Breaking News: Andre Dawson A Bit Of A Dick

As you may have heard, Andre Dawson was recently elected into the Baseball Hall of Fame. More than any other sport, baseball's Hall of Fame carries with it real significance, which is why many who actually still care about this kind of crap were disappointed to hear of Dawson's election. Despite the hilarious pee-in-your-trousers title of this post, its not that Dawson is a bad guy, or even that he was a bad baseball player. He may or may not be the first, but he definitely wasn't the second. But while he didn't suck, he wasn't worthy of being elected into the Hall of Fame.

This is my opinion, but also that of some people much smarter than I, like Baseball Prospectus' Jay Jaffe. This is from Jaffe's column after the Hawk was elected. By the way, "JAWS" is a system to assess the worthiness of a player to enter the Hall of Fame not a reference to the Monday Night Football commentator.

Though Dawson falls fairly short on the JAWS scale, his election is not a travesty, or at least not a garment-rending travesty on the order of Jim Rice's election last year. He was far from a one-dimensional player in his prime, he piled up hardware and other honors, and despite his injuries, he played into his early forties. Still, his hackstastic ways—camouflaged a bit by a higher intentional walk total than I gave him credit for in my writeup—leave him with the lowest career OBP (.323) of any enshrined outfielder, 20 points lower than the previous low man, Lou Brock.

So Dawson is, at best, a very low level Hall of Famer, and really not even at that level. But he's in, and that ain't changing, so even if we, the statistical community, aren't happy about it, he should be. Right?

Well, no.

Dawson is upset that the Hall has deemed he should enter with an Expos hat on. Unlike other Halls of Fame, Baseball's gives enshrined players a plaque with a sculpted headshot of sorts, like this. By tradition, the player's sculpted image is wearing a baseball cap. Because some players (now most) play their careers for multiple teams, the Hall makes the final decision as to which hat the player should be immortalized with.

The Hall recently announced Dawson will be depicted with an Expos hat. When the news broke, Dawson had this to say:

I'm disappointed. I can proudly say that because Chicago was my preference.

Dawson played his career primarily with two teams, the Montreal Expos (who have since moved to Washington to become the Nationals) and Chicago Cubs. Dawson spent parts of 11 seasons in Montreal and six with the Cubs, and because of that simple math, there really shouldn't be any surprise that the Hall picked Montreal over Chicago as the team with which Dawson should forever be associated.

Its tempting to really go off on Dawson for expressing himself in this way, but I'll spare you the obligatory goat and overly standard poop references. Still, shouldn't Dawson just be happy he's in the Hall at all, rather than complaining which hat he'll be wearing?

.

A Post In Five Acts

This photo from offwingphoto.com

After last night's dismantling of the New York Islanders, YOUR Washington Capitals are in first place.

Which 'first place'? Well, all of 'em. OK, that's not entirely true, but all of 'em that matter.

Just for fun, lets count 'em:

First place in the Southeast Division - With a 19 point lead (with a game in hand) over second place Florida, they have the largest lead of any division leader in the NHL. This virtually assures them of having one of the top three seeds in the East come playoff time.

First place in the Eastern Conference - With a five point lead over second place New Jersey (though Jersey has a game in hand), the Caps are setting the pace in the conference.

Highest scoring team in the NHL - And it ain't even close. The Caps have scored 202 goals in 52 games, an average of 3.81 goals per game. For some context, San Jose is in second place, 21 goals behind. They've averaged 3.28, over half a goal less per game.

Longest current win streak in the NHL - The Caps have won seven in a row, the last six of which have been in regulation.

Noticeably absent from the above list is 'Most Points in the NHL'. The leader in that category is San Jose with 78. In fact, the Caps aren't even in second place. Chicago has 76 points, two points more than Washington, though the Caps have a game in hand on both teams.

One more thing the Caps are leading the league in, and this one is a biggie:

Largest goal differential - A while back Bill James of baseball statistical fame figured out that the best predictor of future record is run differential, not record. Simply put, the best teams score the most runs, regardless of situation, inning, opponent, or any other factor. The same is true for hockey. The team that scores the most goals while giving up the least goals, i.e. the one with the largest difference between the two is likely the best team going forward.

Here are the top five teams by goal differential (through 1/26/10):

1. Washington Capitals ... +57

2. Chicago Blackhawks ... +52

3. San Jose Sharks ... +51

4. Vancouver Canucks ... +43

5. New Jersey Devils ... +25

After the top four, the list drops off substantially. This isn't a fail-safe predictor of future record, but you can see that teams like the Devils, Sabres (+20), and Penguins (+20) aren't in the same league with the Caps, Hawks, or Sharks. At least, not as currently composed.

In fact, three teams currently in playoff position in the Eastern Conference have negative goal differentials: the Senators (-4), Rangers (-8), and Panthers (-8). In the Western Conference, only the Red Wings (-3) are in the red, though the Predators have scored exactly as many as they've given up. For the benefit of the other two readers of this blog, the Flyers are +11, the Flames are -2, and the Stars are -20. Yikes. Don't put any non-refundable down payments on Stars playoff tickets this season.

So, what's all this mean? For the Caps it means they're very likely going to be sitting at a one or two seed come playoff time and just as likely they'll be facing a team who probably has little business being on the same rink. There are always upsets in short series, and the trading deadline will have lots to say about how valid the above rankings end up being, but as currently constituted, even with their rotating goalie situation, the Caps are one of the three best teams in the NHL, if not the best.

.

Iceberg? What Iceberg?

Tomorrow night, the Dallas Stars will do battle with the Calgary Flames, the team immediately ahead of them in the Western Conference playoff race, with both teams currently on the wrong side of the playoff bubble. The Stars have reached their current standing by playing lights out at home but virtually inept lately on the road, including a recent 4-0 beat down at the hands of the Colorado Avalanche, the team that has bookended the Stars’ current 1-8-0 road stretch.

The Flames, on the other hand, have seen the rug pulled out from under them at in front of their home crowd; they just went through an inexplicable 10 game stretch in which they have gone 1-8-1, including a string of six straight home losses that saw the team score a paltry six goals total.

Understandably, the fans of both teams have grown increasingly frustrated over the past few weeks as their teams have continued to slide down the standings. However, where the Stars would almost be expected to do so based on their bottom-five position in the league in terms of team payroll, the Flames and their fans went in to this season with their eyes on the Stanley Cup. They went out and added prized free agent defenseman Jay Bouwmeester, who came with a $33.4 million price tag, to their already high-priced blue line – their defensemen eat up $23.4 million this season.

With both teams going through embarrassing segments of their season, I thought it might be fun to play a little Which Coach Said This Publicly About Their Team, aka What Would Nathan Thurm Say?* There’s not much good to say about Calgary or Dallas these days, so let’s have a look at how Stars’ head coach Marc Crawford and Lames’, er Flames’ head coach Brent Sutter are handling their underachieving squads, while having a little fun at their expense.

Guess which coach uttered these overly optimistic proclamations:

1. “I won’t stand here and be negative.”

2. "It's not that complicated, but it is doing the right things over and over again. I do believe it will work, and I do believe we will make it work”

3. “Yet, when you’re in that, you almost have to go the other way, going, ‘I’ve got to get my work ethic back to where it needs to be — or higher,’ and things will start coming again.”

4. “As much as it is a loss, in a funny way it could a real catalyst for our team. We're hoping that it can be a catalyst for our team.”

5. “Knowing we haven't played our best, it also gives us some solace knowing that if we get our act back together, we'll get right back into the thick of things."

6. “All through summer, when you’re communicating with guys, with the coaches, and when you’re sitting down with management, you visualize what your team needs to be and how you have to play. And this is the way I visualized this team.”

