Great story in the New York Times (although it's curious they don't mention Alexander Karelin...they must not be up on this blog).
I don't see any mention of his most devastating outing. Three (!) innings. I distinctly remember that he was the last guy in the Yankee pen, and if Aaron Boone doesn't hit that homer, the Sox were going to win that game. Or maybe he would have pitched forever that night, because he's Mariano Rivera.
As a sidenote, Tim Salmon. Haven't thought of him for a while.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
SPAIN
Spain. We beat Spain 2-0. Seriously. Spain.
Spain is the best soccer team in the world right now. Without a doubt. It's such a stunning outcome, I don't even know how to react. Exactly two of our players play regularly in a top European (England, Spain, Italy) league, Clint Dempsey at Fulham and our keeper, Tim Howard, at Everton. Every single player on the Spanish team plays regularly in Spain or England. The only guy on our roster who might--might!-- make the Spanish squad is Howard.
Although I bet Oguchi Onyewu and Jay Demerit will get some serious consideration by teams looking for central defenders after this game. Spain spent much of the game unsuccessfully trying to cross the ball in past these two. The last half hour of the game consisted largely of Spain crossing the ball across our goal and one of those two heading it away. It's a nervy strategy, and it only works if one has complete confidence in one's central defense, it worked today.
And I bet Jozy Altidore will get a lot more playing time next season. He's looking good.
Peter Vecsey points out that the real benefit should come in the draw for the 2010 World Cup, where we should (finally!) be seeded ahead of Mexico.
Where would I put this on the list of US Soccer victories? #5. It's not higher because it didn't happen in the World Cup.
#1 USA 2-Mexico 0 in the 2002 World Cup: (a) we made the quarterfinals, and (b) we knocked Mexico out of the World Cup. It doesn't get any better.
#2 USA 3-Portugal 2 2002 World Cup group stage: Portugal was seen as a serious contender for the title. This game was personally outstanding because Schlamp was so tired he lay his head down on the bar of the Chieftain at halftime and napped. For me, this was funny. For Schlamp's immune system, this was a test. You don't want to put your head on the bar of the Chieftain.
#3 USA 2-Columbia 1, 1994 World Cup group stage: supposedly Columbia was going to challenge for the title.
#4 USA 1-England 0, 1950 World Cup: it happened a long time ago.
Spain is the best soccer team in the world right now. Without a doubt. It's such a stunning outcome, I don't even know how to react. Exactly two of our players play regularly in a top European (England, Spain, Italy) league, Clint Dempsey at Fulham and our keeper, Tim Howard, at Everton. Every single player on the Spanish team plays regularly in Spain or England. The only guy on our roster who might--might!-- make the Spanish squad is Howard.
Although I bet Oguchi Onyewu and Jay Demerit will get some serious consideration by teams looking for central defenders after this game. Spain spent much of the game unsuccessfully trying to cross the ball in past these two. The last half hour of the game consisted largely of Spain crossing the ball across our goal and one of those two heading it away. It's a nervy strategy, and it only works if one has complete confidence in one's central defense, it worked today.
And I bet Jozy Altidore will get a lot more playing time next season. He's looking good.
Peter Vecsey points out that the real benefit should come in the draw for the 2010 World Cup, where we should (finally!) be seeded ahead of Mexico.
Where would I put this on the list of US Soccer victories? #5. It's not higher because it didn't happen in the World Cup.
#1 USA 2-Mexico 0 in the 2002 World Cup: (a) we made the quarterfinals, and (b) we knocked Mexico out of the World Cup. It doesn't get any better.
#2 USA 3-Portugal 2 2002 World Cup group stage: Portugal was seen as a serious contender for the title. This game was personally outstanding because Schlamp was so tired he lay his head down on the bar of the Chieftain at halftime and napped. For me, this was funny. For Schlamp's immune system, this was a test. You don't want to put your head on the bar of the Chieftain.
#3 USA 2-Columbia 1, 1994 World Cup group stage: supposedly Columbia was going to challenge for the title.
#4 USA 1-England 0, 1950 World Cup: it happened a long time ago.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Monday, June 15, 2009
The Experiment
Someone (Schlamp?) brought up the possibility of Alexander Karelin as a candidate for athletic dominance. Yes.
Karelin went undefeated from 1987-2000. I'll give him 13 consecutive years of dominance, which puts him one above Mariano Rivera. As The Experiment, Karelin may also have the best nickname. We'll see how long Rivera is on top, it seems to me he's slipping a little. Just a little. He can't pitch forever (right?), and Papelbon or K-Rod may become the guy baseball people most trust to get out of an inning if their lives depended on it. But my sense is that Rivera is still the man, until further notice.
I also thought of Steve Redgrave. Who? Just a guy who won gold medals in rowing at (ahem) five different Olympics. But he wasn't always the best. He came in third in 1990 in a race. Plus, crew is such a team sport. Except for singles, you're always part of a team, and everyone is doing the same work. It's tough to say that anyone is the "best". Redgrave may be the greatest rower in history, but it's difficult to prove that he was the best rower in the world at any one point.
Karelin went undefeated from 1987-2000. I'll give him 13 consecutive years of dominance, which puts him one above Mariano Rivera. As The Experiment, Karelin may also have the best nickname. We'll see how long Rivera is on top, it seems to me he's slipping a little. Just a little. He can't pitch forever (right?), and Papelbon or K-Rod may become the guy baseball people most trust to get out of an inning if their lives depended on it. But my sense is that Rivera is still the man, until further notice.
I also thought of Steve Redgrave. Who? Just a guy who won gold medals in rowing at (ahem) five different Olympics. But he wasn't always the best. He came in third in 1990 in a race. Plus, crew is such a team sport. Except for singles, you're always part of a team, and everyone is doing the same work. It's tough to say that anyone is the "best". Redgrave may be the greatest rower in history, but it's difficult to prove that he was the best rower in the world at any one point.
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Mariano Rivera
How many people are the best in the world at what they do? Usually, it's hard to even know who's the best in the world at anything, much less find the person who's the best at it.
Now consider, how many people have been the best in the world at their chosen profession for twelve consecutive years? Mariano Rivera's had some competition lately: Papelbon's been great the last couple of years, and plenty of other closers have had individually better years. But since he became a closer in 1997, pretty much everyone in baseball would choose him to pitch the bottom of the ninth with a one run lead.
Has any athlete in history ever been the best at what he did for twelve consecutive years?
My first thought was Edwin Moses. Undefeated from 1977-1987, he won Olympic Gold in 1976. He was at the top from 1976-1987, but by 1988, he "only" got the bronze in Seoul. He didn't last 12 years.
You could make a case for Rickey Henderson. He was the best leadoff hitter in baseball starting about 1980, but I don't think he was necessarily the best for 12 years. Henderson was hurt in 1987, and Vince Coleman was probably better. Tim Raines was undoubtedly better in 1986. Henderson was the best for a long time, but not consecutively.
What about Bill Russell? If one assumes he was the best center in basketball starting in the 1957-58 season, when he was the league MVP, I'm not sure he lasts 12 years. I don't follow basketball closely enough to know, but according to wikipedia, Russell was falling off by the 67-68 season. Maybe Russell gets ten or eleven years, but that's not as impressive as Rivera
Am I missing any other plausible candidates?
(As a sidenote, Edwin Moses was a double major in college in physics and industrial engineering? So he's like Ed Cho, but faster and with an additional physics major.)
Now consider, how many people have been the best in the world at their chosen profession for twelve consecutive years? Mariano Rivera's had some competition lately: Papelbon's been great the last couple of years, and plenty of other closers have had individually better years. But since he became a closer in 1997, pretty much everyone in baseball would choose him to pitch the bottom of the ninth with a one run lead.
Has any athlete in history ever been the best at what he did for twelve consecutive years?
My first thought was Edwin Moses. Undefeated from 1977-1987, he won Olympic Gold in 1976. He was at the top from 1976-1987, but by 1988, he "only" got the bronze in Seoul. He didn't last 12 years.
You could make a case for Rickey Henderson. He was the best leadoff hitter in baseball starting about 1980, but I don't think he was necessarily the best for 12 years. Henderson was hurt in 1987, and Vince Coleman was probably better. Tim Raines was undoubtedly better in 1986. Henderson was the best for a long time, but not consecutively.
What about Bill Russell? If one assumes he was the best center in basketball starting in the 1957-58 season, when he was the league MVP, I'm not sure he lasts 12 years. I don't follow basketball closely enough to know, but according to wikipedia, Russell was falling off by the 67-68 season. Maybe Russell gets ten or eleven years, but that's not as impressive as Rivera
Am I missing any other plausible candidates?
(As a sidenote, Edwin Moses was a double major in college in physics and industrial engineering? So he's like Ed Cho, but faster and with an additional physics major.)
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Sonia Sotomayor
I'm making a rare reversion back into politics, because the Supreme Court is important.
Obviously, Sonia Sotomayor's ethnicity and her gender are hot topics. The way I see it, there are somewhere around 100 people in this country who are qualified for the Supreme Court at any given time. We may not agree with their decisions, but they have the training, background, and experience to be qualified. (I think that both of W's appointees, Roberts and Alito, fall into the 'qualified' category, although his first choice, Harriet Miers, definitely does not.)
So the President has to choose someone from a pool of people, all of whom have roughly the same set of qualifications. I think that it's worthwhile if the Supreme Court resembles the people of this country, and since Sotomayor comes from the set of people who are eligible due to their experience, she's a good choice.
Sonia Sotomayor is unquestionably qualified. None of the present justices ever worked as a state prosecutor, and only Alito, who worked as a federal prosecutor, has ANY criminal law experience. Hard to believe, but true. NONE of the present justices ever served as a trial judge (Souter did, but he's the one who's retiring). Since the justices regularly have to decide questions that are a trial judge's bread and butter (evidence, procedure, jury instructions, etc.), it would be worthwhile to have someone in the room who's actually had to make those kind of decisions.
So what kind of justice will she be? I don't have any idea. No one does. Souter was supposed to be a pocket conservative, and Scalia was seen as a moderate consensus builder. Who knows how someone will be in ten or twenty years? Not me.
One can demand that the President chooses someone who falls in the 'qualified' group, but outside that, you pretty much just have to hope they rule the way you want when the time comes.
Obviously, Sonia Sotomayor's ethnicity and her gender are hot topics. The way I see it, there are somewhere around 100 people in this country who are qualified for the Supreme Court at any given time. We may not agree with their decisions, but they have the training, background, and experience to be qualified. (I think that both of W's appointees, Roberts and Alito, fall into the 'qualified' category, although his first choice, Harriet Miers, definitely does not.)
So the President has to choose someone from a pool of people, all of whom have roughly the same set of qualifications. I think that it's worthwhile if the Supreme Court resembles the people of this country, and since Sotomayor comes from the set of people who are eligible due to their experience, she's a good choice.
Sonia Sotomayor is unquestionably qualified. None of the present justices ever worked as a state prosecutor, and only Alito, who worked as a federal prosecutor, has ANY criminal law experience. Hard to believe, but true. NONE of the present justices ever served as a trial judge (Souter did, but he's the one who's retiring). Since the justices regularly have to decide questions that are a trial judge's bread and butter (evidence, procedure, jury instructions, etc.), it would be worthwhile to have someone in the room who's actually had to make those kind of decisions.
So what kind of justice will she be? I don't have any idea. No one does. Souter was supposed to be a pocket conservative, and Scalia was seen as a moderate consensus builder. Who knows how someone will be in ten or twenty years? Not me.
One can demand that the President chooses someone who falls in the 'qualified' group, but outside that, you pretty much just have to hope they rule the way you want when the time comes.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Zach Greinke is ridiculous. It's one thing to pitch well at the start of the season, but we're two months in and his ERA after two months is 0.84.
In this start he went from 72 to 96 on consecutive pitches. That's just wrong. He's also a great (from 2007) story (2009). I have no particular insignt into his psychology, but I hope he stays healthy. The Royals are at .500, and it's surely been a while since that happened two months into the season....
In this start he went from 72 to 96 on consecutive pitches. That's just wrong. He's also a great (from 2007) story (2009). I have no particular insignt into his psychology, but I hope he stays healthy. The Royals are at .500, and it's surely been a while since that happened two months into the season....
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Randy Johnson
I've long been a fan of the guy.
I'm also a fan of Bill James, of course, although I find this Joe Posnanski fellow rather annoying. But here Posnanski is right on. Maybe the lesson is that he should always use Bill James as a resource. Bill James cannot help but be interesting.
