How To Steal a No-Hitter From Your Pitcher, Thoughts On Jimenez Trade, Return of Tiger Woods

On Sunday, Jered Weaver of the Los Angeles Angels faced off against Justin Verlander of the Detroit Tigers in baseball’s most anticipated matchup of the weekend. Both men have had spectacular seasons thus far and easily are early candidates for the AL Cy Young Award. Weaver came in with a major league leading 1.79 ERA and a 14-4 record. While Verlander’s numbers aren’t quite as good, he is roundly considered the most dominant pitcher in the game right now. Facing the Toronto Blue Jays in May, Verlander recorded his second career no-hitter while facing the minimum 27 batters. Virtually every start he makes is placed on no-no watch and Sunday was no exception.

Both hurlers started off well. Weaver surrendered a lead off walk in the third inning but quickly got the next two batters out. Then he hung a breaking ball to Magglio Ordonez, who promptly placed it in the left field seats. Verlander set to work with the two run lead. His fastball was around 94-95 MPH through the early innings. With the lead and a no-no in the works, he started hitting 98-99 MPH in the sixth and seventh innings. This is probably the most remarkable aspect of Verlander’s game. He is the only pitcher in baseball who seems to get stronger the deeper he goes into games. His four-seamer has always been highly touted. It is his curveball that has taken on new definition during the 2011 season. According to the Tigers, he is now throwing it with more control and a sharper break.

During the game, I texted my father that I hadn’t seen a pitcher mix that good of a curveball, with a 20 MPH drop from the fastball, since Pedro Martinez pre-shoulder surgery. In the seventh, Verlander walked Bobby Abreu for the second time in the game. Vernon Wells then hit a fly ball to the warning track in right field, generating an audible sigh of relief from the crowd (and probably Verlander, too). He got Alberto Callaspo to pop out in foul territory to end the inning. With just six outs to get, it seemed almost a foregone conclusion. Almost.

Baseball is just one of those things that can turn around in a heartbeat, take on a new meaning and a new look in just one moment. With the exception of the two run shot by Ordonez, Jered Weaver had been putting together a fine start himself and keeping his team in the game. He got the first two Tigers out to start the bottom of the seventh. Detroit shortstop Carlos Guillen stepped into the box. In my opinion, here’s where everything went wrong, for several reasons.

If you watch enough baseball, you’ll start to hear about all kinds of unwritten rules, as if it’s some sort of devious and confusing board game aimed at frustrating, rather than entertaining, the participants. Guillen’s at-bat with two down in the bottom of the seventh highlighted just one of these “rules.” You see, Carlos Guillen has played in 1,290 games over 14 seasons in the majors and during this time has hit 122 home runs. Guillen is a great player and this is a big accomplishment, but no one would classify him as a prolific slugger. In fact, he has only hit 20 or more home runs in a single season twice. Injuries have gotten the best of Carlos in recent years. He entered today’s game with just one home run in 13 games on the season.

With the count full, Weaver tried to bury Guillen with an inside fastball but left it a bit too far out over the plate. Guillen hit a high drive to right field for a homer. Instead of putting his head down and jogging the bases, he proceeded to take a long look at his blast, flip his bat, and then stare down Weaver as an NBA player does when they dunk on someone. Weaver took immediate exception, as he should have, because pitchers generally do not respect this behavior, especially coming from someone who has just hit their 123^rd career homerun. In an attempt to prevent this situation from escalating, home plate umpire Hunter Wendelstedt ran out to Weaver trying to appease his anger, and at the same time issued a warning to both benches.

But this did not work. Guillen’s antics were so infuriating that Weaver’s next pitch was thrown right above Alex Avila’s head. He knew he’d be ejected immediately and so used his remaining time on the field to direct several emphatic “F-you’s” towards Carlos Guillen, who was in the Tigers dugout with a childish sort of “what did I do?” look on his face. Now, the umpires had to make sure nothing escalated further, but more importantly, the Angels now had to replace Weaver. However you string it, Guillen’s antics forced Justin Verlander to sit on the bench for nearly 20 minutes before taking the hill in the eighth. Furthermore, Weaver’s defense of his own honor seemed to fire up an Angels team that was looking for any edge against the seemingly impregnable Verlander.

To start the eighth, Angel shortstop Erick Aybar laid down a perfect bunt and reached second on a bad throw from Verlander, who was charged with an error. Had the game not been taking place in Detroit, he probably would have lost the no-hitter then. The crowd issued a boo and Verlander cast a stern glance out at Aybar, because there is another unwritten that states you may not attempt to break up a no-hitter by trying to bunt for a base hit. But a good fan knows that if the score is close, this is not true. And the rest of the inning proved why.

Justin got the next batter out on a grounder to first, advancing Aybar, who then scored on a fielder’s choice, this time because Verlander botched the pickle throw. Yet with the shutout gone, and the tying run at the plate, he still had the no-hitter intact, that is, until Angel second baseman Maicer Izturis slapped a seeing-eye single to the opposite field, scoring Peter Bourjos. The score was now 3-2. The Angels had successfully broken up the no-no, and put themselves back in the game. Verlander collected himself, however, and struck out Torii Hunter to end the inning. Tigers closer Jose Valverde pitched a scoreless ninth and Detroit got the win.

Verlander had the stuff and was in great position to collect his second no-hitter of the season before Guillen decided to put his ego above the team. Actually, it almost cost his team the game. I’m sure Justin will blame himself first for not being able to pull it through. For that matter, the one hit he did allow was a great piece of hitting by Izturis. But the dreaded long wait on the bench didn’t have to happen, and if he felt cold coming out for the eighth, he can only blame Guillen. The most ironic part of the whole story: Guillen’s homerun stood as the winning run in the game. I still think it should have played out differently.

Dear Rockies, Why?

Sincerely, Sam

By trading ace pitcher Ubaldo Jimenez, the Colorado Rockies front office has effectively put themselves on the hot seat for the next 3-4 years. Who knowingly does that? Granted, Denver doesn’t have the media atmosphere like New York, Boston, and Philadelphia do. Nonetheless, this trade will surely be questioned for the next several seasons by Rockies fans.

In recent days, it appeared that the Rockies were actually serious about letting Jimenez go – as long as some team coughed up a good enough package of prospects. In the eyes of the front office, the Cleveland Indians did so. Colorado will receive Drew Pomeranz, a hard throwing lefty with ace potential. They also get Alex White and Joe Gardner, two sinkerballers who are rated as mid-rotation guys, and Matt McBride, a decent hitting minor leaguer capable of playing multiple positions.

