Monday, May 30, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Baseball's Greatest Sacifice
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Baseball's Greatest Sacifice: "In honor of Memorial Day, I first want to give thanks for all those who have sacrificed their life for this country and also for those who s..."
Baseball's Greatest Sacifice
In honor of Memorial Day, I first want to give thanks for all those who have sacrificed their life for this country and also for those who still continue to give of themselves to protect our freedom. We are all truly indebted to you for your service.
So with Memorial Day, I thought I would try to remember those athletes who gave of themselves for this country and put aside their profession and stature to answer the call of duty. Recently, we remember and honor Pat Tillman, who gave up his highly successful football career to enlist as an army ranger and serve his country. Tillman was tragically killed in the line of duty, but his story and sacrifice will always be remembered. But there was a time when a whole sport lost many of its athletes to the call of duty.
At the onset of World War II, Baseball was well past the dead-ball era, Babe Ruth had taken the nation by storm, and America was suffering from the Great Depression. Real life had hit baseball hard, with record low attendance stemming from the Great Depression and many players leaving the sport, whether by the installment of the draft or by choice, to go fight in WWII. Even baseball's greatest athletes, Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio, felt the call to serve. But before enlisting however, Ted Williams would manage to hit .400 and Joe DiMaggio would hit successfully in 56 consecutive games. Real life became real for these athletes; and for most, it came during the prime of the career and life.
For me to depict their great sacrifice I feel would be somewhat of an injustice. So I would like to share an article written by Gary Bedingfield titled, "Baseball in World War II." It's a great read and if you want to read more, he has devoted a website http://www.baseballinwartime.com/ to baseball's greatest sacrifice. When you get a moment, check it out. Otherwise, Mr. Armchair Speaking.
Baseball in World War II
So with Memorial Day, I thought I would try to remember those athletes who gave of themselves for this country and put aside their profession and stature to answer the call of duty. Recently, we remember and honor Pat Tillman, who gave up his highly successful football career to enlist as an army ranger and serve his country. Tillman was tragically killed in the line of duty, but his story and sacrifice will always be remembered. But there was a time when a whole sport lost many of its athletes to the call of duty.
At the onset of World War II, Baseball was well past the dead-ball era, Babe Ruth had taken the nation by storm, and America was suffering from the Great Depression. Real life had hit baseball hard, with record low attendance stemming from the Great Depression and many players leaving the sport, whether by the installment of the draft or by choice, to go fight in WWII. Even baseball's greatest athletes, Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio, felt the call to serve. But before enlisting however, Ted Williams would manage to hit .400 and Joe DiMaggio would hit successfully in 56 consecutive games. Real life became real for these athletes; and for most, it came during the prime of the career and life.
For me to depict their great sacrifice I feel would be somewhat of an injustice. So I would like to share an article written by Gary Bedingfield titled, "Baseball in World War II." It's a great read and if you want to read more, he has devoted a website http://www.baseballinwartime.com/ to baseball's greatest sacrifice. When you get a moment, check it out. Otherwise, Mr. Armchair Speaking.
Baseball in World War II
by Gary Bedingfield
At the outbreak of the European conflict in 1939, the majority of Americans favored neutrality. There was little desire to become involved in a European problem, and in any case, the nation's fighting force was totally unprepared to do so. At that time, the ill-equipped Army totaled a meager 240,000 men, while the fledgling Army Air Corps operated with obsolete airplanes and fewer than 20,000 personnel. Only the United States Navy could hold its head high with a Pacific Fleet of 82 warships.
Nevertheless, as the Japanese began to fulfill their territorial ambitions in the Pacific and war clouds loomed, the United States prepared to defend itself. The first stage towards increasing the nation's fighting force was the Selective Training and Service Act, or draft, signed by President Roosevelt on September 16, 1940. Every American male between the ages of 21 and 36 was required to register for 12 months of military service "to ensure the independence and freedom of the United States." The draft put nearly two million men in uniform by the end of 1941 - it was the greatest defense program in the history of the nation.
The draft affected every profession, and baseball was no exception. In 1941, major league baseball was at its zenith, enjoying a momentous year. Ted Williams batted .406, Joe DiMaggio hit safely in 56 consecutive games, 41-year-old Lefty Grove got his 300th career win, and Dodgers' catcher Mickey Owen was forever immortalized for mishandling a pitch that cost Brooklyn the World Series. Meanwhile, baseball bid a resounding farewell to the first two players to enter military service.
Holding the distinction of being the first major league regular to be drafted in World War II, Hugh "Losing Pitcher" Mulcahy - a veteran with the Philadelphia Phillies - was inducted on March 8, 1941, and reported to Camp Devens, Massachusetts. The 27-year-old right-hander earned his nickname by losing 76 games between 1937 and 1940 as a starter with the senior circuit's perennial basement team. Mulcahy proudly told The Sporting News, "My losing streak is over for the duration ... I'm on a winning team now."
Detroit Slugger Hank Greenberg, a celebrated star of the time and future Hall of Famer, received his draft call on May 7, 1941. "Hammerin' Hank" had played in three World Series and two all-star games - he hit 58 home runs in 1938 (just two short of Babe Ruth's 1927 record) and was the American League's Most Valuable Player in 1940. Greenberg gave up his $55,000 yearly salary for $21 per month Army pay and reported to Fort Custer, Michigan. He told The Sporting News, "If there's any last message to be given to the public, let it be that I'm going to be a good soldier."
