals, their city and their fans. That was an amazing series and I'm glad that franchise is relevant against after being the laughing stock of the league for three decades. If it wasn't for the greatest pitching performance of postseason and world series history it very well could have turned out differently. It was an amazing run for both teams but even more amazing for the giants who now have won 3 championships in 5 years and have made their claim as a baseball powerhouse.

Here is my question- this morning the talking heads on espn radio have been debating whether the giants are a dynasty or not. It has been split, many say yes, the other say no. The reasons against have included that the championships weren't won in consecutive years, core players have changed and a punch of other mindless dribble.

Hell yes the giants are a modern day dynasty!!!! Three championships in 5 years for a franchise that went 56 years without winning one! In an era when players are brought up, moved up, traded and released till game 162. When a GM loses his 2nd best player and 2/3's of his outfield due to injuries, 1/2 of us infield for an extended time and still manages to win by trading to get peavy, bringing up panik. Remember when the Red Sox won and those same exact morons at espn were claiming that theo epstein was the best GM in baseball? Hows that working out for the Cubs? Jesus....just look and appreciate what the Giants have managed to do!!! They don't have superstars on this team. Posey, sure but he had a very average year. Bumgarner, getting there after this postseason performance. Pence? Nope. Belt? not even close. So please give me these players that "just win baby!!!" over the puljose, the trouts the entire dodgers and yankees lineup. This franchise has sealed the deal. When you win 3 championships you're a freaking dynasty. I would put them with the yankees of the 90's, patriots/lakers early 2000s.

Whatya think?

Making new fans

For the second night in a row, I helped put the girls to bed and then came downstairs to watch baseball, but this has raised a question for me. How do kids decide on teams? One told me last night that she wants the Giants to win, but the other picked the Royals ( I'm pretty sure neither really had much concept of any teams other than the Twins until the last week or so). Obviously they aren't just picking my team, so it's not quite that simple (though obviously that pattern is fairly common). Last fall, this fall's Giants fan consistently chose the football team that was playing against my Niners, but now she's on my side. Meanwhile, her little sister has changed course, choosing the Royals even though she historically has liked my teams. So...what's the deal? Is this a phase and an assertion of independence? Did they see colors they liked on the uniforms? Do their friends have opinions that matter in shaping their decisions on this (this is why these two insist on having Washington NFL tshirts)? Are they just choosing opposite sides out of sibling rivalry? I have no clue, and asking them didn't provide one either. Maybe if there is a game they can stay up to watch I will be able to figure it out. 

Percy Harvin - Why he was traded

Percy Harvin is no longer a Seattle Seahawk.  Reports from multiple sources of sports news suggest that he was a problem in the locker room.  I have no doubts this is true.  However, why would Seattle trade a guy with a bunch of talent after giving up multiple draft picks and giving him a huge contract? The answer to this question is very simple.  Percy Harvin is not a very good wide receiver.  How many diva wide receivers have kept their jobs despite being ridiculous.  Anybody remember Chad Johnson/Ochocinco?

Harvin is exceptionally quick AND exceptionally fast.  In fact, he is a faster version of Randall Cobb (much faster).  However, his career yards per reception is 11.39 (per Pro Football Reference).  This is a good YPC for a running back.  For a receiver with the physical tools of Harvin, this is a big, blaring warning siren.  Having lived in Minnesota for Harvin's entire tenure here, I had the unfortunate opportunity to watch the recent Vikings train wreck.  During this time, Harvin made plays that made my jaw drop.  He also routinely ran poor routes and struggled to get open down the field.

This seems like I should have to explain myself further, but the game tape speaks for itself.  Percy Harvin can't run good routes, so special plays have to be drawn up to get him the ball.  Add to that fact that he is a jerk in the locker room, and it is no surprise that he is moving on to a third team.

A Giants fan abroad

I have been a Giants fan for 33 years.

I was laying on the floor in front of the TV when the Loma Prieta earthquake interrupted the lead-up to Game 3 of the 1989 Giants-A's World Series, and there again when the Series resumed, Carney Lansford (of the A's, but I remember this) sporting the full beard he grew in the interim.

I was sitting in an apartment in Berkeley with a blasted Angels fan of a roommate when the abomination that is the Rally Monkey repeatedly violated the screen, K-Rod violated Giants batters, and Dusty Baker violated good sense in the 2002 Giants-Angels showdown.

For 7 years I withstood the horrors of Southern California baseball--the obsession with the Dodgers (and one reluctant trip to an admittedly wonderful Dodger Stadium), the abomination that is the "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" (two cities?! "The Angels Angels"?! DUMB), and the weird apathy of anyone inclined towards the Padres.

I spent a year in the Land of 10,000 Lakes, a Barry Bonds home run's distance away from Lake Bemidji and the stream that's the Mississippi that far north, watching the 2010 World Series on one of two TVs in an Irish pub, the clincher in the same bar full of patrons...every single of one them but me playing pub trivia. And it was here that I tasted, at long last...victory. It was a lonely triumph, acknowledged by a nod from the Minnesotan who'd attended law school in Berkeley and whose daughter had just bought my truck with its California plates and whose trivia team included my supervisor and who therefore knew that somewhere in town was a Californian, and possibly a Giants fan. I stepped outside and called my dad to share the moment, my brother after that. A few weeks later, a World Champion t-shirt arrived in the mail--Dad was reveling in not the Giants' first title of his lifetime, but their first in San Francisco.

Two years later I found myself another half country removed from my team's home, watching games at a sports bar* in Northern Virginia, the diverse origins of its patrons no consolation given the conspicuous dearth of Giants fans even in Greater DC. A sympathetic bartender named Dan noted my hat, my shirt, and the fact the orange and black does not always indicate an Orioles fan, and made sure the nearest TV showed my game. When I threw up my hands after the final pitch, he gave me a high five and brought me another Sierra Nevada, and that was that. I walked home elated, and called my brother on the way. It was sweet but bittersweet, Dad having passed away earlier that year, and I called Mom to make sure she'd seen that the Giants won, and she had.

*Just for the record, I didn't have home TV in either of these places, which is why it seems I spent an inordinate amount of time in pubs and sports bars.

And another two years on, I've not left Virginia, but I've brought family to me, my partner and our two girls and an arthritic yellow lab (Twins fans to a one) having settled in a house on a hill with some woods at our back, and, yes, finally I will watch this series at home.

List of dislike

What is your top ten list of least favorite teams or any sport? Mine is as always


10. USC/Stanfurd
9. Yankees
8. Dallas Cowboys
7. Texas Football
6. Duke Basketball
5. La Lakers
4. Alabama Football
3. She-cocks
2. Notre Dame football
1. La Dodgers

and......................go!!!

