I'm about to rant, if it doesn't quite follow then suck it up.
I'm sick of hearing that Derek Jeter is the best shortstop of this generation. Let me first state that he is a good player having a great year, but he would be overlooked if he played for any other team in the country (except maybe the Red Sox or Mets). He has always had a great lineup around him and sees a large number of good pitches, because he is not even remotely the scariest hitter in the lineup. Any pitcher would rather let him beat them than A-Rod, Texeira, or Matsui (and before Texeira, it was Abreu or Giambi). And in his defense he has done his share of beating people, but he gets many more opportunities than say a Pujols or Hanley Ramirez, who only get a few pitches to hit because they are the best hitters in the lineup.
Now here is what bothers me: Derek Jeter is being talked about for the AL MVP. I only mention that to prove how underrated the other guy is. (I'm not going to talk about other MVP options in the AL at this time. That's not the point of this blog.) His numbers are great and the player I am going to talk about is in the other conference, but you have not heard a thing about him. Why not? DJ is hitting .332 with a .394 OBP, slugging .476 with 57 RBIs. Good numbers. There is a National League shortstop not being talked about nearly as much who hits 30 points better, 25 more OBP, almost 100 points better slugging, and with 28 more RBIs. Think about that. Those are great numbers; they are MVP caliber numbers. Who is this guy? I mentioned him earlier, it's Hanley Ramirez and he's currently hitting .361 with 85 RBIs and a .995 OPS. He's blowing Derek Jeter out of the water, yet all we hear about is Jeter.
What's going on here? Problem number one is that the NL MVP has been locked up since before the all-star break. Everyone has already decided that it's Pujols and I'm okay with that, but can someone please give Hanley some love. At least stop with all the Derek Jeter is the best shortstop in the league B.S. He's obviously not. Hanley plays on a worse team, is the best hitter on that team (thus meaning less good pitches), his team's payroll is one third of the Yankees, and yet his team is still in the playoff hunt. Why are we still talking about Jeter?
Problem number two for Hanley is that he does not play for the Yankees, Red Sox or Mets. The national media love these teams and seems contractually obligated to only talk about the great players on those teams. Hanley is the best shortstop in baseball, period. Anyone who tells you differently is lying or is misinformed. He has not been around as long as the other guy. And the other's guys career numbers are good, but that guy has always played for great teams with great players.
All I ask is that you think a little bit when you hear that smooching sound of someone kissing Derek Jeter's butt. Maybe we should look at some actual stats instead of just the national media bias for all things Yankee.
P.S. The leading candidate for AL MVP should be Joe Mauer (1.074 OPS, enough said).
P.P.S. The current best player in baseball that you've never heard of (sorry, Adrian Gonzalez): Kendry Morales (.303 AVG, 84 RBIs, 27 HRs, 32 doubles, .923 OPS, .994 Fpct)
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
The Truth About Baseball
All right, so Justin Credible is gonna set everyone straight about steroids and I'll add my two cents as it applies.
Baseball players took steroids, period. There is no need for an asterisk or any other unholy symbol to represent the dark period of baseball. All positions were affected by the use of steroids. Pitchers used, hitters used, hell some coaches and bat boys probably used. So the guy hitting the huge hommers was hitting that fastball thrown from a equally jucied pitcher. The only real complaint should be why baseball did not address the problem in the 80's. Bud you knew what was up were not all idiots. There should be no question why players took steroids. They work. Now they may not help a player hit a round ball with a round bat, but it will help them hit that sucker a long way and more importantly it will help keep that player in the game for 162 games a year. Before pointing that ugly finger at baseball, let's take an honest look at the current culture of sports. Has anyone changed the channel to "World's Strongest Man," the WWE, the bodybuilders in the olympia competition, the UFC, "USC" linebackers, the Govenator, the Olympic sprinters (male and female) or maybe the movie "300?" Lets not forget those crafty cyclists (don't believe me read a freaking book). Why is the media just a black flag over baseball, when everyone is doing it? Certainly, it has been mishandled and mismanaged, but we should be looking at all sport and not just baseball. Yes, It may be a black eye for baseball, but my real concern is for our culture and more importantly or young people. Make no mistake steroids have effected all sport on every level for a long long time. And for those of you still living in your bubble. Trust me, Winstroll, was being handed out like skittles in the 70's and 80's. I will end my rant with a talk about the problem with availability of steroids. Has anyone ever heard anyone talking about not being able to get the drugs. (probably not) If the Government was really interested in stopping the problem, which they so publicly showed. Lets start cracking down on local meat heads. (GNC anyone) Oh yea just in case Congress is reading this if a guy in New York city orders cattle prducts something may be up.