By most accounts, this appears to be a great package for the Rockies. But trading Jimenez at 27 years old is an abrupt departure from what it appeared the team was trying to do. Signing Carlos Gonzalez and Troy Tulowitzki to long-term extensions were two crucial steps in what should have been a three-step process, the third step being Jimenez. His decline in performance this season, if anything, gave the organization an excuse to hold off on an expensive extension for another year. Speculation was rife about his fastball dropping off a bit, but in terms of numbers, he’s been back to his 2010 pace since June. He has easily the most team friendly contract in the entire league. Jorge De La Rosa being on the disabled list is becoming a common theme, so I can’t take this move as meaning anything besides giving up on this season, and probably next season, too.

Even if Pomeranz becomes a top of the rotation type starter, it won’t be for a few seasons – and that’s an if. On the other hand, Jimenez has already established himself in that category. This is tough for any Rockies fan to swallow. Ubaldo is the first really good pitcher to come out of Colorado’s farm system and start producing instant results at the big league level. Last season, he threw the first no-hitter in franchise history. He had a special place in the hearts of Rockies fans and this makes the trade even harder swallow. If Ubaldo continues to be great, and nothing pans out of the prospects Colorado got for him, there will be some much-deserved anger headed towards the Rockies front office.

The Prodigal Tiger Returns

Just when it seemed like Tiger Woods missing the rest of the 2011 season was a foregone conclusion, the secretive star came out of seclusion and announced he would be returning to competition this coming week at the Bridgestone Invitational, a tournament he has won seven times in his career. Woods has maintained that he has been treating his injuries properly and listening to his doctors. For this reason, he has heeded their advice to stay off the course, missing the last two majors. They have cleared Woods to compete this week.

That’s how it appears. This is what everyone else is noticing: Tiger loves Firestone Country Club, there’s better place to come back. He has just dropped to 133^rd in the FedEx Cup standings, just eight spots outside the top-125 mark required for play in the upcoming playoffs. He’s just now dropped out of the top-20 in the official World Golf Rankings.

I believe this is all coincidence. Woods had no reason to sit out of the last two majors for medical reasons only to kick his doctor’s to the curb now. If anything, it’s a blessing, not a coincidence. After all, no one really knows because Woods is so private about all of these matters. All we know is what he gives us, so being ready to go this week is very fortunate. It’s hard to say how he’ll hit the ball, but the fact that he’ll be on a course he’s comfortable with and won at a lot bodes well. He has only been able to putt and we all know championships are won and lost with the flat blade. That should help him too.

It’s also a blessing because regardless of how he finishes, it will really just be a tune-up for the following week’s PGA Championship at Atlanta Athletic Club. Many people think at the current stage of his career, a win – any win – is all he needs to start bolstering his image again. I don’t think the guy has anything left to prove to anyone, certainly not at Firestone where he is a seven-time professional winner. The critics, the naysayers, and even yes, fans like me, all know that where he has yet to prove his eternal greatness in the annals of golf lore is with the major championships. This week, he just needs to find something that clicks and bring it to the PGA with a positive attitude.

And if he is truly back to 100% and ready to go, there’s no reason why he won’t be able to make a great run at an 8^th win at the Bridgestone and at a 5^th win at the PGA Championship. On Sunday at the Masters this past April, when he was making that run, for a brief moment all seemed right and well in the golf world again. Hopefully his return to competition this week marks the end of what has been a terrifyingly dark chapter in the story of this golf legend. Hit ‘em straight, Tiger.

Giants Acquire Carlos Beltran For Almost Nothing

The Giants need his bat, but they'll take his glove too.

In the biggest move yet during this year’s trade deadline, the defending World Series Champion San Francisco Giants acquired New York Mets outfielder Carlos Beltran for almost nothing. I’ll get to the “almost” in a moment. This move will surely bolster a beleaguered Giants offense that has suffered since the loss of catcher Buster Posey early in the season. In the short run, Beltran’s all-around capabilities should help the Giants secure the NL West division. I don’t think the Arizona Diamondbacks have the depth to contend with the Giants on the stretch run. The Giants currently have a 3 game lead over Arizona, and they will face each other nine more times before the end of the regular season.

Besides being an adept outfielder, capable of playing right and center, the switch-hitting Beltran provides some much needed pop in the middle of the lineup. He’s hitting .289 with a .391 OBP so far this season, and leads the NL with 30 doubles. Right now, his average is good for second on the Giants and his OBP is some 47 points higher than current leader Pablo Sandoval’s .344 mark. Beltran has three less home runs (15) than do the top two in the Giants lineup combined (Sandoval 9, Aubrey Huff 9). And while you can make the case that he’s had more chances to drive runs in with the better hitting Mets, Beltran’s mark of 66 RBIs is 19 more than any Giant has collected. He may not pay instant dividends with his bat, but it will probably come sooner or later. At the very least, opposing pitchers will definitely be paying attention to Carlos, opening up the possibility that Sandoval, Huff, and Nate Schierholtz start seeing some better pitches to hit.

Baseball fans well remember when Beltran burst onto the scene in 2004. After being a lifelong Kansas City Royal, Beltran was dealt at the trade deadline to the Houston Astros, whom he helped make the post season. In 12 games that postseason, he hit .435 and belted 8 home runs. Perhaps he’ll recreate his last contract year performance? The Giants sure hope so. Nonetheless, in 22 career postseason games Carlos has a .366 average, 11 home runs, 19 RBI, and 8 stolen bases. A six time All-Star, four time Gold Glover, Beltran is a career .282 hitter who is five home runs, and eight stolen bases away from joining the 300-300 club.

And to look at the Giants team batting statistics, any move for a better bat would have been a smart move. Here’s a little breakdown: they rank 26^th in the MLB with a .241 team batting average. 28^th in runs scored. 24^th in hits and home runs. 22^nd in extra-base hits. 27^th in OBP. 24^th in slugging percentage. Looking at these rankings, one would hardly expect much success, yet the Giants are 60-44. As we know from last year’s World Series, their pitching staff isn’t just good, it’s scary good. When most experts expected the Philadelphia Phillies to mop the Giants up in the NLCS, Tim Lincecum, Matt Cain, Madison Bumgarner, and Brian Wilson said not so fast (with some timely help from Cody Ross’ bat, too). The Phils didn’t just get Cliff Lee for a potential matchup with the heavy left-handed lineups of a Boston or New York in a World Series. If an NLCS rematch occurs, they need someone (besides an aging Roy Oswalt) to challenge the strong Giants rotation. It should be noted, too, that the Giants beat Lee not once, but twice, in the World Series last year.

In a way, the best part of this deal for San Francisco is that they parted with very little to acquire Carlos Beltran (even if he is just a “rental”). Along with cash, the Giants traded Zach Wheeler, a right-handed pitcher throwing for their Class-A Advanced squad. I suppose they paid somewhat of a price, if you consider MLB.com ranks Wheeler as the Giants second best minor league prospect, and 33^rd best in the entire league. But does anyone besides me think that a 7-5 record, 3.99 ERA, and 47 walks in 88 innings – in Class A ball – isn’t much to write home about? OK, he is only 21 years old, and does have 98 K in those innings too. But still, that’s not a very good ERA, nor K/BB ratio. For a team stocked with great, young, pitching talent, it doesn’t seem to be a huge loss parting with Wheeler. Of course, if he comes up in a few years and wins a Cy Young for the Mets, I’ll get started on an apology article. For now, I’ll credit GM Brian Sabean on making a great trade.