Rant

Todd Gurley was caught signing autographs for a memorbilia dealer for reportedly $8-$25 per autograph. I went to espn and their question of the day was should Gurley be deemed ineligble and there were three answers: Yes
                                          No, but he should be suspended
                                          No.

Yes 30%, No but suspended 34% and No 36%.   I found this very interesting. Basically the poll is spilit into 70% don't think he should be suspended, and 30% do...why do i find this interesting?? 70% are essentially saying they don't agree with the ncaa's rule that a player can't profit off his own likeness...I thought this was all cleared up during the o'bannon lawsuit. Ok, so the school can make money off a players likeness, a store can make money off a players likeness but a player can't? I don't really understand why the ncaa has this rule, never have? Can a college player trademark his likeness? like the Jordon logo? Does the ncaa have a rule against this? What if a player trademarks his own logo and puts it on anything that's not whatever sports jersey he plays in...they are being entrepeuners and have their own business...I get the not paying of college athletes, they do get a lot and the ones that "starve" and "struggle" please give me a freakin' break...big college programs, get 5 star food, 5 star gyms, coaches, access to doctors/trainers/physical therapists/nutrionists/counselors/tutors/online classes/stipends and free equipment that sponsors donate to them but I don't see how it's legal for one nor constituional for the ncaa to say you can not profit off your likeness...they need to find a loophole and get the ncaa out of here.

letter to sports illustrated

Dear Sports Illustrated-
    I have had a subscription since I could read. I’ve kept dozens of memorable issues from championship covers of my favorite teams, to galvanizing topics such as sports after 9/11, the steroid era and other social issues of importance. My favorite thing, when I was younger, was getting your season preview issues and seeing the power rankings of players, seeing who signed with different teams and who you predicted to win. However lately I have been upset with the topics you’ve chosen to cover and those you haven’t.
    The season previews no longer have player rankings and you’re predictions have become so ghastly it’s at times unbearable to look at. I stopped reading ESPN the magazine because the level of journalism was relatively low and the magazine focused on stories that I really had no interest in (I.e. Tebow).
    In the most recent issue I received had a MLB playoff preview. Being a life long San Francisco Giants fan I was extremely disappointed to have skimmed through and noticed you omitted any mention of them at all. Even in 2010 and 2012 when they won the world series your analysis pointed squarely against the Giants.  Not that this was any different than many other publications but at least your journalists wrote with attention to detail and told a story rather than just report like a newspaper.
    I miss the stories where you broke stories rather than cover them.  No mention of Goodells shoddy news conference, hardly any mention of other recent controversial topics, instead…another article on Kobe Bryant.
    If you decide to return to what made your magazine so great I will renew my subscription once again but right now I’m not. I used to receive a renewal every Christmas as a gift from my parents and growing up I now wish I can do the same to my own son some day…

Best Regards- Brennan Sellers

week 4 rankings

AFC

1.       Bengals- had the bye- might be too early for this team. At this point, no significant injuries- now they have 13 straight weeks to stay playing at this level. They were number 1 last week- no reason to move them down.

2.       Broncos- also had the bye. Chargers statistically have a better record but I still think denver’s the more complete team. Can’t wait for them to go head to head

3.       Chargers- yet another surprising win. I thought they were due for a let down. Eddie Royal and Rivers are playing lights out. I thought norv turner was an offensive genius?

4.       Colts- started off the year 0-2, since have two big impressive wins. Luck is starting to get into a groove. Can be a very scary team. Can move up.

5.       Texans- hesitant to put them on here. They are 3-1 and are playing well. JJ Watt is a stud. Scary good- the big test will be next week when they play dallas, another suprising 3-1 team

6.       New England- by default only because I have to choose a team from each division. Baltimore should be here. New England is a dud of a team. The entire east is a dud. But with tom brady and belichick they get the benefit of the doubt.

NFC

1.       Seahawks- had a bye- had them here last week, nothings changed. Lynch had a week to get healthy so most likely the offense will be full throttle coming out of the bye.

2.       Eagles- I was going to move them down, but they still only have the one loss, on the road against a very motivated niners team. The offense was pretty terrible, but they had a nice defensive showing and held the niners to some pretty medicore stats.

3.       Arizona- they are 3-0. One of the last few undefeated teams and they’ve played some pretty impressive teams. We will see what happens when they stop getting so lucky or they have to face adversity.

4.       Cowboys- outside of the week 1 loss to the niners they have surprisingly played well- I hate having them on this list but the offense is clicking and at this point of the season Demarco Murray is the mvp of the nfl. Romo has also kept his mistakes to a minimum (week 1 excluded).

5.        Lions- this is a hard one to gauge. They at times look like a runaway favorite and then the next drive, game etc they look like one of the worst. They are 3-1 and haven’t been tested very much in the division but ultimately think green bay will win it.

6.       Falcons- again by default. I don’t think Atlanta is any better than green bay or san fran but have to put them on here. I think their play is so inconsistent it’s very frustrating. You can’t get a finger on this team because one week before they run away from a medicore tampa team and then the following week lose to a pretty terrible Vikings team who bridgewater was starting his first game.  I had the saints high last week, but after getting thumped by dallas, they have to prove that they belong.

 

Boycotting ESPN

I am done with ESPN.  I will no longer frequent their website, nor watch their programming.  Bill Simmons was suspended for three weeks for calling Roger Goodell a liar on his podcast.  On the flip side, Stephen A Smith was suspended for one week for suggesting that women should stop provoking men into beating them.  For further effect, understand that this is not the first on-air display of ignorant sexism, as this sort of behavior was rampant when he was on the radio.  I don't really like Simmons, but this suspension is ridiculous, and suggests that calling somebody a liar is far worse than calling out women for provoking abuse.

Week 3 Observations

Top 6 ranking in each league and my take on goodell

Rankings
Nfc
1.       Seattle- very tough schedule as of yet. One road loss, beat Denver at home. They are the defending champs, so they get my respect. Their offense is better this year with Harvin healthy, however, lynch isn’t, so the ground game is a little down. Defense not as dominating but still top 2 or 3 in nfc.
2.       New Orleans- I know they are only 1-2, but I feel like they should be 3-0. Lost 2 games on last second field goals to a good falcons team and an upcoming browns team that was playing for something, and both loses were on the road. With upcoming games against the cowboys, bucs, lions and green bay at home I don’t see a loss in there and should be 6-2 half-way through the season.
3.       Philly- good offense- Kelly has some tricks up his sleeves. Mccoy injury is troubling. Defense isn’t that great but so far the offense has picked up the slack. Foles is looking like a steal.
4.       Arizona- lots of key players injured and suspended and they have still started 3-0, including a tough win against san diego and traveling east to beat the ny giants. Not sure if Stanton is good enough long term but he seems to do just enough to win. Defense has stepped up.
5.       Was going to put Detroit here and Atlanta next but moving Atlanta Falcons up to number 5. Offense is clicking with a healthy Julio Jones, running game is medicore, defense is alright. They were horrible last year after injuries and this is going to be a bounce back year. So far, looking impressive and matt ryan seems to have built a good rapport with his OC and isn’t making many mistakes
6.       Chicago- for some reason the bears have won and won without their two best receivers playing healthy and forte playing very average. Cutler outside of the game week 1 has looked resialiant.