That was JC, now I'll add my thoughts. Steroids is a media problem. I think fans could care less. We know it happened. We know it's still happening. We don't care. Okay, maybe we care a little. We don't want our kids doing it. And we would like it to go away, but we are realists. We want there to be sports. We want our sports to be exciting and played by great athletes. If you start taking away the best athletes because they used and lower the quality of sports, then we may get angry. If you can clean it up and still keep the competitiveness, then do it. Otherwise, shut up. We didn't even need to know. We still don't need to know. Barry Bonds is still the best hitter of my generation. Even the juiced up pitchers couldn't get him out. As far as I'm concerned, everyone was juicing and it was an even playing field. So I'm good.
I do not even blame the players. I know they were illegal. The sport may not have been testing, but they were still illegal. However, if I someone told me that this substance could give me a chance to make it to the pinnacle of the my job or career and otherwise I would be stuck where I am for the rest of my career, I would probably consider it. Especially when I watched other people who were less talented than me suddenly pass me by. I am actually just sick of hearing about it. Pro athletes are competitive and are going to use any advantage they can get their hands on. That's the way it is. Steroids work, so athletes are going to use them. Until you can actually clear out every single player that used or is using and completely level the playing field again, I don't care. The long and short of it is that technology is going to keep beating the tests, so I would just like to stop hearing about it.
Peace, SL
Baseball players took steroids, period. There is no need for an asterisk or any other unholy symbol to represent the dark period of baseball. All positions were affected by the use of steroids. Pitchers used, hitters used, hell some coaches and bat boys probably used. So the guy hitting the huge hommers was hitting that fastball thrown from a equally jucied pitcher. The only real complaint should be why baseball did not address the problem in the 80's. Bud you knew what was up were not all idiots. There should be no question why players took steroids. They work. Now they may not help a player hit a round ball with a round bat, but it will help them hit that sucker a long way and more importantly it will help keep that player in the game for 162 games a year. Before pointing that ugly finger at baseball, let's take an honest look at the current culture of sports. Has anyone changed the channel to "World's Strongest Man," the WWE, the bodybuilders in the olympia competition, the UFC, "USC" linebackers, the Govenator, the Olympic sprinters (male and female) or maybe the movie "300?" Lets not forget those crafty cyclists (don't believe me read a freaking book). Why is the media just a black flag over baseball, when everyone is doing it? Certainly, it has been mishandled and mismanaged, but we should be looking at all sport and not just baseball. Yes, It may be a black eye for baseball, but my real concern is for our culture and more importantly or young people. Make no mistake steroids have effected all sport on every level for a long long time. And for those of you still living in your bubble. Trust me, Winstroll, was being handed out like skittles in the 70's and 80's. I will end my rant with a talk about the problem with availability of steroids. Has anyone ever heard anyone talking about not being able to get the drugs. (probably not) If the Government was really interested in stopping the problem, which they so publicly showed. Lets start cracking down on local meat heads. (GNC anyone) Oh yea just in case Congress is reading this if a guy in New York city orders cattle prducts something may be up.
