Ian, tell me your thoughts on the Seattle Supersonics and Supersonic-related developments. They grab two blue chippers in the draft (Kevin Durant and Jeff Green) while getting rid of their two best players from the 2006-2007 team (Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis), dramatically altering their roster. Meanwhile Allen is sent to Boston and Lewis signs a max contract (!) with the Magic.
Also, Greg Oden's blog: is he too nice? I mean, this guy seems awesome. Like I'd want to hang out with him and play video games. Maybe I'll move to Portland and ask him if he has any need for someone with my specific skill set in his entourage. And by skill set I mean my sick AND1 basketball moves and bikini inspecting ability. What say you?
P.S. Just for fun, Baron Davis emasculating Andrei Kirilenko.
Seattle did it the right way. I think Seattle did what countless franchises in sports should do but, due to incompetence or lack of opportunity, don't: Blow up the team and go with a youth movement. How often do we hear that a team and/or its fanbase is sick of being an also-ran, but each year they think they can make the playoffs so they don't do anything drastic to make a long-term solution. They don't want to kill three season to be a contender in the fourth. Then the long term arrives and they're still mired in mediocrity, wishing they did it the right way five years ago. The kicker is that they readily repeat those same mistakes again.
Well, Seattle was given an opportunity with the second pick in the draft. They blew up their team. They used the second pick to get an offensive dynamo. They traded their best player to get the fifth pick and a legitimate second banana for the dynamo. They let their second best player go (Max contract? Good riddance!) to keep cap space to do any necessary signings when the complimentary pieces are necessary. It's a great job by the Sonic front office.
Now this is Kevin Durant's team from day one. Make no mistake about it. And Jeff Green? He's their #2 from day one. There will be no Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis demanding shots and money and stunting the growth of the future of the franchise.
So how will Seattle do in 2007-2008? Probably not make the playoffs. Then they add another lottery pick. And the following season? A first-round exit at best. But in five years? You're looking perennial contenders.
Seattle did it the right way.
With Greg Oden, we have a gregarious big man cut from the mold of David Robinson and Shaquille O'Neal. He's very likeable, and I full expect him to be the second face of the league, after LeBron James. It's guys like Greg Oden that make me think the NBA is going to be all right. Think about it. Five years from now, we could very well see Oden, Durant, James, Carmelo Anthony, and Dwayne Wade consistently get beyond the second round of the playoffs. They'll become household names like Magic, Larry, and MJ. Getting the casual fan excited about a league? That's the ticket to success.
I'll save the Celtics for tomorrow. It deserves its own thread.
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Reader email - July 3
Reader Keith from Connecticut asks:
You guys don't think Dan Haren should be starting for the A.L.? Before Sunday, 1.91 ERA in the ever so powerful American League.
Great point, Keith. I like Danny Haren, and for more reasons than simply his resemblence to me. His record (10-2) is comparable to Beckett's (11-2), and his ERA is just over a run lower. All that being said, I feel it's been Beckett's start to lose ever since he was 9-0 and 11-1. Those are simply eye-popping records. Haren was 0-2 and has played catch up ever since. Ten straights wins is great for any resume, but Beckett was in the driver's seat and hasn't done anything to lose the honor. And let's not forget Haren's 1.58 ERA has fallen to 2.20 in the last four starts. His lights out streak is definitely over.
And honestly, I don't believe everything I'm saying right now, but there is one more point to be made. The 2003 World Series MVP is the bigger name and this is the All-Star Game. I expect Beckett to get the nod. I also don't think it's out of the question that those two gentlemen's start this week may determine who's on the mound in the first inning. One of them gets shelled and one of them pitches well... that could decide it.
You know what's funny about this debate? There's a real possibility Leyland will choose his own player - Justin "no-no" Verlander.
What do you think, Saj?
