Just Short Part II - Houston

Since it was so much fun to write about the miserable state of Denver sports on Monday, I've decided to give Houston, my current hometown, the courtesy of joining the party. With the exception of the Major League Soccer Dynamo, who won the league title in 2006 and 2007, their first two years in Houston, the city has actually endured a longer title drought than Denver. Since Houston does not have an NHL team, the Dynamo are the clear #4 in the city, but as much pride as this community feels for the soccer team (especially the large Hispanic population), I still feel like the city would quickly trade both Dynamo titles (and maybe even a third) for one title in the other three major sports.

I suppose I would be remiss if I didn't at least mention the now-defunct Houston Comets, the most successful team in WNBA history. Founded in 1997 as one of the original franchises in the league, the Comets won the first four WNBA titles. The success waned, however, and with it so did attendance and when the owners attempted to sell the team in 2008 but found no takers, the team folded. This is more of a statement on the viability of the WNBA (a league that has operated at a substantial loss throughout its history but has been propped up by the NBA as David Stern's brain-child) than on the state of the Houston sports community. Now the Comets' wikipedia page reads like an obituary.

Now on to the meaningful sports in the city. The most successful franchise in recent years has been the Astros who made the playoffs in 2004 and 2005 as a wild card each year. In 2004, the 'Stros advanced to the NLCS before falling in 7 games to the eventual World Series Champion St. Louis Cardinals. That year's run was highlighted by the eight postseason home runs hit by Carlos Beltran, a mid-season addition to the Astros who played less than half a season with the team before leaving for greener pastures in New York (pun definitely intended). The following year, the Astros made the only championship appearance of any Houston team since the mid-90s, beating the Cards in the NLCS this time on their way to the World Series where they were swept by the Chicago White Sox. While the Astros have been competitive the last three years, there were few expectations of a deep playoff run in that stretch and the future isn't exactly bright.

The only current Houston team in the big 3 sports with a championship victory is the Rockets who won the NBA title in 1994 and 1995. However, I don't know if any team in any sport has had to deal with the kind of asterisk to their titles that these Rockets have. As you may recall, a certain Chicago Bulls player had mysteriously chosen to pursue minor league baseball in that two year stretch, only returning in 1995-96 to win the next 3 titles with the Bulls. It seems any time anyone discusses the Rockets' championships, it must be mentioned that Jordan was "retired" for those two seasons. Of course no one mentions the fact that "45" returned to the Bulls midway through the 1994-95 season but the Bulls would be eliminated in the second round of the playoffs by Shaq, Penny and the Magic (that year's Eastern conference champs). Regardless, this disrespect is a clear chip on the shoulders of Houston fans that won't be removed until a Houston team, and specifically the Rockets, wins another title. In 1996, the Rockets would fall in the second round of the playoffs and the team has not advanced passed the first round since. As for this season, things do look surprisingly promising as the Rockets have climbed to 3rd in the Western Conference standings and appear poised to have homecourt advantage in the first round of the playoffs. Whether the team can capitalize on this and win a series remains to be seen and with the Lakers looming as the dominant force in the West, the city is trying to temper its enthusiasm.

Finally, there's the NFL in Houston. As we all know, the Houston Texans have existed since 2002 but have yet to achieve a winning record, much less make the playoffs. Before the Texans came the Oilers, one of the NFL's most frustrating franchises for its fanbase. The Oilers were a charter member of the AFL in 1960 but didn't find any success until the late 1970's when they made the playoffs three straight years from 1978-80, the first three years of University of Texas product Earl Campbell's career. Those playoff appearances would be fruitless, however, with two of them ending in AFC Championship losses to the Pittsburgh "Steel Curtain" Steelers. The Oilers would fall into oblivion again until 1987 when, under quarterback Warren Moon, they became one of the most successful teams in the AFC over the next 7 years, making the playoffs each year. Despite their regular season successes, the team was never able to get over the proverbial hump and never reached the Super Bowl. Included in this run was the infamous 1992 playoff loss at Buffalo in a game known simply as "The Comeback" in which the Oilers blew a 35-3 lead to lose 41-38 in overtime, the biggest comeback/choke job in league history. After a second round playoff loss in 1993, Warren Moon was traded and the team began a new downward spiral eventually ending in the team's acrimonious stadium dispute with the city and finally the move to Tennessee in 1997. It was this move that has made Bud Adams, current Titans/former-Oilers owner, one of the most despised men in Houston. It is also the reason that a lot of Houston fans still root for the Titans, a perplexing attachment that I myself have been guilty of. I've heard it described, accurately so, as having a nasty divorce with a vindictive wife and then somehow rooting for her to find true love and be happy in the future. You should want her life to be miserable, right? Right?!?

So again, back to the topic at hand. As I mentioned, the city of Denver has had the luxury of living in the world of "just short" with most of its teams. Houston is facing the same situation with the Astros and Rockets and is quickly approaching this point with the Texans. With the Rockies and Texans, I have known the numbness of rooting for a team with no chance at contending. With the Broncos and Astros, I've had the thrill and the disappointment of rooting for teams that get ever so close only to fail in the end. As a sports fan, you start to wonder when, even if, you will feel the joy of victory again. Sometimes so much so that you become the absolute worst thing in all of sports fandom: a bandwagon jumper. You pick the hot team and attach yourself just to try to recapture the glory of victory again, but the feeling is hollow and if the team wins, you feel like you've just cheated on your team for a one-night stand.

Once again, where do your teams fall? Would you prefer an all-out loser or a soul-crushing failure in the postseason? Post your comments below.

To get updates and notices each time there's a post, subscribe above. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for the blog, please post below or I can be reached at chrisf884@gmail.com. Thanks for reading.

Just Short or Not Even Close?

It's a depressing time to be a Denver sports fan. I've covered some of the local teams' failings ad nauseam in this blog (well, maybe not that much but close) and watching yet another late-season swoon by the Nuggets has lead me to a question that I've debated many times in my sports life: is it better to have the teams you root for be perpetually awful/mediocre non-contenders, or to have them get close and always come up short?

Here's how this applies to the Denver sports scene. The last championship in the city of Denver was won by the Avalanche in 2001, shortly before hockey became irrelevant in the United States. Before that, we were blessed to get back-to-back Super Bowl victories from the Broncos in 1998-99, so I know it may not have been long enough since our last major title to really start the complaining process, but we're going on 8 years here! Since the Avs' last title, the team has gone from very good (immediately after the title) to good to mediocre to the point where they likely won't even make the playoffs this season, for the second time in the last three years, a far cry from the nine consecutive division titles the Avs won immediately after moving to Denver from Quebec in 1995.

The other local teams have been equally as frustrating. First, the aforementioned Broncos have had one realistically good season since the Super Bowls (and coinciding retirement of John Elway), a 13-3 season in 2005 that ended with an embarrassing 34-17 home conference championship loss at the hands of the sixth-seeded (and eventual champion) Steelers. Also in that span the Broncos gave us the Brian Griese era, consecutive blowout playoff losses to the Colts (2003-04, along with the much-"enjoyed" (read: endured) Jake Plummer era), the soon-to-be-infamous blown three-game division lead with three to play (capped by a wonderful 52-21 loss to the rival Chargers in the final game to seal the collapse), and now the Josh McDaniels era that is off to an inauspicious start as he seeks to alienate his young franchise quarterback in his first month on the job. Certainly not a fun time to be a Donkeys fan.

Second, the Rockies have come the closest to breaking the title drought with their improbable run to the 2007 World Series, but a four-game sweep at the hands of the heavily-favored Boston Red Sox put an end to that dream season. The Rocks made a significant splash in the Denver area as they won the first NL Wild Card ever in 1995, the franchise's third year in existence. After that, mediocre would be a generous way to put things as they wallowed in the cellar of the NL West for the next 11 years, rarely even threatening the .500 mark before the breakout 2007 season. Even in '07, concerns lingered that it was a "lightning in a bottle" situation where a so-so team got hot at the right time with the exact right set of circumstances to make a playoff run. Of course Rockies fans will never forget the young team reeling off 14 wins in 15 games to force a 1-game playoff with division-rival San Diego, and then the 13-inning epic that game became and finally the 7-straight wins to sweep their way to the NL Pennant. Unfortunately, 2008 brought the feared back-slide, and the Rox have already begun disassembling (read: selling off) their most successful roster ever with the trade of their best player, outfielder Matt Holliday. While I still hold out hope as all baseball fans do in March, I fear this year's Rockies will be little better than last year's.

Finally, there's the Nuggets. For a team that has historically been one of the NBA's most exciting to watch, never have they been a legitimate title contender and particularly not in the last 8 years. The team only gained any sense of competitiveness in 2003 because of sheer luck, winning third in the lottery behind a Detroit team that had inexplicably fallen in love with a foreign big man named Darko. Because of that love affair, the second-best prospect in the draft (behind a certain forward currently playing for the Cleveland Cavaliers), Carmelo Anthony, fell into the Nuggets' laps and the franchise was relevant for the first time in a decade. 'Melo made an immediate impact, leading a rag-tag Nuggets team to the playoffs for the first time since 1995. Suddenly Denver began to believe they had a shot, and began making free agent acquisitions to improve their contending status, such as signing Andre Miller, Kenyon Martin and eventually moving Miller for Allen Iverson. Unfortunately, these moves (which were both lauded and derided at the time they were made) all had the same inevitable result: first round playoff losses. In Anthony's first four season in the NBA, the Nuggets lost first round playoff series's all by the result 4 games to 1. Finally, they broke the streak last year, getting swept by the Lakers.