As for the Mets, this trade may signal the end of an era in Queens. At best, the group that was built around Beltran made it to Game 7 of the 2006 NLCS. At worst, the group headed into the final stretch of the 2007 season with a 7.5 game lead in the division, only to lose 12 of their last 17 games, and the division to Philadelphia by one game. All-Star shortstop Jose Reyes will probably have several teams willing to pay him a lot of money on the free agent market. At that point, one wonders how long stars like David Wright and Johan Santana will stay, too. (Actually, one wonders why Santana signed with the Mets in the first place.) With Philly likely to lead the division for at least another 3-5 years, and the Braves still being a good team, entering a rebuilding era may be prescient for New York anyway.

Sources: MLB.com, Baseball-Reference.com

Twins, Ubaldo Jimenez, Sean O’Hair: Ramblings From a Week Past

It must be the dog days of summer, even though the trade deadline is still six days away. It is the time of year where everything just seems to slow down. The heat helps. I should have sensed the onset of dog day-ness when attempting to write my last post, as I started it, deleted it, and started it again, about four or five times. Oh no! Only two months into the blog and I’m developing writers block?! Somewhere around the fifth try, I realized that this was not writers block, but in fact, something more serious. In the strongest terms possible, I urge people to exercise prudence before attempting to write in an upstairs, A/C-less apartment while it is 100 degrees outside. For a hairy monster like me, finishing that article redefined the phrase sweat equity. And while A/C is nice, there was nothing better than escaping the heat for cooler pastures, as in Duluth, and jumping into the vast and brisk waters of Lake Superior. Righteous was the word that came to mind.

Before heading north, however, my girlfriend and I decided that if you’re going to sit around and be sweaty, why not do it with 38,000 other people at a baseball game? Now, I’m a devotee of Fenway Park, and always will be. That being said, enjoying the new isn’t a bad thing, and it makes you appreciate the old at the same time. Target Field in Minneapolis is a superb venue. We sat less than ten rows from the top on the left field line and still had a spectacular view. There weren’t any blind angles, and we could see the pitcher’s mound and home plate very well. You don’t have to wait in line for any concessions and the skyline view is awesome. It’s worth going to a game there. Coincidentally, we saw a great game making me realize yet again that summer is for baseball.

 Twins left hander Francisco Liriano had one of those really gutsy performances that any huge fan of pitching like me appreciates, now matter which teams are playing. He did not have his best stuff, nor was he throwing many first pitch strikes. He walked four over six innings, two of which were the dreaded lead off walk. But he still had the guts to strike out Cleveland’s Asdrubal Cabrera a slider on a full count with two runners on base. He accidentally beaned Travis Buck square in the head, which I did not see because I was getting a round of beers. I did suspect something happened when I heard 38,000 people collectively gasp at once. He had some luck too. Matt LaPorta absolutely smoked three balls off Liriano, but all were right at a Twins outfielder. Francisco was effectively wild, which you can be when you have stuff like he does, and walked off the mound after six innings having surrendered just one run on a sac fly.

Indians right hander Justin Masterson was simply masterful. I don’t know how hard I can stress that the Twins hitters had literally zero chance off him that night. He’s having a fantastic year and that showed last Tuesday. How good you say? Of 104 pitches thrown in the game, Masterson threw 102 fastballs and two sliders. Mixing four-seamers and two-seamers, he allowed just four hits over 7+ innings, none very hard. He got one out on a fly ball, while getting 15 groundouts and six strikeouts. He walked none. It was pretty impressive to watch.

Twins third baseman Danny Valencia was having one of those games you just want to forget about. He made a couple nice plays in the field, but he struck out swinging in his first two at-bats. In the seventh with one out, the Twins had two runners on base for the first time in the game. Masterson got Valencia to ground into a double play to end the inning. As I looked at who would be due up in the bottom of the ninth, I shuddered at the thought of Valencia being up with the game on the line. It was still 1-0 Indians. After a fly out, Joe Mauer did what great hitters often do and drew a walk. Twins All-Star Michael Cuddyer then smacked a double. After an intentional pass to Jim Thome, up came Danny.

In baseball, it always helps to have an edge. There’s not too many times where that edge happens to be of the following variety. It turns out that Indians closer Chris Perez and Danny Valencia have been friends for 10 years, two of which were as roommates when they were both on the baseball team at the University of Miami. Ahead in the count, Valencia sat on fastball and ripped a line drive that dived too quickly for left fielder Luis Valbuena to catch. Mauer scores, Cuddyer scores, Twins win – and Valencia saves himself from a likely stern chiding. It doesn’t get any better than that on hot, muggy, summer night. I’ll be returning to Target Field in a couple weeks to watch my beloved Red Sox. Next time, I won’t be a-root-root-rooting for the home team, but last Tuesday, I was glad to do so.

Trade Ubaldo? Ucrazy?

There’s not much trade deadline talk this year, and all you have to do is look at how close the standings are to figure out why. Since every division is close and so many teams have a shot at the post season, it is likely to be a down year for big deadline deals. Amongst the few rumors there are, though, is talk of the Colorado Rockies floating their ace right hander Ubaldo Jimenez. Unfortunately, this means that at least part of the Rockies organization has conceded this season. For a team that has been making post season by going on ridiculous August/September runs, this is tough to hear. But GMs are always supposed to be looking to make the team better.

I think they’re floating the idea just to see if anyone bites. The asking price has to be high because in reality, the Rockies would be pretty crazy to trade Ubaldo. He admits that he did not properly prepare for this season, leading to injury early, and ineffectiveness up until about a month ago. But he’s rebounded and his numbers from season’s past speak for themselves. He’s got a nasty sinker that tops out 98-99 MPH and a good slider to boot. He’s only 27 years old. Most importantly though, the Rockies have him signed through 2014 at less than what teams are paying for closers and decent position players. Under his current deal, the most he would make is $8 million in the 2014 season.

Adding fuel to the fire is the rumor that Jimenez has been upset since last offseason, when the Rockies inked Troy Tulowitzki and Carlos Gonzalez to huge contract extensions. I didn’t think the Rockies had the money even to get both deals done in one offseason, but needless to say, they certainly didn’t have the money to get all three done. Jimenez angrily dispelled those rumors last week. I think the Rockies are asking for so much that ultimately no other team is going to land him. I also think that Jimenez will likely get the extension and money he deserves after this season. So, Yankees fans should stop drooling because it ain’t gonna happen.