Likewise, minor league baseball's vast manpower pool responded to the nation's call to arms. Billy Southworth Jr, an outfielder with the Toronto Maple Leafs and son of the St Louis Cardinals' manager, was one of the first professional ballplayers to enter military service by voluntarily enlisting in the Army Air Corps in December 1940. "I think it's my duty to enlist because they're going to need us," Southworth had confided to his father earlier in the year. "My baseball career can wait."
Despite the deteriorating international situation, these one-year draftees hoped peace would prevail and allow them to return to civilian life. But during the early hours of Sunday, December 7, 1941, that peace was violently shattered. The Japanese surprise aerial attack that rained terror on Pearl Harbor and sunk or damaged 18 warships of the United States Pacific Fleet marked, with an authoritative stamp, America's entry into World War II.
Pearl Harbor saw the nation besieged in a wave of overwhelming patriotism followed by an immediate rush to enlist. On December 9, Hank Greenberg, at 30 years old, re-enlisted after having been discharged from the Army under a new law releasing draftees 28 or older from duty. He admitted "this doubtless means I'm finished with baseball."
Like Greenberg, Cleveland's 23-year-old pitching sensation, Bob Feller, rushed to enlist as soon as he heard the news of the bombing. Feller joined the United States Navy and served as a chief petty officer aboard the battleship Alabama in the Pacific.
Hitler's declaration of war against the United States on December 11 merely fueled the enthusiasm. Industrial giants responded with a roar, and factories, workshops, mills and mines swung into action. The vast automobile industry switched to the production of military vehicles, turning out a steady stream of trucks, Jeeps, tanks and airplanes, while manufacturers, more accustomed to handling refrigerators and vacuum cleaners, turned their straight-line production techniques to the manufacture of ammunition, guns and other essential war commodities. Even manufacturers of sporting goods equipment contributed to the war effort. Hillerich & Bradsby, makers of the famous Louisville Slugger baseball bats, turned their wood-turning skills to the production of stocks for the M1 carbine rifle. Within months of Pearl Harbor, America was impressively living up to the pledge it had given to become the "Arsenal of Democracy."
But would baseball survive the war? America's entrance into World War I had ended the 1918 baseball season on September 2, and only the armistice agreement saved the following season. Fears that the war would jeopardize baseball again in 1942, however, were quashed when President Roosevelt, in response to a direct plea from baseball's ruling head, Kenesaw Mountain Landis, sent his now famous January 15 "Green Light" letter. Roosevelt said, "I honestly feel that it would be best for the country to keep baseball going" and added that he would like to see more night games that hard-working people could attend. Roosevelt also noted that baseball could provide entertainment for at least 20 million people, and added that although the quality of the teams might be lowered by the greater use of older players replacing young men going into military service, this would not dampen the popularity of the sport.
But, although players were enlisting or being drafted into the armed forces from the beginning, their existed an undertone of displeasure towards seemingly fit men participating in sports and apparently evading military duties. Some thought baseball squandered manpower and should be shut down for the duration. In hindsight, this attitude is understandable, but there is little doubt that for the overwhelming majority baseball was a major morale booster throughout the war years. In response to the negative undertones, The Sporting News took it upon themselves, in April 1942, to ask servicemen for their view on the situation - should baseball continue while they fight and perhaps die for democracy and freedom? An abundance of replies besieged the offices of The Sporting News in St Louis strongly backing the President's directive to keep baseball going. Private John E Stevenson, based at Fort Dix, New Jersey, wrote, "Baseball is part of the American way of life. Remove it and you remove something from the lives of American citizens, soldiers and sailors." Private Clifford P Mansfield at Fort Knox, Kentucky reiterated, "For the morale of the soldier and the morale of America itself, 'keep 'em playing'."
More than 500 major league players swapped flannels for khakis during World War II, and such well-known players as Stan Musial, Joe DiMaggio and Ted Williams served their nation off the diamond. The minor leagues, formerly a veritable oasis of baseball talent, were seriously affected by the manpower shortage with 4,076 players seeing military service. On a daily basis, talent was drained from the game as promising young athletes who had spent summers developing their athletic skills were plucked from baseball diamonds all across the country and taught to fly planes, shoot weapons and maneuver tanks. No more than 12 minor leagues survived during the war years compared to 44 circuits that operated in 1940.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Commissioner Armchair's Mission Statement
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Commissioner Armchair's Mission Statement: "A Mission Statement from the new Commissioner of Major League Baseball: Mr. Armchair. Good Evening. When does our past time become out d..."
Commissioner Armchair's Mission Statement
A Mission Statement from the new Commissioner of Major League Baseball: Mr. Armchair.
Good Evening. When does our past time become out dated? Remember that question.
Good Evening. When does our past time become out dated? Remember that question.
I would first like to say that I'm honored and humbled to be named the new Commissioner of Major League Baseball. I pledge to you that I will do my best to represent the game to the best of my abilities, and please know that I share the same love and excitement for the game of baseball as any another fan and kid does.
I love Baseball because it is filled with rich tradition and history. There is nothing like going and sitting in the bleachers at a Baseball field (stadium, park, wherever…) and take in a day game while eating a hotdog and drinking a cold one. Baseball is America’s past time. It’s as American as apple pie. The first ever recorded baseball game was June 19th, 1846, in Hobeken, New Jersey, and I bet the sun was shining bright and the grass was freshly cut. The game is still played as beautiful and pure today as it was in Hobeken. Not a lot of rules, written or unwritten, have changed since then; and much has been done to keep baseball that way. Which is why I'm here today. The state of our game is in need of a change.