So now I sit here watching my new hometown team, the Houston Rockets, face my true hometown team, the Nugs, and as the Nuggets trail by 12 at home in the fourth quarter, I wonder if this year will be any different. Yes, all signs point to the Nuggets making the playoffs again and if they can get hot, they might even have homecourt advantage for the first round for the first time in the Melo era. Heck, they might even win TWO games with Chauncey Billups, their first real point guard in this era, manning the 1. But will they win a series? Maybe. Two? Probably not. A title? Flatly, no.

And now finally I return to my first question with you having a full understanding of where I'm coming from: is it better for your favorite teams to be downright awful or to be good but not good enough? For Denver fans, we are smack in an era of not quite good enough for all of our teams. None are so bad that they will flat-out rebuild and try to become better in a few years, but also none seem to be close enough to winning it all to be a team to rally behind. I thought the Rockies, with considerable youth, had the talent to start a string of successful seasons. Instead, they're a team whose window may have opened and closed in an 18-month span as ownership's purse strings are too tight to make the needed moves. For the Nuggets, my hopes have been raised and dashed so many times I'm becoming numb to them. The Broncos are closer to rebuilding than winning it all. And the Avs? Well, they basically died to me at the 2004-05 lockout and don't appear to have the talent or direction from ownership/management to become relevant again any time soon.

Alright, now that I'm thoroughly depressed, let me know what you think. Which situation are your teams in, and which would you prefer?

To get updates and notices each time there's a post, subscribe above. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for the blog, please post below or I can be reached at chrisf884@gmail.com. Thanks for reading.

Who'll Feel the Economic Pain First?

Interesting coincidence, as it turns out, not only did A-Rod take steroids, but apparently spring training is about to start pretty soon. Who knew they actually still play baseball anymore? With some big name free agents still on the market in baseball (names such as Manny Ramirez and Ben Sheets top the list now that Ken Griffey, Jr. finally signed) as pitchers and catchers report to Florida and Arizona, the issue of the economy looms large on the upcoming season. In previous years, players like Ramirez would have signed within a couple weeks of the end of the season (it's been almost four months since play ended) and even a guy like Sheets, with all of his injury concerns, would have likely found a home. But times, they are a-changing and owners are tightening their belts around the MLB and all professional sports.

Already, there are signs that teams (outside of the greater New York metropolitan area) are cutting back, or at least minimizing their spending. Here in Houston, Astros owner Drayton McLane, not necessarily known to be extremely tight with money, has all but shut it down this offseason as the Astros have signed only one free agent (Mike Hampton for around the veterans minimum) and have let several players from last year's wild-card runner-up team sit unsigned. Starting third baseman Ty Wigginton is still on the market, and pitcher Randy Wolf, a solid late-season pickup last year, sat on free agency until just 2 weeks ago when he signed with the Dodgers. Houston is not exactly a small market, yet the purse strings are as tight here as anywhere.

Baseball is the first major pro sport in the US that will get a true taste of the bad economy. For the NBA, most teams sold their season tickets around April or May of last year, before the stock market crash, meaning that their only noticeable impact from the recession is a decrease in walk-up ticket sales and the difficulty in getting money in loans for payroll. But for the MLB, last season didn't end until the economy began it's decline, and now we will find out just how much American families and corporations are cutting back their spending on sports entertainment. After years and years of attendance gains, Major League Baseball may see a huge drop-off as fans will be very reluctant to come out to the ballpark for mid-week games early in the season or between two bad teams.

With the NBA trade deadline passing this afternoon, we began to see (and hear) similar economic rumblings from that league. Many struggling small market teams looked to make trades to trim money, but even the big market teams were reluctant to bring on big salaries leading to a relatively quiet day of action. One of the higher-profile trades, the New Orleans Hornets sending former All-Star center Tyson Chandler to the Oklahoma City Thunder (a trade that was later rescinded because Chandler failed a physical), was a clear cost-cutting move by the struggling New Orleans franchise. The trade made very little sense on paper for the Hornets as a team, but as a franchise that is in one of the league's poorest markets, they felt they had to do something, and trading a big contract for a couple of expiring contracts seemed like their best option. Who knows what will happen now that that trade has fallen through. Word out of the NBA's All-Star Weekend last week was that the talk among NBA insiders was about the economy and some of the dramatic effects it could have on the league. The question of whether some franchises, such as New Orleans, New Jersey, and Memphis, would move or even be contracted was the undercurrent of the weekend.

While the MLB free agency period has shown us one view of the struggling economy, we will get an interesting perspective in the coming weeks as the NFL, the country's most successful league, will enter its free agency stage. With a more equitable profit-sharing system and a strict salary cap, the NFL presents a much different landscape from the MLB. Small market teams will not be completely locked out of free agency as they were in baseball, and big market teams, while still having some advantage, shouldn't dominate. Then again, a team like the Dallas Cowboys offers a much stronger opportunity for a free agent looking for outside income (advertising money, for example) than a team like the Buffalo Bills does, and the Cowboys will now be far more willing to give a nice healthy signing bonus than those smaller market teams. I shudder to think what the situation would be like if this year was the uncapped year as opposed to next year. (In case you didn't know, the NFL owners exercised an option to opt out of the current Collective Bargaining Agreement, reached several years ago, as of next year and if no new deal is reached, the NFL would have no salary cap in 2010.)

The reason for some of the financial woes for teams isn't even necessarily the lack of income from the teams. While this is the catalyst for problems, the root cause is that many of the super-"rich" franchise owners were really only rich on paper (in other words, companies/stocks/funds they owned had extremely high value). Now that these big companies' values have collapses, so too has the wealth of these owners. For example, the Cleveland Cavaliers owner's money comes from Quicken Loans. How do you think his portfolio is doing these days? That is a team that might be a financial risk if it weren't for LeBron James and the fact that the team is a title contender, assuring strong attendance. Many owners will be forced to cut back their spending -- such as big signing bonuses for NFL free agents -- because of the lack of availability of cash for them.

All in all, we don't know exactly how teams will respond because we don't know exactly how long the economy is going to stay bad, and how bad it will be over the next couple of years. Regardless, I'd call it a fair bet that at least one NBA franchise moves in the next two years for financial reasons (my money's on New Orleans, but Memphis seems promising, too) and the other leagues may see the same thing. Even if the franchises don't move, there's still a strong possibility that we could see some teams sold in the next two years. Which sport do you think will be first or most affected by the nation's financial turmoil?

To get updates and notices each time there's a post, subscribe above. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for the blog, please post below or I can be reached at chrisf884@gmail.com. Thanks for reading.

Guilty By Association

Now a full week removed from the startling revelation that Alex Rodriguez had tested positive for steroid use in 2003, it is interesting to take in the reactions of those both within the sports world as well as those viewing from the outside. From the perspective of pro baseball players, there seems to be three different reactions to the news:

1. Understanding/Forgiveness - This is coming almost exclusively from others that have been "outed" in the last several years for having done the same things. Players like Jason Giambi and Andy Pettite have been quick to commend A-Roid (I'm also partial to the nickname Ster-Rod, but no one seems to be catching on with it) for being forthright about his cheating. As if somehow admitting that you cheated after you were caught cheating makes it okay.

2. Anger - This is coming from those players, such as the Houston Astros' Lance Berkman and Roy Oswalt, that did not cheat (supposedly). Their anger, of course, is because of that "supposedly" that must now be placed by the names of all baseball players. Before A-Rod's exposure, there were still many that wanted to believe that some great players were simply great, and didn't require or even want to use the drugs. Now, every single baseball player of the last 2+ decades is guilty by association.

3. Silence - There are a couple of explanations for this. Either they don't have strong feelings about what's going on (seems rather unlikely), or they are trying to stay below the radar because they've done something they don't want revealed. I know that not every player used (at least I *hope* that not every player used), but any players that are being quiet right now appear suspicious, like they are trying to hide something. As we know, Rodriguez was just one of 104 players that tested positive in the supposedly confidential drug test. Right now, there are 103 other players praying that the rest of the names never get released.

So how do I feel about this whole thing? It's tough to say. I want to say that I've lost all interest in baseball because the purity of the sport has forever been tarnished. Then again, we knew this for years as we watched Barroid Bonds break record after record with an increasingly bulbous head. And then I just wonder how this is any different from the sleaze-ball bankers and executives that used unethical and even illegal tactics to bilk countless Americans (and now every American taxpayer) out of billions of dollars to line their own pockets. It's all cheating. Sports are supposed to be an escape for us, and yet we are now seeing in the sporting world the same greed and corruption as we see in the corporate world. The fact is, though, players have been doing things to get an edge ever since sports began, and especially since money became such a significant factor. Sure, now it's steroids, but in the 70's and 80's it was cocaine, before that it was spitballs, pine tar, even nail files being used to change the way the ball moved. Cheating in sports, and in baseball in particular, is nothing new.