I especially love this point, about Johnson's peak to Sandy Koufax's peak:
Koufax from 1963 to 1966 famously went 97-27 (.782 winning percentage) with a 1.86 ERA (a 172 ERA+ -- meaning his ERA was 72 percent better than the average pitcher of his time) and he averaged 307 strikeouts per year.
Johnson from 1995 to 2002 went 143-44 (.765 winning percentage) with a 2.61 ERA (a 177 ERA+ -- meaning his ERA was 77 percent better than the average pitcher of his time) and he averaged 302 strikeouts per year (despite missing most of the 1996 season).
In an otherwise great column, though, it's a shame that the leave out one of Randy Johnson's absolute career highlights.
I'm also a fan of Bill James, of course, although I find this Joe Posnanski fellow rather annoying. But here Posnanski is right on. Maybe the lesson is that he should always use Bill James as a resource. Bill James cannot help but be interesting.
I especially love this point, about Johnson's peak to Sandy Koufax's peak:
Koufax from 1963 to 1966 famously went 97-27 (.782 winning percentage) with a 1.86 ERA (a 172 ERA+ -- meaning his ERA was 72 percent better than the average pitcher of his time) and he averaged 307 strikeouts per year.
Johnson from 1995 to 2002 went 143-44 (.765 winning percentage) with a 2.61 ERA (a 177 ERA+ -- meaning his ERA was 77 percent better than the average pitcher of his time) and he averaged 302 strikeouts per year (despite missing most of the 1996 season).
In an otherwise great column, though, it's a shame that the leave out one of Randy Johnson's absolute career highlights.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Randy Johnson
I am looking forward to Randy Johnson getting win 300. He's now at 298.
Two years ago, I doubted he'd get to 300.
Barring injury, the Very Large Unit will get win 300 in the next few weeks. Very cool. Then there will be another slew of articles about how we'll never see another 300 game winner, just like there were when Glavine got to 300. In 2007. (Note the Sports Illustrated article I linked to, which has a quote from Bobby Cox about Tom Glavine: "Tommy will be the last 300-game winner ever." Thanks, Bobby.)
Two years ago, I doubted he'd get to 300.
Barring injury, the Very Large Unit will get win 300 in the next few weeks. Very cool. Then there will be another slew of articles about how we'll never see another 300 game winner, just like there were when Glavine got to 300. In 2007. (Note the Sports Illustrated article I linked to, which has a quote from Bobby Cox about Tom Glavine: "Tommy will be the last 300-game winner ever." Thanks, Bobby.)
Friday, May 08, 2009
Rickey!
This is exciting news. Rickey Henderson, wearing an outstanding shirt, toured the Hall of Fame prior to his induction.
As I've mentioned before, Rickey Henderson is as obvious a Hall of Famer as we will ever see in our lifetimes. My only surprise is that some voters didn't vote for the greatest leadoff hitter in history.
But that's not why I'm giddy. Obviously, it's for Rickey's speech. I've never looked forward to a Hall of Fame induction speech as much as I have to this one. Expectations are sky high.
Am I asking too much? Perhaps. But we should not temper our high hopes, not when we're talking about him. After all, Rickey is the greatest:
As I've mentioned before, Rickey Henderson is as obvious a Hall of Famer as we will ever see in our lifetimes. My only surprise is that some voters didn't vote for the greatest leadoff hitter in history.
But that's not why I'm giddy. Obviously, it's for Rickey's speech. I've never looked forward to a Hall of Fame induction speech as much as I have to this one. Expectations are sky high.
Am I asking too much? Perhaps. But we should not temper our high hopes, not when we're talking about him. After all, Rickey is the greatest:
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Giants Offense
It's nice to see the Big Giant pitch a great game and get win 296.
It's worth noting that the score was 2-0. This year started well, with a three game series against Milwaukee where the Giants scored 19 runs or 6.3 per game. So far so good. But since then, they've scored 18 runs in the last nine games, just two per game. All told, it's 37 runs in 12 games, 3.1 per game. They are next to last in the National League in scoring.
This is not a new problem. I think it will be a long season for the Giants. Again. It's tough to win games when you can't score, and it's even tougher when your staff ERA is thirteenth in the National League.
Actually I think the pitching will come around. I'll be pretty surprised if the offense shows much improvement, though.
It's worth noting that the score was 2-0. This year started well, with a three game series against Milwaukee where the Giants scored 19 runs or 6.3 per game. So far so good. But since then, they've scored 18 runs in the last nine games, just two per game. All told, it's 37 runs in 12 games, 3.1 per game. They are next to last in the National League in scoring.
This is not a new problem. I think it will be a long season for the Giants. Again. It's tough to win games when you can't score, and it's even tougher when your staff ERA is thirteenth in the National League.
Actually I think the pitching will come around. I'll be pretty surprised if the offense shows much improvement, though.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Carpenter?
I think Chris Carpenter is the most pivotal player for the Cardinals. My earlier doubts about them were really about how he would pitch.
At least for one start, he's back, healthy, and dominant.
Joel Piñeiro won yesterday. Based on past history, I'm not confident that 6 2/3 innings of two run ball will be his standard outing, but a rotation of Carpenter, Wainwright, Lohse, Wellemeyer, and Piñeiro ain't bad. We just have to keep Carpenter healthy.
At least for one start, he's back, healthy, and dominant.
Joel Piñeiro won yesterday. Based on past history, I'm not confident that 6 2/3 innings of two run ball will be his standard outing, but a rotation of Carpenter, Wainwright, Lohse, Wellemeyer, and Piñeiro ain't bad. We just have to keep Carpenter healthy.
Saturday, April 04, 2009
Mmmmm, baseball
I ran around Pac Bell Park SBC Park AT&T Park (aka The Phonebooth) yesterday. It looks good. One can look through the right field fence to the playing field, and they were cutting the grass in the outfield. The cleaning crews were at work on the outside of the stadium, and those red, white, and blue buntings are up above the entrance. I'm ready.
Incidentally, baseball is sometimes charmingly bizarre. Opening Day in Boston is Monday. At that game, Seal, an Englishman of Nigerian ancestry married to a German supermodel, will sing The Star Spangled Banner. And why not?
Incidentally, baseball is sometimes charmingly bizarre. Opening Day in Boston is Monday. At that game, Seal, an Englishman of Nigerian ancestry married to a German supermodel, will sing The Star Spangled Banner. And why not?
Friday, April 03, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
2009 Baseball Predictions
I went for a short run this morning around the Phonebooth. It was swarming with cleaning crews and there were two mowers in the outfield and life is good. My predictions for this year1:
AL East
I think 95 wins will be enough to win this division. Due to the unbalanced schedule, the three good teams are going to beat each other up a lot.
1. Tampa Bay (Tampa? whatever)-Last year they were all around good. Add in David Price (yes, he'll be back in the Show soon, and another year, and I think they're as good as last year. Really, I'm picking them beacuse the Sox and Yankees have too many weaknesses to be dominant.
2. Sox-I think the pitching will be pretty good. Assuming Matsuzaka isn't burned out from the World Baseball Classic, a rotation of Beckett, Lester, Matsuzaka, Wakefield, and then some of Clay Buchholz, Smoltz (not impossible), or Brad Penny (why not?) looks pretty good. That looks like two #1 starters, a solid #2, a #4 and plenty of potential.
I worry about the offense. Papi had a down year last year. True, he doesn't have Manny in the lineup, but he's also 33 and a big dude. I like Mike Lowell, and he's supposedly healthy this year, but his offense is also slipping. Varitek is great with the staff, but can't hit anything anymore. Jason Bay is good, but he's no Manny.
The Sox scored a lot of runs last year. I think that number goes down a bit in 2009.
3. Yankees-Sort of like the Sox, but they look a little weaker across the board. Good, but not great pitching, and too many holes on offense, from a team that was average last year.
Their pitching is improved. Offense? Teixeira, unfortunately, is terrific. But Jeter seems to be (quickly!) trending down, Matsui's coming off an injury, Jorge Posada hits like Varitek (horrible to say about anyone, but it's true).
And who's going to play center field? Melky Cabrera? He hit .249 last year.
For that matter, is Xavier Nady really the rightfielder?
4. Toronto-I still believe that if you have to pick one pitcher for the upcoming season, you still have to go with Roy Halliday. I would not be surprised if he again leads the league in complete games and innings. But he can't pitch everyday, nor can he play other positions.
5. Baltimore-The Orioles are going to lose a lot of games. Again.
AL Central
I dunno. I figure the Twins are always good, and maybe the Tribe too.
AL West
Probably the Angels, again. I mean, Texas and the Mariners are both bad, so the only question is if the A's can make a run at them.
NL East
You gotta love Jamie Moyer. This will be his 23rd year in the bigs. His ERA last year was 3.71. The list of active pitchers with more wins the Moyer is (1) Randy Johnson and (2) Tom Glavine. Because of him, I'm rooting for the Phillies.
NL Central
Sigh. I don't know. The Cardinals aren't going to win many games if everyone's hurt. Chris Carpenter may be healthy, but he's started four games since the 2006 season. Adam Wainwright had a pretty good year last year, as did Kyle Lohse. Todd Wellemeyer wasn't bad either. To me, they're three solid #3 starters. As with years past, I think Carpenter's health is the key o the staff.
Obviously, Pujols is the #1 pick if you're choosing someone in the field, but other than him? I don't know.
NL West
1. Dodgers-It's all about Manny, obviously. When he plays hard, he's just dominant.
Then there are the Giants. It's deja vu. Last year their offense was awful. It's still going to be awful.
With the Franchise, the Old Creaky Unit, Matt Cain, Noah Lowry, and Zito, they may have the best rotation in baseball. (Quick, how good was Randy Johnson last year? His ERA was 3.91) I don't think you want to be going into the season hoping to win every game 1-0, espcially when your closer's ERA was 4.62 last year.
1-For teams and divisions I pay attention to
AL East
I think 95 wins will be enough to win this division. Due to the unbalanced schedule, the three good teams are going to beat each other up a lot.
1. Tampa Bay (Tampa? whatever)-Last year they were all around good. Add in David Price (yes, he'll be back in the Show soon, and another year, and I think they're as good as last year. Really, I'm picking them beacuse the Sox and Yankees have too many weaknesses to be dominant.
2. Sox-I think the pitching will be pretty good. Assuming Matsuzaka isn't burned out from the World Baseball Classic, a rotation of Beckett, Lester, Matsuzaka, Wakefield, and then some of Clay Buchholz, Smoltz (not impossible), or Brad Penny (why not?) looks pretty good. That looks like two #1 starters, a solid #2, a #4 and plenty of potential.
I worry about the offense. Papi had a down year last year. True, he doesn't have Manny in the lineup, but he's also 33 and a big dude. I like Mike Lowell, and he's supposedly healthy this year, but his offense is also slipping. Varitek is great with the staff, but can't hit anything anymore. Jason Bay is good, but he's no Manny.
The Sox scored a lot of runs last year. I think that number goes down a bit in 2009.
3. Yankees-Sort of like the Sox, but they look a little weaker across the board. Good, but not great pitching, and too many holes on offense, from a team that was average last year.
Their pitching is improved. Offense? Teixeira, unfortunately, is terrific. But Jeter seems to be (quickly!) trending down, Matsui's coming off an injury, Jorge Posada hits like Varitek (horrible to say about anyone, but it's true).
And who's going to play center field? Melky Cabrera? He hit .249 last year.
For that matter, is Xavier Nady really the rightfielder?
4. Toronto-I still believe that if you have to pick one pitcher for the upcoming season, you still have to go with Roy Halliday. I would not be surprised if he again leads the league in complete games and innings. But he can't pitch everyday, nor can he play other positions.
5. Baltimore-The Orioles are going to lose a lot of games. Again.
AL Central
I dunno. I figure the Twins are always good, and maybe the Tribe too.
AL West
Probably the Angels, again. I mean, Texas and the Mariners are both bad, so the only question is if the A's can make a run at them.
NL East
You gotta love Jamie Moyer. This will be his 23rd year in the bigs. His ERA last year was 3.71. The list of active pitchers with more wins the Moyer is (1) Randy Johnson and (2) Tom Glavine. Because of him, I'm rooting for the Phillies.
NL Central
Sigh. I don't know. The Cardinals aren't going to win many games if everyone's hurt. Chris Carpenter may be healthy, but he's started four games since the 2006 season. Adam Wainwright had a pretty good year last year, as did Kyle Lohse. Todd Wellemeyer wasn't bad either. To me, they're three solid #3 starters. As with years past, I think Carpenter's health is the key o the staff.