That was JC, now I'll add my thoughts. Steroids is a media problem. I think fans could care less. We know it happened. We know it's still happening. We don't care. Okay, maybe we care a little. We don't want our kids doing it. And we would like it to go away, but we are realists. We want there to be sports. We want our sports to be exciting and played by great athletes. If you start taking away the best athletes because they used and lower the quality of sports, then we may get angry. If you can clean it up and still keep the competitiveness, then do it. Otherwise, shut up. We didn't even need to know. We still don't need to know. Barry Bonds is still the best hitter of my generation. Even the juiced up pitchers couldn't get him out. As far as I'm concerned, everyone was juicing and it was an even playing field. So I'm good.
I do not even blame the players. I know they were illegal. The sport may not have been testing, but they were still illegal. However, if I someone told me that this substance could give me a chance to make it to the pinnacle of the my job or career and otherwise I would be stuck where I am for the rest of my career, I would probably consider it. Especially when I watched other people who were less talented than me suddenly pass me by. I am actually just sick of hearing about it. Pro athletes are competitive and are going to use any advantage they can get their hands on. That's the way it is. Steroids work, so athletes are going to use them. Until you can actually clear out every single player that used or is using and completely level the playing field again, I don't care. The long and short of it is that technology is going to keep beating the tests, so I would just like to stop hearing about it.
Peace, SL
Brett Favre is Back, Now Stop Complaining
So we all knew he was coming back. Did you really think he would have surgery (which by the way is a big problem cause he still has that little issue with prescription narcotics) just to hang on his ranch? Did you really think the Vikings were dumb enough to pass on Michael Vick (which would've been a Vick, Peterson, and Harvin backfield) unless they knew that Favre was still interested? Don't for a second tell me that the team that hired strippers and a boat for their players are too good morally for Michael Vick. So you should've known he was coming back.
My question is: why is everyone so pissed? This is the way pro sports work. We as fans are so attached to our teams that we want the players to be too, but sports are business. If your team no longer wants a player or does not think that he is worth the money and someone else does, then the player every right to leave. We want our players to be loyal, but if ownership isn't loyal to them then what can we do. If the Vikings thought that Brett was worth money and the risk and Brett wanted to play that is a decision for that player and that organization, not anyone else. Brett has the right to do whatever he wants, even if he sucks. If the team wants him, then he has every right to sign with them. (You would hope that he would have enough integrity to not play if he did not think that he could play at a high level, but that is not a necessity.) If you were in Brett's shoes, then you would do the same thing. You would have no loyalty to the Packers, who no longer want you and if you disagree with me, then you are lying to yourself.
So stop whining. Packers fans are pissed because he went to a division rival. You have no right to be angry. If you wanted him, your ownership should not have run him out of town. They especially should not have run him out and then tried to tell him where he was allowed to play. As I said before, Brett Favre has every right to play for any team that wants him. Your team did not want him, so he went to one who does, be mad at your ownership or say good riddance, stop bitching.
Vikings fans. Why on God's green earth are you whining? You have gone from Tarvaris Jackson or Sage Rosenfels to one of the top ten QBs of all time. Why is this a problem? I don't care how long you have hated him, he makes your team better. I am a huge Georgia fan and I hate Tim Tebow, but I would love to have him on my team. Let go of your stupid pride and realize that he makes you better. No matter what you have had to deal with in the past, it's over now and he's going to help your team win. Stop being mad just because he used to beat your ass.
Here are some real reasons for Vikings fans to be mad (note that none of them are because he used to play for the Packers and you have hated him your whole life):
1. If you think that he is washed up and will not be able to play at a high level for the whole season.
This is a legitimate concern and probably the reason it took so long for Brett to make a decision. Missing training camp will definitely help and I think Brett believes he can make it a whole season or he would not have come back. Nobody knows what it takes to play QB in the NFL better than Brett Favre. This is still my biggest concern but I think he will be better than last year.
2. If you think that this may make you a pass happy team.
That would be a big problem. The Vikings should run the ball, play great defense, and then, maybe, pass. If they want to pass more now that they have Favre it becomes a huge problem. Their best offensive player is still Adrian Peterson and then probably Harvin. They should bang with Peterson and use Harvin any way they can. They had one of the best defenses in football last year and should have again this year. They do not need to throw the ball as a first option.