7. “What do you mean we’ve lost all these games in a row? No we haven’t! You’ve lost a bunch of games. It’s so funny to me that you would think I don’t know how we’re doing. Why wouldn’t I know how we’re playing on the road? We’re doing fine.”

What happened to the era of coaches ripping their teams publicly for their pathetic performances? They’re grown men and make a ton of money - they can handle it. Where’s Mike Keenan when you need him?

Obviously, both coaches are being much more pointed behind closed doors - at least I hope they are – but the constant soft-pedaling and coddling of the players that Crawford and Sutter continue to offer up to the public is getting insulting. Unless the Flames and Stars somehow get their acts together in the next thirty games, we won’t be hearing any of this claptrap past mid-April.

Answers: 1. Sutter; 2. Crawford; 3. Sutter; 4. Crawford; 5. Crawford; 6. Sutter; 7. Coach Thurm.

Dat Da-Da! Its SuperMinaya To the Rescue!

I feel strange writing about baseball after the NFL conference championship games this past weekend, but, well, what am I supposed to say? Peyton Manning is crazy good? The Saints are a great story? I'd sure like to see a pie eating contest between Rex Ryan and Andy Reid? Until I have something to add to the conversation I'm going to move on to something else.

Lately, I've been looking at old posts. Its interesting to look back at the long and sordid history of Toooast posts and see how things have changed since I/we wrote something. Sometimes I'm right on the money (told you that Abe Lincoln guy would pan out) and sometimes not so much (Hitler won Time Magazine's Man of the Year so he can't be that bad, right?).

Often I've criticized something after it's happened, but rarely do I actually go back and see how valid that criticism was. Take for example, my post on Gary Matthews, Jr's trade request last November. Apparently ignorant of any and all financial matters, especially the fact that the $23 million still owed him over the next two years would make dealing him more than difficult, Matthews decided that he didn't want to play in Anaheim anymore. Matthews told the LA Times, "I just feel like it's time for me to play for an organization that believes I can contribute every day from day one. Whether it's a trade or them releasing me, it's time to go."

The problem with this was twofold: 1) Matthews was owed $23 million over the next two years, and 2) he sucks. At the time I wrote that no team would be willing to take on Matthews salary. Well, obviously I was right and it didn't take an Ivy League education to figure that out. No organization exists that thinks Gary Matthews, Jr. is worth $23 million over the next two seasons.

Matthews would only be traded if the Angels would agree to take on another team's lousy contract (I suggested Milton Bradley of the Cubs) or if the Angels agreed to pay some massive portion of Matthews contract, in effect paying him to play for another team.

Bradley was traded to Seattle for another bad contract, that of goferballer Carlos Silva, so both horrible and expensive players were off the trade market. It was rumored that Matthews would be dealt to Boston for Mike Lowell, but Lowell is actually a useful player so I didn't find that believable.

At the time, I wrote,

The most likely scenario doesn't involve a trade because no team in it's right mind would want Matthews at any price above the league minimum salary because he's old and not very good. The Angels will eventually realize they're going to have to pay his salary for the next two years anyway, so no matter what happens they're going to be out $23 million. Instead, its going to come down to this: faced with a choice of Gary Matthews, Jr. or an open roster spot, they'll choose the roster spot and release his ungrateful ass.

Look at the bolded portion of the above again. "No team in its right mind..." Foolishly I discounted the possibility of the Angels dealing with a team not in its right mind. And which teams are not in their right mind?

Two teams come to my mind. One is the Royals, but they've already hamstrung themselves with more lousy old expensive players (Farnsworth, Jason Kendall, Yuniesky Betancourt, Jose Guillen) than they can really afford now.

The second team is the Mets. They have the cash flow to over-pay for Matthews, and most importantly, they're dumb enough to want him.

So guess what happened.

Yup, Omar Minaya traded a perfectly serviceable bullpen arm for Matthews and $21 million. The Mets are now on the hook for $1 million per over the next two seasons for Matthews.

Marty Noble who covers the Mets for MLB.com, and is thus disposed to at least even handed if not pro-Mets coverage, has this to say about the Matthews trade:

In most cases, I understand what the club has tried to accomplish in a trade, even if I disagree with it. This one bewilders me.

Matthews' reputation as a defender has faded a bit. And if the Mets are, in fact, paying $2 million of the money owned him and dealing a player as well, that seems quite unwise to me. Increasing their offers to Molina and Joel Pineiro would have been wiser. That the Mets don't believe they have a young outfielder who can run down a fly ball for a month or so, it is a condemnation of their player development system.

Yikes.

To sum up, the Mets gave up a player and $2 million for someone who could be replaced for a quarter of that and has an attitude problem to boot because, and this is the best case scenario, they have nobody in their entire minor league system who can cover center field for three weeks.

Add this bewildering move to the long term big money deal given to Jason Bay, an outfielder who can't play the outfield, and its apparent that Omar Minaya's judgment is pretty shitty. Short of giving an award to Hitler, I'm at a loss as to what more he can do to send that message more clearly.

.

Pensblog Should Rethink Use Of DC Sniper As "Humor"

It's never particulary [sic] fun when the Pens lose to the Washington Capitals. You have to deal with some Capitals fans acting like its a big deal. It makes you wish the D.C. Sniper would have got a couple of extra kills.

For those who don't know or don't remember, the DC Sniper shot and killed people with a high powered rife for no apparent reason. Human beings were targeted while filling their cars at gas stations. The entire Washington DC region was terrorized, including my parents and friends. People died at the horrific hand of a mentally ill maniac and I wouldn't wish it upon anyone.

To say that comment was in poor taste is an understatement. It isn't not funny, it isn't inventive, its not in any way amusing, and if I'm misreading it as humor and the remark was intended literally, the owners of pensblog's server should cancel their account.

It speaks quite poorly of the writers at pensblog that they wrote it, more poorly that they would publish it, and even more poorly that they've had no second thoughts and pulled it. Similarly, shame falls on pensblog's readers as nobody (as of 11:30am EST this morning) had chastised the author(s?) into taking it down or even justifying it.

Plainly put, this is the type of thing that people point to when commenting ill of blogs. The comment should be taken down and an apology put up in its place. Immediately.
.

Eastern Conference Leading Capitals Whip Up On Some Team

image stolen from The Washington Post

Last season was a pretty successful one in Pittsburgh. And though it wasn't a bad season in DC, the hoisting of a certain trophy may have been done by players clad in a more reddish hue last June had Game 7 of the Caps/Pens turned out differently.

Not that it was close to turning out differently. Ovechkin could've added a hat trick and the Caps still would've lost. And been outplayed. And been embarrassed in their own building. Still, taking the eventual Stanley Cup champs to a Game 7 was an accomplishment, even if it didn't seem like it at the time.

Since that day the NHL schedule makers deemed the two teams should just stare at each other from opposite sides of Maryland. Until last night, when the two rivals met for the first time since the Faux Pas At The Phone Booth last May (chronicled with curse words aplenty here). To say there was hype was an understatement. But both teams handled the media scrum with aplomb.

Then they did the same with each other through two periods, after which the score stood at 3-3. From there, the Caps shook the Penguins off like a dog shaking off muddy water, scoringf three goals in the third (one was an empty netter) to cock-block the Penguins, 6-3. That's a sentence you won't read in the Washington Post. (Crosby is a bitch. There's another.)

In all the jubilation, I think some context is important. This wasn't a season defining victory, nor was it the clinching win that sends a team hurdling into the playoffs. What it was was a good win against a good opponent on the road. That's all.