Obviously, Pujols is the #1 pick if you're choosing someone in the field, but other than him? I don't know.
NL West
1. Dodgers-It's all about Manny, obviously. When he plays hard, he's just dominant.
Then there are the Giants. It's deja vu. Last year their offense was awful. It's still going to be awful.
With the Franchise, the Old Creaky Unit, Matt Cain, Noah Lowry, and Zito, they may have the best rotation in baseball. (Quick, how good was Randy Johnson last year? His ERA was 3.91) I don't think you want to be going into the season hoping to win every game 1-0, espcially when your closer's ERA was 4.62 last year.
1-For teams and divisions I pay attention to
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Schilling
Curt Schilling retired. Or rather, he announced he was finished, surprises no one.
I've wondered for a while now about whether his numbers are Hall of Fame worthy. I was on the fence, but now I'm thinking that he makes it.
216 wins isn't a lot of wins, but he did get them in the Steroid Era.
What pushes him over the top is the postseason. Everyone knows that he thrived (throve?) on pressure. But this ESPN article points out that he was 11-2 in the postseason, the best playoff winning percentage ever for guys with ten decisions. His postseason ERA is even more remarkable1. These games are (obviously) games against the best teams, to have a 2.23 postseason ERA is amazing.
Does that matter for the Hall of Fame? I think it does. Postseason success matters.
The Hall of Fame is also comparative. If Mussina gets in, I think Schilling has to get in.
Since Schilling hasn't pitched since 2007, I believe he'll be eligible in 2012, a year earlier than Maddux. I don't think Schilling is a first ballot hall of famer, and it wouldn't surprise me if voters want to give Maddux the honor of going in alone, so it wouldn't surprise me if he has to wait a couple of years. But I think he gets in.
Tangentially, Schilling had an extremely unusual career, in that he was a late-bloomer. As Rob Neyer points out, Schilling's record at age 30 was 52-52. The only present player I can think of who's remotely similar is Jamie Moyer. Why Moyer? Astonishingly, Jamie Moyer's record at age 30 was far worse: 34-50.
1-It's worth noting that these statistics necessarily eliminate great money pitchers of the past like Bob Gibson, because they pitched in so many fewer playoff games.
I've wondered for a while now about whether his numbers are Hall of Fame worthy. I was on the fence, but now I'm thinking that he makes it.
216 wins isn't a lot of wins, but he did get them in the Steroid Era.
What pushes him over the top is the postseason. Everyone knows that he thrived (throve?) on pressure. But this ESPN article points out that he was 11-2 in the postseason, the best playoff winning percentage ever for guys with ten decisions. His postseason ERA is even more remarkable1. These games are (obviously) games against the best teams, to have a 2.23 postseason ERA is amazing.
Does that matter for the Hall of Fame? I think it does. Postseason success matters.
The Hall of Fame is also comparative. If Mussina gets in, I think Schilling has to get in.
Since Schilling hasn't pitched since 2007, I believe he'll be eligible in 2012, a year earlier than Maddux. I don't think Schilling is a first ballot hall of famer, and it wouldn't surprise me if voters want to give Maddux the honor of going in alone, so it wouldn't surprise me if he has to wait a couple of years. But I think he gets in.
Tangentially, Schilling had an extremely unusual career, in that he was a late-bloomer. As Rob Neyer points out, Schilling's record at age 30 was 52-52. The only present player I can think of who's remotely similar is Jamie Moyer. Why Moyer? Astonishingly, Jamie Moyer's record at age 30 was far worse: 34-50.
1-It's worth noting that these statistics necessarily eliminate great money pitchers of the past like Bob Gibson, because they pitched in so many fewer playoff games.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Michigan Basketball
This is what I was talking about yesterday. We have a good team, a good coach, and (finally!) hope for the future of the program.
We even have a great blog (who knew?). I didn't start reading www.umhoops.com until the NCAA tournament started, but I'll remember it next year.
We even have a great blog (who knew?). I didn't start reading www.umhoops.com until the NCAA tournament started, but I'll remember it next year.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Michigan
It's disappointing Michigan lost in the second round, but all in all I'm pretty pleased. This was the best team in more than ten years, and all of the significant players come back for next year. We lose our starting point guard, a walkon who's a legitimate student athlete getting a master's degree in public policy, but that's about it. He's replaceable.
Now I can go back to ignoring college basketball, although I expect I'll be paying attention next season.
Now I can go back to ignoring college basketball, although I expect I'll be paying attention next season.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Go Blue!
I remember the last time Michigan was in the NCAA tournament. It was my final spring of law school, 1998. Robert Traylor, Lou Bullock, Maurice Taylor. I remember being late for some portrait (for the law school maybe?) because I was watching that team being upset in the tournament. I never would have imagined it would be 11 (!) years until I again got to watch Michigan in the NCAA tournament.
But we're back and we won. Whoo-hoo! Sweet victory!
But we're back and we won. Whoo-hoo! Sweet victory!
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Yeeech
I've bashed Dan Wetzel before, but now I think he has his place in the sportswriting firmament. He should be an old time investigative reporter.
I felt slimy just for reading this. It's all the worst parts of big time college sports.
I have no idea if Kevin Love is any good (and I can't make myself care), but he comes across as a decent guy trying to navigate a crowd of complete blood-suckers and bottom-feeders.
(Dan, seriously, stick with reporting. This is great stuff. Shine some sunlight into this dark corner. You are a terrible columnist, but a great reporter.)
I felt slimy just for reading this. It's all the worst parts of big time college sports.
I have no idea if Kevin Love is any good (and I can't make myself care), but he comes across as a decent guy trying to navigate a crowd of complete blood-suckers and bottom-feeders.
(Dan, seriously, stick with reporting. This is great stuff. Shine some sunlight into this dark corner. You are a terrible columnist, but a great reporter.)
Thursday, March 05, 2009
A-Rod
So A-Rod needs hip surgery and will be out ten weeks? And from the sound of things, he didn't tell Girardi beforehand?
If this sad, sad development is true, on behalf of everyone here at drakethoughts, I wish him a healthy recovery. A long, healthy recovery. In fact, I would recommend he wait a bit to even have the surgery. There's no need to rush things.
If this sad, sad development is true, on behalf of everyone here at drakethoughts, I wish him a healthy recovery. A long, healthy recovery. In fact, I would recommend he wait a bit to even have the surgery. There's no need to rush things.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Bonds Appeal
Prosecutors have appealed the judge's earlier ruling on perjury. Basically, it looks to me like the Feds don't have a case without this evidence. Anderson isn't going to testify, and if they can't introduce this evidence of Bonds' steroid use, prosecutors won't have anything to go on.
Legal Note: Normally you have to wait for a trial to be over to appeal. The idea is that if you appeal every ruling, you'd never finish the trial. Sometimes, though, you can file an interlocutory appeal, which is what this is. It's essentially a timeout in the trial.
However, this will irritate the judge, as noted in the Chronicle article. Trial was to start this week and the judge probably wants to (finally!) get rid of this case.
I predict that if the Ninth Circuit (the court that hears appeals from courts in California and other western states) doesn't allow this evidence, prosecutors will drop the case and Bonds will walk.
Legal Note: Normally you have to wait for a trial to be over to appeal. The idea is that if you appeal every ruling, you'd never finish the trial. Sometimes, though, you can file an interlocutory appeal, which is what this is. It's essentially a timeout in the trial.
However, this will irritate the judge, as noted in the Chronicle article. Trial was to start this week and the judge probably wants to (finally!) get rid of this case.
I predict that if the Ninth Circuit (the court that hears appeals from courts in California and other western states) doesn't allow this evidence, prosecutors will drop the case and Bonds will walk.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
A Steal
The Franchise signed a one year contract for $650,000.
Considering the Giants are paying Randy Johnson $8 million, and Zito (ahem) $18 million, Lincecum's a steal.
More broadly, it's a small demonstration of how much sense it makes to go with young players. It's rather doubtful that the Big Creaky Unit will give the Giants 15 times the value they get from Lincecum.
Considering the Giants are paying Randy Johnson $8 million, and Zito (ahem) $18 million, Lincecum's a steal.
More broadly, it's a small demonstration of how much sense it makes to go with young players. It's rather doubtful that the Big Creaky Unit will give the Giants 15 times the value they get from Lincecum.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Steroids
Rob Neyer at ESPN pointed out this article in Sports Illustrated about the popularity of steroids. It includes the following quote:
Are anabolic steroids widely used by Olympic weight men? Let me put it this way. If they had come into the village the day before competition and said we have just found a new test that will catch anyone who has used steroids, you would have had an awful lot of people dropping out of events because of instant muscle pulls."
This article was published in 1969.
Yes. 1969.
Something to consider next time Bud Selig refuses to take any responsibility for steroids or (seemingly) anything else.
Are anabolic steroids widely used by Olympic weight men? Let me put it this way. If they had come into the village the day before competition and said we have just found a new test that will catch anyone who has used steroids, you would have had an awful lot of people dropping out of events because of instant muscle pulls."
This article was published in 1969.
Yes. 1969.
Something to consider next time Bud Selig refuses to take any responsibility for steroids or (seemingly) anything else.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
TARP
The benefits and the costs of the TARP is a very complicated topic, with all sorts of nuance.
However, the New York Times linked to presentation that seems to be as helpful as anything else in explaining what it's all about:
The TARP, in Pictures
(It's available here.)
However, the New York Times linked to presentation that seems to be as helpful as anything else in explaining what it's all about:
The TARP, in Pictures
(It's available here.)
Friday, February 20, 2009
Bonds
The judge just tossed a lot of the evidence against Bonds for being inadmissible hearsay. For prosecutors, the problem is that Greg Anderson still isn't talking. He's the guy who could tell the story, and he's not going to say anything. (Why? Beats me.)
Is that all bad? Perjury is bad, of course, but does Bonds really deserve to go to jail? I dunno. If he does, it won't be for long. As I've said before, don't lie to the Feds.
Quick Hearsay Review: Inadmissible hearsay is evidence that exists (in this case the test results) but can't be used in court. I still remember my Evidence professor saying that hearsay is 'an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.' Here, all those test results are statements that were made outside the court, and the prosecutors are trying to use them as evidence. Hearsay actually has lots of exceptions, but apparently the judge didn't think that this evidence fell within any of them. The reason the rule exists is that we would prefer that evidence be offered by a live witness. In this case that witness would be Bonds (who can't be forced to say anything due to the Fifth Amendment) or Anderson (who won't testify).
Is that all bad? Perjury is bad, of course, but does Bonds really deserve to go to jail? I dunno. If he does, it won't be for long. As I've said before, don't lie to the Feds.
Quick Hearsay Review: Inadmissible hearsay is evidence that exists (in this case the test results) but can't be used in court. I still remember my Evidence professor saying that hearsay is 'an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.' Here, all those test results are statements that were made outside the court, and the prosecutors are trying to use them as evidence. Hearsay actually has lots of exceptions, but apparently the judge didn't think that this evidence fell within any of them. The reason the rule exists is that we would prefer that evidence be offered by a live witness. In this case that witness would be Bonds (who can't be forced to say anything due to the Fifth Amendment) or Anderson (who won't testify).
Friday, February 13, 2009
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
103 To Go
It's also worth noting that A-Rod was one of (supposedly) 104 positive tests. That's a lot of players--four complete teams worth. Who are the others? I figure the names will all come out sooner or later.
Monday, February 09, 2009
A-Rod
So A-Rod juiced too. Huh. I didn't expect that.
I don't think we can necessarily get inside his head to say why he did it, but we can wonder whether they helped him. I don't know. If you look at his career stats, it's murky. He averaged almost 42 homers from 1998-2000, then jumped to averaging 52 a year from 2001-2003. He played every game with the Rangers, so it's not surprising he would hit more homers, but then with an unquestioned workout routine, maybe the drugs helps his durability. His slugging percentage was marginally higher in 2001-2003 than it had been from 1998-2000, but not by much.
So I'm not sure anyone can say whether he improved. Of course, this all supposes he's telling the truth when he says that he only juiced from 2001-2003.
It will make for an interesting season this year in the Bronx....
I don't think we can necessarily get inside his head to say why he did it, but we can wonder whether they helped him. I don't know. If you look at his career stats, it's murky. He averaged almost 42 homers from 1998-2000, then jumped to averaging 52 a year from 2001-2003. He played every game with the Rangers, so it's not surprising he would hit more homers, but then with an unquestioned workout routine, maybe the drugs helps his durability. His slugging percentage was marginally higher in 2001-2003 than it had been from 1998-2000, but not by much.