The biggest traditionalist of the game of baseball is Commissioner Bud Selig. For all who don’t think highly of him (two thumbs pointing at this guy), he has been adamant and steadfast about keeping baseball set in its ways. That regime is over now. The game of baseball needs a tune-up. Every now and then, you need to take a step back and asset how the game is being played, and what can be done to make it better. The purest will argue that the game is fine the way it is. I'm here to tell you that is not the case. The game of baseball needs a face lift, which will in turn vastly improve the play and the game. I have three rule changes that I will be making that will improve the game of baseball, while making it more appealing to watch, and bringing the game into the 21st century.
Rule Change #1: Expand instant replay to include all judgment calls. This includes: close plays at bases, tag outs, determining if a ball is fair or foul, determining if a home run has left the field of play, and if a catch has been made. A bang, bang play, or an umpire not visually able to make a call, will no longer determine the outcome of a baseball game. There are enough cameras stationed around the ballpark and playing field that capture nearly every angle of every play. Let's use this to our advantage and make the correct call. Yes, I knowledge that there is a human element to the game, but humans can be wrong. And if a call can be corrected, let's make that correct call for the sake of the game. I know St. Louis Cardinals fans will embrace this change, as they surely remember Game 6 of the 1985 World Series.
Rule Change #2: Home plate umpires will not be making balls and strikes calls anymore. Baseball will be embracing technology. We will now be setting up a sensory system around home plate that will create a standard, consistent strike zone, and if a ball is thrown within that zone, it's a strike. If not, it's a ball. We will have an official monitor of the balls and strikes system, and he/she will control the system from a booth easily accessible to the home plate umpire. The official can then relay the call of the pitch to the home plate umpire via a mechanical devise, so that the home plate umpire can replay the count to the batter, catcher, and pitcher. If the system were to shut down or become inoperable during the game, then the home plate umpire will resume the duties of calling balls and strikes. Umpires have demonstrated that they are unable to consistently call balls and strikes in an appropriate manner. Inconsistency in this aspect of our game is becoming a detriment, and something needs to be done to fix it. Home plate umpires will continue to be responsible for making safe, out, and obstruction (see rule change #3) calls with regards to plays at the plate.
Rule Change #3 (two-part change): Baserunners will no longer be able to take aim at the catcher and cause a collision with the catcher in an attempt to dislodge or break up a close play at homeplate. Also, catchers will no longer be able to protect or block the side of homeplate, preventing a baserunner from getting to homeplate safely. Technically, this is already a rule in baseball, we are just actually going to enforce it. It's Rule 7.06, obstruction. When a fielder illegally hinders a baserunner, the fielder is guilty of obstruction. There are two types of obstruction: type A and type B. The two types pertain to whether or not the obstructed runner is being played upon. But in regards to the rule change, Baseball will be following in the same footsteps as football when it comes to protecting defenseless players. When a baserunner is coming from third at full speed, charging down upon a catcher who is in a standstill, compromising position, he is deemed a defenseless player, and therefore the baserunner can no longer take aim upon the catcher. If he does, he is ruled out automatically. In the same manner, catchers without the ball can no longer block the front of the plate to prevent the baserunner from reaching homeplate safely. Obstruction will be called on the catcher and homeplate will be awarded to the baserunner. Catchers can position themselves out in front of the plate to receive the throw, make the catch, and then apply the tag. If the catcher doesn't have the ball, he must remain out in front of homeplate so that he doesn't obstruction the baserunner coming into homeplate.
I understand these new rule changes will be met with great opposition. However, I feel that they in no way compromise the integrity and the purity of the game of baseball. If anything, these rule changes strengthen the integrity and purity of baseball. We want every aspect of our game to be perfect and called correctly in every fashion. If we have the ability to do so with the help of technology, then we will use it. Our past time has become out dated. And my first goal is to bring it up to date. Thank you.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: When we have no rooting interest, we root for vali...
Mr. Armchair Speaks: When we have no rooting interest, we root for vali...: "B arring a miracle, it looks like we are going to have an NBA Finals matchup pinning the Dallas Mavericks against the Miami Heat. While no..."
When we have no rooting interest, we root for validation.
Barring a miracle, it looks like we are going to have an NBA Finals matchup pinning the Dallas Mavericks against the Miami Heat. While nothing is certain, the probability of this matchup happening is highly likely, so for the sake of this piece, I’m going to roll with it.
For the NBA’s sake, out of the four remaining teams left in the playoffs, this is their dream matchup. Both are large television markets which will drive up revenue; and both teams feature stars that the average NBA fan can “root” for. But with no vested interest in either team, who do you “root” for to win? It’s silly to just simply want to “root” for a good game or great series, and call it the night. You ultimately end up taking a side or tilt to one team to win. We sports junkies commonly uses terms as “I’m favoring…”, ”I would like to see…”, “I’m pulling for…”, “I’m leaning toward…”, “I wouldn’t mind…”, or my favorite, “I wouldn’t it hate if…” We use these as buffers so we don’t get too emotionally wrapped up in the pandemonium the true fans will incur in following their team, with the hopes of winning a championship. We aren’t pledging our allegiance or jumping on any bandwagon, yet still stating who we will be “rooting” for to win. And by no means is this meant to be taken as an act of treason, for we still have our loyalties to our teams, but it’s just merely a way for us to have some level of interest and excitement and keep the channel on the game without switching to the season finale of American Idol, and get lost in the captivating stare that comes from Scotty McCreery. Have you seen this kid??? He looks like Alfred E. Neuman (for those who need explaining, he’s the kid on the cover of Mad Magazine). Anyways, to bring this full circle, how do we determine our “rooting” interest, when we have none vested?