Tip O’ The Cap to Sean O’Hair

Yesterday, Sean O’Hair won the RBC Canadian Open in a playoff against Kris Blanks for his fourth career PGA tour victory. I just want to tip my cap to O’Hair for a resilient win. With nine top-10 finishes and a win at Quail Hollow, he finished 10^th in the FedEx Cup standings in 2009. He didn’t play quite as well last year and it led to disaster this year. In his first 11 events of 2011, O’Hair missed the cut six times. By early May, he had fired his caddie and his coach. His best finish in his next seven tournaments was tied for 16^th at the Crowne Plaza Invitational, missing the cut another four times including his previous two starts heading into last week. 10 missed cuts in 18 events? One top-ten finish? No, O’Hair was not thinking about these things showing that in golf, it’s always best to look forward, not back.

Best and Worst of the 2011 Open Championship

Best: Let’s start with the obvious: Darren Clarke. The winner of any tournament usually puts together the best four days of golf and Clarke did just that. His round of 69 on Saturday was a driving and ball striking clinic, and he did it in heavy wind and rain. His putting was touch and go, but the rest of his game was so clean that it didn’t matter in the end. And even then, he stepped up and eagled the seventh hole on Sunday, right after Phil Mickelson did, showing that he wasn’t going to go down without a fight. Just as Phil faded, Dustin Johnson kept the pressure on, but Clarke just kept playing. “The luck of the Irish” was surely in effect, or the golf gods were just on his side, but either way, his ball took lucky hops over sand bunkers not once but twice on Sunday. Not only did he play the best golf, he had the best story; a much-deserved win.

Worst: “Oh no.” I said that with little exclamation as I saw the ball leave Dustin Johnson’s club on the 14^th hole yesterday. After what he’s been through in majors recently, it really is a huge accomplishment that DJ found himself playing in the final pairing on Sunday once again. And yet once again, he suffered from a mental lapse that cost him a major victory. He went right on the one hole at Royal St. George’s where you can’t go right. If Clarke made it look easy, Dustin proved just how hard it actually is. But if he can bounce back from blowing up at Pebble Beach and accidentally grounding his club at Whistling Straits, he can surely bounce back from a simple executional error. He did keep one streak alive, though. Since 1961, no one who has made a hole-in-one in the Open has gone on to win. Then again, if Dustin hadn’t made that ace, he might not have made the cut, much less tied for second place.

Best: In terms of how a course should play in a major tournament, Royal St. George’s Golf Club put Congressional to shame. It also showed that links golf really does get to the heart of what the game is all about. You need attitude, execution, and some luck to put a good round together. And as advertised, the weather played a large role. I like seeing professionals struggle under adverse conditions because it allows them to showcase all aspects of their shot making ability. Someone on the St. George’s grounds crew deserves a huge bonus. They made the fairways that were “unfair” easier to hit, and with the added yardage and loss of a par-5, maintained a degree of difficulty that should exist in a major. Instead of being target practice, like Congressional, it tested the mettle of a golfer’s entire game.

Worst: ESPN’s broadcast coverage wasn’t what I thought it would be. I found it choppy, slightly confused, and at times lacking in that color that the NBC/Golf Channel crew provides so well. Scott Van Pelt is better at doing highlight shows and interviews than he is at play-by-play. Mike Tirico should stick to football. Azinger did well, but with little help, also sounded lost. People hate Nick Faldo’s elitist, self-endorsing attitude, but I actually think the guy makes for a great TV commentator. Needless to say, Nick, Peter, Ian and the rest of the crew do it week in and week out. But I’ll give ESPN the benefit of the doubt, it was their first time tackling the entire four days, and they did OK. That being said, I caught Sunday on live streaming with BBC Sports, and I have to admit, those guys were good.

Best: Former professional golfer turned sports agent Andrew “Chubby” Chandler must be doing something right. Dubbed the “Chubby Slam” already with the PGA still remaining, one of Chandler’s clients has captured each major championship this season. The crazy thing is he doesn’t even represent that many guys. Charl Schwartzel and Rory McIlroy are clearly two budding young stars, but Darren Clarke is considered one Chubby’s “you’re old but I like you” clients. Will someone complete the Chubby Slam at next month’s PGA Championship? I don’t know, but either way, its an interesting coincidence, I guess.

Worst: Despite being the clear favorite, Rory McIlroy did not show up. When he was criticized for taking time off, Rory pointed out that he took off three weeks before the Masters and had “three and a half pretty good rounds there.” Operative word there being half. Let’s be honest, those three weeks were probably spent getting ready, as opposed to three weeks he spent before this major. Granted the kid had a right to celebrate, had to answer to media frenzy, and apparently begged his girlfriend to come back. I suppose it was our fault for thinking he’d be the same. Quite honestly, McIlroy at St. George’s looked, simply put, rusty. Instead of biting the bullet, though, Rory went out and said that he hates playing in bad weather, going so far as to imply the British Open is unfair because you get the luck of the draw with the weather. I’d accept this coming from an American who grew up in Florida or Southern California, but not a dude from Northern Ireland who grew up supposedly playing these types of courses in those types of conditions. And if he really is the “best shot maker in the game” right now, he should have been able to deal with it…

Best: …Which leads me right into my next point. Rickie Fowler’s round of 68 on Saturday in terrible conditions is a testament to his character and his golf game. Always touted as talented, he may be more equipped to win a major soon than I had previously thought. He did everything you’re supposed to do. Hang around on Thursday and Friday. Make a move on Saturday. He just couldn’t quite put it all together on Sunday, but give the guy some credit. Not too many players broke par on Sunday to begin with, and most who did were out of contention. But that Saturday round is something he should hold onto for his whole career. He admitted himself he had never really played in conditions that bad. Yet he shot two under par. What do you think of that, Rory?

Worst: My own predictions. Through two major championship preview articles, I have shown an enormous talent, not in picking potential winners or high finishers, but rather those who will miss the cut. Maybe I should do some more research. I doubt that Nick Watney and Lee Westwood read my preview, but if they did, and are so enthralled by my writing that they’re reading now, I’m sorry gentleman. Tell me who you least want to see make the cut at the PGA, and I’ll put them on my short list of contenders for next month. I did say, however, that I didn’t see this year’s winner beating Ben Curtis’ score of one under par by more than four or five strokes. Lo and behold, Darren Clarke finished at five under par. So there.

Roger Clemens Gets Mistrial in Perjury Case

"Those other lawyers are idiots, man!"

Federal prosecutors presented inadmissible evidence in the perjury trial of Roger Clemens yesterday, a move Judge Reggie Walton said “a first year law student” would know is wrong. Judge Walton was none too pleased, declaring a mistrial, and scolding the prosecution for attempting to “bolster the credibility of one witness with clearly inadmissible evidence.” Ironically enough, that witness is none other than Andy Pettitte, a former teammate of Clemens with the New York Yankees and Houston Astros. This comes on just the second day of the trial after what was apparently an excruciating jury selection.