So I'm not sure anyone can say whether he improved. Of course, this all supposes he's telling the truth when he says that he only juiced from 2001-2003.
It will make for an interesting season this year in the Bronx....
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Bush
Finally, he's gone. I cannot let him go without commenting.
I wish Bush a long and healthy life. I hope he and members of his administration have the opportunity to witness the complete destruction of their legacy. I hope they spend decades defending the decision to go to war in Iraq, their conduct during Katrina, their monstrous deficit spending, their intransigence on global warming, their embrace of torture, etc. Public opinion has long turned against Bush; I bet most Republicans will follow quickly. This administration's incompetence cost numerous Republicans in Congress their jobs, I expect them to turn on him to survive.
My country is a better place than it was a week ago.
And now back to regularly scheduled blogging....
I wish Bush a long and healthy life. I hope he and members of his administration have the opportunity to witness the complete destruction of their legacy. I hope they spend decades defending the decision to go to war in Iraq, their conduct during Katrina, their monstrous deficit spending, their intransigence on global warming, their embrace of torture, etc. Public opinion has long turned against Bush; I bet most Republicans will follow quickly. This administration's incompetence cost numerous Republicans in Congress their jobs, I expect them to turn on him to survive.
My country is a better place than it was a week ago.
And now back to regularly scheduled blogging....
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
We. Are. So. Screwed.
Michigan's defense last year was awful.
And we've just hired a man named Gerg. Gerg? Yes, Gerg. Gerg was just fired after going 10-37 at Syracuse, a worse winning percentage than even Michigan last year.
The reviews? Notsogood. Yes, now is the time to commence panic. When the Syracuse football blog's title is He's Your Problem Now, Michigan, it looks like we've chosen poorly:
Wha, was there something else important going on today?
And we've just hired a man named Gerg. Gerg? Yes, Gerg. Gerg was just fired after going 10-37 at Syracuse, a worse winning percentage than even Michigan last year.
The reviews? Notsogood. Yes, now is the time to commence panic. When the Syracuse football blog's title is He's Your Problem Now, Michigan, it looks like we've chosen poorly:
Wha, was there something else important going on today?
Saturday, January 10, 2009
College Football Playoffs, Again
As with previous years, I still say that if you support a playoff in college football, you need to decide how many teams to invite. 4? 6? 8? 12? 16?
The problem is that every year the "right" number of teams is different. So in keeping with previous years, lets look at how many teams you would put in a playoff this year (for instance, last year, Ohio State deserved to play the final game against one of 8 other teams that had a case).
This year, how many teams? Eight teams indisputably deserve to be in a playoff, which is to say there's no way to choose between them. Boise State, which went undefeated, would at least have an argument. Here's the updated chart:
This year doesn't help those who advocate for a playoff. If you're going to have a playoff to be "fair", you must invite at least eight teams. The whole idea just doesn't work.
The problem is that every year the "right" number of teams is different. So in keeping with previous years, lets look at how many teams you would put in a playoff this year (for instance, last year, Ohio State deserved to play the final game against one of 8 other teams that had a case).
This year, how many teams? Eight teams indisputably deserve to be in a playoff, which is to say there's no way to choose between them. Boise State, which went undefeated, would at least have an argument. Here's the updated chart:
This year doesn't help those who advocate for a playoff. If you're going to have a playoff to be "fair", you must invite at least eight teams. The whole idea just doesn't work.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Michigan football is in terrible shape, but things may be looking up.
This is perhaps the only bit of good news in the last couple of years.
This is perhaps the only bit of good news in the last couple of years.
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
The 40-40 Club
At dinner a couple of weeks ago a few of us started talking baseball and the 40-40 Club came up. After much discussion, we finally agreed on the membership in this group. Without cheating, can you name them? We will pause for a moment....
.....
[pause]
Members: Jose Canseco, Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, and Alfonso Soriano
If you must cheat, they're listed after the word members above in white text, highlight to see them.
As we talked about this, though I realized another thing that some members of this club have in common, which may serve as an additional hint about its membership. If my calculations are correct, half of the member of this already exclusive club have had "special" relationships with Madonna. Suffice to say, though, that membership in the Madonna Club is considerably less unusual than the 40-40 Club.
.....
[pause]
Members: Jose Canseco, Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, and Alfonso Soriano
If you must cheat, they're listed after the word members above in white text, highlight to see them.
As we talked about this, though I realized another thing that some members of this club have in common, which may serve as an additional hint about its membership. If my calculations are correct, half of the member of this already exclusive club have had "special" relationships with Madonna. Suffice to say, though, that membership in the Madonna Club is considerably less unusual than the 40-40 Club.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Bravo for Bowls!
Finally there's a college football column I can agree with. He's too professional to say that Wetzel's an idiot (but I know he's thinking it). His bigger point is maybe the best argument of all for the bowls:
Bowls are fun.
It's not complicated. They're fun. A bowl game is fun to go, fun to be a fan at the game, fun to watch on TV. I can't wait tomorrow to roll out of bed and catch Michigan in th--wha? Wait, you're joking, right? Seriously? No, that's can't be correct. Really? Whew. That blows.
Bowls are fun.
It's not complicated. They're fun. A bowl game is fun to go, fun to be a fan at the game, fun to watch on TV. I can't wait tomorrow to roll out of bed and catch Michigan in th--wha? Wait, you're joking, right? Seriously? No, that's can't be correct. Really? Whew. That blows.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Big Unit
The Giants signed Randy Johnson to a one year deal for $8 million (plus incentives).
I like it. When he's healthy, Johnson can still a pretty good pitcher. Last year he made 30 starts and had a 3.91 ERA. Obviously, the key part of that sentence is "when he's healthy". Johnson's actually been fairly durable--just two years with fewer than 30 starts since 1999. Of course, he'll turn 46 this fall. (At the same time, it's worth noting that occasionally a power pitcher ages well.) If he does stay healthy, Johnson should get to 300 wins, which would be cool.
I think the Giants have a legitimate shot at the playoffs next year, with The Franchise (who I still worry about), Matt Cain, Johnson, and Zito in the rotation. They're lucky to play in a crummy division.
Last year, though, their problem, was hitting. Their batting average was actually in the middle of the pack, but they were next to last in runs, and you gotta score runs to win.
Hitting is still the big problem. I sure hope the organization is now going to try to get some, or else it'll be another long year.
I like it. When he's healthy, Johnson can still a pretty good pitcher. Last year he made 30 starts and had a 3.91 ERA. Obviously, the key part of that sentence is "when he's healthy". Johnson's actually been fairly durable--just two years with fewer than 30 starts since 1999. Of course, he'll turn 46 this fall. (At the same time, it's worth noting that occasionally a power pitcher ages well.) If he does stay healthy, Johnson should get to 300 wins, which would be cool.
I think the Giants have a legitimate shot at the playoffs next year, with The Franchise (who I still worry about), Matt Cain, Johnson, and Zito in the rotation. They're lucky to play in a crummy division.
Last year, though, their problem, was hitting. Their batting average was actually in the middle of the pack, but they were next to last in runs, and you gotta score runs to win.
Hitting is still the big problem. I sure hope the organization is now going to try to get some, or else it'll be another long year.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Yankees, Pitching
Last year, in the face of a weak staff, the Yankees did nothing. The result was pretty predictable, even if the details (Mussina was terrific, the rookies, not so much) were not.
Unfortunately, they did not make the same mistake this year. Like everyone else, I think Sabathia's great. Burnett is good when healthy, although it's worth noting that he has a five year deal and has reached 200 innings twice in the last five years, somewhat like some of their previous signings. (Sorry, Schlamp.)
But all in all a huge step up for them. They went from a rotation of Mussina, Pettitte, Wang, and then assorted rookies and castoffs to Sabathia (a clear #1), Burnett (#2, potentially a #1 when healthy), Wang (a #3), maybe Pettitte (?), then the rookies. I think it's fair to say that Sidney Ponson won't get another 15 starts next year.
Unfortunately, they did not make the same mistake this year. Like everyone else, I think Sabathia's great. Burnett is good when healthy, although it's worth noting that he has a five year deal and has reached 200 innings twice in the last five years, somewhat like some of their previous signings. (Sorry, Schlamp.)
But all in all a huge step up for them. They went from a rotation of Mussina, Pettitte, Wang, and then assorted rookies and castoffs to Sabathia (a clear #1), Burnett (#2, potentially a #1 when healthy), Wang (a #3), maybe Pettitte (?), then the rookies. I think it's fair to say that Sidney Ponson won't get another 15 starts next year.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
It's that time of the year again
Earlier I criticized Yahoo Sports columnist Dan Wetzel for blasting the BCS without proposing an alternative.
In fairness, he's now proposed something. Unfortunately, his proposed playoff is flat out impossible. It has zero possibility of being implemented.
Sixteen teams, four rounds of games. No chance. Why? Let us count the ways:
-The last two teams would play 17 games. There's no way college teams could play that many games.
-When would they schedule the games? College students have exams in December, to which he says: "college athletics has never allowed academics to stand in its way before." Actually, yes it has. That's one reason teams don't play in December.
-College presidents don't want a playoff. To which he says "Presidents are notoriously weak-spined and revenue desperate. Pressure and cash can change opinions in a hurry. They follow the herd." Really? If they're weak spined, why haven't they caved and had a playoff already?
A sixteen team playoff might be possible if we could redo everything about college football, i.e. create a different sport. I consider that unlikely, though, and there's absolutely no chance that this idea has any possibility of ever happening.
In fairness, he's now proposed something. Unfortunately, his proposed playoff is flat out impossible. It has zero possibility of being implemented.
Sixteen teams, four rounds of games. No chance. Why? Let us count the ways:
-The last two teams would play 17 games. There's no way college teams could play that many games.
-When would they schedule the games? College students have exams in December, to which he says: "college athletics has never allowed academics to stand in its way before." Actually, yes it has. That's one reason teams don't play in December.
-College presidents don't want a playoff. To which he says "Presidents are notoriously weak-spined and revenue desperate. Pressure and cash can change opinions in a hurry. They follow the herd." Really? If they're weak spined, why haven't they caved and had a playoff already?
A sixteen team playoff might be possible if we could redo everything about college football, i.e. create a different sport. I consider that unlikely, though, and there's absolutely no chance that this idea has any possibility of ever happening.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Maddux-Clemens
With Maddux retiring, we can look at the final comparison of his wins with Clemens.
After last year I thought that Maddux would pas Clemens this year and have a shot at getting to 361 wins and #6 all time. That won't happen, but I doubt anyone will pass him again.
And get ready for a slew of articles saying how great he was. Too many times, these articles are written about undeserving players. Not this time.
After last year I thought that Maddux would pas Clemens this year and have a shot at getting to 361 wins and #6 all time. That won't happen, but I doubt anyone will pass him again.
And get ready for a slew of articles saying how great he was. Too many times, these articles are written about undeserving players. Not this time.
Friday, December 05, 2008
Maddux Retires
Apparently Greg Maddux is calling it quits. I do think someone else will eventually get to 300 wins, but I'm not so sure anyone will ever get to 350. I suspect he will always be the greatest player ever whose last name ends with the letter x.
It goes without saying that he will get into the Hall on the first ballot. It does mean there's no chance that Mussina gets in on the first ballot.
And, as a public service, I would like to remind you that chicks dig the longball:
It goes without saying that he will get into the Hall on the first ballot. It does mean there's no chance that Mussina gets in on the first ballot.
And, as a public service, I would like to remind you that chicks dig the longball:
Monday, December 01, 2008
Rickey Henderson
Some Hall of Fame decisions are easy. Rickey Henderson is on the ballot this year.
If he is not voted in on the first ballot, the Hall should disband immediately. Normally one might argue about, say, the best centerfielder or first baseman in history. But one could also consider position in the lineup, instead of position in the field. Does anyone doubt that Rickey Henderson is the best leadoff hitter in history?
It's unfair to focus on just one year, but in 1990 his OPS was 1.016, he stole 65 bases and was caught just ten times. He was an outrageously good base-stealer: in 1998, when he was 39 years old, he had 66 steals and was caught 13 times.
In fact, given his quotability, I'm already giddy at the thought of his acceptance speech....
If he is not voted in on the first ballot, the Hall should disband immediately. Normally one might argue about, say, the best centerfielder or first baseman in history. But one could also consider position in the lineup, instead of position in the field. Does anyone doubt that Rickey Henderson is the best leadoff hitter in history?
It's unfair to focus on just one year, but in 1990 his OPS was 1.016, he stole 65 bases and was caught just ten times. He was an outrageously good base-stealer: in 1998, when he was 39 years old, he had 66 steals and was caught 13 times.