For the most part, it’s player driven. We pinpoint players who have teased and flirted with winning a championship, but never did. They have climbing the mountain, never reaching the peak. Our hearts go out to these players. They have worked hard and grinded through lean years to get to this moment; so we root for them. We should root for them. Dan Marino should have won a Super Bowl. Ted Williams should have won a World Series. Charles Barkley should have won an NBA Final. There are many more I could name, but those are some of the more notable names. All three had great, hall of fame careers, but never won a championship in their respective sport. That is just wrong. They needed to win one because if anything, it’s a validation of their great careers. And players need to be validated.
How great of a player would Mickey Mantle really be if he wasn’t a Yankee and won all those World Series rings? How much better of a player would Ted Williams be if he had won a World Series ring? And the prime example is Dan Marino. Statistically the best quarterback to ever play in the NFL, his career and legacy is never looked at in the way it should be because he never won a Super Bowl. This shouldn’t be the case. We should remember Dan Marino for his greatest and accomplishments, not the fact that he never made it to the peak. So with regards to the NBA Finals, my good friend and follow blogger, The Professor, he will be happy to know that for the next two to three weeks, I will be “rooting”, “favoring”, “would like to see”, “pulling for”, “leaning toward”, “wouldn’t mind”, and “wouldn’t hate it if”, the Dallas Mavericks win/won the NBA Finals. Because if anything, Dirk Nowitzki and Jason Kidd deserve to be validated.
Much has been said and debated recently about Dirk's place in NBA history. Is he one of the "greats" or just a really good player? Where do we slot Dirk among the NBA royalty? After recently looking at the 50 greatest players in NBA History list issued by the NBA in 1997, I can tell you that Dirk has differently displaced some of the players on that list. While I won't go as far as his own coach did and label Dirk as a top 10 greatest of all-time, I will say that Dirk is definitely in the top 50.
There isn't much I feel I need to say about Jason Kidd. J. Kidd is one of the all-time, greatest point guards to ever play in the NBA, and no one can tell me otherwise. He is a triple-double waiting to happen in any game and his court vision and ability to run a team is something you don't see in basketball anymore. It's Magic Johnson, Oscar Robertson, and Jason Kidd; Bar None. And like Dirk, J. Kidd is a top 50 all-time player.
But both players have been climbing the mountain their whole careers. Both have been to the NBA Finals before, both coming up short of a championship. Dirk and J.Kidd both happened to start their careers with the Dallas Mavericks, at times when the Mavericks were considered the basement of the NBA. They have put in their time, played through some lean years, and now with both of their careers (J.Kidd mainly) having reached their pinnacle, they deserve to see the peak of the mountain. D.Wade has his ring already and like I said in a previous post, we all know with some certainty that it's only a matter of when, not if, LeBron and the Heat win a championship. They can wait a year. So for the sake of validation, everyone without a vested interest in the NBA Finals should, for a span of two to three weeks, root for the Dallas Mavericks to win the NBA Finals.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
Monday, May 23, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Where's the defibrillator?? We have dying sports!...
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Where's the defibrillator?? We have dying sports!...: "Everyone knows and loves the three major sports that rule the sports worlds in the United States: baseball, football, and basketball. The..."
Where's the defibrillator?? We have dying sports!!
Everyone knows and loves the three major sports that rule the sports worlds in the United States: baseball, football, and basketball. The diehard’s know these sports inside and out - from the strategies used for success - to the essential information about the players and coaches. Even the occasional fan knows the basics of how the games work and their major players. Not much is needed to lock in the American sports fan to watch and follow the big three. Then there are the sports that have its following and draw in the occasionally sports fan when they are relevant; those sports being hockey, golf, soccer, MMA, and tennis. These sports are the equivalent of being the middle child. They have their place and get the attention needed whenever they are relevant; but ultimately, they are mostly forgotten throughout the year. They do try very hard to reach the same level of relevancy as their old brother sports (baseball, football, and basketball), but always fall short and remain in their place.
Then there are the sports that have out lived their time, much like an uncle that whenever you see him, he tells you about how great of an athlete he was in his prime and that if luck went his way, he would have been a great star. These sports, much like your uncle, were at one point in their existences, the talk of the sports world. Everyone knew they existed and followed them with great intent. Whenever there was a major event, it received world renowned coverage and was the event of the sporting world. It was right up there along with the Super Bowl and World Series, in terms of attention received by the general public. The sports I am referring to are boxing and horse racing. Two sports that as a sports junkie and purest, I love and follow. But unfortunately, not even Mr. Armchair himself can save these two sports. They are dying a slow death; with the defibrillator nowhere to be found.
This past weekend, these two sports had showcasing events that drew minimal coverage and received little attention from the general public. You had the Preakness Stakes, which is the second leg of the Triple Crown of horse racing, and you had a major championship fight in boxing. These two events at one time during their existences would have been major television events, and received much attention even from modest sports fans. Much would have been made of these events prior to them actually happening, and the excitement level would register throughout the nation. People would have known every participant and much trash talk would be flying around to help fuel the interest. Instead, the two events this past weekend, featured an over the hill boxer who at one point was a worthy champion but is continuing to fight just to stay relevant; and a field of mediocre horses that even the most famous jockeys wouldn’t ride. The prevailing winners of these events were a horse (Shackleford) that will soon be forgotten in 4 months, and a boxer (Bernard Hopkins) who is well pasted his prime at 46 years old, but is still continuing to fight for a paycheck. Not to diminish their accomplishments, but it’s nothing to get excited about. (Side note: this blogger hit the 5-11, Shackleford - Animal Kingdom Exacta!!! Just had to throw that in there)
A major reason for these two sports dying off is the fact that they both lack major stars or attractions. Back when horse racing and boxing were at their peak, they featured major stars that people could admire and appreciate. In horse racing, you had beautiful racehorses like Affirmed, Man o’ War, Seabiscuit, Seattle Slew, Secretariat, and War Admiral. These racehorse were admired in the sporting world. With such purity and elegance, they captured the hearts of many sports fans. They were as popular as any human athlete for their time.