Excellent question, Keith, excellent question. Ignoring my fanboy-ism (which is the only reason I chose Beckett anyway) and Ian's crafty exercise in rationalization there is no reason why Dan Haren should not start the All-Star Game. Bay area starter, having a fantastic season, Ian thinks he looks like him. No reason, except for C.C. Sabathia. While Haren leads the AL in ERA, ERA+, WHIP, and OPS against, Sabathia holds the edge in wins, innings pitched, K's, K/BB, and donuts consumed in a single sitting. I'm not saying that makes him more deserving, but 116 strike outs and only 17 walks is pretty ridiculous. As is the two dozen Krispy Kremes he demolished in twelve minutes.
Of course this is all subject to the caprice of Jim Leyland. He could go with his boy (Verlander), his old boy (Beckett), or the best pitcher on the planet (Johan Santana) in lieu of either Haren or Sabathia. I think Leyland goes with Haren. And I think Haren ends the season with an ERA above 3.50. And I think Santana drops his ERA another half run and wins the Cy Young Award. And I think I'll have ice cream for lunch today. Those are my thoughts.
Thanks for the emails, readers.
You guys don't think Dan Haren should be starting for the A.L.? Before Sunday, 1.91 ERA in the ever so powerful American League.
Great point, Keith. I like Danny Haren, and for more reasons than simply his resemblence to me. His record (10-2) is comparable to Beckett's (11-2), and his ERA is just over a run lower. All that being said, I feel it's been Beckett's start to lose ever since he was 9-0 and 11-1. Those are simply eye-popping records. Haren was 0-2 and has played catch up ever since. Ten straights wins is great for any resume, but Beckett was in the driver's seat and hasn't done anything to lose the honor. And let's not forget Haren's 1.58 ERA has fallen to 2.20 in the last four starts. His lights out streak is definitely over.
And honestly, I don't believe everything I'm saying right now, but there is one more point to be made. The 2003 World Series MVP is the bigger name and this is the All-Star Game. I expect Beckett to get the nod. I also don't think it's out of the question that those two gentlemen's start this week may determine who's on the mound in the first inning. One of them gets shelled and one of them pitches well... that could decide it.
You know what's funny about this debate? There's a real possibility Leyland will choose his own player - Justin "no-no" Verlander.
What do you think, Saj?
Excellent question, Keith, excellent question. Ignoring my fanboy-ism (which is the only reason I chose Beckett anyway) and Ian's crafty exercise in rationalization there is no reason why Dan Haren should not start the All-Star Game. Bay area starter, having a fantastic season, Ian thinks he looks like him. No reason, except for C.C. Sabathia. While Haren leads the AL in ERA, ERA+, WHIP, and OPS against, Sabathia holds the edge in wins, innings pitched, K's, K/BB, and donuts consumed in a single sitting. I'm not saying that makes him more deserving, but 116 strike outs and only 17 walks is pretty ridiculous. As is the two dozen Krispy Kremes he demolished in twelve minutes.
Of course this is all subject to the caprice of Jim Leyland. He could go with his boy (Verlander), his old boy (Beckett), or the best pitcher on the planet (Johan Santana) in lieu of either Haren or Sabathia. I think Leyland goes with Haren. And I think Haren ends the season with an ERA above 3.50. And I think Santana drops his ERA another half run and wins the Cy Young Award. And I think I'll have ice cream for lunch today. Those are my thoughts.
Thanks for the emails, readers.
Monday, July 02, 2007
All Star Ruminations
Well, Saj and I decided to take the month of June off to recharge the old batteries. Saj will probably try to convince you that he left me in the States to go oil up Swedish supermodels, but that would be a lie. They were Norwegian and I was there, too.
We return now on the first Monday of July with a promise. Throughout the summer, we will have two posts a week for you. Please check back regularly. It'll be mostly baseball for a while, with tennis, golf, and offseason NBA and NFL mixed in. Around September, things will heat up with the NFL kicking off and baseball getting into its stretch run, with our beloved BoSox making a run at another World Series.
Later this week, Saj and I will give our thoughts on recent NBA developments around the league. Today, however, we will concentrate on yesterday's announced MLB All-Star rosters.
I'll start with what I think was the biggest snub of the year, an interesting choice for me as many are saying Kevin Youkilis, my favorite player in the league, was the biggest AL snub. However, easily the biggest snub of the year is one of my least favorite players in the league: Gary Sheffield.