In fact, given his quotability, I'm already giddy at the thought of his acceptance speech....
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Mussina, Jesse Haines
Schlamp, I won't argue that Jesse Haines belongs in the Hall of Fame. Whether he belongs is certainly debatable.
However, I will point out that (a) he played for the Cardinals, so he must be good (whoo-hoo!); and (b) he won two rings (1926, 1934). So his career was superior to Mussina's in at least two ways.
However, I will point out that (a) he played for the Cardinals, so he must be good (whoo-hoo!); and (b) he won two rings (1926, 1934). So his career was superior to Mussina's in at least two ways.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Dan Wetzel
As sportswriters go, I think Dan Wetzel is unusually bad, which is saying something. His most recent column exemplifies why.
He complains about the Big 12's selection method for choosing which team to put in its championship game. Three teams have one loss: Texas beat Oklahoma, which beat Texas Tech, which beat Texas. The conference decides who goes to the championship game by virtue of which team is ranker more highly.
Wetzel says this is bad, "jokes" about whether a team's color scheme should come into play (HA! good one!), and includes the following paragraph:
Maybe Texas should hire Barack Obama’s advisor David Axelrod for the rest of the season because it might be in trouble due to a scheduling quirk. Next week Oklahoma will have another big nationally televised opportunity to impress voters against highly ranked Oklahoma State. The Longhorns, meanwhile, seem like the team everyone forgot.
What does this mean? I have no idea. (Axelrod? Scheduling quirk? Wha?)
But what he never bothers doing is making any kind of suggestion about what they should do about it. If it's so bad, one would think he would have a better idea.
As for me, I think it seems pretty reasonable. Years ago the Big 10 would only let one team go to a bowl game and if two teams were tied, the athletic directors would vote to determine who went to the Rose Bowl. The Big 12 could have their athletic directors vote, but that's obviously prone to politicing as well. So all in all, seems to me that using a poll is as good a method as any other.
He complains about the Big 12's selection method for choosing which team to put in its championship game. Three teams have one loss: Texas beat Oklahoma, which beat Texas Tech, which beat Texas. The conference decides who goes to the championship game by virtue of which team is ranker more highly.
Wetzel says this is bad, "jokes" about whether a team's color scheme should come into play (HA! good one!), and includes the following paragraph:
Maybe Texas should hire Barack Obama’s advisor David Axelrod for the rest of the season because it might be in trouble due to a scheduling quirk. Next week Oklahoma will have another big nationally televised opportunity to impress voters against highly ranked Oklahoma State. The Longhorns, meanwhile, seem like the team everyone forgot.
What does this mean? I have no idea. (Axelrod? Scheduling quirk? Wha?)
But what he never bothers doing is making any kind of suggestion about what they should do about it. If it's so bad, one would think he would have a better idea.
As for me, I think it seems pretty reasonable. Years ago the Big 10 would only let one team go to a bowl game and if two teams were tied, the athletic directors would vote to determine who went to the Rose Bowl. The Big 12 could have their athletic directors vote, but that's obviously prone to politicing as well. So all in all, seems to me that using a poll is as good a method as any other.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Mussina
Mussina retired, which makes my previous argument that he's in the Hall of Fame moot. I figured he'd pitch at least another year or two. Now I'm not so sure. Hard to believe, but he only had one full season with an ERA under 3.00. That's not so good. Never won the World Series, never particularly dominant. I'm not sure durable guys should make the Hall.
On the other hand, 270 wins in the Steroid Era is impressive. And he finally won 20 games this year.
I figure he gets in eventually, but not on the first ballot.
On the other hand, 270 wins in the Steroid Era is impressive. And he finally won 20 games this year.
I figure he gets in eventually, but not on the first ballot.
Monday, November 17, 2008
No We Can't!
Well I like Obama but I wasn't happy to see that he supports a playoff in college football.
As I've said before (and before), the problem with a playoff is figuring out how many teams to invite. Playoff proponents gloss over this question, but it's actually enormously important. Just check out the comments here. People argue for six teams, eight teams, twelve teams, sixteen teams, etc.
Until playoff proponents can give a rational argument for a certain number of teams, there's no reason to discuss a playoff.
Case in point: 2005. Texas and USC were undefeated and they met for a (fantastic) national championship game. Should they have been forced to play Penn State and Oregon, each of which lost a game earlier, before playing each other? No!
As I've said before (and before), the problem with a playoff is figuring out how many teams to invite. Playoff proponents gloss over this question, but it's actually enormously important. Just check out the comments here. People argue for six teams, eight teams, twelve teams, sixteen teams, etc.
Until playoff proponents can give a rational argument for a certain number of teams, there's no reason to discuss a playoff.
Case in point: 2005. Texas and USC were undefeated and they met for a (fantastic) national championship game. Should they have been forced to play Penn State and Oregon, each of which lost a game earlier, before playing each other? No!
Thursday, November 13, 2008
AL Cy Young
Cliff Lee won the AL Cy Young, with Roy Halliday in second. This is unquestionably the correct result.
But quite a few voters revealed their foolishness. Francisco Rodriguez came in third, which is just stupid. The first problem is those seven voters who put him second, ahead of Halliday. Anyone that foolish should have their voting rights revoked immediately.
In fact, there's no reason to even put F-Rod third. Yes, he had a lot of saves, but saves are silly. If you're going to give a reliever your third vote, at least look at the statistics. Of American League relievers, F-Rod had a good year and a lot of saves, but the following closers had a lower ERA: Joakim Soia (surely you've heard of him), Mariano Rivera, and Joe Nathan.
If you are going to vote for a reliever at #3 (I would have voted for Lester), F-Rod is your fourth best choice. The best reliever in the AL last year is the same guy who's pretty much been the best the last 13 years: Mariano Rivera. His ERA was 1.40. 1.40! That's dominant even for him. He issued six walks last year. Six! Did I mention his ERA was 1.40?
But quite a few voters revealed their foolishness. Francisco Rodriguez came in third, which is just stupid. The first problem is those seven voters who put him second, ahead of Halliday. Anyone that foolish should have their voting rights revoked immediately.
In fact, there's no reason to even put F-Rod third. Yes, he had a lot of saves, but saves are silly. If you're going to give a reliever your third vote, at least look at the statistics. Of American League relievers, F-Rod had a good year and a lot of saves, but the following closers had a lower ERA: Joakim Soia (surely you've heard of him), Mariano Rivera, and Joe Nathan.
If you are going to vote for a reliever at #3 (I would have voted for Lester), F-Rod is your fourth best choice. The best reliever in the AL last year is the same guy who's pretty much been the best the last 13 years: Mariano Rivera. His ERA was 1.40. 1.40! That's dominant even for him. He issued six walks last year. Six! Did I mention his ERA was 1.40?
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
The Franchise
(sorry for the delay, I was busy with www.votingwisely.com, and distracted by the election)
Lincecum won the Cy Young. This is cool for the Giants. I'm happy to be wrong.
I hope I'm also wrong about overworking him. He pitched 146 innings last year and 227 this year. I just hope he didn't hurt himself this year.
And for the guy who didn't have Lincecum in his top three? Awful. Yes, Lidge was good this year, but there's no way he belongs on the ballot. He pitched 69.1 innings. Webb, Lincecum, and Santana all pitched more than three times as many. A closer can only win a Cy Young when there's no dominant starter, and this year there were three.
Besides, every time I think of Lidge I think of this.
Lincecum won the Cy Young. This is cool for the Giants. I'm happy to be wrong.
I hope I'm also wrong about overworking him. He pitched 146 innings last year and 227 this year. I just hope he didn't hurt himself this year.
And for the guy who didn't have Lincecum in his top three? Awful. Yes, Lidge was good this year, but there's no way he belongs on the ballot. He pitched 69.1 innings. Webb, Lincecum, and Santana all pitched more than three times as many. A closer can only win a Cy Young when there's no dominant starter, and this year there were three.
Besides, every time I think of Lidge I think of this.
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Michigan. Sigh.
Incidentally, I went to Ann Arbor last weekend for my ten year law school reunion. Aside from the other festivities, there was a football game against Illinois.
Michigan looked awful. That's not true. After the first quarter, Michigan was ahead 14-3. The vibe was positive, happy, relaxed. Life was good.
Then it all went awry, and Michigan played three quarters of truly awful football. Everything went wrong. The offensive line couldn't block, Threet couldn't throw, and the defensive secondary thought it would be a good idea to soak in gasoline and light themselves on fire.
Michigan's defense, the "strength" of the team before the season, gave up 402 yards in the final three quarters (yes, I am enough of a loser to add it up).
We Michigan fans are in unchartered territory. Michigan presently has the longest bowl streak in NCAA history, 33 years. The last time Michigan did NOT go to a bowl game was after the 1974 season. It's worth noting that before 1975, only one Big Ten team was allowed to go to a bowl--the champion went to the Rose Bowl. If more than one team from the conference had been allowed to go to a bowl, Michigan's bowl streak would date to the 1968 season, or 40 years.
I think this is the year it ends, which would be jarring. I have no living memory of Michigan not going to a bowl, and I distinctly remember Michigan losing the 1978 Rose Bowl to Washington, because we were terrible in the first half and dominated the second half (this is why I never liked Warren Moon growing up).
So this whole situation is bizarre. Michigan has had its ups and downs, but the concept of completely throwing a season away is foreign to us. I certainly hope it's only for one year.
As a sidenote, it seems someone was dropping a whole lot of acid in Pasadena in the fall of 1977.
Michigan looked awful. That's not true. After the first quarter, Michigan was ahead 14-3. The vibe was positive, happy, relaxed. Life was good.
Then it all went awry, and Michigan played three quarters of truly awful football. Everything went wrong. The offensive line couldn't block, Threet couldn't throw, and the defensive secondary thought it would be a good idea to soak in gasoline and light themselves on fire.
Michigan's defense, the "strength" of the team before the season, gave up 402 yards in the final three quarters (yes, I am enough of a loser to add it up).
We Michigan fans are in unchartered territory. Michigan presently has the longest bowl streak in NCAA history, 33 years. The last time Michigan did NOT go to a bowl game was after the 1974 season. It's worth noting that before 1975, only one Big Ten team was allowed to go to a bowl--the champion went to the Rose Bowl. If more than one team from the conference had been allowed to go to a bowl, Michigan's bowl streak would date to the 1968 season, or 40 years.
I think this is the year it ends, which would be jarring. I have no living memory of Michigan not going to a bowl, and I distinctly remember Michigan losing the 1978 Rose Bowl to Washington, because we were terrible in the first half and dominated the second half (this is why I never liked Warren Moon growing up).
So this whole situation is bizarre. Michigan has had its ups and downs, but the concept of completely throwing a season away is foreign to us. I certainly hope it's only for one year.
As a sidenote, it seems someone was dropping a whole lot of acid in Pasadena in the fall of 1977.
Monday, October 06, 2008
Playoffs
So it's Sox-Devil Rays and Dodgers-Phillies.
I think it's fair to say that Major League Baseball (i.e. Fox Sports) is hoping for a Red Sox-Dodgers series. Rays-Brewers would have been their ultimate nightmare, and maybe the dream matchup would have been Cubbies-Sox.
As a sidenote, baseball's a funny game. Jed Lowrie knocked in Jason Bay for the winning run.
The Rays worry me, but there's no need to worry about that right now. I'm happy the Sox are back in the ALCS.
I think it's fair to say that Major League Baseball (i.e. Fox Sports) is hoping for a Red Sox-Dodgers series. Rays-Brewers would have been their ultimate nightmare, and maybe the dream matchup would have been Cubbies-Sox.
As a sidenote, baseball's a funny game. Jed Lowrie knocked in Jason Bay for the winning run.
The Rays worry me, but there's no need to worry about that right now. I'm happy the Sox are back in the ALCS.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Idiotic Sportswriting
Exhibit A.
This column is so stupid, it's difficult to know where to start. So in no particular order:
NL MVP
How on earth can Manny Ramirez and CC Sabathia be the TOP TWO choices for MVP in the National League? Sabathia was terrific, but he played in 17 total games. Brandon Webb had twice as many starts, and twice as many wins. How can Webb not be more valuable to his team?
The Manny selection is even worse. He was great, but he played in 53 games for the Dodgers--less than a third of the season! He cannot possibly be as valuable as someone who played the entire year.
Most ridiculously, the obvious winner, Pujols, is fifth (fifth!) on his ballot. Pujols had a far more dominant offensive year than Howard, even if Howard's (less important) homer and RBI numbers were better. Pujols also is a fantastic defensive player. Howard is not.