I’m surprised they were able to even find a jury (10 women, two men, by the way) considering how famous Clemens is as a baseball star, as well as his widely covered issues with performance-enhancing drugs and extramarital activity. They did though and the long-awaited trial got underway only to come to a grinding halt because of the prosecution’s gaffe.  Look, it’s bad enough that the federal government ever stuck their noses into Major League Baseball in the first place. There were plenty more important things to deal with then, and there are arguably more now. But since they can’t just back out, the least they could do is put some competent prosecutors on the case. This seemingly did not happen.

The worst and most ironic part is that Roger’s fate in this trial was more than likely going to hinge on Pettitte’s testimony. Not only did this error result in a mistrial, Walton also indicated that government might not be able to proceed with a re-trial either. Oopsy. Aspiring law students may want to find out where these guys went to school, and if it happens to be one they’re looking at, it might be prudent to knock it off the list. The main reason I’m upset, though, is because I was banking on Clemens jumping over the desk and starting a Texas-sized brawl whenever Pettitte got to the part of his testimony where he’d say he saw Clemens use PEDs. Oh, well.

Hall of Fame chances doubtful?

While Roger Clemens for now has escaped legal ramifications for his alleged PED use (well, lying about to Congress technically), his Hall of Fame credibility still remains in limbo. We still don’t know how the Hall is going to deal with what is unquestionably an inevitable era in baseball. Mark McGwire didn’t receive the votes because he really didn’t have the statistics that are usually required to gain entry. This did not exactly convince the baseball populace that the HOF voters have come to any consensus on how to treat statistics put up by players starting from the late 80s/early 90s through 2003, when the MLB actually made the use of such drugs illegal for the first time.

Since the Hall of Fame is so revered, so sacred, and so meaningful to players and fans alike, this is a pretty contentious issue. From what I’ve discerned, there are some who are not going to vote for anyone who was even accused, at any point in their career. This goes against the entire American conception of justice, and I think these people are living in an absurd, make-believe reality, where somehow this whole “steroids in baseball” thing is just a bad dream. On the other hand, there are some voters who are willing to consider achievements outside PED usage. The infamous Barry Bonds is a great example here: 3 MVPs, 400 home runs, 400 steals, etc., all before 1999, when the vast majority of fans, players, and media believed he started using. Originally, the steroid issue was inextricably linked with home runs. It makes that debate relatively easy to have.

Roger Clemens is another story. If Bonds represents the steroid era in perfect fashion as the batter who used, and thus was able to swat more homers than any in history, Clemens is the pitcher who was able to reach 300 wins and 4,000 strikeouts (did it in the same game) because he used. When stories first broke about pitchers using PEDs, it wasn’t so much about being able to throw harder. Everyone knows that being big and strong doesn’t necessarily translate to being a power pitcher; just ask Sandy Koufax and Pedro Martinez. But, it does help pitchers stay healthy. It helps, as Andy Pettitte admitted, a pitcher return quickly from injury. The prevailing thought is that also helps a pitcher perform at high level through their mid-30s and into their early 40s, the years in which they typically begin to decline in performance.

If you accept former Yankees trainer Brian McNamee’s accusation as truth, then you put Clemens’ PED usage starting in 1998. The other widely accepted rule of “truth” now is “once you pop you just can’t stop,” or as I like to call it, “the Pringles Rule.” While McNamee’s accusations cover 1998-2001, using the Pringles Rule and considering Clemens made 3 All-Star teams, winning one Cy Young Award after 2001, it’s a safe bet he found ways to continue using PEDs without McNamee.

So what do Roger’s numbers look like using the Pringles Rule? In 14 PED-less seasons, Clemens posted a 213-118 record (.644 winning %) with a 2.97 ERA, while tossing 109 complete games and 41 shutouts. In 3,040 innings he struck out 2,882 batters while only walking 924, and posted a WHIP of 1.147.  He averaged 217 IP per season, yet this is mostly due to a couple injury-plagued years: he eclipsed 240+ innings in 8 different seasons, with high of 281.2 in 1987. Additionally, Roger led the league three times in complete games, four times in strikeouts, five times in ERA, and six times in shutouts. He had four 20-win seasons, with a high of 24 in 1986, the same year he won the AL MVP and the Cy Young. Clemens was the first pitcher in history to strike out 20 batters in a nine-inning game, and the only to do so twice, accomplishing this feat in 1986 and 1996. In total, he had six All-Star selections, four Cy Young Awards, one MVP, and Rookie of the Year.

Does this put Roger in the Hall? I would certainly think so. The awards alone are enough. The wins argument doesn’t hold up (Chief Bender 212, Jesse Haines 210, Don Drysdale 209, all Hall of Famers).  Neither does the ERA argument, although ironically, his Pringles Rule ERA is some 15 points lower than his actual 3.12 career ERA. Most of all, his strikeout total in those 14 seasons would still be good for 17^th all time, ahead of HOFers Jim Bunning, Cy Young, Warren Spahn, Bob Feller, Christy Mathewson, Drysdale etc.

I think the Pringles Rule is totally acceptable when considering the likes of Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds. Both of these men were exceptional players over a long period, and while the validity of the latter part of both of their careers is in question, we are still left with what they did, and who they were, before they decided to use PEDs. So, do I think Roger Clemens should get into the Hall of Fame someday? Yes, on the first ballot. Do I think he will? I’m not so sure. We’ll just have to wait and see.

Sources: USAToday, baseball-reference.com

Photo Credit: Alex Brandon, AP

All-Star Game Provides For Mid-Summer Whining

Whining is acceptable only at times like this.

After the Major League Baseball moves through its opening weeks, it’s time for a few rounds of interleague play. Before you know it, it’s time for the All-Star Game. Have I been absent from my perennial duties of following baseball? Am I no longer in touch with the heartbeat of baseball fans? When did these two subjects become an excuse for 9 weeks of whining and complaining about our beloved sport? Just snoop around for awhile on the various media outlets and blogs, and you’ll find a wealth of snooty “I should be running the MLB” articles that make it seem like these “central” issues in baseball are worse than the nation's current debt-ceiling problem. 

OK. There’s no doubt that there are a few things about interleague play that need to be fixed. But these boil down simply to providing a balanced schedule. It really shouldn’t be that hard to do this. ESPN’s Jayson Stark wrote a comprehensive piece on this subject earlier in the year. Balancing interleague play, if the league chooses to do so, will likely come down to two things. First, reducing the number of games. Second, removing the “cross-town/cross-state/in some cases cross-region” rivalry matchups that really don’t matter, and because it is interleague, by definition aren’t rivalries. 