3. If you think that Favre throws too many picks.
They need a quarterback who will not make mistakes, which Favre has been known to do. But do you really think he's a worse option than Jackson, Rosenfels, Booty or even Vick in that category.
SL/JC
My question is: why is everyone so pissed? This is the way pro sports work. We as fans are so attached to our teams that we want the players to be too, but sports are business. If your team no longer wants a player or does not think that he is worth the money and someone else does, then the player every right to leave. We want our players to be loyal, but if ownership isn't loyal to them then what can we do. If the Vikings thought that Brett was worth money and the risk and Brett wanted to play that is a decision for that player and that organization, not anyone else. Brett has the right to do whatever he wants, even if he sucks. If the team wants him, then he has every right to sign with them. (You would hope that he would have enough integrity to not play if he did not think that he could play at a high level, but that is not a necessity.) If you were in Brett's shoes, then you would do the same thing. You would have no loyalty to the Packers, who no longer want you and if you disagree with me, then you are lying to yourself.
So stop whining. Packers fans are pissed because he went to a division rival. You have no right to be angry. If you wanted him, your ownership should not have run him out of town. They especially should not have run him out and then tried to tell him where he was allowed to play. As I said before, Brett Favre has every right to play for any team that wants him. Your team did not want him, so he went to one who does, be mad at your ownership or say good riddance, stop bitching.
Vikings fans. Why on God's green earth are you whining? You have gone from Tarvaris Jackson or Sage Rosenfels to one of the top ten QBs of all time. Why is this a problem? I don't care how long you have hated him, he makes your team better. I am a huge Georgia fan and I hate Tim Tebow, but I would love to have him on my team. Let go of your stupid pride and realize that he makes you better. No matter what you have had to deal with in the past, it's over now and he's going to help your team win. Stop being mad just because he used to beat your ass.
Here are some real reasons for Vikings fans to be mad (note that none of them are because he used to play for the Packers and you have hated him your whole life):
1. If you think that he is washed up and will not be able to play at a high level for the whole season.
This is a legitimate concern and probably the reason it took so long for Brett to make a decision. Missing training camp will definitely help and I think Brett believes he can make it a whole season or he would not have come back. Nobody knows what it takes to play QB in the NFL better than Brett Favre. This is still my biggest concern but I think he will be better than last year.
2. If you think that this may make you a pass happy team.
That would be a big problem. The Vikings should run the ball, play great defense, and then, maybe, pass. If they want to pass more now that they have Favre it becomes a huge problem. Their best offensive player is still Adrian Peterson and then probably Harvin. They should bang with Peterson and use Harvin any way they can. They had one of the best defenses in football last year and should have again this year. They do not need to throw the ball as a first option.
3. If you think that Favre throws too many picks.
They need a quarterback who will not make mistakes, which Favre has been known to do. But do you really think he's a worse option than Jackson, Rosenfels, Booty or even Vick in that category.
SL/JC
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Message to Greeny (and all other Jets fans): Mark Sanchez is not your savior
The New York Jets spent a good deal of money and some draft picks to get Mark Sanchez. Unfortunately for them, he's not the answer at quarterback in New York and I've got 5 reasons why.
5. He only started for one college season. This is one of the favorite arguments against Sanchez and I think it is only minorly important. It would be nice if he had more experience and he still had eligibility to get that experience, but he chose not to. Which incidentally was the right choice even when he fails this year. You do not go back to school if you are going to be the second QB taken in the draft, that's just stupid, but it doesn't make you ready to play either.
4. He has a knee injury that impairs his movement and he did not have good mobility to begin with. A lack of mobility along with an average arm (I defer to J.C. here who refuses to give him above that) is a bad combination.
3. His own coach, who has NFL experience said that he wasn't ready. This is only third on the list because I think his coach had some self-serving motivation for this statement (i.e. the lack of a decent player to take his place). Nonetheless, his coach knows what NFL talent looks like and what a starting NFL quarterback should be, yet he still did not think his own guy was there yet. I still find this rather telling.