NL Cy Young
The foolishness continues. It's easy to plug Sabathia's numbers into yesterday's chart, although we have to add innings to the mix because a pitcher who pitches a lot of innings is significantly more valuable to his team than one who doesn't.
Sabathia had a great half season, but you don't win the pennant with half seasons. Anyone who votes for him over the other three should forfeit the right to vote for future awards.
This column is so stupid, it's difficult to know where to start. So in no particular order:
NL MVP
How on earth can Manny Ramirez and CC Sabathia be the TOP TWO choices for MVP in the National League? Sabathia was terrific, but he played in 17 total games. Brandon Webb had twice as many starts, and twice as many wins. How can Webb not be more valuable to his team?
The Manny selection is even worse. He was great, but he played in 53 games for the Dodgers--less than a third of the season! He cannot possibly be as valuable as someone who played the entire year.
Most ridiculously, the obvious winner, Pujols, is fifth (fifth!) on his ballot. Pujols had a far more dominant offensive year than Howard, even if Howard's (less important) homer and RBI numbers were better. Pujols also is a fantastic defensive player. Howard is not.
| OBP | Slugging | HR | RBI | |
| Pujols | .462 | .653 | 37 | 116 |
| Howard | .339 | .542 | 48 | 146 |
NL Cy Young
The foolishness continues. It's easy to plug Sabathia's numbers into yesterday's chart, although we have to add innings to the mix because a pitcher who pitches a lot of innings is significantly more valuable to his team than one who doesn't.
| Record | ERA | Strikeouts | Innings | |
| Webb | 22-7 | 3.30 | 183 | 226.2 |
| Lincecum | 18-5 | 2.62 | 265 | 227 |
| Santana | 16-7 | 2.53 | 206 | 234.1 |
| Sabathia | 11-2 | 1.65 | 128 | 130 |
Sabathia had a great half season, but you don't win the pennant with half seasons. Anyone who votes for him over the other three should forfeit the right to vote for future awards.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Cy Young
Well the Giants kept running Lincecum out there because they wanted to get him a Cy Young.
I think it was a mistake, but we won't know that until next year. For now, I think that Johan Santana has pitched his way into the discussion with 14 consecutive quality starts down the stretch.
I think it's close:
Innings (226.2, 227, 234.1), complete games (3, 2, 3) and shutouts (1, 1, 2) are effectively indistinguishable.
I dunno. The problem here is that the guy with the most wins has the highest ERA. Webb shouldn't be in the discussion, based on ERA, but 22 wins is a lot of wins. I suppose I'd vote Webb, Lincecum, then Santana, but I wouldn't argue with any arrangement of them.
I think it was a mistake, but we won't know that until next year. For now, I think that Johan Santana has pitched his way into the discussion with 14 consecutive quality starts down the stretch.
I think it's close:
| Record | ERA | Strikeouts | |
| Webb | 22-7 | 3.30 | 183 |
| Lincecum | 18-5 | 2.62 | 265 |
| Santana | 16-7 | 2.53 | 206 |
Innings (226.2, 227, 234.1), complete games (3, 2, 3) and shutouts (1, 1, 2) are effectively indistinguishable.
I dunno. The problem here is that the guy with the most wins has the highest ERA. Webb shouldn't be in the discussion, based on ERA, but 22 wins is a lot of wins. I suppose I'd vote Webb, Lincecum, then Santana, but I wouldn't argue with any arrangement of them.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Mike Mussina
Mike Mussina made the Hall of Fame today, when he won his 20th game of the season. You know it mattered to the Yankees because Mariano Rivera came on in the 8th.
Before the season I had by doubts about his chances. Having 20 wins stands out on his resume. More accurately, never having a 20 win season stood out on his resume. I don't think he's a first ballot kind of guy, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet that he makes it eventually.
Of course, this year isn't the end. He's now at 270 wins. I also doubted that he would ever get to 300 wins (which means certain enshrinement in the Hall). I don't think he can get there in two years, but if he stays healthy for three, I think he'll win 300 games easily.
Before the season I had by doubts about his chances. Having 20 wins stands out on his resume. More accurately, never having a 20 win season stood out on his resume. I don't think he's a first ballot kind of guy, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet that he makes it eventually.
Of course, this year isn't the end. He's now at 270 wins. I also doubted that he would ever get to 300 wins (which means certain enshrinement in the Hall). I don't think he can get there in two years, but if he stays healthy for three, I think he'll win 300 games easily.
More College Football
The column I mentioned on Thursday looks a little more silly today. Georgia and Florida join USC as one loss teams. Note that this will soon lead to a variety of columns saying that "The BCS got lucky" because all these teams lost.
No. It isn't luck. It's very rare for more than two teams from power conferences to go undefeated. It happened once since the old conference tie-ins were eliminated: in 2004 (USC, Oklahoma, Auburn). While possible, it's unlikely that more than two teams will go undefeated this year, at least more than two teams from power conferences. It's certainly premature to start complaining about it.
No. It isn't luck. It's very rare for more than two teams from power conferences to go undefeated. It happened once since the old conference tie-ins were eliminated: in 2004 (USC, Oklahoma, Auburn). While possible, it's unlikely that more than two teams will go undefeated this year, at least more than two teams from power conferences. It's certainly premature to start complaining about it.
Friday, September 26, 2008
USC Out
And sometimes criticizing sportswriters works out perfectly.
Of the six contributors to the premature BCS bashing, five assumed that USC would go undefeated (kudos to David Fox, who pointed out that USC loses a conference game or two every year).
As a sidenote, Oregon State? Huh? They were clobberedby Penn State three weeks ago.
Of the six contributors to the premature BCS bashing, five assumed that USC would go undefeated (kudos to David Fox, who pointed out that USC loses a conference game or two every year).
As a sidenote, Oregon State? Huh? They were clobberedby Penn State three weeks ago.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Dumb Sportswriting of the Day
Writing about college football is easy. Whenever you need a quick story, just bring up the BCS and complain about it.
But this is a good one. It's September and they are already hyping the possibility of too many undefeated teams! Guys, can we at least wait until conference play starts?
But this is a good one. It's September and they are already hyping the possibility of too many undefeated teams! Guys, can we at least wait until conference play starts?
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Lincecum
After tonight's start (4.1 innings, 4 ER, raising his ERA to 2.66), I don't think The Franchise can win the Cy Young over Webb. They both can make one more start, but Webb already has 22 wins and Lincecum has just 17. He's now up to 220 innings. Last year he only pitched 146.
The Giants are mad if they let him make his final start. It would be really stupid. The risks are too high for no reward. He's had a great year. With his nine strikeouts tonight, he has 252 for the season, which gives him the Giants season record over Jason Schmidt. The Cy Young talk has been fun. But now the time to give up and get ready for next year.
Lincecum is maybe the most valuable pitcher in baseball right now. He's a young potential #1 starter, and the list of #1 starters under 30 includes Webb, Johan Santana, Sabathia, Josh Beckett, Jon Lester, and not a lot of other pitchers.
But while Sabathia will be printing money in free agency the next few years, the Giants have a few years of Lincecum on the cheap.
As a sidenote, I feel the same way about Lester, who's just six months older than Lincecum. With the Sox clinching the postseason today, they should give him a short tuneup before the playoffs and that's it. Don't risk him; he has 204 innings this year and 63 last. He'll also have at least one start in the postseason.
The Giants are mad if they let him make his final start. It would be really stupid. The risks are too high for no reward. He's had a great year. With his nine strikeouts tonight, he has 252 for the season, which gives him the Giants season record over Jason Schmidt. The Cy Young talk has been fun. But now the time to give up and get ready for next year.
Lincecum is maybe the most valuable pitcher in baseball right now. He's a young potential #1 starter, and the list of #1 starters under 30 includes Webb, Johan Santana, Sabathia, Josh Beckett, Jon Lester, and not a lot of other pitchers.
But while Sabathia will be printing money in free agency the next few years, the Giants have a few years of Lincecum on the cheap.
As a sidenote, I feel the same way about Lester, who's just six months older than Lincecum. With the Sox clinching the postseason today, they should give him a short tuneup before the playoffs and that's it. Don't risk him; he has 204 innings this year and 63 last. He'll also have at least one start in the postseason.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
AL Race
The Sox are still chasing Tampa for first place. (Never thought I'd write *THAT* sentence)
Barring a huge collapse, which is still possible given the Sox pitching situation (no, I don't trust Bartolo Colon in the rotation), the postseason pairings are predictable. As of today, the Sox are 1.5 games behind the Rays and lead the wild card by 6.5 games over the Twins and 7.5 over the Blue Jays and Yankees.
The Angels will play the wild card team with the winner of the East against the winner of the Central (either the Chisox or the Twins). The Sox want to win the East because the Angels are such a nightmare.
The way things are going, though, the best thing the Sox can do is hope someone else beats up on Tampa (thanks, Minnesota), because they seem to have Boston's number.
Barring a huge collapse, which is still possible given the Sox pitching situation (no, I don't trust Bartolo Colon in the rotation), the postseason pairings are predictable. As of today, the Sox are 1.5 games behind the Rays and lead the wild card by 6.5 games over the Twins and 7.5 over the Blue Jays and Yankees.
The Angels will play the wild card team with the winner of the East against the winner of the Central (either the Chisox or the Twins). The Sox want to win the East because the Angels are such a nightmare.
The way things are going, though, the best thing the Sox can do is hope someone else beats up on Tampa (thanks, Minnesota), because they seem to have Boston's number.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Michigan-Notre Dame
I watched the first half of the game and some of the third quarter, before I (fortunately) had to leave to go to a wedding.
It was not, shall we say, a great game. Michigan fumbled the opening *TWO* kickoffs and was down 21-0 after about ten minutes.
However. I saw plenty of good things and I'm with mgoblog on feeling encouraged. Everyone knew this year was going to be ugly, but we made some progress. We found a quarterback and a tailback. Threet made some good throws and played well. Sam McGuffie looks like our tailback for the next several years, unless he gets hurt (he's a little guy, which makes me nervous).
On the other hand, our defense, supposed to be the strength of the team, was bad. And it's very, very important for our receivers to catch the ball on kickoffs.
Now Michigan has a bye week, which is what they need. Threet should spend it working with the first team offense and hopefully the team will also work on not fumbling.
It was not, shall we say, a great game. Michigan fumbled the opening *TWO* kickoffs and was down 21-0 after about ten minutes.
However. I saw plenty of good things and I'm with mgoblog on feeling encouraged. Everyone knew this year was going to be ugly, but we made some progress. We found a quarterback and a tailback. Threet made some good throws and played well. Sam McGuffie looks like our tailback for the next several years, unless he gets hurt (he's a little guy, which makes me nervous).
On the other hand, our defense, supposed to be the strength of the team, was bad. And it's very, very important for our receivers to catch the ball on kickoffs.
Now Michigan has a bye week, which is what they need. Threet should spend it working with the first team offense and hopefully the team will also work on not fumbling.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Notre Dame
I don't like Notre Dame. Not at all. They were terrible last year and I laughed. Unfortunately, Michigan might just be that bad this year. I'm not sure this columnist was joking when he predicted a 3-0 Michigan win in five overtimes.
In the meantime, my fellow Michigan comrades posted an instructive interview with Charlie Weis.
In the meantime, my fellow Michigan comrades posted an instructive interview with Charlie Weis.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
AL Cy Young
The standard answer on the American League Cy Young is the Cliff Lee has it sewn up. Which he probably does. A 21-2 record is ridiculous, and he leads the league with an ERA of 2.28.
Howeva. Roy Halladay. 18-9 ain't bad either, he's won his last five starts, and has eight complete games. Lee is ahead, but if he has a couple of bad starts and Halliday keeps pitching like this, he could lose it....
Yes, I'm ignoring Francisco Rodruiguez. Lee has more than triple the innings and a lower ERA. Game over.
Howeva. Roy Halladay. 18-9 ain't bad either, he's won his last five starts, and has eight complete games. Lee is ahead, but if he has a couple of bad starts and Halliday keeps pitching like this, he could lose it....
Yes, I'm ignoring Francisco Rodruiguez. Lee has more than triple the innings and a lower ERA. Game over.
Monday, September 08, 2008
Webb Slipping
As someone (Schlamp?) pointed out, Webb is in fact doing his best to lose the NL Cy Young.
Brandon Webb hasn't won a game since I first posted. In his last three ugly starts, his ERA's gone from 2.74 to 3.41. That ain't good. Maybe he's hurt.