Boxing featured such prized fighters like Joe Frazier, Sugar Ray Robinson, Rocky Marciano, Sugar Ray Leonard, George Foreman, Mike Tyson, and the greatest of all, Muhammad Ali. Known as the "sweet science", boxing is as beautiful of a sport to watch as any. The technique and coordination needed to dance around the ring while plotting your next punch is poetry in motion. After recently taking up boxing classes, it's a sport where you need to be on top of your game, both physically and mentally. Like chess, you are always thinking two moves ahead of your opponent, while still trying to focus on the here and now. There is a great appreciation for a boxer as an athlete, which is why whenever two goliaths like Ali and Frazier got into the ring to fight each other, it instantly became the sporting event of the year.
Whenever these racehorses raced or fighters fought, it was a big deal; and an even bigger event. It is because of these great horses and fighters that the Kentucky Derby is the greatest two minutes in sports, and a championship fight brings out the best Hollywood and politics has to offer. But now and days, the stars are far and few between. In horse racing, the jockeys and trainers are more famous than the racehorses themselves, and race tracks across the country are having to close up their stables. The industry still holds out hope for that next great crop of racehorses to save the sport. For boxing, it has all but written off the heavyweight division; a division that once carried and made the sport. It now focuses its attention to developing prized middleweight fighters in hopes that they can carry the sport.
There is however a glimmer of hope for these two sports to be saved. For horse racing, they need a horse to win the Triple Crown in the worst way. For the novice sports fans, the Triple Crown of horse racing is when a horse wins the Kentucky Derby, Preakness Stakes, and the Belmont; the three preeminent races in horse racing. All three races are run in a span of three months, making horse racing semi-relevant for a short time period. Recently, there has been plenty of horses that have won the first two legs (races) of the Triple Crown, causing much anticipation leading up to the third leg, but ultimately failing to win. Horse racing could also do a better job at featuring some of its other races held during the year; making horse racing relevant for an extended amount of time. They can feature races like the Arkansas Derby, Florida Derby, Louisiana Derby, Santa Anita Derby, and the Breeder's Cup. Obviously the Kentucky Derby, Preakness Stakes, and Belmont speak for themselves and have a rich history.
Boxing on the other hand, needs two things to happen. The first is for the heavyweight division to develop a great boxer. Heavyweight fights are the fights that more often than not produce knockouts - which is what the average boxing fan likes to see - and why MMA has now taken precedence over boxing to the average sports fan. They want to see people get knocked out by power punches. You aren’t going to find much of that in the middleweight or featherweight divisions. Those fights are more tactical in nature, with most fights ending with a decision by judges. Having a great heavyweight fighter who can mow through the competition, a la Mike Tyson, to use a recent example, could really do wonders for the sport of boxing and help draw in fans. Plus, heavyweight fights are the class of boxing. It’s their bread and butter, and it’s also how boxing came to be so great.
The other thing that needs to happen is for Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao to once and for all, square off in the ring and fight each other. These two boxers are arguably the best and most renowned the sport has to offer. "Pretty Boy" Floyd has never lost a fight, allowing him to make the claim of being the greatest "pound for pound" boxer of all-time. Manny Pacquiao currently holds all Welterweight Championship belts and is the first boxer in history to win ten world titles. He was also named “Fighter of the Decade” for the 2000’s, and is currently rated as the “pound for pound” best boxer in boxing right now. While Mayweather is supposedly “retired” and unwilling to fight Pacquiao, many estimate that if this fight were to happen, it would be the largest grossing Pay-Per-View fight in boxing history, and would certainly draw new interest into the sport. But this fight needs to happen soon, as Mayweather and Pacquiao aren’t getting any younger and are nearing the end of their prime. Some (Mayweather mostly) argue that Pacquiao's reluctance to Olympic standard drug testing is preventing this fight from happening. Other say pride, ego, and the fear of defeat from Mayweather will most likely prevent this fight from ever happening. So until this fight happens, boxing will continue to promote any fight involving Pacquiao, even if it’s against 39 year old wash-ups (sorry Sugar Shane, but you had no business fighting Pacquiao).
Both once proud and renowned sports, horse racing and boxing have been delegated to back page news and a following that rivals most piano lounge singers. But they can be saved. They just need a defibrillator.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Want to beat The Heat? Let LeBron and D-Wade scor...
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Want to beat The Heat? Let LeBron and D-Wade scor...: "The Miami Heat were the talk of the offseason. After acquiring the two prized free agents in LeBron James and Chris Bosh, they along with D..."
Want to beat The Heat? Let LeBron and D-Wade score.
The Miami Heat were the talk of the offseason. After acquiring the two prized free agents in LeBron James and Chris Bosh, they along with Dwayne Wade, would rule the NBA. With the "Big Three" now on one team, they were seemingly thought to be unstoppable. Miami sports writer Dan Lebatard even predicted on ESPN's PTI, that the Heat would match the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls 72 win season. It's not a matter of when they will win an NBA Championship, it's a matter of how many, and how soon? I remember LeBron being asked at the welcome party the Heat threw for him and Bosh, "how many championships do you think you guys can win together? One? Two?" LeBron confidently answers, "Not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six, not seven...."