As was pointed out to me, the Caps have now beaten last season's Stanley Cup Finals participants consecutively. They lead the Eastern Conference by three points over the Devils and Sabres. They are seven points ahead of Pittsburgh with two games in hand.

Last night's win in Pittsburgh was a nice reminder that the Caps can not only play with those guys, they can whip up on them too. But that's all. The success or failure of the 2009-10 season for the Capitals won't be decided in January. Its always good to beat Pittsburgh, but the Caps have other, if not bigger, fish to fry.

.

Cowboys Sign Phillips To Extension, Redskins Fans Everywhere Cheer

Ol' Funhouse Face showing that, yes, he actually does have opposable thumbs.

With a first round loss in the playoffs, the Cowboys would've been looking for a new head coach. Guaranteed. Instead the Cowboys eviscerated the Eagles.

Then they got their asses blown off by the Vikings, but hey, Mission Accomplished!

Another order of that shit, right? Must be what Jerry "Funhouse Face" Jones was thinking because soon after his team slank (slinked?) off what passes for a "field" at the Metrodome, 'OFF' signed head coach Wade Phillips to a two year contract extension.

Its forward thinking like this that gave us Redskins fans the perverse pleasure of counting Cowboy playoff wins in the last decade on one finger.

High Five!


Yes, that is Jones "high fiving" Dubya after a Cowboys touchdown. Sickening.

For more insight into this deal, check out this priceless comment from Temo at the Football Outsiders 'Holy Crap, they just gave Wade Phillips a contract extension?" thread.

.

Posted Only Because Its Funny: Izzy Alcantara

Way back at the turn of the century, the Red Sox were a bunch of choking dogs who hadn't won anything since the Titanic sank. The team's fans were perpetually distraught, as the team was persistently on the verge of making the playoffs, but always falling short.

During this time, the Chosen One, the player who would ride in on a white horse (or maybe a bus) and single-handedly push the team into the playoffs was always around the corner. The Boston media went from one such player to the next, always hyping hyping hyping until the inevitable downfall.

One such player who got the "Next Great Thing" treatment was Izzy Alcantara. Alcantara was a hitter of such extraordinary ability that he would surely arrive in Boston grab the team by the collar and drag the Sox kicking and screaming past opposing players into the playoffs.

Here's Alcantara in action:



Well, part of that last sentence was correct. Lets look at it once more, but this time with the proper edits:

Alcantara was a hitter of such extraordinary ability that he would surely arrive in Boston grab the team by the collar and drag the Sox kicking and screaming past opposing players into the playoffs. in the face.


There. Much better.

.

Information About NHL Sweater Sales Or A Complicated Penis Joke: You Be The Judge!

Whoops, looks like I misspelled it.

The great DC Sports Bog has a piece up on the top ten best selling sweaters in the NHL, and the top five best selling Caps sweaters at the Caps team shop at their practice facility. Obviously the number one seller is the same for both lists, Alex Ovechkin.

First, the top ten selling sweaters across the NHL:

1. Alex Ovechkin
2. Sidney Crosby
3. Evgeni Malkin
4. Henrik Lundqvist
5. Martin Brodeur
6. Henrik Zetterberg
7. Marc-Andre Fleury
8. Mike Richards
9. Patrick Kane
10. Pavel Datsyuk

Nothing really surprising about that list. Now the Caps list:

1. Ovechkin
2. Nicklas Backstrom
3. Mike Green
4. Semyon Varlomov
5. Brooks Laich

You may notice a name conspicuously absent from that list. In fact, if you compare the above list to the Caps top five point scorers this season, all of the top point scorers are on the best sellers list (obviously excluding the goalie) with one exception: Alexander Semin.

This raises an important question: do Capitals fans not recognize the capabilities of the Caps second leading goal scorer? Do we Caps fans not understand the immense talent possessed by number twenty eight? Is his goal scoring prowess overshadowed by the greatness of Alex Ovechkin to such a massive extent that fans don't even notice him?

To all of the above, I say 'fraid not. There is a simpler and more juvenile answer afoot. Ask yourself this question: You are a hard working Caps fan. You've budgeted $350 to spend on a sweater. Whom do you choose?

The obvious answer is Ovechkin. He's the premiere player on the team and arguably the greatest player in the NHL right now. But, that's what everyone buys (myself included). What if you want something different than the masses? What if you want a sweater that says, "I'm not a member of the bandwagon."

You could choose Backstrom or Green or Varlomov, or even Matt Bradley, but none of them quite have that in-your-face talent, that one-on-one skill set that can just blow people away, make NHL players look like Mites on Ice.

You walk your way through the isles of sweaters on sale until you stop in front of one player's: [cue holy-sounding music] Alexander Semin.

Perfect! Your search has come to an end!

But then you remember the words of your grand father right before he died. He looked up at you from that hospital bed, tears in his eyes, and with his dying breath, said, "Son, never pay $350 for a sweater with a player's name that bears more than a passing resemblance to jizz."

So you drop tree fidy on a David Steckel sweater and call it a day.

.

How Bout Them Cowbo... Wait, Wha?!

image taken from washingtonpost.com

We Redskins fans haven't had much to cheer about in, oh, the last fifteen years, so we have to take our dollops of victory where ever we find them. Fortunately for us, the Cowboys have been generous in that regard during Washington's, uh, dry spell.

Despite annual predictions of greatness from Valley Ranch and beyond, and by 'beyond' I mean Jerry Jones' skullfuck of a facelift, the Cowboys find themselves munching carpet face down in the dirt every December.

But! With three dominating wins to end the season followed by a vicious de-pantsing of the Eagles in the first round of the playoffs, this year promised to be different. All together now:

NOPE!

The Cowboys offense was rounding into form and their defense was brutally crushing opposing quarterbacks to the turf play after play after God-blessed play. Then the Vikings came to town. "No problem," said the Dallas faithful. "We'll grind their purple jerseys into a fine powder, which we'll then wrap in a nondescript package and ship with no return address to Michael Irvin's place! We'll beat them!" they said.

NOPE!

Yet again the Cowboys have face planted come playoff time. Sure it took a week longer than some of us thought it would, but hey, we Redskins fans will take it every time. And Eagles fans probably won't complain either. Hell, even Giants fans may look up from pleasuring their Eli Manning blow-up dolls and smile before going back to work.

Sunday wasn't just and ending, it was a beginning too. It marked the start another off season full of angst, Jesus, and when nobody is looking, anal insertion. Speaking for Redskins fans everywhere, its good to see things are as they should be.
.

Yay! I Might Finally be Able to Watch a Real Hockey Team!!

In today's ESPN NHL Insider blog, the great E.J. Hradek reveals that the fucking ridiculous spat between Versus and DirecTV may soon come to an end - and dammit, it can't come too soon as the only team that I get a steady diet of these days is the three-legged-deer-in-the-headlights known as the Dallas Stars.

"Will the Versus-DirecTV dispute be settled any time soon?
American hockey fans, who, like me, have DirecTV, are hoping (praying) for a resolution before the playoffs. During the regular season, the battle between the two broadcast entities isn't much more than a minor nuisance. Come playoff time, though, it will be a big problem for hockey fans. On Thursday evening, NHL commish Gary Bettman told me the two sides have started talking again. He left it right there, though. He stopped well short of saying the groups were anywhere close to an agreement. For the sake of all hockey fans impacted by this dispute, let's hope they can get a deal done before April."

Lately, my only exposure to other teams is through NHL On the Fly, where I just saw Ovechkin and the Caps thoroughly de-pants the Leaves*.

*Damn right I said "Leaves." Stoopid Canadians don't even know the plural of "Leaf."