 Afc:

1.Cincinnati-most complete dynamic, rounded team in the afc. Dalton is playing lights out and that’s with AJ Green not fully health

2. Denver- tough schedule so far, looked good against seattle who is almost unbeatable at home and they took them to OT. Defense is a little sketchy. Almost lost to Indy in the 2nd half, Manning however is a nice safety net

3. San Diego- a surprise team so far, tough loss week 1, have looked a lot better. Upset seattle, rivers looks rejuvenated and gates/royal have looked good as well. Running game is pretty unimpressive, now losing woodhead for the year, see how they respond

4. New England- Not the force it used to be. Not a lot of weapons on offense outside of brady and an injured gronk.

5. Indianapolis- Luck has looked good the last few weeks, and they could string together a winning streak especially playing in a weaker league. Inconsistent play on both sides has been their Achilles heal thus far, but they can turn it around

6. Pittsburgh- they were toe to toe with Baltimore but injuries and suspensions were the reason I couldn’t put them on here. Big Ben is healthy and playing well, running game with Blount and Bell has looked good thus far. Defense isn’t the strongest anymore, but I think it’s better than average and that’s all they need on this team.


Roger goodell when he first came on the scene was high on my list. He, whether for the right reasons or not, concerned himself witb heqd trauma and did his best to alleviate head injuries and a return to play protocal. However he does hold players accountable but does he hold refs with blown calls. Education is step one not fining players that for years the nfl glorified big hits. But lately goodell has been shit. 54 cases of domestic violence, 37 no repurcusions issued by the league. And thats just one issue. He has done lots for the owners, little for the players. From the referee lockout last year to the players lockout to blacked out games, no expansion franchises under his tenure etc. His new conferences are cold and unemphatic. He talks about player safety but yet wants to add 2 more games. He seems very reactive and very minimal proactive. Will do nothing until it blows up. I cant wait for him to leave.

Trend or anomaly

I'm curious to know what you all you think.....a decade ago coaches that transitted from the college ranks into the pro's did horrible...(spurrier, carroll stint #1, etc) with a small percentage doing really well (j johnson unfortunately). But recently I feel that most are having moderate to good and even great seasons. I see this more coming from the Pac-12 coaches (kelley, harbaugh, carroll, and even ron rivera with his connection to usc). My question is if this is the new wave of coaches into the pro ranks or if it's gong to dive back to coordinators etc in the pro's being recycled over and over again? And also if you think this is because of the new spread offense being used by college teams, now being implemented by many of the pro teams? I go back to my other postelation (<----- word?) and the pro teams and coaches and coordinators that just seem to be recycled despite few seasons of success and many of underperforming and lackluster. How many freakin' years was jim fassell in the pro's and what the hell did he accomplish? Also....one more observation and it goes back to the pac-12 coaches...the pac-12 is a very innovative conference with many non traditional offenses being run....when coaches from other conferences come into the pro's they seem to have a lot of 8-8 seasons and than go back or become a coordinator. But just look at these recent pac-12 coaches and their success in the pro's (Carroll-super bowl, harbaugh-3 seasons nfc championship game, kelley-taken a medicore philly team and now top 5 in the nfc, rivera-went from usc to coordinator to coach and has carolina as a perenial conference contender). Give me jim harbaugh, give me carroll or chip kelley over bruce arian, mike smith, doug marrone, trestman, marvin lewis, mike pettine, jason garrett, john fox, caldwell, Bill o brien, chuck pagano, gus bradley, andy reid, joe philbin, mike zimmer, coughlin, rex ryan, dennis allen, mccoy, jeff fisher, lovie smithm ken whisenhunt annnnnnnnnnnnnndd jay gruden. The only coaches that are proven that I would consider elite are belichick, sean payton, tomlin, and john harbaugh. Boom.

Week 2 QB roundup

Here's my rundown for the past week:

1)  Colin Kaepernick - If the guy doesn't develop some more accuracy, he's never going to get better.  He's a freak athlete, but he just seems to overthrow everything.  Jay Cutler did a really great job bringing his team back, but Kaepernick was a huge part of why Cutler even had a chance.

2)  Andrew Luck - I've mentioned this to a few people, and I continue to feel that we are watching a non-whiny Donovan McNabb.  Luck and McNabb are very similar in terms of athletic ability.  Luck does not seem to have the propensity to show up to camp bloated claiming he "put on muscle," which works in his favor.  Luck also has a pretty good arm and makes some great throws.  However, Luck bottom third of the league in terms of accuracy.  He leaves too many yards and points on the field by being inaccurate.  This doesn't mean he isn't really good, it just means that he is going to struggle to maximize his opportunities until he develops better short to mid-range accuracy.

3)  Aaron Rodgers - Good rebound week.  I bet he's glad the Packers gave Jordy Nelson all that money, though.  This was the first time in a long time that I wasn't quite sure whether Rodgers was making a receiver better, or the receiver was making Rodgers look better than he is.  Nelson was amazing, and thus Rodgers also looked amazing.

4)  Andy Dalton - On my list again, and for all the right reasons.  Dalton looked good even without AJ Green for most of the game.  That is one heck of a team, and is a Super Bowl favorite if Dalton maintains consistency.

5)  Matt Ryan - This is what happens when Matty Checkdown tries to play dink and dunk against a team with a legit defense.  Terrible game, terrible decision making, terrible outcome.

Sorry for a lot of the repeats from last week.  I don't get to watch every game, and I'd rather not comment on guys I didn't see play.

Adrian Peterson

This is going to be quite the non-sports post, but oh well.  Adrian Peterson was arrested for child abuse, etc (don't feel like looking up the actual term).  I saw some pictures online.  If those pictures are the result of Peterson "switching" his 4-year old child, I hope he rots in prison.  I have a lot of trouble judging corporal punishment.  I was spanked as a kid.  A lot of kids get hit with belts.  Typically, these events are half-hearted and are meant to scare the kid into listening, not actually hurt them.  The picture I saw showed angry red lashes across the legs of a child.  If these pictures are indeed of that kid and are from a switching that Peterson administered, then I am in front of the line screaming for the Vikings to cut him.  This may seem hypocritical, but I would maybe even feel a bit different if it was an 8-10 year old.  Or maybe not.  Peterson administered a "whooping" (his words) that went way overboard (if those are the actual pictures).