Some think the Heat are one, maybe two years away from being the completely dominate team they were built to be. While they do have the Big Three, the rest of the team is made up of garbage even Emeril wouldn't want to cook with (I know, way harsh). However, after taking a 2-1 series led over the 1st seeded Chicago Bulls, and making quick work of the defending Eastern Champion Boston Celtics, we could be looking at "the Heatles" (as LeBron has dub them), hoisting a trophy sooner rather than later. Their play of late has many asking the same question they were asking when the Heat first signed LeBron and Bosh, how do you stop and defend the Miami Heat?
This blogger thinks he had figured it out. After looking at all of the boxscores of the games lost by the Miami Heat during the regular season and the playoffs, there was one noticeable trend. Specifically looking at the Big Three, if one of them was held to under 20 points, the Heat generally lost. Only in three loses (regular season and playoffs) did the Big Three all score 20 points or more. And in those loses sustained by the Miami Heat, the one player of the Big Three who was generally under the 20 point benchmark was Chris Bosh. Could it be that the blueprint to beating the Miami Heat is to actually let LeBron James and Dwayne Wade score?
I know it sounds crazy, but I actually think that the best way to beat the Miami Heat is to let LeBron and D-Wade score their points, and focus on taking away or shutting down Chris Bosh and the other ancillary parts that make up their team. If you can keep Bosh under 20 points, and if possible, Bosh and the other starters and bench players not names LeBron and Wade, under or between 30-35 points total, you give yourself a pretty good chance at winning. If you are successful at accomplishing this, it forces LeBron and Wade to make up the difference. As a team, the Heat averaged 102 points per game throughout the regular season. So say you are able to hold Bosh and the other players to 35 points combined, that leaves 67 points that LeBron and D-Wade have to make up the difference on. Divide that amongst LeBron and D-Wade, that is 33.5 points. LeBron's season scoring average was 26.7 points per game; D-Wade is at 25.5 points per game. If you round up those scoring averages, that is only a combined 53 points, 14 points off the 67 point mark they need to hit.
I understand that to actually accomplishing this strategy is harder than it is too type about, seeing as the Heat's record this season was 58-24, but this seems to be the blueprint that is the most effective and easiest to achieve. You can try to stop and hold D-Wade to under 20 points, which might work, as when I was looking at the losing game boxscores, if it wasn't Bosh under 20, it was D-Wade who wasn't picking up the slack. But typically, in all of the Heat's loses, Bosh would consistently be held to under 20 points. One thing was apparent in looking at the boxscores, you weren't going to stop LeBron. In all of the Miami Heat loses this season (regular and post), only four times did LeBron not score over 20 points, two of those games happen to be in the postseason. So if you had to pick between Bosh or D-Wade to defend and hold under 20 points, who would you choose? I can already anticipate the answer from my armchair.
So could it be that the best way to defend and beat the Miami Heat is to actually let LeBron and D-Wade score? If this theory is correct, then the answer is absolutely. The real question may be: is a coach daring enough to actually let it happen? The pride and ego of a coach may prevent this from ever happening, but if they wants to win, they will have to put pride and ego aside for a night. It's almost funny when you think about it. Who would have thought that out of LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, and Chris Bosh, the one player you would need to defend and shutdown the most would be Bosh.
This is why many maintain that the Miami Heat are a year or two away from really being the dominate team everyone expects them to be. Yes you have two dominate players and a very good number three, but who else do you have that can consistently put up average numbers? Mike Miller, Mario Chalmers, Udonis Haslem, and Zydrunas Ilgauskas were thought to be those players, but injuries and poor play has forced the Heat to look elsewhere for production. The Heat acquired Mike Bibby in a trade mid-season, but he is clearly showing signs of aging. Luckily, Joel Anthony and James Jones have been real contributors to the Heat through the season. But the one to two year time frame given by the pundents to the Heat to win an NBA Championship is more to give the front office time to acquire a better support cast for the Big Three, and not to give the Big Three time to gel as a unit. So while the Heat may very well win the NBA Championship this year with a mediocre support cast, just wait that one to two years. Their best is yet to come. And that is scary.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
Some think the Heat are one, maybe two years away from being the completely dominate team they were built to be. While they do have the Big Three, the rest of the team is made up of garbage even Emeril wouldn't want to cook with (I know, way harsh). However, after taking a 2-1 series led over the 1st seeded Chicago Bulls, and making quick work of the defending Eastern Champion Boston Celtics, we could be looking at "the Heatles" (as LeBron has dub them), hoisting a trophy sooner rather than later. Their play of late has many asking the same question they were asking when the Heat first signed LeBron and Bosh, how do you stop and defend the Miami Heat?
This blogger thinks he had figured it out. After looking at all of the boxscores of the games lost by the Miami Heat during the regular season and the playoffs, there was one noticeable trend. Specifically looking at the Big Three, if one of them was held to under 20 points, the Heat generally lost. Only in three loses (regular season and playoffs) did the Big Three all score 20 points or more. And in those loses sustained by the Miami Heat, the one player of the Big Three who was generally under the 20 point benchmark was Chris Bosh. Could it be that the blueprint to beating the Miami Heat is to actually let LeBron James and Dwayne Wade score?