News Of The Obvious: McGuire Admits Steroid Use, Public Fakes Semi-Outrage

Two or three days ago, whenever the story broke, I was on the Washington Post website reading about the Capitals. For some reason I checked the front page and under the "Breaking News" section (still love the Daily Show's line about breaking news: When News Breaks, We Fix It!), there were two headlines posted, according to the site, just minutes ago. The first was 'McGuire Admits Steroid Use' and the second was 'Sarah Palin To Join Fox News'.

Under those headlines were 'Titanic Sinks', 'Nixon Is Crook', and 'Clinton Fucks Couch, Stove, Coffee Maker'. In other news, I'm shocked.

Is there anyone out there who thought, 'I really think that McGuire guy was clean'? I suppose its news that he came out and admitted that he did it, but it wasn't like we needed him to do so. And I don't mean because he hit a ton of homers. Guys have done that with steroids and guys have done that without steroids, and McGuire probably fits into both categories.

Predictably people are making judgments, moral and otherwise, but nobody really knows what this says about McGuire. Because we really don't know, don't understand at all, the effects steroids have on a baseball player. Steven Goldman of Baseball Prospectus and the Pinstriped Bible recently asked if steroids were so helpful to baseball players why isn't baseball being infiltrated by weight lifters?

So we don't know. Using steroids could help a player get healthier more quickly like McGuire and Andy Pettitte before him claimed, but what are the effects on the rest of the body? Again, we don't know. Most prescription drugs come with warnings because often to solve a problem you have to create another. I know someone who had a kidney transplant. As one would imagine, she's on a ton of drugs, many of which are to solve problems created by other drugs she's on. You take one to help X, but by doing so you create Y, so you have to take something else for that, but it creates Z, so you have to take something else for that, and so on.

So I'm skeptical that steroids are the magical cure-all that they're made out to be. But even if they are, what is their effect on ball players? Again, we don't know. We can easily see the benefits of taking steroids for offensive linemen in football. Their job is to shove people. Strength is a requirement. Without it, they're out of a job. Baseball isn't that way though. Some of the best players in history, before steroids were conceived of to be used by ball players, were skinny people with quickness and hand-eye coordination. Ted Williams and Joe Dimaggio come to mind. Check out this picture of Dimaggio or this one of Williams. No muscles on either guy, but both are thought of as great hitters and both are in the Hall of Fame.

So maybe steroids solve a single problem, but medicine is more complex than that. By solving a problem, how many more problems are created? McGuire is a interesting case because he claimed that steroids helped him get healthy. If we are to take him at his word, he started using steroids in 1993 when he missed all but 27 games to injury. Prior to that year, McGuire averaged 150 games played per season. From that year on, McGuire averaged 106 games played per year. Would he have played fewer games without steroids? Maybe, but he also might have played more.

None of this is intended to give McGuire a pass for an act that if not specifically prohibited by baseball's rules, was against the law. He shouldn't have done it, if no other reason, than because it was illegal. But much of the public debate concerns, not the moral component, but the on-field effects. What was the effect on McGuire's on-field performance? Would he have hit as many homers if he hadn't used steroids? That is impossible to know. It seems to me the answer is no, but its such a complex question that its almost silly to answer it (notice that didn't stop me).

Its impossible to know what 'taking steroids' meant for McGuire, but his admission of guilt is the farthest thing from surprising.
.

Hot Stove Predictionating: Results

About a month and a half ago, I took a shot at predicting where the big free agents in baseball would sign and how much they'd get. I looked at Jason Bay and Matt Holliday, the two best hitters on the market, John Lackey, the best starting pitcher on the market, and two guys coming off very different years but still with value, Johnny Damon and Adrian Beltre. Damon still hasn't signed, but I'm tired of waiting for his dumbass, so lets see how I did anyway:

* * *

Player (previous team): Matt Holliday (St. Louis Cardinals)
Predicted: New York Yankees; 7 years, $128 million
Actual: St. Louis Cardinals; 7 years, $120 million, with team option for 8th year at $16 million ($1 million buyout)

- Damn I'm good. I nailed the total value of Holliday's contract, but I didn't see him going back to the Cardinals. In fact, earlier on in the free agency season he made it pretty clear that St. Louis wasn't his first choice. The fact that the Red Sox and Yankees were both ostensibly in the market for a left fielder made this an easy call: Holliday ain't going back to St. Louis.

But the Sox signed Mike Cameron to play center field, moving current center fielder Jacoby Ellsbury to left, and the Yankees adding Curtis Granderson through trade from Detroit. Of course, Granderson plays center field, so the Yankees still need a left fielder, which is Holliday's position. So you'd think they'd still be in the market for him, but for some reason, they weren't. Laughably the rumor sites say the Yankees have told all the agents for unsigned players that they have only $2 million to spend on a left fielder. Maybe the Yankees do... have... a budget?

BWWWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! * sniff *

As for Holliday, it appears that agent Scott Boras again managed to get a team to bid against themselves. Its impossible to know for sure, but since no other team was connected to Holiday, you might think the Cardinals could've come down a bit. Maybe the Yankees were secretly in it and the Cardinals needed to out-bid them, but probably not. The next highest known offer for Holliday was 5 years, $82 million, submitted and later pulled by the Red Sox. There's quite a lot of ground between that and 7 years, $128 million.

While not a bargain in any sense, the Cardinals can get what they're paying for if Holliday stays healthy and hits like he has over the past few years.

It might happen. *cue birds flying from my butt*

* * *

Player: Jason Bay (Boston Red Sox)
Predicted: New York Mets; 5 years, $100 million
Actual: New York Mets; 4 years, $66 million with club option for 5th year at $16 million ($3 million buyout)

- I got the team right, but I probably let my severely low opinion of Mets GM Omar Minaya color the contract value. In my head Minaya has a giant catapult with which he launches barrels with giant dollar signs painted at them.

It wasn't that bad, but with good players flying left and right, most certainly including the Roy Halladay-to-the-rival-Phillies trade, the Mets had to do something. After last year's disappointing season on the heals of the previous two disappointing seasons, you knew Minaya was going to launch money barrels at someone in attempt to save his job. And he did. In the end, Bay ended up with $1 million more than the Red Sox offered him at the beginning of the 2009 season and a full no-trade clause, which is something.

Like the Holiday deal, this contract pays the player like he will perform like he has during his peak years. Generally speaking, most good players decline slightly through their early thirties and then more quickly through their late thirties. Unlike Holiday who is signed through his age 36 season (crowd: Yikes!), Bay is only signed through his age 34 season, so there's a fair chance he can hold his value at the plate.

Bay will fit in well in the Mets lineup, but less so in left field at Citi Field where he'll actually have to catch fly balls from time to time. In the National League there is no DH, so if the Mets want his bat they'll have to put up with his fielding, and at $16 million per season, they'll have to put up with his fielding or have the most expensive pinch hitter in the history of baseball.

This signing makes the Mets better next season, but not so much so that Minaya and his catapult will survive to see the end of this contract.

* * *

Player: John Lackey (Anaheim Angels of Anaheim, California, 92801)
Predicted: New York Yankees; 5 years, $81 million
Actual: Boston Red Sox; 5 years, $82.5 million

- Well, got the money right, but I didn't see the Red Sox stepping in on Lackey. In my defense, if Red Sox GM Theo Epstein's words are to be believed, he didn't either. I saw Lackey going to the Yankees because they need another starting pitcher. They did get one, but they got him in trade (Javier Vazquez, a salary dump from Atlanta).

