Imagine waking up Saturday morning and going to espn.com to see this.
Talk about unexpected. Of course, immediately, sensationalism comes way of Buster Olney and his rant on A-rod's legacy tarnished. I'm not sure why people are all caught up in legacy to begin with. Let's enjoy the game and not worry about legacies.
The most rational story came from Rob Neyer. We hope he didn't do steroids, but regardless of the outcome, he's still one of the best players. It's rather odd that Barry Bonds and his still massive on base percentage, slugging percentage and head couldn't get a one year contract last year when really bad players like Gregg Zaun, who was mentioned on the Mitchell Report, sign a contract with the Baltimore Orioles.
For some reason we hold athletes and celebrities to some high moral standard. We should not idolize them or be envious of them. We watch them for entertainment. Baseball now has strict penalties for those who get busted. So it would be completely foolish to take steroids (or get caught) these days. Back then, what's the penalty? Illegal? Sure. But if there is no penalty, what's the harm?
Where do we go from here? It should be an interesting next couple weeks. I expect columnist to praise moral values and condemn him. I expect many readers to think they are creative and post reader comments saying "A-roid." I am curious for A-rod's response. I am curious to see the names of the other 103 players. I wonder what Bonds and Roger Clemens are thinking. Stay tuned.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Friday, January 9, 2009
Baseball Hall of Fame Voting
ESPN posted the ballots of their baseball writers who have a vote for the Hall of Fame.
To me, it's pretty simple. Rickey Henderson, Bert Blyleven, Alan Trammell, Mark McGwire and Tim Raines.
I really don't see the debate for Henderson, Blyleven or Raines so I won't address them.
For McGwire, he played in his era and was one of the most dominant players.
If you look at Alan Trammell's stats, they don't look that impressive. His career OPS+ is 110. An OPS+ of 100 indicates an average major league baseball player. At 110, he was a very good hitter. However, you have to take into account that he played shortstop. He wasn't a first baseman, right fielder or designated hitter hitting 110. Taking into account his position, he actually was an impressive hitter. And since most people agree that Craig Biggio is a first ballot hall of famer, as a fellow middle infielder, his stats look similar.
This will mark Jim Rice's final year on the ballot. For whatever reason, he will make it into the hall of fame. His career OPS+ is 128, which is very good. But most legit baseball writers, namely Keith Law and Rob Neyer, will point out that he was a horrible fielder, couldn't run and had bad away stats.
This movement of Jim Rice love has come from this label of "feared hitter." One writer labeled him a feared hitter and now everyone believes it. Under the reader comments of the ESPN ballot, user 4reojr14 has a long post and ends it with "And remember that there was a reason that Rice was feared!" Of course he was.
To me, it's pretty simple. Rickey Henderson, Bert Blyleven, Alan Trammell, Mark McGwire and Tim Raines.
I really don't see the debate for Henderson, Blyleven or Raines so I won't address them.
For McGwire, he played in his era and was one of the most dominant players.
If you look at Alan Trammell's stats, they don't look that impressive. His career OPS+ is 110. An OPS+ of 100 indicates an average major league baseball player. At 110, he was a very good hitter. However, you have to take into account that he played shortstop. He wasn't a first baseman, right fielder or designated hitter hitting 110. Taking into account his position, he actually was an impressive hitter. And since most people agree that Craig Biggio is a first ballot hall of famer, as a fellow middle infielder, his stats look similar.
This will mark Jim Rice's final year on the ballot. For whatever reason, he will make it into the hall of fame. His career OPS+ is 128, which is very good. But most legit baseball writers, namely Keith Law and Rob Neyer, will point out that he was a horrible fielder, couldn't run and had bad away stats.
This movement of Jim Rice love has come from this label of "feared hitter." One writer labeled him a feared hitter and now everyone believes it. Under the reader comments of the ESPN ballot, user 4reojr14 has a long post and ends it with "And remember that there was a reason that Rice was feared!" Of course he was.
Monday, December 8, 2008
No, that pun was intended!
Earlier in my blogspot posting days, I wrote a brief commentary about puns.
Well, after reading about the Detroit Tigers landing catcher Gerald Laird, I skimmed the readers comments. One of the most fascinating parts about journalism these days is the instant reader feedback. Anyway, one of our crafty readers said this:
"laird is no big catch no pun intended. in reality there are not many big time catchers out there any more like a bench fisk or pudge in his prime. varitek just turned down arbitration which would have put him at last years 10 million or above does he really believe he is a 10 million dollar player.well i tell you my opinion i have been watching baseball for 3o plus seasons mostly red sox games and he is by far the single worst hitter i have ever seen bar none."