As Stark points out, if the MLB expands the postseason by adding a second wild card in each league, team executives will likely push for the old 154 game schedule, and a reduced, balanced interleague format. I’m just playing messenger here; if you’re an executive of a MLB team, you are allowed to complain about things like unbalanced schedules, and stupid interleague series that involve unnecessary traveling. Instead of flooding the web with “here’s what I think they should do” pieces, let’s thank Mr. Stark for writing an informative article, and leaving it to actual employees of MLB or it’s clubs.

As I said before, the timing of interleague flows nicely into the Mid-Summer Classic. The amount of whining and complaining has nearly doubled. Baseball fans love to wax poetic about how it is “the intellectual’s sport.” Does that mean we have a right to nit pick every little thing, all the while offering up grand schemes of what to do next?  Look, in 2002, I certainly agreed with you. There are no ties in baseball, so yeah, the 2002 All-Star Game was a complete joke. And what do you know? The MLB came up with a fascinating idea to make this exhibition of stars actually mean something!

The All-Star Game has been great to watch ever since, with no shortage of close, dramatic games (2003, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009). But no, there’s always something wrong in baseball. Fans shouldn’t be able to vote the starting lineup (a strong belief, ironically, of many baseball fans). The “at least one player from each team” rule is ridiculous. And so on. This year’s game pointed out how invalid both of these points are: enough players didn’t play or show up because of injury or otherwise that anybody “unfairly” left off the squad got there anyways. I like that the game counts for home field advantage in the World Series. And I like that it is subject to things beyond anyone’s control. That’s baseball.

One comment on an article I read today said the flaw in this format is “unfair,” suggesting that Red Sox fans (his guess for the AL pennant winner) will look back with anger because they didn’t have the likes of C.C. Sabathia, Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Mariano Rivera, and Felix Hernandez supporting the AL squad last night. I almost blew a gasket. First of all, as a Red Sox fan, I could care less who, if anyone, from the Yankees plays in the All-Star Game, even if it counts. By the way, kudos to Boston’s Adrian Gonzalez for driving in the AL’s only run – a solo home run off Philadelphia’s Cliff Lee. In doing so, he also made Joe Buck and Tim McCarver swallow their tongues, as they had just been saying Lee “never misses over the plate.” I always enjoy that.

The AL didn’t have Josh Beckett and Justin Verlander either. Most of these pitchers weren’t available because they took the hill for their teams on Sunday. Home field isn’t worth jack if you can’t get there, especially when each division in baseball is so close. The vast majority of baseball teams thought it more important to get one more win before the break. Most importantly, I don’t think C.J Wilson is a bad pitcher. Last night, he made a bad pitch to Prince Fielder in the wrong situation. “So it goes.”

The home team has an inherent advantage in baseball by getting to bat last. Yet, the home team has won just 55% of all postseason games in history, a marginal advantage at best. Of the 35 Game 7’s played in World Series history, the home team has won 18 times (51.4%). So really, if there’s any case to be made about the All-Star Game not being interesting, it should be that home field advantage isn’t enough of an advantage to care that much about. Even if it still matters a little bit, great pitching beats great hitting on any night of the week, in any ballpark. That’s been true forever.

Sources: Getty Images, http://www.twinkietown.com/2010/9/24/1708402/the-math-behind-home-field-advantage , http://bleacherreport.com/articles/421234-world-series-game-7-what-home-field-advantage

Also, my favorite book ever, Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five Or The Children’s Crusade: A Duty-Dance with Death

Post Script:

Before becoming angry on the subject of whining baseball fans, and realizing the inane qualities of articles by writers who think they could (should?) be running various professional sports leagues, I was going to segue from baseball’s All-Star Game to basketball’s. I’ve never thought that basketball’s All-Star Game was that interesting, and it is certainly meaningless in so far as the winning conference doesn’t get home-court advantage in the Finals. However, I do think that if any other sport could adopt the MLB’s format, it is the NBA, and could potentially make their All-Star Game really interesting and fun to watch.

My only evidence for a change is its low ratings except when the game itself isn’t held in a large market (Like this year, when the game was held in Los Angeles, and it got the highest ratings since Michael Jordan’s final All-Star game). However, given that it took getting the bronze medal in the 2004 Olympics, and hiring Mike Krzyzewski, for a congregation of stars to actually play with each other (jury’s still out on the Miami Heat), I won’t hold my breath. But I still think it’d be cool, and I still think more people would watch if it meant something, giving the money-losing league a little bump in revenues. But again, I’m not saying they should do this. I just think it’s an interesting idea.

2011 British Open Preview and Picks

The natural coastline terrain provides a classic test of links golf.

750-1.  Those were the odds that Ben Curtis was going to win British Open at Royal St. George’s Golf Club in 2003.  An unknown PGA Tour rookie playing in his 16^th professional event, the 26-year-old Curtis defied the odds and beat out a field that included Tiger Woods and Vijay Singh in their primes.  He was the only golfer to finish under par despite having never played the course before that week.  He became just the second golfer in history, joining Francis Ouimet (1913 U.S. Open), to win a major in his first attempt.  The best in the world return to Royal St. George’s next week for the 140^th meeting of golf’s oldest tournament.

It’s funny, looking back on 2003 seems like looking back a few decades, rather than eight years.  The makeup of the sport has changed considerably since then.  So, it is only natural that the layout has undergone a few notable differences.  Located in Sandwich, Kent, overlooking the North Sea, Royal St. George’s is a classic links course that tests every aspect of a good golf game.  Its proximity to the ocean and the fact that it’s in England (where I’m told it rains sometimes), gives it the “battle of the elements” potential that is a signature of this tournament.

In 2003, St. George’s played as a par-71 and measured 7,106 yards.  The course is now 105 yards longer and plays a par-70.  So many of the world’s great courses have succumbed to the combination of golf technology and a deeper field, and clearly, St. George’s is not exempt.  But it’s not just the simple numbers.  This isn’t just adding length and subtracting a number from par.  The course has strategically changed as well.  The best example is the fourth hole.  In 2003, it played as an attackable 497-yard par 5, offering players an early chance to bag a birdie and possibly an eagle.  Next week, it will play as an intimidating 495-yard par 4.  The loss of a stroke on par isn’t as drastic as the change in strategy – no longer an opportunity, the fourth hole stands as an early test to stay even.

Of course, this is only after navigating the third hole, a par 3 that will play 240 yards, some 30 yards longer than it did in 2003.  The seventh hole is still a par 5, but has been lengthened by 32 yards to 564.  The same trend applies to the rest of the changes for 2011: the par 4 ninth hole (388 to 412 yards) and the par 4 fifteenth hole (475 to 496 yards).  If the players face rain and strong winds, we could see scores like we saw in 2008 at Carnoustie, when Padraig Harrington won at three over par.  Even if conditions stay favorable, it will require consistent driving and ball striking to avoid the classic “blow up” hole.   The bunkers, undulations, and greens at St. George’s should provide quite the challenge.