One more thing...  Peterson is smiling in his mugshot like he is on vacation.  No big deal, just arrested for beating the hell out of your kid.   Right now, I'm trying to wait for all the facts, but I just can't help but hate this guy.  My wife and kid have Peterson jerseys and I just want to burn them.... ugh.

Thursday Night Apathy

I guess there's football on right now. I'm writing a blog post about not watching, rather than planting my rear on my couch with a beer. I've a feeling that's not what the NFL has in mind with this whole Thursday night game thing.

I've never found the Thursday night games especially compelling. There was always something nice about the NFL being limited--I could get stuff done on Saturday and spend Sunday sitting in front of the TV with a bowl of guacamole or salsa and a bag of chips, and not feel too awfully guilty about it. I could watch MNF knowing I'd worked all day, and (when I lived on the West Coast) knowing I could do homework after the game, and that it football would then go away for the rest of the week. I could look forward to the novelty of Thursday football on Thanksgiving--and it didn't matter that it was always the Cowboys (who I hate) and Lions (who just weren't often very good, but could be fun to watch), because it was so unusual. Now we have imbalanced Sunday slates with crappy games picked for market reasons, Monday night double-headers, an extra Thanksgiving game added, and a game every other Thursday, too. On top of the saturation, I frequently have no particular interest in the Thursday match-ups (or Monday, either), certainly not enough to have gone out looking for a place to watch when they aired only on the NFL station.

For me, football always functioned best when it wasn't competing with anything else, and all I had to do was enjoy the game. Now, with its encroachment into the rest of the week, it feels to me like the bulk of it competes with the rest of my life, which limits the amount I can realistically consume, and then when I go to do that, there is nothing that appeals anyway--the Niners and Packers aren't often broadcast here in Virginia, and when they are, they're in those national games that I don't generally make time to watch anyway. Whereas I used to call up all the box scores and run through stats, I just don't do it multiple times per week, much less schedule my life around football.

But today I was in a decent place with my work, and thought maybe I'd carve out some time to at least watch the start of the game if it was on my TV (CBS now, as well as NFL Network--at least I think so, but can't confirm, since I didn't actually watch). Then I looked to see who was playing. Steelers-Ravens. Oh, this is good. Not only do we now have a game representing a league (really a product--let's call it what it is) that is trying to take over my life in increasingly uninspiring/unappealing ways, but also one that encapsulates ugly moral issues like sexual assault and domestic violence

So instead I sat upstairs and talked with my kids (who were supposed to be in bed by then anyway, but I audibled when we had a rough night), checked my email, and read a book by a Spokane Indian about Indians (who never, by the way, seem to call themselves "Redskins" non-Indian contentions that that's a positive term).

I guess I'm not the guy the NFL is trying to appeal to (though frankly, that's probably a smart marketing move, one of the things the NFL excels in).

Week 1 QB Round-up

I'm going to try to start doing a weekly QB round-up.  I'll pick 3-5 performances (that I at least saw some of) and discuss them.  I have a part-time job on Sunday and Monday nights, so I might not see every performance, so I won't discuss those games a lot of the time unless I DVR them and watch them later.  Here goes:

1)  Matt Ryan - Matt Ryan is still Matty Checkdown... Bear with me on this one.  Matt Ryan had a great game on Sunday.  He played like a QB who can win it all, although I have strong doubts that the Saints' defense is anywhere near as good as people think they are.  The thing that struck me is that he had yet another couple of plays where a screen led to a gigantic gain.  He always seems to get some great YAC from his RB or WR on those plays.  I want somebody to track YPCD (yards per checkdown) to see just how far ahead of everybody else this number is for Ryan.  Again, he played a great game, I just found it chuckly-worthy that it of course included a couple of big-gain checkdowns.

2)  Eli Manning - Terrible.  The worst multi-Super Bowl-winning QB in history... and only better than Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson on the list of QBs who have even won 1.  He has been inaccurate and turned the ball over his whole career.  Now that he doesn't have a defense to bail him out, he looks a lot more like the mediocre QB that he has always been.

3)  Andy Dalton - Andy Dalton struggled on third down.  He also struggled on all downs in the second half.  However, he did something he's never done against Baltimore: he didn't kill his team with bad throws.  This was a change.  Dalton is flawed.  He doesn't have a big enough arm to dominate a game.  However, give him guys like Gio Bernard and AJ Green, and he has plenty of arm to win.  I think this is the year that Dalton finally wins a playoff game and people stop riding him so hard.

4)  Joe Flacco - This dude is owner of the dumbest contract in sports history.  In fact, the stupidity of his contract rivals the stupidity of the Herschel Walker trade.  I understand he was historically great in their playoff run and that he has a great playoff record.  Just keep in mind that his playoff wins include at least one stat line (too lazy to search it) with double-digit passing yards.  Playoff wins are overrated in determining how good a QB is.  While Flacco deserves all the credit in the world for that amazing playoff run (11 TD, 0 INT), I think it's pretty obvious that those numbers are the only thing keeping him from trumping Dilfer and Johnson for worst SB winning QBs ever.  Ok, enough of my soapbox... I'm supposed to talk about this past week.  Flacco looked lost.  He turned in his typical 60+ attempts, <400 yards performance, most of which was accumulated playing catch up because he had played so poorly early.  Yes, I know Steve Smith dropped 4 balls early, but Flacco wouldn't have looked much better had Smith caught those balls.

5)  Aaron Rodgers - Oh boy, hate to do this one.  Aaron Rodgers looked timid last week.  In the first half, when the line was doing an ok job of protecting, Rodgers refused to push the ball downfield. It was really disappointing.  Even more disappointing is that he didn't challenge Richard Sherman at all. Sherman is good, but he's not freaking Deion Sanders.  At least throw toward the guy ONCE!  In the second half, Rodgers was under pressure more, but he still didn't look comfortable.  He wasn't accurate, he wasn't decisive, and he wasn't himself.  I've heard analysts blame his collarbone.  Huh? Dumb analysis.  He didn't look this bad last year after he returned from the injury.  This is probably just a one game thing and it wouldn't be the first time that Rodgers has played fairly poorly in the first game of the year (in fact, the only game where he truly played great was the opener against the Saints right after the lockout).  One thing that I found really interesting was looks of disgust and the head-shaking by Rodgers on the sideline every time the defense did something stupid.  I don't think I've ever seen him so demonstrative.  I think there might be trouble on the way for this team this year.

Green Bay Packers... Ugh.

So, the two (maybe still three...) people who read this blog know I'm a big Packers fan.  They also know that I'm not a rabid, drooling, foaming-at-the-mouth homer.  I can call it like I see it (except maybe when it comes to Aaron Rodgers, but he went to Cal, so leave me alone!).  Thursday concerned me a lot.  The Seahawks are a really good team.  The whole world knew going in that they would be tough to beat at home, and they were.  Not a shocker.