Again, with the no pun intended!! Of course the pun was intended. The dude was smirking his way through that post. Hmmm. Catcher, no big catch. I'm witty!!! Let's write this masterpiece. Balloons come down, confetti sprays throughout the air.
Well, after reading about the Detroit Tigers landing catcher Gerald Laird, I skimmed the readers comments. One of the most fascinating parts about journalism these days is the instant reader feedback. Anyway, one of our crafty readers said this:
"laird is no big catch no pun intended. in reality there are not many big time catchers out there any more like a bench fisk or pudge in his prime. varitek just turned down arbitration which would have put him at last years 10 million or above does he really believe he is a 10 million dollar player.well i tell you my opinion i have been watching baseball for 3o plus seasons mostly red sox games and he is by far the single worst hitter i have ever seen bar none."
Again, with the no pun intended!! Of course the pun was intended. The dude was smirking his way through that post. Hmmm. Catcher, no big catch. I'm witty!!! Let's write this masterpiece. Balloons come down, confetti sprays throughout the air.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
"Scrappy" Pedroia Gets Extension
AL MVP Dustin Pedroia signs an extension for six years and 40.5 million with the Red Sox. The benefits for Pedroia is that he gets guaranteed big bucks. The payoff for the Red Sox is that if he trends upward, they get an extremely valuable player at a cheaper rate during his prime years. Pedroia's value isn't just with his numbers because let's be honest, he's similar to Pat Burrell with the bat. That's not a knock. Both are well above the average hitter. Burrell's OPS+ is 125 and Pedroia's OPS+ is 122 with an OPS+ of 100 being the average. His value is having Pat Burrell numbers as a second baseman. Now of course Pedroia is a very short man. He is also of the caucasion persuasion. Because of that, Pedroia will get the label of "gritty," "gutty," "grinder" and "scrappy." Those are nice terms for short, pasty baseball players who manage to have average success in the big leagues. David Eckstein gets those comparisons. Not only are those adjectives peppered from journalists in describing someone of Pedroia's proportions, but they top it off with a "he plays the game the right way." Whatever that means. I guess hitting moonshots and being really good isn't the "right way." Regardless, I thought I'd check out what the reader comments responded to the ESPN article on the Pedroia extension.
"This guy is the Red Sox Derek Jeter only for 1/3 the price!"
I get what he's saying, but at this time, Pedroia is a better player than Jeter.
"Funny how Pedroia gets less than $7 million per year and good ol' A-Rod is getting $28 million per year. Just goes to show what complete idiots the Yankees have running their organization. A-Rod hit 24 points lower, had 18 more HRs, and had 20 more RBI's. I'd take the Pedroia deal any day of the week over A-Rod's. $21 million difference??? Great deal for both Pedroia and the Red Sox."
Check out A Rod's stats. Rodriguez, despite a lower batting average, has a higher on base percentage and a much higher slugging percentage. He's one of the best players ever. Pedroia's deal might be better because Pedroia is younger, cheaper and valuable, but taking those away, Rodriguez is a much better player.
"You can't compare Pedroia to any player that has been in the league for 10+ years, whether it's ARod or Jeter or anyone else. I'm not trying to take anything away from Pedroia, he is a great player and the deal is great for the Red Sox, but he has only played 2 seasons. Not saying he won't continue playing like he is, but 2 years isn't enough to give the man the bank...yet."
A sane comment.
"Thats because he's a team player, and team win Championships, not A-Rod obviously, the fact that Pedroia signed a contract like shows he wants to win, and that all the individual awards are just a bonus! Only a NY fan would call Pedroias MVP a joke, he had that on lock all year, with his team on his back."
Not quite. Pedroia came on strong at the end of the year. But J.D. Drew carried the team in the first half and had much better offensive numbers than Pedroia. With Drew's position being a position of offense, he has no more value really than Pedroia. Certainly Drew is not a dime a dozen, but he is a very good baseball player. If the Red Sox had A Rod during their two World Series runs, he would not have prohibited them from winning a World Series. When Pedroia's contract runs up (and assuming his production trends upward), he'll be asking for the $100 million contract.