I didn't see Lackey coming to Boston because I didn't think the Red Sox needed another starting pitcher. But, looking at the deal now, this is Josh Beckett insurance. Beckett is a free agent after this season, and if he leaves, Boston will still have a top flight pitcher in the rotation. Baseball-reference.com's similarity scores say that the pitcher in all of baseball history that is the most similar to John Lackey is *drum roll* Josh Beckett. For this year at least, Lackey joins Jon Lester and Josh Beckett to make one of the best top three in a rotation that I can remember.

Like the Bay and Holliday deals, this contract will pay Lackey for his upside. If he's hurt like he was last season, or suffers from ineffectiveness due to increasing age, this deal won't look so rosy. Also, moving from Angel Stadium to Fenway Park and from the AL West division to the AL East will all likely make his stats look worse, even while the quality of his pitching is the same.

* * *

Player: Adrian Beltre (Seattle Mariners)
Predicted: Philadelphia Phillies; 3 years, $29 million
Actual: Boston Red Sox; 1 year, $9 million (with player option of $5 million or $10 million depending on playing time [Beltre needs 640 plate appearances to raise option value])

- I had the rate correct (~$9 million a year), but I got the team wrong. Still, after the Phillies signed Placido Polanco to play third base, I posted in the comments section that since he wasn't going to Philadelphia, my next guess was Boston. Still, I didn't expect Boras to accept a one year deal for Beltre, one of the premier fielding third baseman in baseball.

Beltre was hurt last year and, possibly because of that, was horrendous at the plate, hitting .265/.304/.379. If he does that again, this will be a waste of $14 million (not $9 million because if he hits like that again, he'll take the $5 million next season). If he's healthy and driven by the one year nature of his contract, this will be money well spent.

* * *

Player: Johnny Damon
Predicted: New York Yankees 2 years, $22 million
Actual: still unsigned

- Despite having a very good year for the Yankees last season, Damon has received almost no interest on the free agent market. A two year deal for the kind of money I predicted is very unlikely at this point. Rumors have connected Damon to three teams, the Yankees, Braves, and Giants, but apparently he's yet to receive an offer from any of them. The Giants just signed Aubrey Huff, so that may remove them from the Damon sweepstakes, though Damon continues to age, so you never know. Brian Sabean may not be able to help himself. The suits who run the Braves won't let GM Frank Wren spend anything.

The logical conclusion to all of this is a return to New York, but at this point Damon would have to sign a contract far below the $13 million he made last season. As I mentioned above, the Yankees have been telling anyone who will listen that they're not prepared to spend more than $2 million for a left fielder. That's pretty ridiculous coming from the Yankees, but the literal meaning is probably not as important so much as the desire to not spend much. 'Not much' for the Yankees is probably something in the $5-7 million range, with maybe a team option for the same amount.

Some other team (the Orioles?) could swoop in with at two year contract, at or more than $7 million per, but that's unlikely this late in the year.
.

Beat The Media: Why Stupid People Hate Stats

I've covered the Red Sox Notes column in the past here on Beat the Media, a name for this type of post which I just made up. Red Sox Notes has been a regular column in the Sunday Boston Globe for decades now. Peter Gammons started it, I believe, back when the Globe was published on a hunk of slate and left at the entrance to your cave.

More recently Nick Carfardo wrote the column, but after this savage beating (administered by yours truly), he's moved on. Amalie Benjamin now writes it, and I must confess, I'm an Amalie Benjamin fan. Maybe not as much as the fine folks at Surviving Grady, but still a fan. So, in fairness to Ms. Benjamin, I should note that it isn't her words that I'm quarreling with. No, the words in question belong to someone named Bill Chuck.

You will now see how I know this:

From the Bill Chuck files: Runs produced (RBIs plus runs minus home runs) is a good tool to measure batter effectiveness. Albert Pujols led the majors in 2009 with 212 runs produced. Jason Bay ended up with 186, the same as Mark Teixeira . . .

Being the baseball stat nerd I am, I was shocked to find a statistic I hadn't previously heard of. Runs Produced. Huh.

Looking at its components, I know why I've never heard of it before: its total shit. Still, for fun, lets take a closer look.

Runs Batted In + Runs - Home Runs = Runs Produced

RBIs, huh? Allow me to quote myself quoting myself:

RBIs are worthless in determining who is and who isn't a good hitter. RBIs are a function of the lineup and where in the lineup a player plays not how good a player is.

This really isn't a difficult concept to grasp. To get an RBI without homering, one must hit with a runner on base, and unless MLB has adopted the concept of single person lineups with 'ghost runners' like we did in f'n middle school, that isn't under the control of the hitter.

If the hitter is on the Yankees, he often comes up with runners on. If he is on the Padres, he often comes up with no runners on base. Neither situation has a damn bit to do with how good the hitter is.

So, RBIs are stupid. Yet they are used as a component of this Runs Produced stat. The cliche 'garbage in, garbage out' pretty much has this covered.

Short of that, Runs Produced is a good stat, right Semi-Literate Lives-In-His-Parent's-Basement Nose-Picking Wiping-It-Underneath-The-Chair Internet Guy?

Actually, no. Not at all.

Runs aren't a good stat to evaluate a player either. Think about it. If RBIs are a function of hitting with runners on base, runs scored are a function of being on base when guys behind you hit. After getting on base, there isn't much to be done but wait. Sure, some guys steal bases, but almost nobody steals three bases consecutively. Its happens, but so infrequently its not worth discussing.

A quick look at the leader board for the 2009 season will prove my point.

1. A Pujols ... 212
2. R Howard ... 201
3. P Fielder ... 198
4. R Braun ... 195
5. J Bay ... 186
5. M Teixeira ... 186
7. B Abreu ... 184
8. R Zimmerman ... 183
8. H Ramirez ... 183
10. E Longoria ... 180

The above is a list of the top 10 players ranked by Bill Chuck's Runs Produced stat. If we take that same list and replace the players name with their teams and their team's rank in runs scored
(by team), we get this:

1. Cardinals ... 18th
2. Phillies ... 4th
3. Brewers ... 9th
4. Brewers ... 9th
5. Red Sox ... 3rd
5. Yankees ... 1st
7. Angels ... 2nd
8. Nationals ... 21st
8. Marlins ... 13th
10. E Longoria ... 7th

Basically, we've got a list of players who hit in the middle of the top ten run scoring lineups in baseball. Admittedly there are a few exceptions. Albert Pujols is first on the list and the Cardinals are only 18th in runs scored. But Albert Pujols is the best hitter in baseball. We don't need a new stat to tell us that. Pujols had a .448 on-base percentage and slugged .658.

For some context, some (misguided) people were talking about Mark Teixeira for MVP in the American League. Pujols bested Teixeira in on-base by .060 and out-slugged him by .103. Technically speaking, he crushed him, and Teixeira is really good. Basically, Pujols would be in the front of the list if he played on any team in baseball. That's how good he is.

The other two are Hanley Ramirez of the Marlins and Ryan Zimmerman of the Nationals. Ramirez is an incredible talent and the Marlins weren't far out of the top 10. Zimmerman is a tougher nut to crack, but I'm guessing (I don't have the ability to look this up) that he converted a higher percentage of his RBI opportunities than he would be normally expected to do.

But none of that is the point. The point is that Runs Produced is the combination of two stats that don't tell us how good a hitter someone is, minus a stat that can (but doesn't necessarily). Runs Produced doesn't add anything to the discussion of who the best hitters in baseball are or who the most valuable hitters in baseball are, or even who can take the biggest dumps. It doesn't tell us anything, and therefore its not worth anything.
.

One Out Of Four Isn't...Bad...? Aw Hell!

Immediately after posting my predictions for the first weekend of wonderfully moist NFL Wild-Card action, I posted again. This time about how I can't predict when I'm going to take my next piss let alone (uh oh...) the outcome of a football game.