Here's my problem:  The defense is still a problem.  Specifically, the play on the edges is the problem.  I've read article after article and analysis after analysis saying that the defense played poorly in the middle.  Yeah, it's true.  AJ Hawk and Brad Jones kinda suck.  However, I have images of Percy Harvin running around the end on a motion handoff time after time burned into my brain. Why are they burned into my brain?  Nick Perry/Mike Neal/Clay Matthews/Julius Peppers repeatedly crashing down the line ALL THE WAY TO THE FREAKING CENTER biting on a fake hand off up the middle.  This has been a consistent theme for Mike McCarthy's teams with the exception of the 2010 Super Bowl team.  

I read a lot about sports.  I read team websites, blogs, major sports sites, etc.  One of the things that I read often on Packers.com is "Players, not plays" as stated by Vic Ketchman.  I think this is interesting.  I'm pretty quick to blame Dom Capers for a lot of the problems on defense because he continues to play a 2-4-5 defense, which is just plain stupid.  That particular defensive alignment has NEVER worked, and NEVER will (don't give me the argument about two lineman standing up and it working... I'm talking a true 2-4-5, where there are only two DL on the field).  However, at some point I have to just think that the players are either too stupid or too undisciplined to actually play the defense that is called.  Maybe the players are to blame.  But the flip-side is that the coaches are not focusing on this issue.

So, what do I actually think?  Well... this issue, as I stated earlier, has spanned multiple "generations" of Packers players, suggesting that coaching is an issue.  In addition, I think the types of players the Packers are choosing for their defense needs to be questioned.  I don't really know what the answer is, but I'm sick and tired of the Packers I-AA (FCS, fml that I felt I needed to add that) defense.  No more Super Bowls for Rodgers until that defense shows some freaking discipline.

A few random NFL QB thoughts before the big game tomorrow night

I've been busy, so not a lot of posts, so I'm just going to word-vomit them all out at once.

1)  "The Dalton Line" - Quite a few analysts have been spraying this bit of nonsense around for a while.  The idea is that if you have a QB worse than Dalton, you need a new QB.  If your QB is better, then you are ok.  Typically Dalton sits between 15-20 in these rankings.  I find this pretty hilarious as it is a clear indication that playoff victories are perceived as a single player accomplishment.  Andy Dalton hasn't won in the playoffs.  He also hasn't played particularly well.  Does this remind you of anybody?  Peyton Manning comes to mind.  Matt Ryan has been horrible in the playoffs, but he is considered a top 10 QB.  I don't really see much difference between Matty Checkdown and Dalton, yet everybody hates Dalton... In fact, Dalton gets Romo-esque hate (Romo is a different beast, though).

2)  Johnny Manziel - Despite the best efforts of ESPN, Johnny Foosball will not be starting.  I've never seen so many pundits wet their pants over a 5-6 YPA.  Manziel is very good at running around, but he isn't so good at actually throwing the ball to his teammates.  I don't think Manziel sits on the bench long, but he likely won't be any good once he finally gets on the field.

3)  Jay Cutler - It doesn't even take ESPN to run a hype train on this guy.  My neighbor, my dad, probably the guy down the street who doesn't even like football, and everybody's moms think Jay Cutler is going to set records this year because he has SOOOO many weapons.  The team had the same weapons last year.  Jay Cutler still throws really stupid interceptions.  He will probably throw for 400 yards with 25 TD and 20 INT, which is a far cry from the crap I'm hearing.

4)  Eli Manning - This one really makes me chuckle.  Bob McAdoo installs a west coast offense, only to find that Eli Manning is completely incapable of throwing accurate short and intermediate passes.  This season could be the year that cements him as a two-time SB winner that doesn't make the hall of fame.  

 

Josh Gordon Thoughts

Here are my overall thoughts on the Josh Gordon situation and since goodell came out with a new nfl domestic violence issue...that topic as well. First the Ray Rice Domestic Violence Issue.

1. Goodell came out and said they made a mistake by issuing rice only a two game suspension for punching his wife. They have deservedly gotten a lot of slack and criticism. So with that goodell came out today with the new policy:  a) First offense- 6 game suspension
                        b) second offense-life time ban.

Love it.....if a player hasn't learned after their first case of domestic abuse not to abuse them again they don't deserve to ever get another nfl paycheck...while the common less fortunate population would most likely spend a significant time in jail, these assholes get nothing. they get a fine and *gasp* get suspended for a few games, where any of us would spend time in jail, a restraining order, probation, and a fine. So now people are being critical of this new policy...because it's too harsh...seriously? you abuse your significant other you should not only be banned from the nfl for life but you should also spend the rest of your shitty life in agonizing pain rotten in a prison sneaking heroin into jail in your butt so you don't get murked.

2. Josh Gordon- yes the nfl admitted it screwed up so people need to stop comparing the suspension to ray rices. Gordon was also a repeat offender, not to mention the shitnose gets a dwi while being in alcohol treatment program for ALCOHOL AND DRUGS!!! and yes i get it, weed overall is not as bad as other things. But guess what dipshits. the nfl players union collectively argued for a suspension like this when you mess up multiple times. and boo hoo gordon don't give me your retarded sob story that goodell wasn't able to understand your story and thus reduce the sentence. look bro you have a problem...you messed up in college you messed up in the pros. if getting millions of dollars and being one of the 300 people in the world lucky enough to play in the nfl and you aren't able to put your team and family ahead of your own personal shit than you don't deserve ANY CHANCES!!! Take this year, go to rehab, get your life in order and come back better than before. Look no one forced you to drive drunk nor to smoke weed, you did it to yourself so please shut up fans and uniformed morons when  trying to justify your position. that's the problem when arguing with some sports fans...some are just plain stupid as shit...

college footballs top 25 with complete anaylsis

Here is my analysis for the  preseason top 25, my picks for the top 4, champion and destroying the old school mentality of the archaic thinking against a playoff.