"This guy is the Red Sox Derek Jeter only for 1/3 the price!"
I get what he's saying, but at this time, Pedroia is a better player than Jeter.
"Funny how Pedroia gets less than $7 million per year and good ol' A-Rod is getting $28 million per year. Just goes to show what complete idiots the Yankees have running their organization. A-Rod hit 24 points lower, had 18 more HRs, and had 20 more RBI's. I'd take the Pedroia deal any day of the week over A-Rod's. $21 million difference??? Great deal for both Pedroia and the Red Sox."
Check out A Rod's stats. Rodriguez, despite a lower batting average, has a higher on base percentage and a much higher slugging percentage. He's one of the best players ever. Pedroia's deal might be better because Pedroia is younger, cheaper and valuable, but taking those away, Rodriguez is a much better player.
"You can't compare Pedroia to any player that has been in the league for 10+ years, whether it's ARod or Jeter or anyone else. I'm not trying to take anything away from Pedroia, he is a great player and the deal is great for the Red Sox, but he has only played 2 seasons. Not saying he won't continue playing like he is, but 2 years isn't enough to give the man the bank...yet."
A sane comment.
"Thats because he's a team player, and team win Championships, not A-Rod obviously, the fact that Pedroia signed a contract like shows he wants to win, and that all the individual awards are just a bonus! Only a NY fan would call Pedroias MVP a joke, he had that on lock all year, with his team on his back."
Not quite. Pedroia came on strong at the end of the year. But J.D. Drew carried the team in the first half and had much better offensive numbers than Pedroia. With Drew's position being a position of offense, he has no more value really than Pedroia. Certainly Drew is not a dime a dozen, but he is a very good baseball player. If the Red Sox had A Rod during their two World Series runs, he would not have prohibited them from winning a World Series. When Pedroia's contract runs up (and assuming his production trends upward), he'll be asking for the $100 million contract.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Walmart Wounds
On Black Friday, one Walmart worker died from a shopping stampede. Seriously!
"In the first, a temporary Wal-Mart employee was trampled to death in a rush of thousands of early morning shoppers as he and other employees attempted to unlock the doors of a Long Island, New York, store at 5 a.m., police said."
Really, if there was going to be a death over merchandise, does it shock you that Walmart is the venue? One of the interesting things about being a writer in this day and age is that bloggers (like what I'm doing now) will link and comment to other stories. I wrote for the State Press at Arizona State University during the summer 2006. I wrote about two experiences I had at Walmart. Sure I was a big tongue-in-cheek, but it was an accurate representation of my experience. After writing the column, I got a bunch of emails telling me how funny the story was, how inaccurate it was, how cool I was, how nerdy I was. These emails were from all over the country. It wasn't until I did a google search and noticed that an anti Walmart website linked the story. While I don't agree with most of Walmart's policies on virtually everything, I don't consider myself anti Walmart.
Looking back, here is one email I got in regards to the story:
"loved your piece on walmart. i happen to work at the one on mckellips and greenfield and know that you dont know how right you really are about the place. i stock shelves overnight and see the freakshow on a daily basis. last night was a prime example - it started with a crazy man out in the parking lot harassing customers. was he on drugs or was off his meds? unknown, but he was loud and irrational. i guess he was making so much noise that no one noticed the dead body by the front door. no, really, i shit you not here. an employee was found dead behind a planter when one of my colleagues went out for a smoke break at midnight. rumor is that he offed himself after he got off of work, the revolver lying on the ground next to his cooling corpse being the prime evidence thereof. but wait, thers more! as the police, the police SWAT team, the fire department, and the entire walmart management team is standing around scratching their heads, a meth-head starts tweaking hard right in front of them. this particular lady was (literally) bouncing off of walls and sales counters while rearranging items on shelves when the police noticed that something was possibly amiss with her. so they then areested her and her friend (who was also higher than the proverbial kite and was running around the store filling up shopping carts).
so there you have it, just another night of crazies, drug addicts, and self-induced gunshot wounds at walmart. be glad you got out alive!"
And on the completely opposite side of the spectrum:
"I seriously doubt there was one, much less two, attractive females in your "group". IF that had been the case, you would not have been at Wal-Mart for Scrabble. Your article draws a shadowy picture of a bored geek whom, having nobody to play with, tries to make himself feel better by picking on imaginary inferior creatures. More shadowy still, you probably are trying to sell WMT short and so are angry at 'the market', not the shoppers. Wow, you really seem to have hit a nerve (mine) with that article - maybe because I shop Wal-Mart and am long on the stock. :) So if that was your goal, good for you. But that article portrays, no - betrays - you, the writer, as an immature, superficial, non-substantive idiot. But what do I know? More than you - sometimes that's enough."