Does this make it okay for today's baseball players to cheat? Absolutely not. All I'm saying is that if you enjoy the game, take it for what it is. Watch it on t.v. where you get the best view of the action and you're not paying exorbitant ticket prices, and understand that the idea of purity in anything in society, particularly anything concerning money, is gone.

To get updates and notices each time there's a post, subscribe above. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for the blog, please post below or I can be reached at chrisf884@gmail.com. Thanks for reading.

A Few MLB, NBA Observations

Here are a few thoughts on some of the top sports stories right now.

Obviously number 1 has to be the A-Rod steroid story. As a sports fan and a baseball fan, I think this was finally the last straw in the steroid era for me. I'll admit, I had cheered for A-Rod because of the belief that he was going to do clean what Bonds had done tainted. Unfortunately, we now know for sure that A-Rod cheated (he admitted as much) while Bonds continues to deny any wrongdoing (not that anyone believes him). My feeling now is that the entire Steroid Era in baseball should be separated from the rest of baseball history. Jim Rome made an interesting point on his radio show yesterday: with all of the conflicting stories on steroids, the public has only two options: assume no one used, or assume everyone used. Looks like assuming everyone used is a pretty safe bet these days.

So here's what baseball should do (are you listening, Bud Selig?): anyone that played from 1985 on will be considered to have used some form of performance enhancing drug, and it's okay. They were not illegal in the sport at the time. However, all such players will be held to a separate standard when considered for entry into the Hall of Fame, and statistics compiled during this period will be kept as if unrelated to historical baseball numbers. Barry Bonds will be the Steroid Era Home Run King, while Hank Aaron will retain his title as all-time HR King. Bonds will also keep his SE single-season HR record, but so will Roger Maris keep his single-season mark. The baseball Hall of Fame is in a precarious position, and they have shown a propensity to hold suspected steroid use against players (see Mark McGuire). To remedy this, just create a separate wing in the Hall for those that played in the Steroid Era. Maybe a few bad apples will be tarnishing the accomplishments of many great, clean players, but the evidence seems to indicate the contrary.

###

Now that football season is officially over, it's time to start shifting gears to basketball. The NBA All-Star break is coming up this weekend, which means the trading deadline is right around the corner as well. Many experts and NBA executives seem to think that this could be one of the most active trade deadlines we've seen in years, although it may not involve many star players. The reason for this is, of course, the economy. Teams that are losing this year and not getting good attendance will be looking to unload expensive players that they literally cannot afford to keep. Meanwhile, other teams will be looking to position themselves for the Summer of 2010 free agent class (remember, includes LeBron, D-Wade, Chris Bosh, Steve Nash, among others). This means trades will be made with teams eying their salary cap a year and a half from now.

The biggest rumor currently swirling around is that the Phoenix Suns are looking to move Amar'e Stoudamire. This seems like a clear case of cutting off the nose to spite your face. The Suns have been a disappointment this year, and the reason is that their players do not match the playing style wanted by their head coach, Terry Porter. Again, these are the same players that led the Suns to the Western Conference Finals two years ago and consistently put up 50-win seasons under Mike D'antoni. But the Suns management decided to go another direction, bringing in a slow-it-down, defensive-minded coach in to replace Mike D and trying to make the players play the coaches style. This has not worked at all, and the players appear to be turning on the coach. So what is GM Steve Kerr going to do? Not get rid of the coach, but instead blow up the nucleus that's had so much success over the years.

Stoudamire, just 26 years old, is among those that will be in the famed Summer of 2010 class, and thus is going to require a big payday. He will be a coveted prize and thus can fetch a very nice package now because: 1) he's an All-Star caliber player at his best, and 2) he has an expiring contract in 2010, which means he'll create cap room that summer. Is Kerr making the right move shopping him? Well, for one thing, he'd better trade him now, because knowing the guy has been criticized for his work ethic before all this, you can just imagine how hard he'll try playing for a team that openly discussed moving him. I think the Suns would be better off trying to move Shaq, but almost no one would even consider taking on his huge contract for another year after this one, even if it does mean cap relief in 2010. But if the Suns do trade Amar'e, then they'd better be prepared to let Nash go in 2010 as well and be ready to start from scratch.

###

One last NBA note. The Houston Rockets are self-destructing right before our eyes. This team, one that many think has the talent to be among the 5-6 championship contenders this year, has been in a tailspin the last month or so. They have not yet been the unit that was expected when Ron Artest was acquired in the offseason, and this is largely because their stars (Artest, Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady) have not been healthy at the same time all year. Now, they claim, they are healthy and ready to make a strong stretch run. So how do they start it? By getting blown out by a terrible Milwaukee team last night that was missing three of its top players. The Rockets already have 6 losses this season to last place teams, and while their 31-21 record is not bad at all, it may be time to wonder just how far this team can go if they keep playing this poorly. They're not that far removed from the #9 spot in the West, meaning they'll probably need to be better than .500 over their last 30 games to make the playoffs.

What troubles me most is that it sounds like the locker room is beginning to splinter. After the Rockets loss a few days ago, Artest evidently called out T-Mac for not playing hard on defense. McGrady then went to the media and said that the team "talks too much." If this isn't the start of a meltdown, I don't know what is. On top of that, the fact is, McGrady (whether he's truly hurt or that's just an excuse) is a shell of his former self. He's only 30, but he's been in the league since he was a teenager and he plays like he's closer to 40. He's got no lift on his jumper (which was never great to begin with, and is now downright bad) and he can't get to the rim like he used to. He's a mediocre (at best) player right now. I suspect the Rockets would actually consider trading him if it weren't for the fact that he is due $20+ million next year, making him unpalatable for any team that might think he still has something in the tank. Looks like the Rockets are stuck with him for the rest of this year, and they have to hope that things get better before the playoffs. Either way, McGrady might be moved next offseason the way the Nuggets rid themselves of Allen Iverson, to a team looking for an expiring contract.

To get updates and notices each time there's a post, subscribe above. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for the blog, please post below or I can be reached at chrisf884@gmail.com. Thanks for reading.

Yanks Give Themselves an Early Christmas Gift

The big news yesterday is that the New York Yankees have given themselves and early Christmas gift by signing switch-hitting first baseman Mark Teixiera to a massive 8 year, $180 million deal. This move, as reported throughout the sports world, now gives the Yankees the four highest-paid players in the entire league. Tex, along with recent signing CC Sabathia, Alex Rodriguez and Derek Jeter hold the four largest contracts in Major League Baseball.

So here's the question: is this bad for the sport? In about 2001, the Yankess began to shift from a semi-big spending team that had just won four titles in five years, largely with homegrown players like Jeter, Jorge Posada, Bernie Williams, and Mariano Rivera, to a super-big spending club. The result: just two World Series appearances since then, with losses to the big-spending Arizona Diamondbacks (who promptly blew up their own roster to save money) and the small-market Florida Marlins (who blew up their roster of the next several years, despite it not being an expensive group).

Despite the Yankees signing every big name free agent under the sun, the success just hasn't been there. One explanation is that the Yanks teams that were winning didn't have all of the ego issues that we see today, Because they had some lower paid role players, the group functioned more as a team than as a collection of stars. Meanwhile, teams like the Red Sox, although they spend a lot, still have quality players coming up through their systems and spending a lot of time learning their place within the organization. Thus when they reach the Big League, they are ready to contribute in whatever way the team sees fit.

The Yankees have had minimal success with their prospects. Pitcher Chein Ming Wang has been very good, but guys like Robinson Cano and Melky Cabrera have been only decent, not stars. Others, like Nick Johnson and Drew Henson, never panned out at the pro level. The jury is still out on pitcher Phil Hughes, among other recent Yankee call-ups. So while the Yankees had all-stars at most positions, they lacked depth on the bench and in the rotation, and haven't good role-player guys, i.e. bench players that can make an impact both in the game and in the lockerroom.

So should the other teams around the league and their fans be outraged at the money the Yankees are throwing around? Well as the Rays last year and the Rockies in 2007 and the Marlins back in 2002 have all proven, a well-run organization with strong player development can still reach the promised land. And while they may not always win, they can be plenty competitive with the likes of the Yankees and Red Sox. Until their players leave for the big money, that is.

No post tomorrow. Merry Christmas and I will be back on Friday. If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for the blog, please post below or I can be reached at chrisf884@gmail.com. Thanks for reading.

Next On The Agenda

As I continue this little fall-in-review, next I'll take a look at what's happened in the MLB since last I posted. A brief recap:

1. Playoffs happen. Rays beat Red Sox in close, but ultimately surprisingly unexciting ALCS. Despite the Rays near-epic collapse in Game 5, blowing a 7-run lead when needing only 7 outs to advance to the World Series, and seeing them rally and give the ball to a rookie closer in the ninth inning of Game 7 to win it, the lack of history in this "rivalry" really hurt the dramatic impact of an otherwise quality matchup. On the other side, the Phils made quick work of the Brew-crew and Manny's Dodgers on their way to the Fall Classic.

2. Wet and Wild World Series. Rays/Phillies. A classic matchup! Despite Tampa Bay being everyone's darling this year, the signs were quite clear that they had little chance going into this series. The Phillies' hitting was simply too good, their pitching was good enough, and the Rays' lack of experience and on-base percentage looked to be their ultimate downfall. What followed was an entertaining and bizarre World Series, as Game 5 (with the Series on the line) was broken up over 3 days due to a huge storm hitting Philadelphia in the middle of a "tie game" (Phillies fans will argue that the Rays' tying run was gift-wrapped by the umps so the game couldn't be called final). In the end, the Phils finished the game with a win and closed out the series 4-1. And as Chase Utley do eloquently put it, the Phillies are now the "World f***ing Champions!"