1. Florida St- Heisman winner, great coach, super weak conference, weak schedule. should run the table
2. Alabama- AJ McCarron returns for what goddamn seems like his 10th season in college football. Should lose 1 game, but play in the SEC so that won't affect them, because hell the sec is the greatest conference of all time, GREAT GREAT GREAT
3. Oregon- Heisman candidate QB, aggressive offense, great coaching and 900 uniform combinations, so they should run the table, willl lose 1 game however against oregon st in the civil war and drop 15 places in the rankings, thus ending any chance for a national championship
4. Oklahoma- My favorite to finish #2 in the country...mostly because their conference also sucks and they play tulsa and louisville tech
5. Ohio St- go "f" yourself ohio state...will lose 3-4. get out of my life you stupid nut
6. Auburn- too high- good team, hard schedule, will lose 2
7. UCLA- interesting team, they came on strong last year...darkhorse heisman candidate-however i think it's too early..it's goddamn ucla...they are always under-performing. will finish the year with 3 loses and #22 in the country
8.Michigan St- my darkhouse national champion. if they can get past oregon week 2 they will run the table. 9. South Carolina- steve spurrier will find a way to lose a game or two...always has. overrated as all hell. Met him at a golf tournament and he was wasted and didn't smile in a picture...
10. Baylor- don't know anything about this team this year...know they will probably average 50 points a game and give up 48
11. Stanturd -hoping they lose every game, they are due to have a down year...this is the year.
12. Georgia- one of those sec schools like s. carolina that always starts the year super high and than loses several games but because they play in the sec are overrated and thus get the benefit of the doubt when they lose. another 9-3 season. good job richt.
13. LSU- actually one of the sec schools i think is GOOD. They will finish 10-2 and probably a #8 ranking and play in the sugar bowl. good team.
14. Wisconson- always overrated. will lose 4 and finish outside the top 25.
15. USC-AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA- a player lies after "falling" off a balcony and tells the country he was saving his drowning nephew and another player accuses the coach of extreme racism and quits. i don't think they were good enough to be ranked this high, thinking they lose 4-5. do they miss kiffin yet??
16. Clemson- always lose 2 games like georgia and s. carolina. probably finish with 3 and a justified #16 ranking. most years they are much higher
17. Notre Dame- they sure are taking their time to "investigate" the players accused of academic cheating. Oh how the mighty have fallen. love it- i have they lose every game, and tie stanturd
18. mississippi- get the fuck out of here. ole miss sucks. eli went there. please stop putting them in the rankings. Only thing good about this school is p. willis.
19. Arizona State- tough schedule- might be a year away from earning a top 20 ranking.
20. Kansas state- right where they should be.
21. Texas AM- eh. Sure why not.
22. Nebraska- finish #12. super weak schedule. will lose against michigan st and that's it.
23. North Carolina- nope.
24. Missouri- nope.
25. Washington- hahahahahaha nope. Cal makes it here.

My top 4
1. Florida State
2. Oklahoma
3. Michigan St
4. Alabama

Florida State 33 vs Oklahoma 28- Florida State Champion
Marcus Mariotti- Heisman

Preseason rankings rant: I HATE the preseason rankings. what good does it do? It rewards teams that lose early because they have time to win a few more games and thus moving up in the rankings. It also is that "best team on paper" argument...what if they aren't that good, they don't lose and than get absolutely destoyed when they play a good school (NOTRE DAME is one example against alabama). Rankings should come out after 4 weeks- out of conference games are through and any teams that have suspended players begin returning and teams that have injuries to important players begin to play schools not named north dakota state and rice.

Playoff Rant: Today on mike and mike bobby bowden was on and said that he hates the playoff because, it doesn't necessarily put #1 and #2 in the championship game....jesus christ...shut up you senile. First of all, there were controversies almost every single year when it was the BCS and computers ranked teams #1 and #2 and most years there was a team that was left out of having the change to win the championship because they might have won every single game but the computers ranked them #3. Secondly before the BCS there was no guaranteed #1 and #2 championship game either, since there were different polls that were used, and different games that were recognized. I think 6 was the perfect number. Get rid of championship conference games. Top 2 teams get byes, and the other 4 play. I know, I know the controversy what if the #3 or #4 teams have the same record...just win baby...the difference is that they still have a chance to play for the championship.

Thoughts? Questions? Concerns?

exciting

Besides the obvious (ie perfect game) what would be your top 5 most exciting plays in football, baseball or basketball? My list:

5. 3 pointer to win a game at buzzer down by 2
4. Triple play
3. Fg to win a game with no time left
2. Walk off homerun
1. Hail mary td to win game

56

Just finished Kostya Kennedy's 56: Joe DiMaggio and the Last Magic Number in Sports, a decent enough read and a break from my usual fare. He clearly did a ton of research--interviews, newspaper reports, scrapbooks and diaries--to fill it out and consider the streak's impact on players and fans and even those who paid little attention to the game but knew DiMaggio. He clearly makes a case for the streak's significance in a larger American culture, though it inevitably pales somewhat next to the parallel developments of the summer of 1941--like, you know, Nazi Germany's advances, Roosevelt's radio broadcasts, Britain's pleas for help, and the implementation of the draft--that Kennedy pulls in as a foil to the nation's interest in baseball, and as a threat to individual players who might be drafted and to a sport that might be shut down to prepare for war. He does take some liberties in writing as though he knows the thoughts and feelings of some of the characters, which I was less enamored of--perhaps he has some reason for assigning the thoughts he does, but the historian in me wants footnotes and documentation to support those assumptions (while I'm sure the reader in everyone else wants the historian in me to shut up about footnotes and enjoy the damn book already).

But my favorite part of this book was the reading experience. I've never read a book on an iPad before, in part because I've never had an iPad (I recently was assigned one for work, so I'm getting to experiment a bit), and in part because even reading on my Kindle Fire can be really distracting since it does so much more than let me read. But in this case the iPad was perfect, mostly because I could switch back and forth between Kennedy and Baseball-Reference.com to check out the stats and bios and careers of guys I was reading about. Dom DiMaggio was pretty darn good, but most of us only know him because of his brother (Californians might know a bit more about all the DiMaggio boys who played ball in San Francisco). Charlie Keller was a slugger who walked a lot, somebody it seems like Billy Beane would have loved a few years ago. Lefty Gomez--Joe's roommate on the road--was good, but a Hall of Famer?! Phil Rizzuto, too, strikes me as another Hall of Famer who benefits from a couple of big years, but even more from being a Yankee (and I'm not so sure what makes him noticeably more qualified than Dom DiMaggio). It was also a bit shocking seeing so many holes in these guys' careers, 2-, 3-, and 4-year gaps when they were in the service (and also holy crap Ted Williams left those numbers with a 3-year hiatus).

Plus, seeing a bunch of guys who are smaller than I am, instead of some hulking behemoth, makes me realize I could have been a pro if I'd just been born a little earlier (ha!).

The last little bit of the book gets into some probabilities of a 56-game streak, the odds of it happening, the odds of it happening with DiMaggio, how much it stands above the next-longest (Rose's 44), its likelihood compared to the likelihood of somebody hitting .400, etc. A nice analytical addition, and something that will be familiar to folks who've read Nate Silver and his ilk on these things. This is a heavy way to end a light read, but it also drives home Kennedy's larger point--this is the rare number that's going to stand for awhile (unless DiMaggio makes a comeback, since he also hit in 61 straight as a San Francisco Seal).