2. He played on probably the most talented team in the country, in a conference with historically weak defenses, struggled in the big games and could not lead his team to a national championship appearance. This seems harsh, but a team as talented as USC is expected to compete for national championships every year and he could not get them there.
1. Finally, and most important. The two players who beat him out for the QB job at USC are currently doing what in the NFL? In recent reports Matt Leinart is in a battle for the number 2 quarterback job in Arizona. While John David Booty is the third string quarterback for a Viking team that everyone knows has no good options at their 1 or 2 spots. So he got beat out in college by two guys that will be holding clipboards this year in the league, but he's going to be ready start right away. I doubt that.
So add it all up and what do you have with Mark Sanchez? An inexperienced college quarterback with an average arm and slow feet who is prone to injury and slightly underachieved in college. Plus, he couldn't beat out two quarterbacks who are fighting to be the back-ups on NFL teams and his college coach did not think he was ready. Does that sound like someone you want leading your team?
Honorable Mentions:
J.C. had some other stuff that didn't make the top 5, but I'll mention it anyway:
His head is like an eggshell
He never won the big game:
SL says, "They did win their bowl game, but that was against someone weak."
JC replies, "They did not win their big games during the season though."
SL: "They did beat Ohio State."
JC: "You don't get points for beating up a girl."
So I guess that's the end of that argument.
He never played in the cold or the wind.
In college he played on grass, not turf.
He's never been booed.
SL/JC
5. He only started for one college season. This is one of the favorite arguments against Sanchez and I think it is only minorly important. It would be nice if he had more experience and he still had eligibility to get that experience, but he chose not to. Which incidentally was the right choice even when he fails this year. You do not go back to school if you are going to be the second QB taken in the draft, that's just stupid, but it doesn't make you ready to play either.
4. He has a knee injury that impairs his movement and he did not have good mobility to begin with. A lack of mobility along with an average arm (I defer to J.C. here who refuses to give him above that) is a bad combination.
3. His own coach, who has NFL experience said that he wasn't ready. This is only third on the list because I think his coach had some self-serving motivation for this statement (i.e. the lack of a decent player to take his place). Nonetheless, his coach knows what NFL talent looks like and what a starting NFL quarterback should be, yet he still did not think his own guy was there yet. I still find this rather telling.
2. He played on probably the most talented team in the country, in a conference with historically weak defenses, struggled in the big games and could not lead his team to a national championship appearance. This seems harsh, but a team as talented as USC is expected to compete for national championships every year and he could not get them there.
1. Finally, and most important. The two players who beat him out for the QB job at USC are currently doing what in the NFL? In recent reports Matt Leinart is in a battle for the number 2 quarterback job in Arizona. While John David Booty is the third string quarterback for a Viking team that everyone knows has no good options at their 1 or 2 spots. So he got beat out in college by two guys that will be holding clipboards this year in the league, but he's going to be ready start right away. I doubt that.
So add it all up and what do you have with Mark Sanchez? An inexperienced college quarterback with an average arm and slow feet who is prone to injury and slightly underachieved in college. Plus, he couldn't beat out two quarterbacks who are fighting to be the back-ups on NFL teams and his college coach did not think he was ready. Does that sound like someone you want leading your team?
Honorable Mentions:
J.C. had some other stuff that didn't make the top 5, but I'll mention it anyway:
His head is like an eggshell
He never won the big game:
SL says, "They did win their bowl game, but that was against someone weak."
JC replies, "They did not win their big games during the season though."
SL: "They did beat Ohio State."
JC: "You don't get points for beating up a girl."
So I guess that's the end of that argument.
He never played in the cold or the wind.
In college he played on grass, not turf.
He's never been booed.
SL/JC
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
The Yankees and Red Sox Broadcasting Network AKA ESPN
So, I don't know if you noticed, but ESPN's Chris Mortensen has been visiting the training camps for a select group of NFL teams. He has a fancy bus that he is very proud of and he's been interviewing someone from every team he's visited on this bus. Well, as fate would have it, when good ole Mort rolled into Detroit, the commissioner happened to be in town. So instead of talking to anyone at all related to the Lions, he spends his time with the comish. In and out of town with ever talking to anyone from the Lions team. Not the number 1 overall pick, not anyone from the new front office. Hell, I would have been satisfied if they had rolled Matt Millen out from the back, that would've been close enough for me. But no.