It's stories like the Black Friday one that just reaffirms my story. Though I do agree with one point from the reader who nailed me in the email. The story was immature. I did go for the jokes. Sure, it was easy, but what did we learn from the story that we didn't already know?
While I was google searching for the anti Walmart link, apparently another blog published my story.
"In the first, a temporary Wal-Mart employee was trampled to death in a rush of thousands of early morning shoppers as he and other employees attempted to unlock the doors of a Long Island, New York, store at 5 a.m., police said."
Really, if there was going to be a death over merchandise, does it shock you that Walmart is the venue? One of the interesting things about being a writer in this day and age is that bloggers (like what I'm doing now) will link and comment to other stories. I wrote for the State Press at Arizona State University during the summer 2006. I wrote about two experiences I had at Walmart. Sure I was a big tongue-in-cheek, but it was an accurate representation of my experience. After writing the column, I got a bunch of emails telling me how funny the story was, how inaccurate it was, how cool I was, how nerdy I was. These emails were from all over the country. It wasn't until I did a google search and noticed that an anti Walmart website linked the story. While I don't agree with most of Walmart's policies on virtually everything, I don't consider myself anti Walmart.
Looking back, here is one email I got in regards to the story:
"loved your piece on walmart. i happen to work at the one on mckellips and greenfield and know that you dont know how right you really are about the place. i stock shelves overnight and see the freakshow on a daily basis. last night was a prime example - it started with a crazy man out in the parking lot harassing customers. was he on drugs or was off his meds? unknown, but he was loud and irrational. i guess he was making so much noise that no one noticed the dead body by the front door. no, really, i shit you not here. an employee was found dead behind a planter when one of my colleagues went out for a smoke break at midnight. rumor is that he offed himself after he got off of work, the revolver lying on the ground next to his cooling corpse being the prime evidence thereof. but wait, thers more! as the police, the police SWAT team, the fire department, and the entire walmart management team is standing around scratching their heads, a meth-head starts tweaking hard right in front of them. this particular lady was (literally) bouncing off of walls and sales counters while rearranging items on shelves when the police noticed that something was possibly amiss with her. so they then areested her and her friend (who was also higher than the proverbial kite and was running around the store filling up shopping carts).
so there you have it, just another night of crazies, drug addicts, and self-induced gunshot wounds at walmart. be glad you got out alive!"
And on the completely opposite side of the spectrum:
"I seriously doubt there was one, much less two, attractive females in your "group". IF that had been the case, you would not have been at Wal-Mart for Scrabble. Your article draws a shadowy picture of a bored geek whom, having nobody to play with, tries to make himself feel better by picking on imaginary inferior creatures. More shadowy still, you probably are trying to sell WMT short and so are angry at 'the market', not the shoppers. Wow, you really seem to have hit a nerve (mine) with that article - maybe because I shop Wal-Mart and am long on the stock. :) So if that was your goal, good for you. But that article portrays, no - betrays - you, the writer, as an immature, superficial, non-substantive idiot. But what do I know? More than you - sometimes that's enough."
It's stories like the Black Friday one that just reaffirms my story. Though I do agree with one point from the reader who nailed me in the email. The story was immature. I did go for the jokes. Sure, it was easy, but what did we learn from the story that we didn't already know?
While I was google searching for the anti Walmart link, apparently another blog published my story.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
YouTube is the new MTV
Bring up MTV to anyone in my age group, and you will hear something to the effect that MTV isn't even music anymore. Sure, the music videos isn't as prevalent these days, but go to YouTube for your music videos.
If I want to check out my favorite band, The Foo Fighters:
Or let's say I'm on a Kanye kick:
If I want to check out my favorite band, The Foo Fighters:
Or let's say I'm on a Kanye kick:
Monday, November 17, 2008
There Will Not Be The Benefactor Season Two
Doesn't seem like good times for Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban. First, he was denied by the Cubs. Now he's being accused of insider trading. Apparently, he saved $750,000 in this deal. Of course, he could have saved millions if he never made this trade last year. But hey, at least he doesn't have to embarrass himself with this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)