There are definitely scoring opportunities.  Both of the par 5’s are relatively short. And while two of the par 3’s will play at 240+ yards, the sixth and sixteenth holes will be just 178 and 163 yards, respectively.  However, these chances will likely be mitigated by the difficulty of the par 4’s.  Only one plays less than 400 yards, while six of them play at 440+.  The Open’s website claims “the front nine is characterized by blind shots, imposing dunes and terrifying bunkers” while the back nine has less sand but “the fairways feature no fewer undulations and the greens are arguably trickier.”  It’s tough to call, especially because we don’t know what will happen with the weather.  With favorable conditions, I don’t see the winner besting Ben Curtis’ one-under finish by more than four or five strokes.  Here’s who I like going into next week.

Rory McIlroy

McIlroy with 2011 U.S. Open trophy

Currently ranked fourth in the world, McIlroy has to be the odds-on favorite to win this tournament.  Combining his starts on the European and PGA Tour’s, he has six top-10 finishes in just 10 events, while only missing one cut (Wells Fargo Championship).  Of course, this is just part of the story.  The 22-year-old had a four shot lead through 54-holes at the Masters in April before suffering a back nine meltdown, all but ruining his chances.  He finished tied for 15^th after leading the field for three straight days.  But he showed up last month at the U.S. Open determined to prove he was the real deal.  McIlroy blew away the field in a Woods-like fashion with an eight-stroke victory for his first win in 2011 and his first career major victory.

McIlroy has exceptional skills in every aspect and at the U.S. he proved that also applied to his mental game.  The pressure was on Rory to prove he could hold a Sunday lead, and he did so, but now the world’s eye is upon him.  He is far and away the favorite.  He grew up playing links courses like St. George’s.  The only negative against him coming into next week is that he has not played since winning the U.S Open, but I’m sure he’s been getting ready.  If he can match his driving accuracy and ball striking from Congressional, he might blast ahead of the field again.

Lee Westwood

Can this Brit finally do it?

Westwood is having a solid 2011 season.  He is currently ranked second in the world, though he held the top spot for a few weeks earlier in the year.  The Brit has bagged wins at the Indonesian Masters (Asian Tour) and the Ballantine’s Championship on the European Tour.  He finished tied for 11^th at the Masters in April and tied for 3^rd in the U.S. Open last month.  He has always been a solid contender in the majors, which is why he currently carries the “Phil Mickelson Award” for best player that has never won a major.

Of course, Mickelson was too talented to hold that title forever, and eventually he went on to win four majors.  Westwood continually has great showings in the majors, but just has never been able to push through to victory.  I think the British Open is the one where he can do so.  He finished in second place last year at St. Andrew’s.  His game naturally fits on the links course and he has the power to shorten the long holes at St. George’s.  His putter is what has failed him in the past, so if he can stay consistent on the greens, he’s got a great chance of winning.  Most of all, he comes in hot.  His worst finish in any event since April is tied for eleventh.

Nick Watney

Watney seeks his first major title as well.

This Sacramento native is having a superb season.  Currently ranked tenth in the world, Watney has eight top-10s, including two victories (WGC-Cadillac Championship, AT&T National) in 14 PGA Tour events.  He has missed just two cuts.  With his win last week, he moved to first place in the FedEx Cup standings as well.  Under the tutelage of Butch Harmon, Watney has put together a skill set that has everything one needs to win a major championship: power, accuracy, and short game.

He has struggled in majors so far this year, but I think the courses you typically see in the British Open and PGA Championship suit his game better.  He finished tied for seventh at St. Andrew’s last year.  In the PGA Championship at Whistling Straits (also a links course) last August, he held a three shot lead after Saturday.  He too suffered from a meltdown in the final round, shooting an 81 and finishing tied for 18^th.   He’s only come back stronger and more determined.  He has shown his game translates well to a links course and certainly has what it takes to contend in this tournament.  If an American wins, I think it will be Watney.

Wild Card: Sergio Garcia

Garcia hopes to reverse this trend.

If there’s a sleeper out in the field, ready to pounce on the title if a front-runner falters in the final moments, I think it is Sergio.  After all, that is how Ben Curtis won his British Open.  The Spaniard has come so close so many times it’s staggering.  He has 16 top-ten finishes in majors, but no victories.  Of those 16, nine were in the top-5 and he’s finished second or tied for second three times.  In the 2007 British Open, he lost in a playoff to Padraig Harrington by one stroke.  The next year at the PGA Championship, he held a back nine lead on Sunday but wasn’t able to stave off a final push by Harrington, again, and lost by two strokes.

Despite having every tool in the shed to win any given tournament, Garcia has always suffered from a lack of consistency, whether it is across four days, or even within a round.  He was so battered down that in 2010, in the midst of a slump, he took a break from competitive golf.  In May, he told the media he wasn’t sure if he’d ever be good again and didn’t know if he would try to play in the U.S. Open.  But he changed his mind and earned a spot in a qualifier.  He then played well enough to finish tied for seventh.  That got him into the field at Royal St. George’s, where he finished tied for tenth place in 2003.

Can the Spaniard keep it together for four solid rounds?  That’s the real question.  Typically, there are many ups and downs on the leaderboard during a major.  If Sergio can hang around within a few strokes of the leader, he might be able to seize victory simply by playing consistently, or maybe even pulling off a back nine Sunday run.  He’s as good a wild card pick as any in the field and has experienced so much heartbreak that you have to root for him. 

Sources and Photo Credits:  PGA.com, royalstgeorges.com, opengolf.com, independent.co.uk, Getty Images

Tiger Woods Still Injured, Golf Fans Still Waiting

No Claret Jug this year

Well, there’s another Tiger-less major coming up in two weeks.  Sigh.  Woods announced today that he’ll be sitting out of the British Open.  I can say with authority that Rory McIlroy’s coming-out party at the U.S. Open last month was a great thing for golf because a Woods comeback in 2011 is looking less and less likely.  Many people are wondering why Tiger doesn’t just throw in the towel on the year.  He’s clearly in uncharted waters right now.  Not that he’s never gone through injuries, rather he’s never handled them this way.  I use the plural because he’s suffering from a sprained MCL and a sprained Achilles.  Having two injuries didn’t stop him at Torrey Pines in 2008.  Perhaps at the age of 36, his doctors have finally reached him.

Did I jinx him with the first article I ever wrote for my blog?  No…no, no.  I may be the superstitious type when it comes to these things, but that’s just crazy.  Too far out there, man.  Although, in my U.S. Open preview article I made a vigorous case for Tiger to win it, only to discover a few days later that he’d withdrawn from competition.  At least this time I waited to write my preview article.

Anyway, one has got to give credit (most of all his doctors) to Tiger Woods for not using his classic pain tolerance test as the bar to return to competition or not.  It appears that now he’s actually listening to professional medical people’s recommendations.  So yeah, it’s pretty annoying that we get so excited when he makes an appearance or posts on his website, only to find out he’s sitting out of the next tournament on his schedule.  But since he’s never handled being injured in this way, I’ll cut him some slack.