3. The US economy takes a dump. This story has obviously received a ton of publicity, but the surprising and somewhat lesser-reported aspect of the economic downturn is its impact on the pro sports. When even the all-powerful NFL is cutting employees and taking out loans, you know things are dicey. In the MLB, the impact is being felt in the league's offseason as free agents are forced to wait out teams for their ridiculous 8- or 9-figure contracts. Teams like the Mets and Yankees are taking advantage of the rest of the league's tight budget by signing whomever they want, and some even at slight discounts. (In the case of the Yankees' new defensive tackle... er, starting pitcher, they're actually paying a huge premium to pry Sabathia away from the West Coast. Hopefully CC gets closer to 350 wins than 350 pounds during his time in New York, because he doesn't seem like he has the sensibility to survive the media onslaught if he lands in the doghouse. Let's just say I'm predicting he'll be exercising his option after 3 years and running as far from New York as possible, to the Angels' or Dodgers' benefit.) Meanwhile, teams like my hometown Astros and Rockies are forced to shop their pricier players and let their free agents walk due to growing budget constraints. In other words, in the only major sports league in the US without a salary cap, the rich again get richer while poor, and their fans, get the shaft.

4. Nobody wants Manny. Thanks in part to the economy, Scott Boras (Manny Ramirez's agent) and Mr. "Manny being Manny," one of the top right-handed hitters in MLB history is having trouble finding a home. Teams around the league are wondering if bringing on a personality like ManRam would bolster or devastate their clubhouse, and this is before checking the price tag ("if you have to ask, you can't afford it"). MLB executives with ever-tightening budgets are growing more and more leery of dealing with an agent like Boras, and guaranteeing 4-years, $80-$100 million for a player that has a history of quitting on teams when things don't go his way seems like a shady proposition. My guess: he either takes a big contract to play for the Yankees (unlikely, but no one else seems to have the money to throw around) or else (more likely) takes a "hometown discount" (i.e. no one will actually pay him more, but Boras has to save face) to stay with the Dodgers.

5. Mark Texiera sweepstakes are becoming silly. It seems everyone has thrown their hat in the ring for Tex, the premier offensive weapon in this year's free agent class not named Manny Ramirez. From the Red Sox to the Nationals to the Orioles to the Angels and maybe even the Braves, Tex has more money being thrown at him than an AIG executive. (Okay, maybe that's an exaggeration. No one has THAT much money being thrown at them.) The question is, will the "lucky" team that lands Tex be getting the same performance out of him as AIG has gotten from said executives? Maybe, maybe not, but I can assure you that he's not the missing link in Baltimore or D.C., so don't be surprised if there ends up being a bit of buyer's remorse if he ends up on an also-ran like them.

If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for the blog, please post below or I can be reached at chrisf884@gmail.com. Thanks for reading.

Top 5 Biggest Disappointments in Baseball

As we approach the trade deadline in Major League Baseball, the time has come to officially announce whether a team is a contender or a pretender. Along with this come the countless excuses and the calls by fans and the media for teams to blow up their rosters and build for next year, or the year after that, or the year after that…

Regardless, it’s time for labels and the one label all teams want to avoid is that of “underachiever.” The following are the five times that have most underachieved and failed to live up to lofty expectations. If your team currently resides in a West division, you may want to avert your eyes.

Honorable Mention #1: Washington Nationals (38-64) – No, the Nats weren’t expected to be contenders, and they knew as much coming in, but this is still embarrassing. Opening a brand-spanking new stadium and coming off a season where they actually flirted with .500 throughout, the Nats were hoping that this year might be the first step toward a promising future. Instead, the Nats are the worst team in their division by a wide margin and they’re only a half game out of dead last in the NL.

Honorable Mention #2: Los Angeles Dodgers (49-52) – Yes, they’re still “contenders,” but that’s only because they’re in the woeful NL West. The Dodgers believed that they had a solid-enough core of young talent and a handful of veterans that Joe Torre could mold into a playoff team. Instead, big-time acquisitions Andruw Jones and Jason Schmidt have been hurt and bad, and the team is staggering towards another sub-.500 season and watching the playoffs from home.

5. Toronto Blue Jays (51-51) – While the prognosticators didn’t jump on the Jays band wagon too much this past offseason, there was the usual buzz that this just might be the year the Jays finally break into the playoffs. Toronto had a good year last year and had the payroll to play with the big boys in the AL East, but things never really came together. Add very poor offensive performance (they still don’t have a player with 10 home runs) to a manager that got run out of town before the All-Star break, and you can see why this team once again rests at mediocrity, and out of the playoff hunt before August 1.

4. Seattle Mariners (38-63) – The Mariners easily could be higher on this list, but I give them a pass (to an extent) because of the fact that they haven’t been a playoff team in over 5 years and the expectations were probably too high. That said, this team made a run at the division last year with basically the same roster, and might have made the playoffs if not for a late-August into September collapse. In the offseason they made a big splash acquiring Eric Bedard from the Orioles, and had what many considered one of the top rotations in the AL. Unfortunately, injuries to Bedard and Jarrod Washburn blowing up have helped the Mariners reach the worst record in the AL and cost their manager his job before the break. But on the plus side, at least they finally got rid of Richie Sexton.

3. Colorado Rockies (45-58) – Yes, the Rockies were the NL Champions last year, but it was widely considered to be at least a bit of a fluke. Still, expectations were high, especially from Rockies fans such as myself, and hopes of a repeat were quite prevalent. The Rockies have struggled all season with their pitching, something that was a great strength in their late run in 2007. Also the team had trouble filling the void at second base left by Kaz Matsui’s departure to the Houston Astros. On top of that, offensive star Brad Hawpe failed to break .250 until July and second-year phenom Troy Tulowitzski spent two stints on the DL and is batting under .200 when healthy. All this has led to a highly unsatisfying season and while the Rockies can still sniff the division lead (6 games back right now), they aren’t exactly doing it in the toughest division.

2. San Diego Padres (38-65) – Hard to believe that the team that came 3 outs shy of the NL Wild Card in 2007 would have THE WORST RECORD IN BASEBALL, but that’s the case. The Padres, who last year survived on great pitching and timely hitting, have been lacking the latter and it’s killed them. Playing half of their games in the pitcher-friendly confines of PetCo Park, the Padres are 28th in the Majors in batting average and dead last in runs scored (just 3.7 per game). Expectations were definitely high for the team as it hadn’t lost any significant players from 2007 and the division, rightfully so, seemed ripe for the taking. Instead, the Pads are trying to figure out if they have any tradable pieces and hoping that maybe next year things will be better.

1. Cleveland Indians (44-56) – The Indians were a win away from the World Series in 2007, and they had 3 chances to get that win. Instead, the team blew a 3-1 series lead on the Red Sox in the ALCS and started looking to 2008. With virtually the entire roster from 2007 returning, the Indians were considered by many to be a World Series favorite, or at least a favorite to take on the Sox in the ALCS again. But the wheels came off early, and the team was never able to establish itself offensively. The man they expected to carry the offense, Travis Hafner, seems to have fallen off a cliff as his numbers have plummeted, although that started happening even last year. The pitching was great despite CC Sabathia’s slow start with Cliff Lee picking up the slack, but there just weren’t enough runs to go around. Amazing that things were so bad that Sabathia was dealt before the break, effectively signaling that the Indians had already thrown in the towel on such a promising season. Cleveland earns this spot because of just how high the expectations were, even though their record isn’t the worst.

So what do you think? Agree or disagree? Let’s hear it.

The Sad State of the Houston Astros

The Houston Astros are in last place in the NL Central and a whopping 9 games under .500 putting them 12 games back in the wild card race. The Colorado Rockies are in third place in the NL West and a staggering 13 games under .500, 14 back in the wild card but just 6 back in the division race. While it seems like the Rockies are in a worse place this year with a worse record and such high expectations, it’s the Astros that are feeling like the sky is falling.

After the 2007 season, the Astros cleaned house, firing much-despised general manager Tim Purpura and firing manager Phil Garner in the middle of the season. That is, 2005 World Series manager Phil Garner. Astros fans rejoiced, saying finally the owner is making a stand against mediocrity. Well, maybe not. To replace those two high-profile positions, the Astros turned to Cecil Cooper, a man that had never been the head manager in the big leagues, and Ed Wade, a man that had led the Philadelphia Phillies to exactly 0 playoff appearances during his tenure as GM in the city of brotherly love.

Regardless, Astros fans were excited. When Wade made several radical moves in the offseason, acquiring Michael Bourn (a speedy center fielder), Miguel Tejada (a veteran and former AL MVP), Jose Valverde (NL saves leader in 2007), Kaz Matsui (speedy 2B from the 2007 NL Champs), among others, people started to believe things were about to turn around. I’ll admit even I got excited about the prospects. Unfortunately, things haven’t exactly worked out.