I know it sounds crazy, but I actually think that the best way to beat the Miami Heat is to let LeBron and D-Wade score their points, and focus on taking away or shutting down Chris Bosh and the other ancillary parts that make up their team. If you can keep Bosh under 20 points, and if possible, Bosh and the other starters and bench players not names LeBron and Wade, under or between 30-35 points total, you give yourself a pretty good chance at winning. If you are successful at accomplishing this, it forces LeBron and Wade to make up the difference. As a team, the Heat averaged 102 points per game throughout the regular season. So say you are able to hold Bosh and the other players to 35 points combined, that leaves 67 points that LeBron and D-Wade have to make up the difference on. Divide that amongst LeBron and D-Wade, that is 33.5 points. LeBron's season scoring average was 26.7 points per game; D-Wade is at 25.5 points per game. If you round up those scoring averages, that is only a combined 53 points, 14 points off the 67 point mark they need to hit.
I understand that to actually accomplishing this strategy is harder than it is too type about, seeing as the Heat's record this season was 58-24, but this seems to be the blueprint that is the most effective and easiest to achieve. You can try to stop and hold D-Wade to under 20 points, which might work, as when I was looking at the losing game boxscores, if it wasn't Bosh under 20, it was D-Wade who wasn't picking up the slack. But typically, in all of the Heat's loses, Bosh would consistently be held to under 20 points. One thing was apparent in looking at the boxscores, you weren't going to stop LeBron. In all of the Miami Heat loses this season (regular and post), only four times did LeBron not score over 20 points, two of those games happen to be in the postseason. So if you had to pick between Bosh or D-Wade to defend and hold under 20 points, who would you choose? I can already anticipate the answer from my armchair.
So could it be that the best way to defend and beat the Miami Heat is to actually let LeBron and D-Wade score? If this theory is correct, then the answer is absolutely. The real question may be: is a coach daring enough to actually let it happen? The pride and ego of a coach may prevent this from ever happening, but if they wants to win, they will have to put pride and ego aside for a night. It's almost funny when you think about it. Who would have thought that out of LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, and Chris Bosh, the one player you would need to defend and shutdown the most would be Bosh.
This is why many maintain that the Miami Heat are a year or two away from really being the dominate team everyone expects them to be. Yes you have two dominate players and a very good number three, but who else do you have that can consistently put up average numbers? Mike Miller, Mario Chalmers, Udonis Haslem, and Zydrunas Ilgauskas were thought to be those players, but injuries and poor play has forced the Heat to look elsewhere for production. The Heat acquired Mike Bibby in a trade mid-season, but he is clearly showing signs of aging. Luckily, Joel Anthony and James Jones have been real contributors to the Heat through the season. But the one to two year time frame given by the pundents to the Heat to win an NBA Championship is more to give the front office time to acquire a better support cast for the Big Three, and not to give the Big Three time to gel as a unit. So while the Heat may very well win the NBA Championship this year with a mediocre support cast, just wait that one to two years. Their best is yet to come. And that is scary.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Can He Shoot? Can He Rebound? Can He Play Defens...
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Can He Shoot? Can He Rebound? Can He Play Defens...: "I want to take a break from writing the same old analytical blog piece where I type from my armchair and criticize about teams and players i..."
Can He Shoot? Can He Rebound? Can He Play Defense? Then I can play with Will Sheridan on My Team.
I want to take a break from writing the same old analytical blog piece where I type from my armchair and criticize about teams and players in sports, and try to hit on something real. It is not my intention to drum up controversy, but why have a blog if you are not going to talk about something that may cause a person to disagree with you? You can’t please everyone. After all, I started this blog so that we can engage in constructive sports dialog. I also had a feeling that sometime sooner or later, a little politics would rear its ugly head into one of my entries; but since that is the field I chose to pursue with my career, it was bound to happen. I want to preface by saying that the topic I’m about to talk about is considered sensitive in nature and somewhat taboo, but I’m completely comfortable and confident talking about this topic and wanted to write about my opinion on this matter. So here I go, and if you disagree and feel that I am hitting a subject that shouldn’t be discussed, well then I apologize.
I have decided to write this entry about former Villanova basketball player Will Sheridan. Who is Will Sheridan? Will Sheridan was a 4-star basketball recruit out of Delaware; a power forward, standing 6’8”, 240 lbs, and according to Rivals, had good handles, passing, and strength. He had offers to go play basketball at national powerhouse schools like Michigan, Notre Dame, Wake Forest, Tennessee, and Villanova; Villanova being his school of choice. So why I’m I writing about him and his story? This week, Will Sheridan came out and announced that he is gay. And while he is not the first former professional or collegiate athlete to announce that he is gay, what I find most interesting and intriguing about his story is, after listen to him being interviewed by Jim Rome, that he confronted and told his teammates about his sexual orientation while playing basketball with them for Villanova University.
Other former athletes who have came out in the past have done so several years after their professional or collegiate careers have ended, and have always maintained that while they were playing, they never revealed their secret to any teammate or coach. Whether it was out of fear of ridicule and embarrassment from teammates, becoming an outcast in the locker room, or jeopardizing their career, they went through great lengths and took all measures possible and available to hide their secret. Will Sheridan on the other hand, took a different approach.
Sheridan played basketball for Villanova University, a small school located in Philadelphia. He, along with another 4-star recruit, point guard Michael Nardi, would make up Villanova’s recruiting class for the 2003 season. Both coming to Villanova as freshmen, they would end up becoming roommates and eventually good friends. They shared computers, went to class and basketball practice together, and hung out around campus together with other teammates. One day, after sizing up Nardi’s character and personality, Sheridan felt comfortable and secure enough with himself and his relationship with Nardi to tell his roommate and fellow teammate that he was gay. Not knowing how Nardi would take the news, Sheridan was a bit surprise when Nardi told him “we’re good.” Next day, life went on, friends were friends, teammates were teammates. But uncertainty still remained. Would Nardi spill his secret and rat him out to his teammates and coaches? I mean, Sheridan was a big time recruit and a fixture on campus. How would his teammates and fellow students handle the news if let out? It was something that Sheridan would just have to deal with. But instead, something completely unexpected happened.