Check it: Gary Sheffield is 2nd in in the American League in runs, 3rd in homeruns, 10th in RBI but has more stolen bases than anyone with more RBI than him, he's 4th in walks, and 7th in OPS. Most importantly, he's carried my fantasy team while the likes of David Wright, Carlos Beltran, and Miguel Tejada were underperforming. That, Saj, is an All-Star. What do you think? Who's the biggest snub?
I will agree that Gary Sheffield is having a very good season, his LL Cool J/pedophile moustache notwithstanding. But while deserving, it's hard to find a place for him. For one, the AL already holds five reserve outfielders on it's roster. Crawford and Rios are picks of necessity (baseball's inane "every team" rule) and Hunter and Sizemore legitimately deserve their selections. The only spot I could see being vacated for the good Mr. Sheffield would be Ramirez's. And, yes, Sheffield is having a better season that Manny, but the All-Star Game is as much a popularity contest as it is a celebration of performance. And Manny, I'm willing to wager, is somewhere near infinitely more popular than Gary Sheffield. Why? Because Sheffield is the kind of guy who would steal walkers from old people and punch them in the face.
I'd say the biggest collective snub of this year's All Star rosters belongs to the alienated trio of the NL shortstop quintet that is taking the league by storm this season. While Jose Reyes and J.J. Hardy are definitely deserving, Hanley Ramirez (on pace for 20 HR, 50 SB and 130 R), Edgar Renteria (hitting .324, OPS .879), and Jimmy Rollins (on pace for 30 HR, 30 SB, 100 RBI, 130 R!) are having great seasons as well. In fact, I would like to see Orlando Hudson removed from the roster in favor of one of these guys. No offense, Orlando.
Not a bad observation. The talented NL shortstops brings me back to the turn of the millenium when the American League had four dynamo short stops (Arod, Nomar, Jeets, Tejada) battling for the crown of best shortstop in the game. Now two of them play other positions and one was probably on roids. Still, even though Jeter seemingly survived the battle, Arod is still the best shortstop ever... he just plays third base.
Let's project some lineups, shall we? Here's what I got for the American League:
1. Ichiro Suzuki CF
2. Derek Jeter SS
3. Alex Rodriguez 3B
4. David Ortiz 1B
5. Vlad Guerrero RF
6. Magglio Ordonez LF
7. Ivan Rodriguez C
8. Placido Polanco 2B
9. Josh Beckett P
Saj?
I agree for the most part. The only thing I'd add is that maybe Leyland throws his guy Magglio a bone at 3 and moves the others down. And flip flop Polanco and Pudge. Also, I like Beckett starting.
National League:
1. Jose Reyes SS
2. Chase Utley 2B
3. Carlos Beltran CF
4. Barry Bonds LF
5. Ken Griffey Jr. RF
6. Prince Fielder 1B
7. David Wright 3B
8. Russell Martin C
9. Jake Peavy P
I barely agree with this, but I think La Russa likes Beltran at three. And as per convention Griffey gets the nod at 5 over young guy Fielder, the catcher hits before the pitcher, and there's a bigheaded asshole in the clean up spot.
Bonds in his home park is up in the first inning, so he hits 3rd, thus defying the general rule of the big-head hitting fourth (see Ortiz). So I swap your three and four, and the rest are the same.
1. Reyes SS
2. Utley 2B
3. Bonds LF
4. Beltran CF
5. Griffey RF
6. Fielder 1B
7. Wright 3B
8. Martin C
9. Peavy P
It appears our lineups are quite similar. At least that makes it easy to see who's more right, which is usually me. We'll keep an eye on the 3-4 in the NL and where Magglio hits in the AL.
NBA Draft fallout later in the week.
Conceding your Bonds point. It makes too much sense. But in that case I see Griffey hitting clean up.
We return now on the first Monday of July with a promise. Throughout the summer, we will have two posts a week for you. Please check back regularly. It'll be mostly baseball for a while, with tennis, golf, and offseason NBA and NFL mixed in. Around September, things will heat up with the NFL kicking off and baseball getting into its stretch run, with our beloved BoSox making a run at another World Series.