I guess Detroit deserves this for being the worst team in the history of football and I don't really feel bad for them, although we here at SOS do love Stafford. No what bothers me is that no one seemed the least bit fazed by this. No one really even noticed. I guess this is why ESPN can continue to get away with ignoring much of the country's sports teams on a daily basis. Now, we all know that during baseball season ESPN becomes the Yankees and Red Sox broadcasting network, but I had hopes that maybe the NFL would be immune to this treatment. Unfortunately, I appear to be wrong again and the only football news I'll get will be about T.O. , Michael Vick, Tom Brady's knee, or someone getting arrested. The only way to get any actual on field news is for a punter to run for a touchdown. Great, soon I'll have to start cheering for long snappers and the gunner on the punt team. It depresses me to say it, but I miss Boomer and Tom Jackson. I can't believe I wrote that, much less thought it. That makes me a sad panda. I don't really want to write anymore.
SL
I guess Detroit deserves this for being the worst team in the history of football and I don't really feel bad for them, although we here at SOS do love Stafford. No what bothers me is that no one seemed the least bit fazed by this. No one really even noticed. I guess this is why ESPN can continue to get away with ignoring much of the country's sports teams on a daily basis. Now, we all know that during baseball season ESPN becomes the Yankees and Red Sox broadcasting network, but I had hopes that maybe the NFL would be immune to this treatment. Unfortunately, I appear to be wrong again and the only football news I'll get will be about T.O. , Michael Vick, Tom Brady's knee, or someone getting arrested. The only way to get any actual on field news is for a punter to run for a touchdown. Great, soon I'll have to start cheering for long snappers and the gunner on the punt team. It depresses me to say it, but I miss Boomer and Tom Jackson. I can't believe I wrote that, much less thought it. That makes me a sad panda. I don't really want to write anymore.
SL
AFC North Watch Out
A warning to the AFC North, watch out for 48 in purple. It appears he's angry about not being drafted by your team and is ready to prove you wrong. Trust me, he can and probably will.
In an August 9th Article from the Baltimore Sun we get to learn about the newest Raven linebacker that wants to rip your favorite player's head off.
"No. 48, right from the beginning, you could see that he had talent and came here to hit," [Terrell] Suggs said.
Dannell Ellerbe was an undrafted free agent who led the BCS runner-up Georgia Bulldogs in tackles his Junior (07-08) season. An injury slowed his numbers down last year and may have led to him not being drafted, but apparently that just made him angry. He showed up at Ravens camp to thump people, and apparently that's what he's been doing. Don't sleep on Ellerbe, he played at a big time SEC program, where they know how to play defense, just ask Colt Brennan or Sam Bradford.
So when your team plays the Ravens and your favorite running back gets decapitated it may not be #52 standing over him.
SL/JC
Here's the link to the article: http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/bal-sp.preston09aug09,0,6403227.column
In an August 9th Article from the Baltimore Sun we get to learn about the newest Raven linebacker that wants to rip your favorite player's head off.
"No. 48, right from the beginning, you could see that he had talent and came here to hit," [Terrell] Suggs said.
Dannell Ellerbe was an undrafted free agent who led the BCS runner-up Georgia Bulldogs in tackles his Junior (07-08) season. An injury slowed his numbers down last year and may have led to him not being drafted, but apparently that just made him angry. He showed up at Ravens camp to thump people, and apparently that's what he's been doing. Don't sleep on Ellerbe, he played at a big time SEC program, where they know how to play defense, just ask Colt Brennan or Sam Bradford.
So when your team plays the Ravens and your favorite running back gets decapitated it may not be #52 standing over him.
SL/JC
Here's the link to the article: http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/bal-sp.preston09aug09,0,6403227.column
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)