A sabermatic argument for Jack Morris's Hall of Fame case

As sabermatics* fanbois carry on with their vendetta against the Magnificent Mustachioed Magician, besmirching both the good name and Hall of Fame case of one Jack Morris, we, the defenders of tradition and the eye test and true grit, deem it worthwhile to respond. Although his case as one of the greatest pitchers of all time--and without peer in his ability to pitch to the score and perform in the clutch--should and can stand on its own, we nonetheless here advance an argument based on statistical analysis. In deigning to approach the question from this perspective, we in no way acknowledge any superiority in that approach despite its alleged objectivity and the fact that it can further build a case in favor of Mr. Morris.

Cutting-edge techniques allow us to quantify the uncountable contributions Jack made to the winning culture of his teams, encapsulating them in one easy-to-understand number that we can easily compare across eras. INTAN+ is a virtual rubicon of information:

I: Intelligence. Baseball intelligence, not that cognitive ability crap; being in the right place at the right time is a matter of baseball intelligence, not just chance.

N: Notable single-game performances. If you can recall a single game, it counts in this metric.

T: Team success. Because nothing says more about one guy's worthiness than the ability of a 27-man roster's success across 162 regular-season and some other post-season games.

A: Attitude. It can be positive, it can be negative; all that matters here is that it helps a guy's team win.

N: Narcissism. A real star/Hall of Famer knows he belongs; many will tell you so.

+: Indicates that this is a measure of comparison with the INTANs of a player's contemporaries, rather than just a raw number with no context. Thus, a 100 INTAN+ indicates a league-average player, while a 150 INTAN+ would indicate a player worth 150% of the league average player.

We start with the assumption that the average player is average: he begins at 100. The player is then assigned a score for each category, on a -20 to 20 scale, with a total of 100 points that may therefore be added to--or, let's not forget, deducted from--the player's starting point of 100. Several categories are complicated to evaluate, and deserve special consideration here. (1) Notable single-game performances come in two varieties, and should be weighted differently. For each Notable single-game performance turned in during the regular season, add one point; if, however, a Notable single-game performance happens to have occurred during the post-season or an All Star game, assign two points. (2) Team success may be defined in multiple ways, but some matter far more than others. For each time the player's team reached the playoffs (even if he was hurt, or useless that year), whether as league champion, division champion, wild card, or one-game wild-card participant (because all of those playoff positions are equally glorious), add one point. A player shall earn zero points if his team does not reach the playoffs, regardless of his individual merit/accomplishments or the team's overall record. Playoff series wins earn a player half a point, but a World Series earns him 3 points. (3) The player who knows he belongs and tells you can earn a maximum of 18 points, because if it's that obvious he shouldn't have to tell you. Since the player who doesn't have to tell you doesn't tell you, he's obviously even more obvious and so may be assigned 20 points.

The Captain, Derek Jeter, is of course the standard-bearer for INTAN+, the all-time leader by a fair margin. If Morris suffers by comparison, it is only as all mere mortals suffer by comparison to the awe-inspiring stature of the gods. A breakdown:

I: 20 points. Has he ever not been in the right place at the right time? He was intelligent enough to get drafted by the Yankees, who could afford to surround him with highly paid, exceptional talent. He knew he'd need to be in that particular spot to cut off a ball and backhand-flip it to Jorge Posada in 2001. He knew he'd want to lead off his final All-Star game in 2014 so he could double off Adam Wainwright before the Cardinals ace warmed up enough to not groove a mistake fastball down the middle of the plate.

N: 20 points. As any Yankee fan will tell you, these are numerous. Every single 4-for-4 was magically memorable and unforgettable, because each one came in a game the Yankees absolutely had to win. Why is this score artificially capped at 20? It's so Jeter can't break the stat.

T: 20 points. Modern-day dynasty, captained by--who else?--The Captain.

A: 20 points. Some may criticize him as milquetoast, even boring, but Jeter was inevitably steady, calm, and confident, and never openly criticized his teammates or his opponents. Set the tone perfectly for his veteran teammates to continue going about their business professionally, just like they'd always done.

N: 20 points. It's obvious, and he doesn't need to tell you. So much so in fact that everyone else did it for him in 2014's farewell tour.

Jeter's INTAN+ therefore clocks in at a mind-boggling 206. Where did the extra 6 come from? Glad you asked.

Jeter has always been the foil to Alex Rodriguez, the guy whose other stats would seem to suggest he should be revered above the Yankee, but INTAN+ exists to show us the error of those ways. A breakdown:

I: -20 points. Made the mistake of getting drafted by the Mariners and playing for them, then choosing the Rangers to sign his first quarter-million dollar contract, then forcing a trade to a Yankees team that didn't need him because it was already legendary and all he could do was get lost in the shuffle. Willingly moved from the most important defensive position to a less important one. Of his 654 career home runs, 612 came with no one on base or his team already in the lead. Used PEDs or was dumb enough to get caught.

N: 0 points. Do you remember any?

T: 9 points. His team won the World Series in 2009, but his 5 home runs and 12 RBI in the first two rounds were empty stats. Yanks clearly should have won in '04, '05, '06, '07, and '10-'12, but he held them back.

A: -20 points.

N: -20 points. Will spend lots of time telling anyone who will listen that he is a star and belongs in the Hall of Fame. Too much time. Especially for someone who used PEDs, and therefore should forever be ineligible for special All-Star cards in packs of Topps, the Hall, compassion, or free Slurpees at 7-11 on July 11.

Rodriguez's total: 41, the Mendoza Line of INTAN+

All of which brings us back to Jack Morris, who presumably falls somewhere between. Let's see where.

I: 16 points. His mustache has a mind of its own, and two brains are better than one. At least one of them always knew the score, and exactly how many runs he could still give up to get the win. 

N: 14 points. That World Series Game 7. Limited legs on this one. Were there others, too?

T: 14 points. Lots of competent teams. One World Series title.

A: 18 points. Gritty. Business like. Feared by opponents, apparently.

N: 16 points. Keeps telling us about it.

A total of 178, indicating his intangibles were precisely 78% more valuable than the average major league player during the course of his career. Explain to me how that is not a Hall of Fame career right there?

If Charlie Kelly can count gasoline, we can count these contributions from an individual winner to a winning team.

*That's on purpose.