Later this week, Saj and I will give our thoughts on recent NBA developments around the league. Today, however, we will concentrate on yesterday's announced MLB All-Star rosters.
I'll start with what I think was the biggest snub of the year, an interesting choice for me as many are saying Kevin Youkilis, my favorite player in the league, was the biggest AL snub. However, easily the biggest snub of the year is one of my least favorite players in the league: Gary Sheffield.
Check it: Gary Sheffield is 2nd in in the American League in runs, 3rd in homeruns, 10th in RBI but has more stolen bases than anyone with more RBI than him, he's 4th in walks, and 7th in OPS. Most importantly, he's carried my fantasy team while the likes of David Wright, Carlos Beltran, and Miguel Tejada were underperforming. That, Saj, is an All-Star. What do you think? Who's the biggest snub?
I will agree that Gary Sheffield is having a very good season, his LL Cool J/pedophile moustache notwithstanding. But while deserving, it's hard to find a place for him. For one, the AL already holds five reserve outfielders on it's roster. Crawford and Rios are picks of necessity (baseball's inane "every team" rule) and Hunter and Sizemore legitimately deserve their selections. The only spot I could see being vacated for the good Mr. Sheffield would be Ramirez's. And, yes, Sheffield is having a better season that Manny, but the All-Star Game is as much a popularity contest as it is a celebration of performance. And Manny, I'm willing to wager, is somewhere near infinitely more popular than Gary Sheffield. Why? Because Sheffield is the kind of guy who would steal walkers from old people and punch them in the face.
I'd say the biggest collective snub of this year's All Star rosters belongs to the alienated trio of the NL shortstop quintet that is taking the league by storm this season. While Jose Reyes and J.J. Hardy are definitely deserving, Hanley Ramirez (on pace for 20 HR, 50 SB and 130 R), Edgar Renteria (hitting .324, OPS .879), and Jimmy Rollins (on pace for 30 HR, 30 SB, 100 RBI, 130 R!) are having great seasons as well. In fact, I would like to see Orlando Hudson removed from the roster in favor of one of these guys. No offense, Orlando.
Not a bad observation. The talented NL shortstops brings me back to the turn of the millenium when the American League had four dynamo short stops (Arod, Nomar, Jeets, Tejada) battling for the crown of best shortstop in the game. Now two of them play other positions and one was probably on roids. Still, even though Jeter seemingly survived the battle, Arod is still the best shortstop ever... he just plays third base.
Let's project some lineups, shall we? Here's what I got for the American League:
1. Ichiro Suzuki CF
2. Derek Jeter SS
3. Alex Rodriguez 3B
4. David Ortiz 1B
5. Vlad Guerrero RF
6. Magglio Ordonez LF
7. Ivan Rodriguez C
8. Placido Polanco 2B
9. Josh Beckett P
Saj?
I agree for the most part. The only thing I'd add is that maybe Leyland throws his guy Magglio a bone at 3 and moves the others down. And flip flop Polanco and Pudge. Also, I like Beckett starting.
National League:
1. Jose Reyes SS
2. Chase Utley 2B
3. Carlos Beltran CF
4. Barry Bonds LF
5. Ken Griffey Jr. RF
6. Prince Fielder 1B
7. David Wright 3B
8. Russell Martin C
9. Jake Peavy P
I barely agree with this, but I think La Russa likes Beltran at three. And as per convention Griffey gets the nod at 5 over young guy Fielder, the catcher hits before the pitcher, and there's a bigheaded asshole in the clean up spot.
Bonds in his home park is up in the first inning, so he hits 3rd, thus defying the general rule of the big-head hitting fourth (see Ortiz). So I swap your three and four, and the rest are the same.
1. Reyes SS
2. Utley 2B
3. Bonds LF
4. Beltran CF
5. Griffey RF
6. Fielder 1B
7. Wright 3B
8. Martin C
9. Peavy P
It appears our lineups are quite similar. At least that makes it easy to see who's more right, which is usually me. We'll keep an eye on the 3-4 in the NL and where Magglio hits in the AL.