Bourn has struggled to stay above the Mendoza line (.200 BA), Tejada started the season red-hot but has been ice cold since mid-May, Valverde is second in the Majors in blown saves, and Matsui has bounced back and forth from the DL. The Astros farm system is barren, but that was largely the case when Wade arrived. Brad Lidge is making Wade look even worse with his dominating season in Philly, as Lidge was traded for Bourn.

Worst of all may be Cooper although the jury is still out on him. Has he made many poor managerial decisions? Yes. Has he struggled to keep his composure with the media? Sure. Has he been managing one of the worst and most underachieving teams in the Majors? Absolutely. It’s because of that last one that Coop can hardly be blamed for having a poor season. Few managers not named “La Russa” or “Cox” or maybe, MAYBE “Torre” could have this group in the hunt for the playoffs.

Herein lays the greatest problem facing the Astros: their minor leagues are so bereft of talent that they have no real prospects that they can plug in the rest of this year to get them some experience. This also means they have no prospects to trade in the offseason to try and improve the club. They’re left with just two options: overspend to try to get better now, which is doable but very difficult and will be VERY expensive; or the Astros can try to blow the team up, trading their big contracts like Tejada and Carlos Lee for some minor league prospects.

The consensus here in Houston seems to be that they should go for the latter, but what I've heard is that owner Drayton McLain won’t stand for a rebuilding process, and that’s why Wade was forced into making the deals he has. It’s a terrible situation to be in, and it’s one that many, many teams have gone through over the years. The Baltimore Orioles are in a very similar situation, in fact, and it took that team years to realize it. Now they have some younger pieces and a much more manageable payroll and appear to be on the way back up. The Astros need to decide if they’re willing to take a long-term approach, or if they want to keep putting that band-aid on the gunshot wound.

What's the Value of a Strong Farm System?

With less than two weeks before baseball's trade deadline, most of the talk in the sports world is about who will be buyers and who will be sellers in the trade market. To put it another way, who will concede defeat and try to get some younger prospects for their veterans, and who wants to forfeit some prospects for the chance to win this year. This leads me to wonder, though, if it's ever truly worth it to be a seller. Let's examine this a bit.

Quick, name me one team that's won the World Series in the last 10 years after being a seller. If you said the 2002 Florida Marlins, you're correct, but that franchise was terrible for years after it sold off its 1998 championship team. The fact is, while most teams never really come to fruition on the prospects' development, and often those players move on before the team has a chance to win, there are actually a few instances of young teams finding success. The Marlins are the only team that I can say took the approach of selling off its players for prospects and turned that into an actual championship, though.

Sure, you can argue that other small market teams such as the Twins, A's and last year's Diamondbacks and Rockies all have had success, at least making the postseason. But only the Rockies have played in the World Series (and you can make the argument that that was a bit of a fluke), not including the 2001 D-backs that won it all, because that was a BIG payroll team at the time. In fact, that team cost the Diamondbacks so much financially that they went into significant debt and that was basically the reason the team turned to the youth movement it currently enjoys.

Meanwhile, the Twins and A's, who have both made numerous postseason appearances in the last decade, have only won a combined 1 playoff series since the days of Kirby Puckett and The Bash Brothers (Jose Canseco and Mark McGuire in Oakland), and that was in 2006 when they faced off against each other in the first round. The A's swept the Twins then went on to lose to the Tigers in the ALCS.

Anyway, let's get back on topic here. To be a buyer or a seller. The teams mentioned above lead me to believe that being a seller on a regular basis is not likely to net you a title, or even a chance at the title. The flip side is the idea of being a buyer, giving up your prospects for the veterans to give you a chance to win now. The best example of a team like that is the New York Yankees.

Since their last World Series title in 2000, the Yankees have been the ultimate buyer in the MLB. They have routinely spent astronomical amounts of money on free agents in the offseason, and they have made numerous trades during the season to bring in veterans at the expense of their farm system (the latest example being the Bobby Abreu acquisition). This strategy has clearly not worked, in my opinion, despite the fact that they are in the postseason every year over that stretch. The Yanks have not won the title since 2000, and haven't even been in the Series since losing to the Marlins in 2002.

All this seems to lead me to one conclusion, and it may sound wishy-washy but it's the truth: teams need to be more in tune to when it's the right time to be a buyer or a seller, and be willing to take the chance accordingly. Largely, it appears that teams that make the big splash at the trade deadline are rarely the teams that go on to win the title. When was the last time a team made a major mid-season acquisition and won the championship that year? Um, I can't think of one. Teams are better off making the big moves in the offseason, because it's unlikely that one or two players can turn a decent team into a great team, and team chemistry and cohesion are major factors in winning a title. Recently, teams that have made big runs are the ones that bring up one of their big-time prospects to the Majors (see Jacoby Elsbury with the Red Sox in 2007, Miguel Cabrera with the Marlins in 2002).

On the other hand, teams would be well-advised to make the moves in the offseason when they have a chance. Where would the Red Sox be if they hadn't traded for Curt Schilling in 2003, or Josh Beckett in 2005? Would the Cardinals have won a World Series if they hadn't traded for Chris Carpenter? Who knows, but maybe the Twins or Rockies or A's win a title of they had used some of their minor league talent as bargaining chips to bring in proven players as opposed to using their veterans to fetch still more unproven prospects.

In the end, I think it's clear that a mixture of veteran players and talented youngsters are the key to postseason success, and this infatuation with minor league prospects makes Billy Beane look good, but eventually you have to take some chances and make a run. If you always build for the future, it may never come.

What do you think? Do Major League teams use their farm systems the way they should? Is there a right or a wrong way to use them?

Some Baseball Thoughts for an Off-Day

So I've now had a full day to recover from Wednesday morning's All-Star game, and it's gotten me wondering a few things.

First and foremost, I start thinking about where that game ranks among the great sporting events I've seen this year. On the surface and looking at the box score, I'd be inclined to say that it could make a push for the top 5, and should definitely fit in the top 10. But then I think about the first 6 innings, and just how slow the game was and how the best players, the ones everyone really wanted to see, were on the bench as the game reached its dramatic climax. But I suppose that's the way baseball's showcase has always been. Makes me wonder if the game would be better in those late innings, particularly extra innings, if the starting position players could return to the field. Maybe then we wouldn't have Grady Sizemore, an All-Star reserve, getting five at bats in the game.

Is baseball's All-Star Game the best in sports? Given how little these exhibitions seem to mean anymore (did they ever mean that much?), it seems baseball is the one where you're most likely to find all the players trying their hardest. In basketball, it usually turns into a glorified streetball game/slam dunk contest within the first few minutes. In football, the players that don't come up with some "injury" to miss the game spend much of the game playing not to get hurt, and rules changes make the game different from any other game, a big negative in my book. In hockey, well, they're playing hockey. So yeah. But with baseball, it's all about the 1-on-1 matchups, and every pitch has serious pride on the line. No players want to risk the embarrassment of giving up a homer or striking out or making an error, something that's impossible to hide. Poor play in other ASG's is usually hidden because of the number of players involved in the action and the pace of play, but in baseball most players are out on an island and every error is magnified.

Is baseball's All-Star Game the best?

=======

What are the chances the Rockies make major changes this season? I've been saying for years that Clint Hurdle is nothing special as a manager and I think last year's Series run was the worst thing that could have happened for the franchise's future. Even as the team made its playoff push, Hurdle was more spectator than he was the reason it happened. Now, with the pressure of slightly more national media attention and the expectations that come with being the defending NL champions, the Rockies have been slightly better than horrible this year and are deluding themselves into thinking they're still alive in the pennant race because they're in the NL West. I think the seat will only get hotter for the Gum Chewer.

Another question seems to be getting more and more evident for my Rox: What do you do with Matt Holliday? His contract expires following next season, and his agent is the much-loathed Scott Boras, the man responsible for A-Rod's big contracts, among others. Boras has evidently made it clear to Rockies management that there will be no hometown discount for Holliday so if he's going to remain a Rockie, it'll cost them. And given the Monforts' (Rockies owners) history of tight spending, it seems almost assured that Holliday will land elsewhere. So the Rockies have three options as an organization:

1. Trade Holliday before this month's trading deadline, a move that would likely get more teams into the running because he'd be available for all of 2009 for that team, not just for a pennant run this year. Considering the quality minor league talent the Indians got for CC Sabathia who is a legitimate "rental player," the Rox could hope for a major haul, ideally including a Major-League ready, or at least AAA, pitcher.
2. Trade Holliday during this offseason like the Twins did last offseason with Johan Santana. This would give all the possible suitors a better idea of what their finances look like for 2009 and beyond, and could get the big spenders like Boston and the New York teams involved because they could potentially re-sign the slugger.
3. Trade Holliday before the trade deadline in 2009. This move, to me, seems the riskiest as Holliday's value doesn't seem like it can get any higher than it's at right now. Waiting a full year allows for the possibility of a slump or an injury that could significantly change his trade value and cost the Rockies precious prospects. It also will mean that the acquiring team will only have Holliday for roughly 3-4 months of the season before having to worry about re-signing him, and my guess is Boras is going to use Alphonso Soriano's huge deal with the Cubs as a starting point in negotiations. So these teams will be reluctant to give up major prospects for a rental player.

I'd love to add a fourth option of "Re-sign the best player the team's developed since Todd Helton" but that really seems like an impossibility. Especially if the Rockies are out of contention this year and early next year. Holliday deserves a lot of credit for giving the Rockies even the three options I've just listed, as it's unlikely Boras would have agreed to a 2-year deal last offseason were it not insisted upon by Holliday.