Why hasn’t he shut the door on 2011 completely?  Come on, it’s not that hard.  This is Tiger Woods were talking about.  He’s addicted to playing in majors, playing when it matters most.  That’s right addicted – like Robin Williams on coke, Snoop Dogg on pot, Lindsay Lohan on going to rehab.  This is why he kept playing in the Masters in April, even though he knew he injured himself on the 17^th hole during the second round.  By the way, he slipped on the pine needles trying to hit a shot out from under the famous Eisenhower Tree.  Somewhere, Ike is shaking his fist, as he purportedly did many times while playing that very hole. 

"Hah! Oh Arnie, being President isn't that hard!"

Quick tangent.  After the archives were opened on Eisenhower’s presidency, historians discovered that he wasn’t such a bad president after all.  It turns out that he was a fabulous administrator, very adept at placing capable people below him and delegating responsibilities.  He got a little practice at doing so when he planned that whole D-Day thing.  What most people don’t understand, especially people who don’t golf, is that he actually did this so he could go golfing, instead of having to make decisions all the time.  That’s how he was able to squeeze in approximately 800 rounds of golf during eight years of being President.  For the mathematically disinclined, that’s 100 rounds per year.  If Obama reads this article, he’ll say, “Man, being President in the fifties probably kicked ass.” Ike would agree.

Back to Tiger.  Had he withdrawn from the Masters, it would have been a huge let down.  We wouldn’t have seen that front nine on Sunday that made us believe he can make the improbable comeback.  At least he injured himself while trying to make a difficult shot, in the end I’m OK with that.  Frenchman Thomas Levet, on the other hand, might also miss the British Open due to injury.  However, he suffered this injury (fractured shin) from jumping into the lake at Le Golf National after winning the French Open.  Woods can’t shut it down for 2011 because there’s still the PGA Championship in August, the year’s final major.

I don’t see much changing.  From the way he sounds, it’s definitely a very likely possibility that he won’t play in the PGA either.  My guess is he’s holding out on the chance that his recovery speeds up and he’s able to give it a go.  There’s no telling how he’ll play because he’s only been putting.  That’s still a good thing, as his decline has been most obvious on the greens.  We don’t know when he’ll be able to make the call on the PGA, or returning in general.  I don’t take Tiger as the type of athlete who reads the papers, so to speak.  But he can’t be completely insulated from the barrage of comments like “he’s done” and “he’ll never win another major, much less reach Nicklaus.”

If his fans were offended by the instantaneous comparisons of McIlroy and Woods after Rory won the U.S. Open, I can’t imagine the rage Tiger felt.  So, all in all, he’s got plenty of mental motivation.  I’m sure he wanted to go across the pond, waltz into Rory’s house, and lay down a classic Woods shellacking.  After all, Tiger has three times as many British Open titles as McIlroy has majors.  But obviously, that’s all side talk until he can get healthy again.  For now, we’re just going to have to throw a bookmark in the Woods saga.  But I still think the best has yet to come.  Come on, Tiger, America loves a comeback. 

Sources and Photo Credits: PGA.com, midwestsportsfans.com, bleacherreport.com

NBA Lockout Reveals a Product in Decline

Lockout of the year in the year of the lockout

It’s bad enough that we fans are facing a fall and winter with no football because the players and owners of the NFL can’t find a decent way that satisfies all parties to split up the magnificent profits their sport is generating.  Some people seem to think that, in recent weeks, the NFL lockout is close to being settled.  I implore you not to hold your breath.  In a fascinating turn of events, the NBA has decided to join the 2011 Lockout Party.  But there’s a key difference here.  Unlike the NFL, the NBA is actually losing money.

In an earlier article, I explored what the NFL lockout reveals about American society these days.  While I eventually pointed out that the NFL players are in the best position to prevent a lost year, I maintained that the situation is because of the owners.  Even though NBA owners have taken the same step, it appears they are being more honest and forthright when it comes to the losing money issue.  Commissioner David Stern maintains that 22 of 30 teams are “operating in the red,” and we don’t know yet how true that is.  We do know the league lost $300 million just last year.

One reason fans have turned their nose towards the NBA in favor of college basketball is the way the games are officiated.  If you watch broadcasts, it’s mentioned a lot.  It comes up in the highlights, too.  The amount of content on the internet, in magazines and newspapers on this subject is astonishing.  A certain amount of this can be chalked up to fans complaining, but at a certain point the sheer volume has to be a concern.  And yet, the NBA has done nothing to address this issue. 

Watching a guy who makes over $18 million a year get free throws on a play that is a charge in college doesn’t exactly speak to the heart of the average American.  Why can’t NBA referees call games as they are in the NCAA?  That question has bothered me ever since I started watching basketball, and to this day I have never received a legitimate response to it.  If that did start happening, I think the quality of basketball’s product would increase.  The look of “it’s not possible for me to commit a foul” might recede from the faces of Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, and many others.

Last season, there was a team from each conference that won less than 20 games (Cleveland, Minnesota).  There were four more teams that got to 20 wins, but were still under 30 (Toronto, Washington, Sacramento, New Jersey).  The combined payroll of those six teams is roughly $260 million dollars.  That’s a lot of investment for not very much production.  Every year there are at least half a dozen teams like this.  There’s not enough quality talent to have 30 decent basketball teams and I’m not sure why that is necessary.  Most leagues got too big during the 1990s because expansion seemed a relatively easy and affordable thing to do during an economic boom.  In the end, this is poor logic.

Under the current system, the teams located in big markets have too large of an advantage over franchises in smaller markets.  That is why a larger scale of revenue sharing is one of the issues on the table.  This could alleviate the hit small market teams incur when they’re in a down year.  Teams with a rich history and a big market location (Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago) have a competitive advantage.  This could help the Charlottes and Milwaukees of the league stay afloat, but it doesn’t necessarily translate into a quality product.  There is no legitimate minor league in basketball and amateurs with enough skills and physical capability can make the jump to the pros quickly.

The lack of these factors in baseball, for example, allow small market teams to stay relatively competitive if they have the right people in charge of identifying and recruiting talent.  The Oakland A’s proved that for many years in the early 2000s as have the Tampa Bay Rays in the last three seasons.  Because basketball players don’t necessarily require the type of development that is needed in baseball, on average, it appears that league is simply too big with the current soft cap and luxury tax system. 

LeBron James, Chris Bosh, and Dwyane Wade proved last summer that stars can be willing to forgo large salaries for the chance to play for a better team.  If the NBA moved to a hard cap, it wouldn’t necessarily preclude teams from having multiple stars.  It would also disperse the talent around the league better, forcing teams to recruit better role players and concentrate on defense.  That’s a much more enjoyable brand of basketball to watch anyway.