Well, my predicting that I can't predict anything was dead on. I called the Bengals over the Jets (NOPE), the Eagles over the Cowboys (NOPE NOPE), and the Packers over the Cardinals (DUH...NOPE).

However, nobody is perfect. I did get one correct.

I suppose I could crow about how I wrote that the Ravens would be able to run on the Pats and the Pats would have to throw on the Ravens but wouldn't be able to. I could crow about that all day and all night. Because I totally nailed it. I saw that one coming all the way, baby. But if I did that, two things would happen. 1) Unless I interspersed the crowing with poop jokes, everyone would stop reading, and 2) At some point someone might notice I was three hundred percent wrong on the other three games.

In the words of a great American, "Doh."

Stay tuned next week for more predictions guaranteed to be right at least 25% of the time.
.

Breaking News: I'm An Idiot!

Your humble author deep in thought.

There are two important rules to follow when predicting anything.

Rule #1: Don't listen to me.

Rule #2: Take that dildo out of your ass and refer to Rule #1.

You need to follow these rules for two good reasons.

Reason #1: I clearly don't have a damn idea what I'm talking about.

Reason #2: I unnecessarily number things.

Take my POOOOST!!! from yesterday where I predicted the Eagles will beat the Cowboys. How'd that work out? Terrible. Not only was I wrong, but the game wasn't even close. Anytime the team you picked loses by 20 points, that's what we in 'the industry' call, and apologies if I'm getting too technical here, a Retarded Prediction. "RP" for short.

OK, sure, that was just one call. It hardly proves gross incompetence on the type of scale I'm claiming. Well, look at the same post from yesterday. I stated that the Bengals would beat the Jets by more than a touchdown. Had I predicted the exact opposite I'd have been correct.

But my predicting gets worse. Take, for example, any football game this past season. If you picked the games I picked, you'd be fired. I should probably be fired too, but nobody is reading this. Also, its hard to be fired from something you do for free. I mean, it can happen, but not often.

In conclusion, when I say, "The Nards will win," I'm wrong. They won't. When I say, "The Buttholes are gonna beat the Cornholes by 23," I'm way off base and Andy Pettitte is on the mound. When I say, "McCain has this one in the bag," don't listen to me. I'm wrong. And when I say, "That's it! I'm swallowing all these pills and there's nothing you can do to stop me!", don't worry. I won't.

Also, Matt Holiday to the Yankees? Not even close.
.

Groundhog Day(s): Your NFL Wild-Card Playoff Preview

This first playoff weekend of the NFL season is akin to Bill Murray's famous turn in the movie Groundhog Day. In the movie, Murray goes to bed and wakes up to the same day over and over again. At first he is angry, but soon he starts to see the advantages of this set-up. Namely, he can try different things each day and see what works. Its like getting unlimited do-overs.

With three rematches from last weekend, its Groundhog Weekend in the NFL. Just like in the movie, we're going to see some corrected mistakes.

Last weekend, the New York/New Jersey Metro-Jets just buried the Cincinnati Bengals with over 250 rushing yards last weekend. I have a hard time believing the Bengals are that bad against the run, and indeed statistics show that they aren't. They aren't great either, but they're bound to be better, if for no other reason, simply by the law of averages. The Jets will turn the ball over and the Bengals will win this one by more than a touchdown.

A second second chapter if you will, or even if you won't, will take place in Dallas at the four hundred Poopillion dollar home of the Dallas Taxcheats Cowboys. Last week the same teams met in the same venue with the Cowboys walloping the Philadelphia Eagles, 24-0 in a game that wasn't as close as the score indicated. At issue was the Cowboys running game and the Eagles inability to stop it. The Cowboys were dominant last week, but don't expect a repeat performance tonight. Relatively under-reported in last weekend's debacle was the disappearance of the Eagles offense. That won't happen again. The Eagles are the better team and they'll show it by sending the Cowboys back home searching for answers yet again.

Farther north, the Baltimore Ravens head to the Boston suburbs to take on the New England Patriots, who will be without number two wide receiver Wes Welker for the remainder of the season and probably part of next as well. The Patriots are not the team they were for most of 2007. Tom Brady isn't playing as well, but most importantly their defense is old. The Ravens should be able to run the ball successfully, while the Patriots will be forced to throw into the teeth of the Ravens defense. If Randy Moss takes over the game, all bets are off, but I'll put my money on the Ravens to win a low scoring battle on the road.

The third and final rematch of last week is the Green Bay Packers who will travel back to Phoenix to face Kurt Warner's Arizona Cardinals. Again. Like the other two games, last week's game was a blowout with Green Bay winning 497-1. Or something like that. I'm too lazy to look up the score. The point was the Packers dominated, and I'm expecting a similar performance from them on Sunday. The Cardinals are at home because they won the ridiculously weak NFC West division, but they are by no means the best team. They say its hard to beat the same team twice in a season, but the Packers will pull it off this weekend.
.

The Greatest Comeback Ever In The History Of Recorded Time

[Warning: This post is not only about fantasy football, it is also petty and not funny. In short, it's wonderful. Enjoy!]

This is just too fucking good.

don’t take this personally but I have no idea how you won 5 fantasy games this year because your team sucks. I looked at your team and I don’t even recognize the names of half the players on that roster. Your kicker has 11 more points than your best WR = embarrassing. I almost accepted the trade cuz I felt sorry for you but even if I gave you Jackson and Clark for free your team would still suck. The fact that I lost to you 2 weeks ago by 4 points because I was gone that weekend and accidently forgot to switch out Felix Jones(1point that week) over my new waiver pickup Miles Austin(29 pts), makes me want to kill myself so I never have to play fantasy football again. I really hope I meet you in the Championship game so I can beat the shit out of you. What a waste of my time having to look at your trade, reject it, read your worthless email, ask people who the hell you are to ensure you aren’t retarded and then write this post telling people what a hypocrite you are and to disregard all your trades.

Commish - please kick this guy out of our league so he can go back to blowing goats and as a special parting gift give him the trophy called ‘The mattymatty Award for Trying to Fuk Another Fantasy Team Up the Azz Without A Reach Around’.

The above was posted on the fantasy football league webpage by someone we'll call "Fat Tank". Without addressing the numerous personal attacks and spelling errors, its true that I beat Tank's team in 105-101 in Week 7. Its similarly true that Tank started Felix Jones who garnered 1 point while Miles Austin's 29 points (and Sidney Rice's 13 and Reggie Bush's 8 and LeSean McCoy's 6) languished on the bench.

Whether it was because Tank was traveling, had impaled himself on a vacuum cleaner, or had anally inserted his computer and was unable to bench Jones with his sphincter, I can't say. But its worth pointing out that Tank played the Redskins defense, which garnered -2 points against Philadelphia that week as well. This is a theme we'll return to later in this post.

In any case, its the bolded line that I keep coming back to.

I really hope I meet you in the Championship game so I can beat the shit out of you.

As luck would have it, my sucky and embarrassing team finished 9-4, first overall in the league. Fat Tank's team, which I'll call "ISUCKYUMMYYUMMYCOCKYUMYUMYUM!!!", finished 7-5-1, good for second overall. To Tank's credit, his team finished the season with 1259 points, one point behind the highest scoring team in the league. (My sucky and embarrassing team finished third.)

In the playoffs, I outscored my opponent in the first round by 36 points over two weeks (each round of the playoffs lasts two weeks long). Fat Tank outscored his (much better) competition by 22.

And so it was. My team, the Whoreville Fucksticks, against Fat Tank and "ISUCKYUMMYYUMMYCOCKYUMYUMYUM!!!" for the championship of the league.