NBA Draft fallout later in the week.
Conceding your Bonds point. It makes too much sense. But in that case I see Griffey hitting clean up.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
O Kobe! My Kobe! Our Fearful Trip is Done!
So Kobe Bryant is requesting a trade and Alex Rodriguez has been all but caught being unfaithful. This is like bizarro-2004 sports news. All this does is further prove that Kobe and ARod are kindred, uber-talented, douchebag spirits.
Ian, what make you of Kobe's trade demand? I really don't think he wants to leave the Lakers and this is something he won't realize until February of next year when he's playing for a 12-win Charlotte team. And isn't it about damn time we stop allowing superstars to exert such control over franchises? Why can't they be more like the polite Mr. Kevin Garnett who toils silently for a team that is both unable and unwilling to add the right players to win him a championship?
I think Kobe is right in his demands. I mean, at this point, shouldn't they have acquired a 7 foot, 300 pound hall of fame center to help win Kobe some championships? Oh, wait, Kobe ran the best teammate of his career out of LA.
And now he's angry at Lakers brass for not getting him help? When he chased away the best center of this generation? Please.
Now, Kobe Bryant is a magnificent player. For several years I've been saying he's the best player in the league and I still believe this. But the audacity he has to sign a humongous contract (read: tie up a large sum of money), obviously demand Shaquille O'Neal to be traded so Kobe could be The Man, and then complain to the front office that they don't get help for him (What is Lamar Odom, chopped liver?) is fundamentally absurd.
My prediction: Kobe isn't going ANYwhere. LA is the spot for the Kobe Bryant's of the world, not to mention the Lakers needs the Kobe Bryant's of the world. Jack Nicholson pays way too much money to watch 75 cents on the dollar. If, however, we want to entertain his demand, where would he go?
Well, the Western Conference is out. A vengeful Kobe Bryant is not someone I'd want to play 4 times in a regular season than in a possible playoff series.
Further eliminations:
Miami (Shaq)
Cleveland (Needs to be the unequivocal man)
Detroit (Not disrupting that squad)
Charlotte (Not nearly enough to give to LA. Okafor and capspace is not nearly enough to fill that void.)
Indiana (NOTHING to offer after Jermaine O'Neal, not even a pick.)
Orlando (NOTHING to offer besides Dwight Howard, not even a pick, and there's no way they move Howard anyway.)
Toronto (Great fit for Kobe if Toronto can keep Bosh, but Ford and Bargnani not enough to get Bryant to Canada.)
I think everyone else has a chance to sign him. Possible deals, alphabetical order:
Atlanta - Joe Johnson, Marvin Williams, #3 pick (LA backs out, needs future 1st rounder)
Boston - Paul Pierce, Gerald Green, #5 pick (Boston backs out, offers Delonte West or Kendrick Perkins instead of Green. La Backs out.)
Chicago - Ben Gordon, Loul Deng, #9 pick (LA backs out, asks for Hinrich in addition)
Milwaukee - Redd, Bogut, Villanueva, #6 pick (this could happen)
New Jersey - Vince Carter, Josh Boone, #17 pick (Vince sells the tickets, at least. Could happen)
New York - Marbury, David Lee, Spike Lee (LA backs out, Marbury is a cancer)
Philly - Iguodala, Dalembert, #12 pick (LA backs out, because they'd be trading Kobe Bryant for guys name Iguodala and Dalembert.)
Washington - Arenas, the #16, next year's first rounder (Might do it.)
That leaves us with Milwaukee, New Jersey, and Washington. Milwaukee and New Jersey are wastelands that Kobe wants not part of. Washington is tempting for him. He has help in Jamison and Butler, there's a lot of marketing possibilities in the capital, not to mention his extramarital affairs fit right in with Congress.
However, Kobe's not going anywhere. And yes, I just realize I wasted 15 minutes of my life going over the possibilities of the impossible. Whatever.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Red Sox and Mets: On a Collision Course?