The Franchise was knocked around last week too, but it was only one bad start. Tonight he got his 16th win, brought his ERA down to 2.54 and went 8.1 innings, moving ahead of Webb. It was Webb's to lose and he may be losing it.
There is a ridiculous CC Sabathia meme going around. He's having a great second half, but no one actually believes that he has a chance. It's just a way for sportswriters to generate some words.
Brandon Webb hasn't won a game since I first posted. In his last three ugly starts, his ERA's gone from 2.74 to 3.41. That ain't good. Maybe he's hurt.
The Franchise was knocked around last week too, but it was only one bad start. Tonight he got his 16th win, brought his ERA down to 2.54 and went 8.1 innings, moving ahead of Webb. It was Webb's to lose and he may be losing it.
There is a ridiculous CC Sabathia meme going around. He's having a great second half, but no one actually believes that he has a chance. It's just a way for sportswriters to generate some words.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Go Yankees (?)
I'm in the unfamiliar position of rooting for the Yankees, as they are playing in Tampa. The Sox are up seven games on New York and trail Tampa by four, but if they and the Yankees keep winning, the Sox can make a run at Tampa.
Is it tempting fate to say that the Yankees are out of it? Yes. And they're not completely out of it. But for them to get back into it, they'll have to pretty much sweep their remaining five games against Tampa.
That would make for a very interesting race indeed going down the stretch....
Is it tempting fate to say that the Yankees are out of it? Yes. And they're not completely out of it. But for them to get back into it, they'll have to pretty much sweep their remaining five games against Tampa.
That would make for a very interesting race indeed going down the stretch....
Monday, September 01, 2008
Maddux
I was juuuust a little bit early on my prediction of when Maddux would pass Roger Clemens. July, September, what's the big difference?
He tied Clemens today with 354 wins, tied for eighth on the list.
Can he get seven more wins at move ahead of, uhhh, Pud Galvin and Kid Nichols? Depends on whether San Diego or the Dodgers needs him next year. I don't think he'll pitch anywhere else.
He tied Clemens today with 354 wins, tied for eighth on the list.
Can he get seven more wins at move ahead of, uhhh, Pud Galvin and Kid Nichols? Depends on whether San Diego or the Dodgers needs him next year. I don't think he'll pitch anywhere else.
Ron English
Ron English was Michigan's defensive coordinator the last two years. He was there for the Very Good (2006) and The Not So Good (2007). I always liked him; I thought the brilliance of 2006 mostly outweighed 2007.
He was fired by Rich Rodriguez and landed at the University of Louisville, where things look good:
Was there anything to like? Yes. The Cardinal defense was spectacular. Listen to me -- it was spectacular. It held UK to 73 yards on the ground. Dixon's jaunt at the end was a gift, and not preventable given the degree to which the game had slipped at that moment. Ron English deserves a lot of credit for turning an unsure group into a physical unit that gave Hartline no good looks down the field, harassed him incessantly, and bottled up the Dixon/Locke combo before it could get started.
I'm happy he landed. He'll be a head coach some day. Maybe some day soon.
He was fired by Rich Rodriguez and landed at the University of Louisville, where things look good:
Was there anything to like? Yes. The Cardinal defense was spectacular. Listen to me -- it was spectacular. It held UK to 73 yards on the ground. Dixon's jaunt at the end was a gift, and not preventable given the degree to which the game had slipped at that moment. Ron English deserves a lot of credit for turning an unsure group into a physical unit that gave Hartline no good looks down the field, harassed him incessantly, and bottled up the Dixon/Locke combo before it could get started.
I'm happy he landed. He'll be a head coach some day. Maybe some day soon.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Sox Injuries
The Sox are 4.5 games behind the Blue Jays, 3 games ahead of the ChiSox and 3.5 games ahead of the Twins for the wild card. So these are important games.
Yesterday, the starter was a man named Michael Bowden, making his first big league appearance. Their first baseman was named Jeff Bailey, and Mark Kotsay (late of the Braves) played right field.
The good news is that they won, but this is a banged up team.
Yesterday, the starter was a man named Michael Bowden, making his first big league appearance. Their first baseman was named Jeff Bailey, and Mark Kotsay (late of the Braves) played right field.
The good news is that they won, but this is a banged up team.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Michigan
It's gonna be a loooooooong year. Utah played poorly, except for their kicker, who was fantastic.
Actually our defense played pretty well. Utah got a lot of yards in the first half, but just 22 points, and they held them to 3 points in the second half.
However. Michigan's offense was awful. Atrocious. The offensive line was astonishingly bad. This is expected (scroll down to Offensive Line). I know we have a new offensive line, but 37 yards rushing? 37? Really? 37 yards rushing?
Bad bad bad. Bad.
Actually our defense played pretty well. Utah got a lot of yards in the first half, but just 22 points, and they held them to 3 points in the second half.
However. Michigan's offense was awful. Atrocious. The offensive line was astonishingly bad. This is expected (scroll down to Offensive Line). I know we have a new offensive line, but 37 yards rushing? 37? Really? 37 yards rushing?
Bad bad bad. Bad.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Lincecum and the Cy Young
The Chronicle advances the (inevitable) Hometown Paper's Ridiculous Cy Young Award argument by pushing The Franchise.
Ehhhhhh, no. Lincecum is having a very good year. You can make a great argument that he's the clear second place winner. But as of today, Brandon Webb has more wins (19-15), more innings (188-185), more complete games (3-0), and more shutouts (1-0). Lincecum beats him on ERA (2.43-2.96) and strikeouts (210-157), but that's it. Oh, and Webb's team is in first place, nine games up on the Giants (not saying it should be a factor, but it is). If the season ended today, Webb wins, and if he gets to 20 wins, it's about over.
Maybe Webb will have a couple of bad starts, or maybe the Giants will skip Lincecum's last start once he gets over 200 innings. We shall see.
Ehhhhhh, no. Lincecum is having a very good year. You can make a great argument that he's the clear second place winner. But as of today, Brandon Webb has more wins (19-15), more innings (188-185), more complete games (3-0), and more shutouts (1-0). Lincecum beats him on ERA (2.43-2.96) and strikeouts (210-157), but that's it. Oh, and Webb's team is in first place, nine games up on the Giants (not saying it should be a factor, but it is). If the season ended today, Webb wins, and if he gets to 20 wins, it's about over.
Maybe Webb will have a couple of bad starts, or maybe the Giants will skip Lincecum's last start once he gets over 200 innings. We shall see.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Synchonized Diving
Two best comments I've heard about synchronized diving:
Is the official sponsor NAMBLA?
and
Appears to be some elegent gay suicide pact.
Is the official sponsor NAMBLA?
and
Appears to be some elegent gay suicide pact.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Pitch Counts Never Die
Someone, I assume Cho, said:
Hey Drake -- In SI this week, Nolan Ryan said he once threw 242 pitches in a start. Why are today's pitchers such babies?
Most obviously, I'm not aware that pitchers today are babies. (Roy Halladay pitched his eighth complete game of the season today.) I would note that (as I've said over and over) pitch counts matter WHEN PITCHERS ARE YOUNG. NOT AFTER THEY TURN 25.
Nolan Ryan, for instance, didn't throw 200 innings until 1972. He was 25 before that season started. Why was he such a baby before he turned 25?
Also, Nolan Ryan was a physical freak. For every Nolan Ryan, I'll give you a Fernando Valenzuela who pitched 285 innings at age 21 and was done at age 29. The single data point of Fernando is as valid as the single data point of Nolan Ryan.
Hey Drake -- In SI this week, Nolan Ryan said he once threw 242 pitches in a start. Why are today's pitchers such babies?
Most obviously, I'm not aware that pitchers today are babies. (Roy Halladay pitched his eighth complete game of the season today.) I would note that (as I've said over and over) pitch counts matter WHEN PITCHERS ARE YOUNG. NOT AFTER THEY TURN 25.
Nolan Ryan, for instance, didn't throw 200 innings until 1972. He was 25 before that season started. Why was he such a baby before he turned 25?
Also, Nolan Ryan was a physical freak. For every Nolan Ryan, I'll give you a Fernando Valenzuela who pitched 285 innings at age 21 and was done at age 29. The single data point of Fernando is as valid as the single data point of Nolan Ryan.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Eliminate Baseball!
I like baseball. I like the Olympics. Baseball is going to be eliminated from the games after this Olympics, and I think that's great.
The Olympics are great because they're different than any other competition. I'm not really very interested in the pole vault, or swimming, but once every four years I care enough to pay attention. What makes a good Olympic sport? To me, it must be a legitimate world championship, ideally in a sport that gets little attention outside the Olympics. It should also be from a worldwide sport, i.e. lots of participants from many countries. Track is a great Olympic event because anyone can run and compete.
Under this rationale, baseball should be out. Major League Baseball teams do not let their players participate in the Olympics, so the best players (from America, Japan, Venezuela, Canada, Dominican Republic, etc.) don't play. The American team is all minor leaguers. Additionally, I think the new (and very cool) World Baseball Classic is going to become very popular. This will become a true competition between nations, like the World Cup for soccer.
I found this old SI article about the procedure for eliminating events. It's interesting reading. Golf did not make the Olympics this time. Golf would be almost as silly as baseball. There are already many, many golf events out there. It has a wide following, and hardly needs more exposure.
This is also the last Olympics for softball. I'm not a big fan of softball because, as one article I read emphasized, America is too good. It's not interesting if one country completely dominates.
Eliminating these sports also helps with limiting the size of the Olympics, a worthy goal mentioned in the SI article. I don't see a need to add any more sports; I think the Olympics would be better off allowing more countries to send athletes in existing sports. For instance, I think it's much better to let ten small countries send an additional sprinter or two, even if those sprinters have no chance, than to allow golf.
The Olympics are great because they're different than any other competition. I'm not really very interested in the pole vault, or swimming, but once every four years I care enough to pay attention. What makes a good Olympic sport? To me, it must be a legitimate world championship, ideally in a sport that gets little attention outside the Olympics. It should also be from a worldwide sport, i.e. lots of participants from many countries. Track is a great Olympic event because anyone can run and compete.
Under this rationale, baseball should be out. Major League Baseball teams do not let their players participate in the Olympics, so the best players (from America, Japan, Venezuela, Canada, Dominican Republic, etc.) don't play. The American team is all minor leaguers. Additionally, I think the new (and very cool) World Baseball Classic is going to become very popular. This will become a true competition between nations, like the World Cup for soccer.
I found this old SI article about the procedure for eliminating events. It's interesting reading. Golf did not make the Olympics this time. Golf would be almost as silly as baseball. There are already many, many golf events out there. It has a wide following, and hardly needs more exposure.
This is also the last Olympics for softball. I'm not a big fan of softball because, as one article I read emphasized, America is too good. It's not interesting if one country completely dominates.
Eliminating these sports also helps with limiting the size of the Olympics, a worthy goal mentioned in the SI article. I don't see a need to add any more sports; I think the Olympics would be better off allowing more countries to send athletes in existing sports. For instance, I think it's much better to let ten small countries send an additional sprinter or two, even if those sprinters have no chance, than to allow golf.
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Dumb Olympic Events
Last night I wanted to see some of the Olympics, and NBC happened to be showing synchronized diving.
Synchronized diving is perhaps the stupidest event in Olympic history.
All events that rely on judging bug me to some degree, but this one has the additional foolishness of being a "team" event where the two teammates don't interact. At least in figure skating they have to work together.
Besides being really dumb, it's unnecessary. The Olympics already have 10 meter and 3 meter competitions for men and women. Synchronized diving is the exact same thing, just with two people. Is there a need for more diving events?
There are plenty of worthy sports in the Olympics, where world class athletes get a chance to display their talents. I favor events that don't have judges--track and field, swimming, crew (of course), etc.
Synchronized diving is perhaps the stupidest event in Olympic history.
All events that rely on judging bug me to some degree, but this one has the additional foolishness of being a "team" event where the two teammates don't interact. At least in figure skating they have to work together.
Besides being really dumb, it's unnecessary. The Olympics already have 10 meter and 3 meter competitions for men and women. Synchronized diving is the exact same thing, just with two people. Is there a need for more diving events?
There are plenty of worthy sports in the Olympics, where world class athletes get a chance to display their talents. I favor events that don't have judges--track and field, swimming, crew (of course), etc.
Saturday, August 09, 2008
Giants-Dodgers
My cousin and her husband, a dedicated Dodger fan, visited San Francisco and we went to the game tonight. It was a terrific game. Tied 1-1 after 8, the Giants brought in their closer Brian Wilson (wait, not him; I meant Brian Wilson, sorry). After one scoreless inning, they yanked him and brought in Tyler Walker for the 10th, who immediately gave up a homer to Jeff Kent. The Giants came back and won it, but still, there was no reason to take Wilson out. He's their closer, their best pitcher. If Billy Sadler (who?) can throw two innings, Wilson can throw two.