Tank had to be feeling pretty good about the match-up. According to the league commissioner, he had the best team, and my team was embarrassing and sucky. Am I beating this far enough into the ground?

So it was, as they might say on The Daily Show, The Match-Up Of The Century Of The Week! The Whoreville Fucksticks, first place overall, against ISUCKYUMMYYUMMYCOCKYUMYUMYUM!!! for all the marbles!! In the words of a great Umurican, bring it on.

After the first week of the two week match-up, Tank had outscored me 136-81. 136 is a lot of points in our league. In fact, I checked and 136 would be the second highest score of the season. Only one team had broken 140.*

*Tank himself scored 144 in Week 6.

136 points was nothing to sneeze at, but more importantly, I had only scored 81, giving Tank a 55 point lead and good reason to think that the championship was in the bag. Following the first week, the commissioner himself posted on the league website a write-up saying I was getting "Rear Admiraled". In his own words, "My last post made fun of [mattymatty] for even trying to think about ... try[ing] to win."

In short, it was over. You don't make up 55 points in one week. The Fucksticks were TOOOAST!!!

But I didn't give up. [cue inspirational music] I was going to fight! Fight to the bitter, bitter end!!

OK, enough of that. If I was to have any chance to win, I had to do three things, broadly speaking:

1. Play For Upside
- I had to find players who had something to play for and would play the full 60 minutes, but most of all I need players who would get the ball enough to score touchdowns.

2. Hope Tank Tanked
- I had to hope that Tank's star players wouldn't play the full 60 minutes, but that he'd still play them anyway.

3. Get Lucky
- Fucking duh.

2 and 3 I couldn't do much about, but I could pull off 1. Because many teams were locked into the playoffs and didn't want to risk injuring their starters before a playoff run, players who wouldn't normally see the field much would start. The beauty of that is most of them weren't on any one's roster meaning there was lots of freely available talent if you knew where to look.

A perfect example: Broncos starting wide receiver Brandon Marshall scored 166 points this year, the 10th most of any wide receiver in fantasy football. Players like that aren't available on waivers, and certainly not in Week 17. Except, Marshall had an injury and didn't play. So did the Broncos #2 wide receiver Eddie Royal, and so did their pass catching tight end Tony Scheffler. The Broncos were going into a must-win game against a terrible defensive secondary (Kansas City) without any of their top three receiving threats. That's called an opportunity.

Even without those players, Denver is still going to throw the ball and when they do, someone is going to have to catch it. Whomever that is will likely be successful because KC's defense sucks. So, the question was, who was the fourth guy on the Broncos depth chart, because that is the guy who suddenly became Marshall and Royal and Scheffler all in one. The answer is Jabar Gaffney, who picked up and put into my starting lineup. Gaffney caught 213 yards worth of passes for 21 fantasy points.

I did the same with Bears Wide Receiver Devin Aromashodu (46 yards and 2 TDs for 16 points) and Houston Running Back Arian Foster (119 yards and 2 TDs for 25 points). Neither player is a household name but both were going to get the ball against teams that either didn't need to win (New England) or weren't capable of winning (Detroit). So into my starting lineup they went.

My other starters and the reasoning behind them:

Aaron Rodgers, QB: The best QB in fantasy football this year, and my only consistent performer all year long. I had picked up a few other QBs in case Rogers didn't play, but fortunately for me, the Packers decided to play to win even though they didn't need to, which meant playing Rodgers. He threw for 235 yards and 1 TD, and ran for another for 19 points.

Matt Forte, RB: Forte sucked this year, and I would've dropped him weeks ago but for this Week 17 match-up against the Lions. Yes, I held on to a guy for basically five weeks simply for a one week match up. It paid off (sort of) as Forte ran for 100 yards and caught 20 more, for 12 points.

Jamaal Charles, RB: Despite ESPN's continual predictions of doom, I kept putting Charles in my lineup and he kept producing. So, even though ESPN predicted only 9 points this week, I put him in there thinking he'd probably be closer to 20, or if I was lucky, 25. Charles ran for 250 yards and two TDs, good for 37 points.

Vernon Davis, TE: Normally my starting Tight End, fortunately for me, he was matched up against a lousy Rams defense. 89 yards and a TD later I got 14 more points.

That about covers my team. But I was down 55 points, so even scoring 155 might not be enough if Tank scored as few as 101.

Tank navigated his first land mine wisely, but got unlucky in the process. He sat usual starting Quarterback, Tom Brady, as the Patriots weren't likely to really try to win. Good call. Brady totaled 5 points. Instead, he played Chad Henne of Miami. Henne had totaled at least 10 points four weeks running with a high of 19 during that period. He wasn't likely to go off, but then he wasn't likely to totally suck either. Unfortunately for him, Henne got hurt and only played one half, totaling 7 points. David Garrad versus Cleveland totaled 18 points and might have been a better if riskier call.

Ray Rice ran for 70 yards but couldn't punch it in from the 1 on two opportunities, opening up the job to Willis McGahee, who inexplicably scored three TDs. Rice ended up with 8 points, his third lowest output of the season. This is one of those instances where I got lucky.

Two other star players, Adrian Peterson and Randy Moss, played sparingly, scoring 11 and 7 points, respectively. Even though Moss scored a TD, starting him probably wasn't a good idea. He wasn't going to play much, so there were likely better options available.

Its hard to quibble with starting Peterson. Half a game of Peterson is probably better than a full game of most guys. Together with his other running back, Thomas Jones, Tank got 30 points from the two slots.

Even with the lousy luck at QB and half games from Peterson and Moss, it might have been enough had Tank got something from his other Wide Receiver, his Tight End, and his Defense/Special Teams.

You can't blame Tank for starting DeSean Jackson against the Cowboys in a Win-And-You-Win-The-Division game. I picked the Cowboys, but I didn't see the Eagles getting shut out. In fact, Jackson was one of the players on Tank's team that really scared me. Jackson made three catches for 47 yards and 4 points.

So his QB got hurt, two star players played half a game and a star wide receiver had a lousy game. Hard to fault Tank for that. It wasn't all tough luck though. Two decisions stand out when going back over his starting lineup. The first is Fred Davis at Tight End. The Redskins offense had completely fallen apart and on the road against San Diego things didn't promise to improve. They didn't, as Davis ended up with 4 points. Six free agent Tight Ends scored more than Davis, including two who scored 14 and 18 points.

Tank's biggest error and one that was pretty easy to see coming was starting the Bengals Defense/Special Teams. The Bengals had nothing to play for against a Jets team that needed to win to make the playoffs. Predictably, the Bengals D/ST totaled -7 points. Every single D/ST that was free for the taking did better than -7 except one, the Giants, and they also scored -7. The Jets were the obvious pick, and they scored 19 points.

Between Jackson, Davis, and the Bengals D/ST, Tank totaled 1 point. With Garrad at QB (+11), the second best free agent tight end available (+10), and the Jets D/ST (+26), Tank wins by five points.

The end result was the Fucksticks scored 155 points, the most of any team in one week all year long. Fat Tank's team, "ISUCKYUMMYYUMMYCOCKYUMYUMYUM!!!", scored 60 points, the fewest points they scored all year. Like that, a 55 point deficit became a 42 point margin of victory.

That is how I beat the shit out of Matt Frank, and that is how the Greatest Comeback Ever In The History Of Recorded Time happened.
.

Hockey Is Better When Its Baseball

h/t to The Joy of Sox

This is the mask that Bruins goalie Tuukka Rask wore for the Winter Classic. It features a bear jumping (?) over the top of Fenway Park with the bloody remains of a Yankees jersey in its teeth.

We've got a new #1 Mask.
.

So Much For That...