Regardless of which option Rockies management chooses, one thing is clear: the Rocks will never be a dominant team in baseball over a long period. They just can't afford it.

So please tell me what you think they'll do. If your favorite team had to trade its best player, where would you be okay with him going?

Tidbits from the All-Star Game (Live Blog)

• How cool was it to see all of those Hall of Famers on the field? I'm not much of a baseball historian, given I've only closely followed the game for a few years, and never given much thought to its past beyond the biggest of the big names. Nevertheless, seeing all of those living legends, and seeing the reverence in the All-Stars' eyes as they shook the hands of these great players, is really quite amazing. It makes me wish I could have seen more of them in their primes, and makes you wonder what a fan felt like seeing those players in action years ago. Back when there wasn't 24 hour news, and nightly SportsCenter, and tons and tons of media coverage of all aspects of sports, what was it like to see a man play that you may only have read about? Makes me wonder.
  
• Is it tougher to be a starting pitcher or a starting position player in the first inning of the All-Star Game? From tonight's game you'd surmise that the former is much tougher, as neither team is able to get the bats going early on. The old saying goes that you want to get to great pitchers early on in a game, before they settle in and get a feel for the pitches that night, but it looks to me like the adrenaline may have been a little too much for some of the starting hitters to handle.
• Was Buck and McCarver's conversation with Yogi Berra the dullest thing you've ever witnessed? I know earlier I gushed about seeing the HOFer's, and that was great, but do we really want to listen to a 70+ year old man wax nostalgic during a 0-0 game that, frankly, is rather dull to begin with?
  
• Does anyone look more smug and sure of himself at the plate and in the field than Derek Jeter? I tell ya, I never cared much for the guy, but I don't think any player in the game is more professional and more suited to the New York stage than Jeter. The man is beloved in the toughest media market in the U.S. and for good reason. Boy it pains me to say that.
  
• How devastating is it going to be for Rockies fans (such as myself) when (not if) the Rockies trade Matt Holliday? With the home run giving the NL the fifth inning lead, Holliday continues to demonstrate that he can hit any pitcher, even one throwing 97 mile per hour gas, and in any atmosphere. You can't argue that Holliday was the Rocks best hitter in the 2007 postseason, and his regular season numbers speak for themselves.
• Is FOX's radar gun juicing again? Did you see how many 95+ mile per hour pitches have been registered so far? This is ridiculous. I know these are the best of the best pitching out there, but come on. Not even the absolute best can light up the radar gun like these guys have. Something seems to be going on here.
• Could this be the year the NL pulls it off? (posted prior to the 7th inning) It seems to me that the NL may actually have the advantage in this game. While the AL has the better overall players and probably has the better bullpen depth, I think the NL has the better hitters for a game like this, guys that can hit for average and hit well situationally. The AL has more stud power hitters that tend to swing for the fences which can be tough against quality pitchers.
• What is Cory Hart doing in an All-Star game? I mean, seriously. I know, I know, he won the fan vote to get in at the last second, whatever. But you can't tell me that he's a better player than Carlos Lee (not in) or Ryan Howard (not in) or Jimmy Rollins (not in) or... Name your player. Hell, I think I'd rather have Hart's teammate Prince Fielder, all 350 pounds of him, instead of Hart. But I digress...
• Has online fan voting improved the All-Star selection process? This topic was brought up earlier in the day (I forget where) and I thought it was an intriguing question. On the plus side, fans are far more informed now than they used to be about how a player is doing this year as opposed to just riding name recognition, so hotter players are rewarded for playing well. On the other hand, though, you get situations where a player like a Ken Griffey, Jr. does not get voted in even though it would be a meaningful demonstration to an all-time great player. Meanwhile, guys like Kosuke Fukudome and Cory Hart, players with good stat lines but that really don't seem to deserve All-Star recognition, get to play in the Midsummer Classic.
• Have you ever heard a more awkward applause than when J.D. Drew hit the game-tying home run? The Red Sox players have been heavily booed throughout the game, but the fans are still clearly favoring the AL (duh) and they don't know how to react when a Sox player helps the AL. Instead of cheering or booing, it was almost like a golf or tennis applause, subtle and withdrawn.
• Did I say the New York crowd was subtle and withdrawn? Oops. So much for that idea as the Yanks fans quickly jump on Papelbon for giving up a lead-off single to the 31-going-on-34-year-old Miguel Tejada. Then when Tejada comes around to score on a sac fly following a horrible throw by Rays catcher Dioner Navarro on a steal attempt, the Yanks fans jump on Papelbawn full throat for giving up the lead. I know the Sox and Yanks hate each other, but this is some serious venom for an exhibition game, even if it does "count."
• Who the hell is Brian Wilson? No, really. Who is this guy? Giants closer? Really? Ooookay.
• Does the "This time it counts!" campaign have any impact on the game or your desire to view it? I never paid much attention to All-Star games before, in any sport, but I usually watched them (or at least have them on in the background), so I can't say that putting home field in the World Series on the line increases my interest. Frankly, I think home field should be determined by the league with the better interleague record, but I suppose that's beside the point. What do you think?
• What am I supposed to do if I have ED? I'm clueless. I haven't seen a single prescription erectile dysfunction commercial this entire time, and I'm loving it. Granted we still have had plenty of "enlarged prostate" options, but at least there are no 50-somethings sitting in bath tubs overlooking the Grand Canyon in those commercials.
• How sweet was that shot by Evan Longoria? As a fan of two NL teams, and a fan of parity in general, I'm really not happy to see the AL tie it, but still. Nice hit for the rookie, and a bit of redemption after finishing dead last in the Home Run Derby last night. Good for him.
• Have players gotten better/faster/more aggressive on the basepaths, or are catchers getting worse? With an All-Star Game record 6 stolen bases thus far (with 1 out in the top of the ninth), it looks like something is definitely up. Is it that the runners are getting great jumps and burning down the basepath, or are the catchers just not making the throws? Or maybe it's the pitchers' fault for not holding the runners on better, as I've seen very few throws over to first tonight. Hard to say, but it appears to be a trend in the regular season, as well, as stolen bases have been increasing the last few years. Maybe the lack of steroids are leading managers to try and play more small-ball instead of just sitting back and waiting for the two- or three-run homer.
• Is there any chance that FOX's "Fringe" survives more than one season? I'm leaning towards no. No good show ever gets advertised this much before it premieres.
• What in the world is the problem with Ryan Dempster's wrist? Did you see this? He flails his glove back and forth three times before each pitch. I've seen odd windups, but this one is really out there.
• Is there any other sport where a chubby, five-foot something Hispanic man could be an All-Star? Dioner Navarro doesn't think so either.
• Was there any doubt this game would go into extra innings? I guess the All-Star backups are getting a bit more work than they bargained for. Maybe we should ask Bud Selig if they can let the starters reenter the game.
• How will this turn out (posted with 1 out in the top of the 10th)? As I mentioned earlier (seems like so long ago now), the NL seems to have the advantage in starting pitching and hitters that hit for average, but in a sudden death-type situation as extra innings are, this seems to play into the AL's strengths: power hitting and bullpen arms. As much as I hate to say it, I think the AL will pull this one out.
• Is Dan Uggla the MVP for the AL in this one? Looks like it's about to be the case as he blows a 1 out, runners on the corners situation in the top of the 10th and follows with a pair of errors to start the bottom of the inning. I do not envy the poor guy and he'd better hope Cook can pull off a miracle.
• Was that Aaron Cook's best inning ever? It just might have been, as he gets FIVE ground balls, and despite Uggla's errors blanks the AL in a bases loaded, no out situation. Absolutely outstanding.
• How good was that throw by Nate McClouth? And an equally amazing play by Russell Martin at the plate to make the "tag" to prevent the game-winning run. Some close calls by the umps, but they were bang-bang plays and I think the call at the plate was right, even if the call at second earlier wasn't. To the 12th inning we go.
  
• Why FOX, why? Why can't we make it through an entire sporting event without an ED drug commercial? Official time: 11:25 central standard time.
• Remember when Matt Holliday hit that home run last week? That was cool. Oh, that was today? Wow.
• Has anybody ever wanted a grand slam more than Dan Uggla does here in the 12th? Not a chance. What a painful at-bat that ended up being. I'll say it again: poor guy.
• Am I the only one hoping for a walk-off here in the bottom of the 12th? Some of us have to go to work tomorrow...
• If the NL wins this thing, is Aaron Cook your MVP? Hard to argue with as he's handled extreme pressure and a lineup of (second tier) All-Stars beautifully over 3 innings.
• Why couldn't that ball go another five feet? Nate McClouth leads off the 14th inning with a shot to deep right field, but it comes up just short as J.D. Drew makes the catch at the track. Earlier in the 13th inning Carlos Guillen had a similar shot to lead off the inning against Aaron Cook, but that turned into a double and produced no runs when all was said and done.
• Is it time for Bud Selig to step in again? I'm not sure anyone would blame him for calling this game as we prepare for the 15th inning, tying an All-Star Game record for innings played. We passed the record for time played at about 11:30 PM and we're at 12:20 as I write this.
• Who didn't want Kinsler's shot to left to get by Ludwick? After going back then staggering to recover, Ludwick makes a nice driving grab in the bottom of the 15th to keep the game tied and Morneau at first. Shortly thereafter, Dioner Navarro belts a single and Drew has another chance to be a hero, 2 on, 1 out. I think the Yankees fans will cheer a Drew hit here, Red Sox player or not. Drew walks, Michael Young up with a chance to win it again, and Clint Hurdle is still chewing the same piece of gum.