The pregame ceremony was cool. They had the best Giants outfielders of the last 50 years came out of the dugout. Most of them aptly reflected the quality of the Giants over the last decades (i.e. Candy Maldonado, good thing he wasn't busy). There was one spot left in the ceremony. Then they played the music from The Natural and Willie Mays slowly walked in from center field. Everyone was cheering and then Bonds suddenly strolled out from left.
I didn't clap for Bonds, but I was happy to cheer for Willie Mays. As far as I'm concerned, he should always enter the field to The Natural.
A snide person would have noted that Willie Mays came out to The Natural; the comparison with Bonds was unstated....
The pregame ceremony was cool. They had the best Giants outfielders of the last 50 years came out of the dugout. Most of them aptly reflected the quality of the Giants over the last decades (i.e. Candy Maldonado, good thing he wasn't busy). There was one spot left in the ceremony. Then they played the music from The Natural and Willie Mays slowly walked in from center field. Everyone was cheering and then Bonds suddenly strolled out from left.
I didn't clap for Bonds, but I was happy to cheer for Willie Mays. As far as I'm concerned, he should always enter the field to The Natural.
A snide person would have noted that Willie Mays came out to The Natural; the comparison with Bonds was unstated....
Thursday, August 07, 2008
Fred Lewis
Fred Lewis is the replacement for Barry Bonds in left field for the Giants. I would say that he's no Barry Bonds. Then I read this, and I was right. He's no Barry Bonds.
I'm going to root for him.
I'm going to root for him.
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
Lester
I'm also worried about Jon Lester. He's a great story (cancer survivor, World Series clinching start, etc.). He's been terrific this year, if not the best pitcher on the staff, then second best to Matsuzaka, but I'm worried he won't last through the season.
He's 24 and he's pitched 146 innings this year; his previous career high was just 63. It's a tight race and if the Sox do go to the playoffs, he'll be asked to pitch into October and go well over 200 innings. In his case, because he's a it older, I'm less worried about the total number and more worried about the increase. I hope he doesn't run out of gas.
He's 24 and he's pitched 146 innings this year; his previous career high was just 63. It's a tight race and if the Sox do go to the playoffs, he'll be asked to pitch into October and go well over 200 innings. In his case, because he's a it older, I'm less worried about the total number and more worried about the increase. I hope he doesn't run out of gas.
Monday, August 04, 2008
Lincecum, Cain
The Chronicle is apparently reading this blog.
As I mentioned before, Eddie, I do think he should go 200 innings this year. But not many more.
Incidentally, he didn't make the cover of Sports Illustrated, but Matt Cain is having a pretty good year too. Although he's 7-9 at the moment, his ERA is 3.60 (with a win tonight). He's a few months younger than Lincecum, and he's thrown 155 innings this year. He has more experience--he threw 190 two years ago and 200 last year. I worry that the damage has already been done. Those 190 innings were at age 21, the 200 at age 22. That's earlier than almost everyone on my earlier list.
The Giants have the potential for a great young staff. Even Zito sometimes remembers how to pitch. There's no reason to put them at risk by pushing them much above 200 innings this year.
As I mentioned before, Eddie, I do think he should go 200 innings this year. But not many more.
Incidentally, he didn't make the cover of Sports Illustrated, but Matt Cain is having a pretty good year too. Although he's 7-9 at the moment, his ERA is 3.60 (with a win tonight). He's a few months younger than Lincecum, and he's thrown 155 innings this year. He has more experience--he threw 190 two years ago and 200 last year. I worry that the damage has already been done. Those 190 innings were at age 21, the 200 at age 22. That's earlier than almost everyone on my earlier list.
The Giants have the potential for a great young staff. Even Zito sometimes remembers how to pitch. There's no reason to put them at risk by pushing them much above 200 innings this year.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Ed Cho Stop Reading Now
Ed Cho does not believe in pitch counts, nor innings thrown, etc. (He's also a communist, but that's not important right now.)
ESPN briefly mentioned that The Franchise has thrown 149 innings this year for the Giants. Last year he threw 146. He was 23 when the season started. Compared to the 16 pitchers listed in my earlier post (the 16 winningest pitchers since 1960), his innings are about average, if he gets to 200 this year. Of course, using these pitchers as a comparison skews the average, since by definition they did not burn out early. If I were the Giants, I'd shut him down once he gets to 200 innings.
They should not take any chances, seeing as they are 11 1/2 games out of first in baseball's weakest division.
ESPN briefly mentioned that The Franchise has thrown 149 innings this year for the Giants. Last year he threw 146. He was 23 when the season started. Compared to the 16 pitchers listed in my earlier post (the 16 winningest pitchers since 1960), his innings are about average, if he gets to 200 this year. Of course, using these pitchers as a comparison skews the average, since by definition they did not burn out early. If I were the Giants, I'd shut him down once he gets to 200 innings.
They should not take any chances, seeing as they are 11 1/2 games out of first in baseball's weakest division.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Football schedules
ESPN has published out of conference schedules for Big 10 schools, and it ain't pretty:
Illinois: Missouri (St. Louis), Eastern Illinois, Louisiana-Lafayette, Western Michigan (Detroit)
Indiana: Western Kentucky, Murray State, Ball State, Central Michigan
Iowa: Maine, Florida International, Iowa State, at Pitt
Michigan: Utah, Miami (Ohio), at Notre Dame, Toledo
Michigan State: at California, Eastern Michigan, Florida Atlantic, Notre Dame
Minnesota: Northern Illinois, at Bowling Green, Montana State, Florida Atlantic
Northwestern: Syracuse, at Duke, Southern Illinois, Ohio
Ohio State: Youngstown State, Ohio, at USC, Troy
Penn State: Coastal Carolina, Oregon State, at Syracuse, Temple
Purdue: Northern Colorado, Oregon, Central Michigan, at Notre Dame
Wisconsin: Akron, Marshall, at Fresno State, Cal Poly
There are a total of just fifteen "respectable" opponents on this list. No one plays more than two respectable nonconference games.
Missouri for Illinois (normally an unimportant game, but this year both teams are good), Iowa State and Pitt for Iowa, Utah and Notre Dame for us, Cal and Notre Dame for State, Syracuse and Duke (nominally) for Northwestern, USC for Ohio State, Oregon State and Syracuse for Penn State, Oregon and Notre Dame for Purdue, and Fresno State for Wisconsin.
I've long complained about this watering down of our schedule. As before, it's easy to compare to USC, which is the model of difficult schedules:
2008: Virginia, Ohio State, Notre Dame
2009: San Jose State, Ohio State, Notre Dame
Commendably, the Pac 10 plays a complete round robin, so they have one less out of conference game. San Jose State is weak, but that's one poor game in two years.
Illinois: Missouri (St. Louis), Eastern Illinois, Louisiana-Lafayette, Western Michigan (Detroit)
Indiana: Western Kentucky, Murray State, Ball State, Central Michigan
Iowa: Maine, Florida International, Iowa State, at Pitt
Michigan: Utah, Miami (Ohio), at Notre Dame, Toledo
Michigan State: at California, Eastern Michigan, Florida Atlantic, Notre Dame
Minnesota: Northern Illinois, at Bowling Green, Montana State, Florida Atlantic
Northwestern: Syracuse, at Duke, Southern Illinois, Ohio
Ohio State: Youngstown State, Ohio, at USC, Troy
Penn State: Coastal Carolina, Oregon State, at Syracuse, Temple
Purdue: Northern Colorado, Oregon, Central Michigan, at Notre Dame
Wisconsin: Akron, Marshall, at Fresno State, Cal Poly
There are a total of just fifteen "respectable" opponents on this list. No one plays more than two respectable nonconference games.
Missouri for Illinois (normally an unimportant game, but this year both teams are good), Iowa State and Pitt for Iowa, Utah and Notre Dame for us, Cal and Notre Dame for State, Syracuse and Duke (nominally) for Northwestern, USC for Ohio State, Oregon State and Syracuse for Penn State, Oregon and Notre Dame for Purdue, and Fresno State for Wisconsin.
I've long complained about this watering down of our schedule. As before, it's easy to compare to USC, which is the model of difficult schedules:
2008: Virginia, Ohio State, Notre Dame
2009: San Jose State, Ohio State, Notre Dame
Commendably, the Pac 10 plays a complete round robin, so they have one less out of conference game. San Jose State is weak, but that's one poor game in two years.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
More Sabathia
Aaaaaand it only gets worse for the Cardinals. Now it's three consecutive complete game wins for Sabathia.
I think the Cards are done. If Carpenter had been healthy they could have stuck around, but I don't think they can last.
Dave Duncan is still the best. Kyle Lohse is now 12-2, after having won 12 games total the previous three years. He's still 29, so maybe he'll end up a long term quality starter.
I think the Cards are done. If Carpenter had been healthy they could have stuck around, but I don't think they can last.
Dave Duncan is still the best. Kyle Lohse is now 12-2, after having won 12 games total the previous three years. He's still 29, so maybe he'll end up a long term quality starter.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Giants Cleaning House
It should have happened a couple of years ago, but finally it looks like they're ditching the old guys. Ray Durham is gone, which needed to happen. Even if they get nothing for him, at least they're not spending money on him.
Omar Vizquel needs to be next. As the Chronicle points out, though, it could be tough to deal a guy hitting so far below the Mendoza line (.166? Wow, that's awful). It's not exactly new news that he can't hit, but it's better to admit it now than waste more at bats on him.
The chickens are coming home to roost for Sabean. He tried to patch together an old lineup for years in hopes of getting to the World Series with Bonds. 2002 seems a long time ago.
Omar Vizquel needs to be next. As the Chronicle points out, though, it could be tough to deal a guy hitting so far below the Mendoza line (.166? Wow, that's awful). It's not exactly new news that he can't hit, but it's better to admit it now than waste more at bats on him.
The chickens are coming home to roost for Sabean. He tried to patch together an old lineup for years in hopes of getting to the World Series with Bonds. 2002 seems a long time ago.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
C.C. Sabathia
C.C. Sabathia is just dominating in the National League with complete game wins in his last two starts.
Although it's tough for the Cardinals, it's great for baseball that the Brewers could pick him up. I think it's a demonstration of baseball's vastly increased revenue. Teams are sharing more revenue, which is better because teams like the Brewers (who've been awful for decades) have a shot at the playoffs.
Although it's tough for the Cardinals, it's great for baseball that the Brewers could pick him up. I think it's a demonstration of baseball's vastly increased revenue. Teams are sharing more revenue, which is better because teams like the Brewers (who've been awful for decades) have a shot at the playoffs.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Brandon Jennings
Who?
I read about Brandon Jennings recently. He's a high school kid who, instead of playing one year at Arizona, is going to play in Europe
Sportswriters reactions ranged from glee because the NCAA is somehow going down (huh?) to announcements from Lute Olson that he'll no longer sign players who will say for just one year (riiiiiight).
I think it's good and I read exactly one column that started to touch on why. I follow neither high school basketball nor the Italian pro league. I have no idea whether this will be good for Jennings or not.
But it seems to me that the NBA shouldn't be unhappy. Part of the whole point of preventing kids from going pro right after high school was to try to ensure that they were more developed and well rounded both on and off the court. I'm sure that Jennings would grow as a person and as a player at Arizona, but nowhere near how he'll do at, uhhh, Pallacanestro Virtus Roma. I say good for him. I expect he'll learn quite a bit and he'll be a better player if and when he enters the NBA draft next year.
What's the problem?
I read about Brandon Jennings recently. He's a high school kid who, instead of playing one year at Arizona, is going to play in Europe
Sportswriters reactions ranged from glee because the NCAA is somehow going down (huh?) to announcements from Lute Olson that he'll no longer sign players who will say for just one year (riiiiiight).
I think it's good and I read exactly one column that started to touch on why. I follow neither high school basketball nor the Italian pro league. I have no idea whether this will be good for Jennings or not.
But it seems to me that the NBA shouldn't be unhappy. Part of the whole point of preventing kids from going pro right after high school was to try to ensure that they were more developed and well rounded both on and off the court. I'm sure that Jennings would grow as a person and as a player at Arizona, but nowhere near how he'll do at, uhhh, Pallacanestro Virtus Roma. I say good for him. I expect he'll learn quite a bit and he'll be a better player if and when he enters the NBA draft next year.
What's the problem?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