Breaking news to all people living under rocks: The Redskins fired Jim Zorn about eight seconds after the plane landed back in DC. "Let me be the first to welcome you to Washington DC. Please wait to remove your seat belts until the plane has taxied to the gate, Jim Zorn you're fired, and again, Welcome to Washington."

4-12 isn't anything to crow about, but was old Zorny ever really given a fair chance? Zorn was undermined by the front office, the owner, an offensive line more fragile than my psyche, and on more than once instance, his kicker.

Its damn hard to be successful when you have all those forces working against you. And Zorn wasn't successful. After a 6-2 start, Zorn's Redskins went 6-18 over the last year and a half. So its housecleaning time again at Redskins Park. Out with Cerrato/Zorn, in with Allen/Shannahan.

The Redskins go into the off season with as many needs as most 4-12 teams. First and foremost they need an offensive line. I mean, they need a whole new line. I'm talking two guards, two tackles and a center. Only one of the guys who started for the Skins this year will or should be starting for their next playoff team, and that's right guard Randy Thomas if he stays healthy, which isn't anything I'd want to bet a season on.

By virtue (if you can call it that) of their 4-12 season, the Redskins will get the 4th overall pick of the NFL draft, so there should be some semi-competent offensive lineman available. Of course, the residue of the Cerrato Era is two of the seven draft picks are gone already, but fortunately Cerrato wasn't able to burn the first and second round picks before being forcibly removed from his office.

The next Redskins coach will have lots of work to do, but he does have a foundation to work with. The Skins defensive line is good, and they have passable talent in the secondary as well. The offense is a bit more suspect, but there are two very good receiving tight ends on the roster and a quarterback that, if he can stay upright, should be serviceable.

But as to Jim Zorn, well, life isn't fair sometimes. Or, really, ever. Best of luck whenever you end up, Mr. Zorn.
.

Cluttered Thoughts On The Halladay And Lee Trades

[Note: This was written the day following the trade announcement, the week following the trade announcement, and then today. We're nothing if not punctual here at T!!!.]

I've wanted to write about the Phillies big trades this past week, the first for Roy Halladay and the second of Cliff Lee, but I'm having trouble distilling my thoughts. You might not be surprised as I spend most of my time knee deep in various types of turds. If perspective parents saw what comes out of my kids they'd sleep in separate beds and wear full body condoms (like this). But I digress.

There are so many different angles in this deal, or really, a series of deals that its hard to wrap your head around it all, baby turds or no. But I'm going to try anyway. Here goes.

First, the very basics:

1. The Phillies traded three prospects to Toronto for ace pitcher Roy Halladay and $6 million.
2. The Phillies traded ace pitcher Cliff Lee to Seattle for three prospects
3. The Phillies signed Roy Halladay to a 3 year contract extension. (Halladay will receive $9.75m in 2o10, and $20m in 2011-2014 from the Phillies, )

Some background information important to the discussion:

1) The prospects the Phillies traded to Toronto for Halladay are very good prospects, and decently close to the majors.
2) The prospects the Phillies received from Seattle are decent prospects, but are pretty far from the majors.
3) Lee will be a Type A free agent after next season, so the team that loses him to free agency will receive two first round picks

In effect, the Phillies traded:
1) Cliff Lee for Roy Halladay, and
2) Three prospects for three other prospects.

Obviously is a very complicated transaction involving three teams with players with money flying every which way. But, to me, the big unanswered question is why not keep both Lee and Halladay? The Red Sox just signed John Lackey, you don't see them turning around and trading Josh Beckett. Boston and Philadelphia are both championship level clubs and championship level clubs don't often trade off pieces like Lee for three A ballers, especially when Lee's contract is so cheap.

Of course the above is very simplistic - clearly the Phils front office doesn't sit around asking themselves what Boston did so they can emulate it. Nor should they. Their job is to win. Its nice the prospects the Phils got from Seattle all have potential, but the point of potential is to help win a World Series and Lee was right there willing and able to do that. There must have been some reason for trading Lee.

Publicly GM Ruben Amaro, Jr. has said that Lee was traded for two reasons, both of which bear examination:

1. Because the Phillies couldn't afford both Lee and Halladay

Lee is to make $9 million in 2010, but he won't receive his first paycheck until the start of the season. So if you accept that the Phillies had to trade Lee to get under their self-imposed salary cap, you still have to answer the question, "Why the rush?". If Lee is made available to other teams its likely, considering his performance record, his salary, and the desirability of those two in one package, the Phillies could have netted more. Of course, that's only speculation, but then I am in my parent's basement in my underwear.

Even if we accept Amaro's reasoning, then trading Lee still isn't necessarily the right thing to do. Instead of saying, "With Halladay on board, the Phils had to get rid of Lee," one should say "With Halladay on board, the Phils had to get rid of $9 million". There are a multitude of ways that they could have removed $9 million in salary without trading their second best pitcher. The list gets even longer if you look backwards just a month or so. If Amaro had any inkling he would be adding Halladay and thus be required to subtract Lee, he likely wouldn't have added the free agents he did and/or he likely would have non-tendered Joe Blanton. Any combination of the above would be better for the Phils on the field and would have cost the same in the ledger.

Amaro has been GM for two years and both years when the free agency period begins he's been out of the box like he's prairie-dogging. Last year he overpaid for Ibanez, and this year he overpaid for Polanco, then threw money - over $5 million in total - at Schneider and Gload. Hell, if he'd kept it in his pants enough to not offer a 4,000 year old pitcher a two year contract, he might have been able to keep Lee. Know how much Moyer is making this year? $6.5 million. You don't think he could've convinced ownership to keep Lee without that commitment?

He must have had some inclination that something along these lines might happen and he obviously knew the dollar threshold ownership mandated, yet he ran out and threw millions at mediocre players, severely limiting his ability to keep his star players later on.

2. To restock the farm system

The farm system is important, but its not what a team like the Phillies should be focused on to the exclusion of the major league roster. The value of the two draft picks plus one year of Lee as the #2 starter on a team in the prime of contending is far, far more valuable than three A ballers who may or may not help the big club in four or five years.

To me, either Amaro had no plan and grabbing Halladay which prompted getting rid of Lee was a seat-of-the-pants maneuver, or he screwed up. A team trying to win now with the collection of talent the Phillies have on the field at the peak of their physical abilities almost never makes trades like the Lee trade.

So I don't get the Lee trade. Sadly for the Phillies, I don't think the Halladay trade in combination with the Lee trade makes their team much better for 2010. However, it does make them better for 2011, as Lee was a free agent. Of course, so was Halladay, who signed a three year extension with Philadelphia after being traded.

Its this extension that makes this deal interesting. Halladay had the leverage to demand five or six years at about $25 million.

While he may nor may not have got a contract like that, the deal he signed with the Phillie is so significantly under market that you'd think there was some shenanigans going on. This isn't leaving $500,000 on the table to play closer to home. This is leaving more money on the table than has ever been left on the table in the history of sports. Halladay left, conservatively, $40,000,000 on the table. That's a staggeringly unbelievable amount to essentially turn down.

Anyone who says, "ah, whats the difference between $60 and $140 million" either hasn't really thought about what that means, or can't do math.

As far as the 2010 Phillies go, this trade comes down to Lee for Halladay. That isn't bad, but its no where near the win that Lee and Halladay is. Amaro deserves lots of credit for acquiring Halladay and even more credit for Halladay's contract, but he flushed ninety percent of that credit by trading Lee to Seattle for three players that won't impact the 2010, 2011, and probably not even the 2012 Philadelphia rosters.

The fact is that even in acquiring one of the top three starters in all of baseball for players not on the major league roster and then getting him to agree to a great contract extension, Amaro screwed up.
.