And Young pulls it off, sac fly to right and Hart's throw is offline to Brian McCann, scoring Morneau and sealing the AL's home field advantage in the World Series. That's all for me, because it's freaking late. I hope you enjoyed reading this, good night.

Random Ramblings on a Tuesday Morning

{NOTE: You no longer have to sign up to post comments on this blog. All comments will be reviewed prior to posting, but you do not need a google or gmail ID to post them. - Chris}

Yesterday when I posted my blog entry, around 9:30 a.m. central time, I had no idea that the topic I chose was going to become the theme of the day on ESPN. When I got home from work and flipped on "Pardon The Interruption" yesterday afternoon, I was amused to see the subject of "Best sporting event of 2008" as a message in their mailbag. Next thing I know, the same topic surfaces again in their final segment of the show, with hosts Bob Ryan and Michael Wilbon debating the merits of the Federer/Nadal match among the best events of the year. Neither agreed with me that the Super Bowl would be #1, but I'm not surprised as it's not nearly as fresh in our memory as Wimbledon or the U.S. Open.

Then hours later I tune in to SportsCenter to find that "Best sporting event of 2008" is a major topic, and in fact their poll question of the night was on that same topic. So what am I supposed to think? Of course they stole my idea. It's so obvious. So desperate are they for ideas, they have to steal them from lowly bloggers like myself. Shameful, really.

+++++

It's July 8th, do you know where your baseball team is?

In my lifetime I have been most closely associated to two cities: Denver, Colorado where I grew up and near where I went to college (Go Rams!) and Houston, Texas where I and much of my family resides. So naturally my preferred baseball teams are the Rockies (38-52) and the Astros (41-49). It's not easy to admit that right about now.

Yes, it may be true that the struggles only add to the sweetness of success. I will admit that the Rox incredible playoff and World Series run last year was that much more enjoyable because I had stuck with the team through all the losing seasons that were over by August. But you know what, there's also something to be said for having a team that you always believe is in contention. Just ask Red Sox or Yankees fans if they'd prefer their teams were terrible for the next 5 years before becoming good for a brief championship run. I think we all know what they'd say.

So to be sitting here on July 8th, with my favorite team (the Rockies) 14 games below .500 (but only 6.5 games back in the division!) and my second favorite team 8 games below .500 and in dead last (behind the Pirates!) in their division, is a little depressing.

Only 12 days until the earliest NFL training camps start opening. Go Broncos and Texans...

+++++

When is the right time for a sports team to officially decide to give up on a season and look towards the future? All 4 of the major sports in this country have a mid-season trading deadline (although that rarely affects anything in the NFL), but is this a good time to start thinking about rebuilding? Or should teams start earlier (see Cleveland Indians trading CC Sabathia) or hold on for a miracle run (see 2007 Rockies, 2005 Astros)?

Let me know what you think.

Is soccer gaining ground in America?

The conclusion of the Euro 2008 soccer tournament was televised on national TV in the U.S. this weekend, broadcasting on ABC at 2:30 eastern time. With the world's largest sports network, ESPN, beginning to not only broadcast Major League Soccer (U.S.) games but many European league games and international matches, it is looking more and more like the world's most popular sport is gaining a foothold here in the United States.

Certainly your average sports fan is paying more attention than ever to the sport, but this doesn't necessarily mean much. Soccer has long been an afterthought for Americans due to its generally slow pace and low-scoring games, not to mention the dreaded ties. All of these aspects are things that American sports have been fighting to avoid for years, from the strict defensive rules imposed in the early '90s by the NBA to allow for more free-flowing, 1-on-1 basketball leading to more scoring, to the NFL's continuing rules changes this decade making it more difficult for defensive backs to hang with speedy receivers, to the NHL's numerous rules changes following the devastating lockout, all aimed at increasing scoring. These rules changes really started, one could argue, in the late 1960s in Major League Baseball when the pitchers' mound was lowered and the strike zone shrunk following a season with record-low scoring totals and the remarkable seasons of starting pitchers Denny McClain of the Tigers (31 wins) and Bob Gibson of the Cardinals (1.12 ERA).

Scoring didn't truly reach the point of mass appeal until the 1990's and the Michael Jordan era in the NBA. In order to further promote the league, Commissioner David Stern decided to take the approach of promoting the game's stars to draw more attention to the sport. While the Larry Birds and Magic Johnsons of the previous decade had drawn significant attention to the sport, it was Jordan that drew in even the most casual of sports fans, the same way Tiger Woods draw even casual sports fans to golf, a game with a history of not connecting particularly well with the average Joe. Jordan brought both national and global attention to the league because of his high-scoring ability and flair for the dramatic, and the other leagues began to take notice.

Further evidence of the U.S.'s desire for scoring and offense came in 1998 when Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa engaged in a home run duel that lasted throughout the summer with both chasing, and each surpassing, the MLB home run record previously held by Roger Maris. This summer saw what many call the rebirth of the sport that was still reeling from a player strike and the cancellation of the 1994 World Series. This event is also what many believe is the beginning of the Steriod Era in baseball, but the fans flocked to the sport, happy to ignore the signs of cheating to watch the offensive juggernauts at work.

Why am I going through all of this? It allows me to present a simple question: Will soccer ever gain a significant foothold in this country, moreso than just the niche sport that it currently is, without some change that provides for more offense? For years I've thought this sport would gain significant appeal and would increase scoring if it simply removed the offsides rule (or perhaps changed it so that players can only be offsides if they are beyond the goal box). Despite the fact that the 1-0 Spain victory on Sunday was an entertaining game, there is something to be said for the idea that a 1 goal lead is not sufficient for a team to just sit on and expect a victory, or at worst a tie. Yes there will be games where a team may overcome a 2 goal lead, but those instances are so rare, it is difficult for a fan to want to continue watching a game if either team takes a 2 or more goal lead.

So what do you think? Does soccer need to consider rules changes to gain more popularity in one of the world's largest economic markets, or should the game remain as it is and be content to be an afterthought in the U.S. while being number 1 nearly everywhere else?

Top 5 Best-Run Organizations in Sports

While it's fun and amusing to look on and laugh at the poor teams stuck in the dregs of sports hell as we did with the last list, there are much different emotions for a list such as this. Often, it's feelings of bitterness, resentment and envy that comes to the following organizations as sports fans look on and wish it was their favorite team that was always on top and holding that bright future. In the era of salary caps, free agency and parity (or mediocrity some would argue), the franchises that are consistently on top are often the subject of hatred, but their fans don't care because they're too busy revelling in their successes. Again, as with the last list, teams must show a commitment to winning both on and off the field.

Honorable Mention - Detroit Red Wings, NHL - Since we didn't include any NHL franchises in the previous discussion, it seemed only fair to not include any in this discussion as well. Thus, the Red Wings, one of the most successful sports franchises in any sport, are excluded from this list. Nonetheless, they still deserve mentioning here as they are a model of consistency when it comes to hiring quality coaches and front office members, signing quality free agents, drafting well and most importantly winning games.

5. Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim - A tough call between the Angels and fellow LA team the Lakers, but the Angels win out because of their ability to make the playoffs consistently in the most competitive sport (in that only 8 total teams make the postseason each year). The Lakers were a one-man team until they stole Pau Gasol from Memphis, and it's hard to give their front office credit for that thievery. The Angels, on the other hand, have been a mainstay in the MLB postseason in recent years, and despite the fact they've only appeared in 1 World Series (which they won in 2002), the appearances are far more meaningful than those of an NBA team. The Angels have a strong coaching staff under Mike Scioscia and a very successful front office that has consistently found young talent making the Angels are one of the strongest organizations in baseball.

4. Indianapolis Colts - Some would argue that the Colts are themselves a one-man team, and that Peyton Manning is good enough to elevate the entire franchise. This simply isn't the case, and football people in the know agree that the Colts are well run from the top down. For a team that has significant turnover on its defense due to salary cap restrictions thanks to its offense, the Colts are consistently among the best defensive teams in the league. Virtually all of the Colts' stars are homegrown players that they drafted, running down the list from Manning to Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Dwight Freeney, Robert Mathis, Joseph Addai... And the list goes on. Add to this a very good coaching staff with one of the NFL's most successful regular season coaches of all time (Tony Dungy), and you have a very strong organization.

3. San Antonio Spurs - Surprisingly, the Spurs are the only team that I really deemed worthy of this list from the NBA. It's hard to value a playoff appearance for an NBA team given the fact that literally over half the league makes the postseason each year (16 out of 30), so an NBA team must be particularly impressive in the postseason to make this cut. The Spurs, having now won 4 of the last 10 NBA titles in an era of parity, have also progressed to at least the second round each year of that time-frame. While the Spurs are considered among the luckiest franchises for landing Tim Duncan in the draft lottery, many, many examples show that one player cannot carry a team to a title in the NBA. That's where the Spurs deserve the most credit: they have brought in strong supporting players year in and year out and have developed some very strong players out of players drafted late in the first round or discarded from other teams. Again, the coaching staff is one of the league's best anchored by head coach Gregg Popovich who has been among the most successful head coaches in NBA history, and has done so in an era and a conference that is among the toughest ever.