Frustration

When did pro athletes begin to make ungodly amounts of money? I don't remember hearing about massive contracts when I was younger. The best players in their respective league made huge gobs of money, but i never remember recall so over the top amounts that they are now. Chris Bosh is making 118 million over the course of 5 years which over 82 games, comes out to $287,805 dollars. Seriously? Chris Bosh is worth paying almost 300,000 K a game to? I know it's a cynical train of thought that goes through my brain but i sometimes get giddy when i read of a player playing through 100 million and is now poor on the street. Antoine Walker comes to mind. Sports Illustrated recently did an article highlighting post career retirement for these players. And while some of it makes sense most of it is just plain bull. granted i've never been making 10 million dollars to play the sport that i love, i'd think i'd be able to learn some coping skills to deal with my money and fame. If any of us would be fortunate enough to be able to retire in our 30's with millions of dollars and name/face recognition that the common man doesn't have we would be ecstatic. a suprising percentage of baseball, football, basketball players are broke within 5 years of retirement and though that may sadden many i take it and say, "f you for ruining your life that 99% of people would do just about anything to have had." i might be way offbase, which im sure i am, but having a kid i hope he chooses someone besides an athlete to idolize. A humanitarian, a city serveant, a homeless politician that worked through and made a life of himself. When a ex player like Jose Canseco who for 10 years cheated his way through baseball to make millions of dollars, and can barely freaking play baseball!!!!! is making millions of dollars because many people still recognize him and are willing to pay him money for appearances and other irrational dealings it's very frustrating. I love sports, i just really wish we as fans would all just get up and leave, and stop paying so much goddamn money to see them play and buy their jerseys and maybe than will the contracts come down again. Mic drop.

Cleveland Cavaliers What-If

LeBron James is going to Cleveland.  The roster currently has a lot of young talent.  Namely, Kyrie Irving is a rising star, although wildly inconsistent as a distributor of the ball.  Andrew Wiggins has through the roof potential, and is one of the best prospects since LeBron James.  And, for anybody who paid attention, Anthony Bennett is a really talented kid who needs to get his weight and sleep apnea under control.  That roster alone is not impressive.  It's looking more and more like it is not what the roster will look like when the season starts.

Scenario 1:  The roster stays the same.  If this is the case, expect this team to immediately become the favorite in the East.  LeBron James alone creates that, and Kyrie Irving and Dion Waiters are very good. If I had to put 50 bucks down, I would say the Cavs with LeBron win the East pretty handily next year unless Roy Hibbert decides to start playing like he is 7'2" instead of 4'2".

Scenario 2:  The Cavs trade for Kevin Love.  These discussions have apparently occurred.  The current thought is that Love for Wiggins, Varajao, and maybe another player or a pick would be the trade.  My guess is that both teams would be happy if the trade included Wiggins, Varajao, and Bennett, but that might be too much young talent to give up.  Regardless, the Wolves would get a top talent to build around and a couple other pieces, while the Cavs would get the best power forward in the league (Duncan is not in his prime).  In my mind, the only way a team with James, Irving, and Love doesn't win the NBA title is if the Spurs keep the magic going or the Rockets sign Bosh and Dwight Howard goes back to being dominant in the paint.

Scenario 3:  None of the above.  I won't speculate on what other options might be, as trade rules in the NBA are a little bit weird.  Perhaps they find a way to pick up another piece or two, or make a more minor trade for role players.  In this scenario, the team would very much look like Scenario 1.

The real story/question here is how good would this team be in scenario 2?  A direct comparison of pieces between the Heat teams of the last 4 years vs. what the Cavs would look like with LeBron, Kevin Love, and Kyrie Irving.  LeBron is a wash.  He is the same player and is in the middle of his prime.  He probably won't get any better, but won't get any worse either if he doesn't get injured.  Chris Bosh is a really great player, but he is not Kevin Love.  Kevin Love does everything Bosh does except he is a much better rebounder.  Kyrie Irving is not the player Dwyane Wade is, but Wade has been hampered by knees the past two years.  As such, if you package Irving and Waiters and compare to Wade and Mario Chalmers, I would again give the advantage to Cleveland.  One issue is that Waiters and Irving don't get along.  James won't tolerate that crap.  He will be the glue guy as well as the superstar.

In terms of starting lineup, I really think the Cavs with Kevin Love would be a better team than the Heat teams of the past four years.  Only time will tell, and Love hasn't been traded, so this may never happen.  Either way, this is going to be fun to watch, and hopefully this all results in Wiggins ending up in Minnesota, because he will be fun to watch.

The LeBron James Return to Cleveland Essay

It is official.  LeBron James is returning to Cleveland.  The essay that LeBron James submitted to announce his decision this time around was as impressive as "The Decision" was unimpressive.  It is clear that LeBron James has grown up in the past few years.  He carries himself as an ambassador for the NBA.  He is the epitome of what is right with the league.  He is a team player, knows the history of the game, and has become very likable despite the amount of vitriole generated by "The Decision."

I think the thing I liked most about the essay was that he was able to address a number of factors in his decision, and able to really explain his reasons in an eloquent and concise fashion.  Least surprising was his desire to go home.  He maintains a home in Ohio, and has not been shy about stating that Ohio is home. While most athletes avoid Cleveland like the plague, LeBron James has always seemed to gravitate to home, and relish the opportunity to play in his own backyard.

The most interesting part of the essay was when he addressed Dan Gilbert and Cleveland fans who burned jerseys when he left.  The phrase "who am I to judge" was extremely interesting especially when he placed it in the context of how he would have felt if his sports hero left in his prime.  This was a pretty serene and sage view of the previous situation, and again illustrates how much this man has grown up in the past few years.

The only thing I really wish he would have done was to address "The Decision" as less of a bullet point on a timeline, but as the debacle it really was.  Something along the lines of it raising a lot of money, but was really handled inappopriately and was probably not the best decision.  Instead, he alludes to having made mistakes. Regardless, I wouldn't really want to talk about it if I had done something that ridiculous either.  And shame on ESPN for their role as well (I'm guessing it wasn't LeBron's idea in the first place, but who knows).

Wishing there was a little more on "The Decision" is nitpicking, especially considering that the overall tone was one of coming home because it is home.  The essay was very direct and sincere in this regard.

Since I'm so warm, fuzzy, and happy, I'll do another post on why this Cavs team is going to be significantly better immediately than the teams James was on in Miami, so as not to suggest that winning was the only reason for leaving Miami.

LeBron to Cleveland = Timberwolves make playoffs in next couple of years?

This is obviously speculative and the title is misleading, but as of 2:17 pm on July 10, 2014 it looks as if LeBron James will either stay with the heat or go to the Cavaliers.  If he goes to the Cavs, it is widely believed they will trade significant assets to obtain Kevin Love to team with James and Kyrie Irving.  The Wolves will apparently demand Andrew Wiggins, who has been characterized as one of the better prospects in recent drafts.  Could it be that the ability of the Wolves to get something good in return for Kevin Love (who hates the organization, and doesn't like Minneapolis, and is gone, despite what homer-boy Paul Allen would have people believe) depends entirely on LeBron James? As a Minneapolis/St. Paul resident, I sure am intrigued!  Hurry up and decide the fate of the Wolves LeBron!