Admittedly, the Yankees aren't officially done just yet, but all signs point to them finally falling off their pedestal as Champions of the American League East. Their vanquishers, the Boston Red Sox, look to be the team to beat in the American League. Over on the Senior Circuit, it's the other New York team that is dominating their under-resourced competition. It seems inevitable to me, even as early as May 29th, that these two teams are on a collision course to meet in the World Series.
This has many implications, though I weigh two more than any other. First, Pedro against the Red Sox in the World Series, which frankly would have meant a lot more if the Sox hadn't won in 2004 with Pedro. Second, and much more appealing, Yankees fans, if baseball fans at all, will have to choose one of these two teams to root for. Of course they'd take the Mets, but that doesn't mean they'll like it.
Saj, any thoughts on a possible Red Sox-Mets World Series? Pedro? Which teams in either league are most likely to stop this scenario from playing out?
It's funny, I was talking to Roommate Rob (a Mets fan and Jets apologist) this weekend, and we agreed that 1) it's pretty clear than the Red Sox and Mets are the class of their respective leagues and 2) if a Red Sox - Mets World Series were to occur one of us would have to move out for a week and a half. Not that we're combative fans, just that baseball-related anxiety tends to be exacerbated by someone on the other side of the series from you.
As for which teams are most likely to stop this scenario, I can come up with a few. First and foremost, I just can't yet count out the Yankees. Yes, they're tied for last in the AL East. Yes, a 13.5 game hole to this Red Sox team may be insurmountable. But they're Expected Win-Loss record (based on runs scored vs. runs allowed) is a full five games better. So they're playing worse than their record AND they're picking up a pretty decent arm AND they're the f****** Yankees. So don't count them out, even if the loser of the Detroit/Cleveland AL Central sweepstakes looks like the best bet to take the wild card.
Other teams:
With the Mets probably finishing the season with the best record in the NL and the NL wild card team probably coming out of the West, they might have to face San Diego, LA or Arizona is a short series. Jake Peavy or Brandon Webb in a five game series? Yikes. Of course it's silly to speculate this far into the future. Like John-Kruk-on-Baseball-Tonight-silly.
As for AL teams: I'd worry about the Angels or the Indians if they somehow merged Cleveland's hitting with Los Angeles' bullpen and maybe also spliced Travis Hafner and Vladimir Guerrero into some sort of super baseball player like how the Constructicons created Devastator. The Tigers? They don't scare me. Not nearly as much as Magglio Ordonez's Jheri-curl. And I do realize that picture is not an accurate representation of Ordonez's tresses.
Switching gears: I was watching the Spurs-Jazz series last night and I found myself pulling for the Jazz even though I was convinced that they were evil incarnate a few weeks ago when they beat the Warriors. A few questions for you, Ian: Why do I hate the Spurs enough to cheer for a team from Utah? How is Deron Williams making Bruce Bowen look like a fool? When will Eva Longoria dump Tony Parker for me? What other questions do you want to answer?
I'm so sick of people hating on the Spurs. I guess that means I'm sick of you.
The Spurs are winners. As the NBA representative from the three major sports, they're part of the triumvirate of Winners of the last decade. They're not as likeable as the Patriots but they're not nearly as hateable as the Yankees. It's astonishing how much the average fan ends up hating winners, especially if their style of play is lacking in the aesthetics department. This was a constant criticism of New England's play during the first Superbowl run and leading up to the second: They won by 3 points, they had a system quarterback, they were lucky, they played physical and weren't pretty (except for their quarterback who's astoundingly pretty).
The Spurs don't win pretty, either. Bowen is dirtier than Paris Hilton, Ginobili flops more than a beached trout, and after a ref calls a foul on him, Tim Duncan looks like Reche Caldwell. Moreover, the Spurs, as a whole, are not your fun run and gun Phoenix Suns. They should not ever apologize for this. All of that is irrelevant to me. They play the slow it down brand of basketball that has won every NBA Championship since Riley's Lakers. Phoenix, Dallas, and Sacramento did not win in the last ten years because they play exactly the type of basketball you like to watch. But guess what. A team isn't winning until they learn to slow it down and play some f'n defense.