2. New England Patriots - Say what you must about Spygate (I'll be the first guy to agree with you that no matter what they say, the Pats did it because they knew it would help them), the Patriots have been successful over the past 7 years because of the strength of their coaching, scouting and player development. One of the signs of a truly strong franchise is the ability to bring in big-name veteran free agents for below market value because they just want a chance at a title, and that's what the Pats have done year after year. Players like Rodney Harrison, Randy Moss, and Corey Dillon have flocked to the Pats and despite their known character issues, have flourished with the team. Much like the Colts and Spurs above, the Patriots were lucky that they found a player that blossomed into one of the best at his position in Tom Brady, but football is the ultimate team game and now team could find the success the Patriots have if all they had was Brady and a bunch of no-names. The Patriots front office has been extraordinarily successful at bringing in those no-names and sculpting them into players that fit the team and the system, and then using them to win championships. They also have a decent coach, I guess.

1. Boston Red Sox - And we conclude our Boston slurp-fest with the team that appears poised to dominate the MLB for the next 5 years or more. Under Theo Epstein, GM since 2002, the Sox have been the best-run organization in their sport and are quickly developing the deepest farm system in the Majors to go along with the best active roster. While the Sox have the benefit of a huge market and no salary cap, many MLB teams have proven that money can't buy championships (see New York Yankees since 2002 and New York Mets) and that teams shouldn't sacrifice their entire farm system in an attempt to acquire veterans to win now. Boston has a quality manager in Terry Francona, but with the talent on the roster Francona's player-friendly approach is precisely what the team needs to find on the field success. All this makes the Sox the favorite to win this year's World Series, and subsequently our number 1.

Top 5 Worst-Run Organizations in Sports

In honor of the upcoming NBA draft (tonight at 6:30), let's have a little fun and run down the five worst-run organizations in the Big Three pro sports (NFL, NBA and MLB; sorry hockey fans, but American stopped caring about 3 years ago). In order to make this prestigious list, the organization must show a deliberate and sustained approach to failure, both on the field and off. Teams on this list have been consistently poor in regards to on-field performance and front office decision-making, and while some have made strides at one time or another, all are still considered the worst of the worst in the sport. Let's begin.

5. Los Angeles Clippers - Okay, so many would argue that the Clips deserve to be higher on this list because of the fact that for many years the ownership made no qualms about the fact that their sole intention was to make money, and they thought they knew the dirty little secret of sports: an owner can make a profit without having to spend money on players or coaches, because people will still come. This thinking led to years of misery for Clippers faithful (if there is such a thing) until a story-book run to the conference semifinals in 2005 got fans excited again, moving LA down the list. Unfortunately, this good fortune turned bad as the owners suddenly started overspending on players and extended coach Mike Dunleavy's contract in the middle of yet another losing season. A few injuries to key players later, and the Clips are back in the cellar where the belong.

4. Detroit Lions - The war chant of Detroit sport fans, no matter the venue or sport, has become "Fire Matt Millen" as these tortured souls have watched the front office of the Lions fail to pull the team out of the gutter year after year. Millen, the Lions GM that has been much maligned but evidently has incriminating photos of the teams owners, has been touted as the main cause of the Lions failings. But the fact is, the team has been awful since well before Millen's time, and even a Hall of Fame running back like Barry Sanders couldn't help the team move beyond mediocrity. And let's not forget the drafting of wide receivers with their first pick in four out of five years, including 3 straight from 2003-05. Only one of those three, Roy Williams, is even in the league anymore.

3. Pittsburgh Pirates - The laughing stock of the MLB now that the Rays are starting to turn things around (and the Rays avoid this list because they at least appeared to have a plan for the last couple years) are the woeful Pirates. Pittsburgh, a team with a long and storied history, has not seen the postseason since 1992 and has not even been in contention for a vast majority of the seasons since. The team has a history in that period of trading its best players in order to dump salary (see, most recently, Brian Giles and Aramis Ramirez) and getting little in return. While Jason Bay turned out to be a solid player coming back in the Giles deal, he is currently the only player on that team that you or I have even heard of. Despite a new and very nice stadium, it's hard to say the future looks bright for the Pirates.

2. New York Knicks - Hard to believe they found their way out of the number 1 hole, but the hiring of Donnie Walsh as GM and Mike D'antoni as head coach are two huge steps in the right direction for a franchise that has been downright embarressing since Patrick Ewing retired. The culprit: Isiah Thomas. No man, without committing a heinous crime (yes, we're talking about you Juice), has done more to sully a stellar professional playing career after retirement, than the aforementioned Thomas. Few will remember him now as the fearless leader of one of the great franchises of the late '80s and early '90s. He will now forever be known as the man that virtually destroyed the NBA's flagship franchise with his ludicrous general management and coaching moves. And that's without mentioning the $10+ million blackeye resulting from a sexual harassment suit. Thanks for the memories, Isiah.

1. Oakland Raiders - An easy choice given the downward spiral this franchise has seen in the last 5 years since losing the Super Bowl. The Raiders, who even at the time of their Super Bowl loss were considered an old folks home for NFL players, have added new members to their solid list of past-their-prime stars in the years since, most notably Warren Sapp. Many of these players have received excessive contracts that have left the team crippled by the salary cap and unable to rebuild. Add to this the numerous failed draft picks (here's looking at you, Robert Gallery) and the coaching carousel led by the league's worst owner Al Davis, and you have a recipe for horrible failure. Even with the team finally seeming to go into rebuilding mode, they can't help but make mistakes. Take this offseason, where the signed wideout Javon Walker to a large contract despite his well-known character issues, and the alleged "letter of resignation" sent by Davis to head coach Lane Kiffin for him to sign, and you see why this team has to rank where it does. While there may be other franchises run worse than Oakland, none have fallen so far, so fast.

Top Five Hitters in Baseball

Last night I went to the Houston Astros-Texas Rangers game at the horribly cramped and poorly air-conditioned Minute Maid Park, and witnessed Lance Berkman go 2-3 with a walk, double, home run, 2 runs and 2 RBI in the Astros 4-3 victory over their in-state rival. This impressive hitting performance got me to thinking: where does The Big Puma rank among MLB hitters? (By the way, isn't that the best nickname in sports right now, only slightly ahead of Jared "The Round Mound of Touchdown"/"The Hefty Lefty"/"J-Load" Lorenzen, now-former QB for the NY football Giants? But that's another list entirely.) Here we go, in classic drama-building reverse order:

Honorable Mention: Chipper Jones, Atlanta Braves - On the strength of this year alone (still batting .395 as of this morning), Jones deserves to make this list. And he's not just a one-year wonder; Jones has been a great hitter virtually his entire career in the majors. He's a rare number 1 overall draft pick that truly lived up to his potential, hitting not just for average but for consistent power over the years. Unfortunately, the guys ahead of him are just too good for him to sneak in.

5. Lance Berkman, Houston Astros - Based on this year alone, The Puma probably deserves to be higher than this, but his career numbers don't quite stack up to the others on here. Berkman is having a career year in both average and power numbers and it doesn't look like he'll be slowing down any time soon. If his careers stats were only a little better, he'd be a spot or two higher.

4. Matt Holliday, Colorado Rockies - As a Rockies fan, I'd love to put Holliday higher on this list but I simply can't because of his home/road splits that imply there may still be something to the Coors Field magic (although, honestly, who doesn't hit better at home?). Holliday is one of the most potent hitters in baseball nonetheless, and he hits for average and power and has shown himself capable of hitting very well in the clutch as he helped lead the Rockies to the World Series last year. Amazing how this guy is on the trading block.

3. Manny Ramirez, Boston Red Sox - His power numbers are spectacular and have been his entire career. In the clutch, he and teammate David Ortiz may be the two most feared hitters in baseball. He can also hit for average, but as is often the case with the big swingers, his average isn't always consistently high and he's prone to slumps.

2. Albert Pujols, St. Louis Cardinals - It is oh so tempting to put A-Pu at #1, not only because of his phenomenal regular season accomplishments but for his postseason resume as well. Unfortunately, the man who may be the best hitter of this era has been plagued by injuries, many of which seem like just pure bad luck, and these have prevented him from dominating enough to win more than one MVP award. That said, he is the MLB's active batting average leader and is second in home runs, RBI and runs since he entered the league in 2001. Of course, he's second to...

1. Alex Rodriguez, New York Yankees - A-Rod has been a model of consistency and dominance in the regular season since he broke in with the Seattle Mariners in 1995 at age 18. The knock on him of lacking that "clutch" ability or "killer instinct" aside, Rodriguez has been the best player in baseball for many years and has put up absolutely staggering numbers, even when playing for the woeful Texas Rangers (although their park is commonly considered among the best hitters parks in baseball). A-Rod is a 3-time AL MVP and is likely to surpass the career home run totals of Hank Aaron and He Who Shall Not Be Named as long as he is able to stay even moderately healthy. No hitters in the game have to ability to hit for power and average at such a consistent clip which gives him the top spot in this list.