So quit hatin' on greatness. Four titles in a decade.
Ian, you ignorant slut.
This has many implications, though I weigh two more than any other. First, Pedro against the Red Sox in the World Series, which frankly would have meant a lot more if the Sox hadn't won in 2004 with Pedro. Second, and much more appealing, Yankees fans, if baseball fans at all, will have to choose one of these two teams to root for. Of course they'd take the Mets, but that doesn't mean they'll like it.
Saj, any thoughts on a possible Red Sox-Mets World Series? Pedro? Which teams in either league are most likely to stop this scenario from playing out?
It's funny, I was talking to Roommate Rob (a Mets fan and Jets apologist) this weekend, and we agreed that 1) it's pretty clear than the Red Sox and Mets are the class of their respective leagues and 2) if a Red Sox - Mets World Series were to occur one of us would have to move out for a week and a half. Not that we're combative fans, just that baseball-related anxiety tends to be exacerbated by someone on the other side of the series from you.
As for which teams are most likely to stop this scenario, I can come up with a few. First and foremost, I just can't yet count out the Yankees. Yes, they're tied for last in the AL East. Yes, a 13.5 game hole to this Red Sox team may be insurmountable. But they're Expected Win-Loss record (based on runs scored vs. runs allowed) is a full five games better. So they're playing worse than their record AND they're picking up a pretty decent arm AND they're the f****** Yankees. So don't count them out, even if the loser of the Detroit/Cleveland AL Central sweepstakes looks like the best bet to take the wild card.
Other teams:
With the Mets probably finishing the season with the best record in the NL and the NL wild card team probably coming out of the West, they might have to face San Diego, LA or Arizona is a short series. Jake Peavy or Brandon Webb in a five game series? Yikes. Of course it's silly to speculate this far into the future. Like John-Kruk-on-Baseball-Tonight-silly.
As for AL teams: I'd worry about the Angels or the Indians if they somehow merged Cleveland's hitting with Los Angeles' bullpen and maybe also spliced Travis Hafner and Vladimir Guerrero into some sort of super baseball player like how the Constructicons created Devastator. The Tigers? They don't scare me. Not nearly as much as Magglio Ordonez's Jheri-curl. And I do realize that picture is not an accurate representation of Ordonez's tresses.
Switching gears: I was watching the Spurs-Jazz series last night and I found myself pulling for the Jazz even though I was convinced that they were evil incarnate a few weeks ago when they beat the Warriors. A few questions for you, Ian: Why do I hate the Spurs enough to cheer for a team from Utah? How is Deron Williams making Bruce Bowen look like a fool? When will Eva Longoria dump Tony Parker for me? What other questions do you want to answer?
I'm so sick of people hating on the Spurs. I guess that means I'm sick of you.
The Spurs are winners. As the NBA representative from the three major sports, they're part of the triumvirate of Winners of the last decade. They're not as likeable as the Patriots but they're not nearly as hateable as the Yankees. It's astonishing how much the average fan ends up hating winners, especially if their style of play is lacking in the aesthetics department. This was a constant criticism of New England's play during the first Superbowl run and leading up to the second: They won by 3 points, they had a system quarterback, they were lucky, they played physical and weren't pretty (except for their quarterback who's astoundingly pretty).
The Spurs don't win pretty, either. Bowen is dirtier than Paris Hilton, Ginobili flops more than a beached trout, and after a ref calls a foul on him, Tim Duncan looks like Reche Caldwell. Moreover, the Spurs, as a whole, are not your fun run and gun Phoenix Suns. They should not ever apologize for this. All of that is irrelevant to me. They play the slow it down brand of basketball that has won every NBA Championship since Riley's Lakers. Phoenix, Dallas, and Sacramento did not win in the last ten years because they play exactly the type of basketball you like to watch. But guess what. A team isn't winning until they learn to slow it down and play some f'n defense.
So quit hatin' on greatness. Four titles in a decade.
Ian, you ignorant slut.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