Sheridan can’t say for sure whether Nardi told their teammates of his secret, and he may have, but it never got back to Sheridan that he did (to this day, Nardi and Sheridan are still best friends). When Sheridan confronted his teammates about his sexual orientation, some of the guys told him that they already knew or already heard, but thanked him and respected and appreciated the fact that Sheridan confronted them about it. Life did go on, and went on well. Sheridan would soon realize that his teammates didn't care and instead were so focus (with basketball and winning) that it didn't matter whether he (Sheridan) was gay or not. He was a contributing basketball player on a Sweet Sixteen, national championship caliber team. Sheridan's sexual orientation becoming known to his teammates didn't change the team dynamic, locker room chemistry, or throw the world off it's axis. I started thinking (I know, not always a good thing), but what if I were on that Villanova team, how would I handle it? How would I embrace Sheridan? I kept asking myself that throughout the interview and I kept coming to the same conclusion. Can he shoot? Yes. Can he rebound? Yes. Can he play defense? Yes. Then I can play with Will Sheridan.
I'm a strong advocate for equality and equal rights. No one should be excluded and discriminated against for something that is beyond their control. But sports, and in particular athletes, are made from a different creed and mind set. You often times hear athletes talk about the sanctity of the locker room and the bond a team shares together. Athletes are almost sheltered creatures, forced to eat, drink, and live the sport they play. It’s what they’ve known their whole life. So when someone goes against the creed and is seen as not being one of them, in this case not living the same lifestyle, it can really shake up their world. It is because of this that makes me more impressed and proud of the Villanova players and coach who played and shared in this experience with Sheridan. It takes a special group of young men, coaches, and leaders to be able to take in the news that Sheridan confronted them with, embrace him as a teammate, respect him enough to keep his secret a secret, and move forward together, still being focused on their ultimate goals. Sheridan described his experience about coming out to his teammates as being position and contributes it to being surrounded by a great group of teammates and coaches, who were just as focused as he was about two thing: winning and playing basketball. All that matter to them was, can he shoot? Can he rebound? Can he play defense? And most importantly, can we win with him? If the answer is yes, then nothing else should matter. Now 26 years old, Sheridan is a graduate, writing, singing, and producing music, and as he says “I’m on facebook, I’m on Twitter. I’m out there and I’m a real person.”
When asked about gay athletes in sports and the possibility playing with them, Charles Barkley said, "It bothers me when I hear these reporters and jocks get on TV and say: 'Oh, no guy can come out in a team sport. These guys would go crazy.' First of all, quit telling me what I think. I'd rather have a gay guy who can play than a straight guy who can't play." Very elementary sounding, but perfectly said.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Rome Wasn’t Built in a Day. And Neither Will The ...
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Rome Wasn’t Built in a Day. And Neither Will The ...: "The term “Rome wasn’t built in a day” is the usual English translation of a French phrase first known from Li Proverbe au Vilain (c. 1190)..."
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Rome Wasn’t Built in a Day. And Neither Will The ...
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Rome Wasn’t Built in a Day. And Neither Will The ...: "The term “Rome wasn’t built in a day” is the usual English translation of a French phrase first known from Li Proverbe au Vilain (c. 1190)..."
Rome Wasn’t Built in a Day. And Neither Will The "New" New York Yankees Be Either.
The term “Rome wasn’t built in a day” is the usual English translation of a French phrase first known from Li Proverbe au Vilain (c. 1190), and listed in John Heywood’s A Dialogue Conteinyng the Nomber in Effect of all the Prouerbes in the Englishe Tougue (c.1538). The meaning of this proverb is: All things take time to create. And great things like the city of Rome take a very long time. So we shouldn’t expect to accomplish something or achieve success immediately. I know this isn't the traditional Yankee way, but it should be the new mantra of the New York Yankees, because after watching this weekend’s Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees’ series, it’s very apparent that the Yankees and their fans are going to need to be patient before they are great again.
The Yankees were sweep this weekend by their arch rival, the Boston Red Sox, and have lost 6 straight games in a row, including tonight's game against another division rival, the Tampa Bay Rays. Yes, it's only May 16th and I know the benchmark for determining whether a team is for real or not is the 4th of July, but this is the New York Yankees folks. Every series, every game, every pitch is held to a benchmark.
What is cause for concern though is that there are no signs of the ship turning around. The Yankees don't have a regular starting position player batting over .286 and as a team, are only batting .249. Hitting staples like Derek Jeter (.255), A-Rod (.242), Jorge Posada (.165), and Mark Teixeira (.252) are all not playing to the back of their baseball card. And underlining stats like Derek Jeter hitting the most ground balls in all of baseball and Posada having the lowest batting average in the league for a player with more than 100 AB's is mind-boggling to anyone, let alone manager Joe Girardi. The fire is getting hot, and Rome is in it's path.
Their pitching is also not a pretty sight as well. C.C. Sabathia is having a decent season posting a 3-3 record, 5 quality starts, 7.54 K/9, and an ERA of 3.47. But he is only one pitcher, and he only gets the ball every 5th day. The other four Yankee starters: A.J. Burnett, Ivan Nova, Bartolo Colon, Freddy Garcia, and when he comes back from the DL, Phil Hughes, aren't having stellar seasons. Burnett has proven that he can't be counted on, Ivan Nova is young and is in his first full season so I will give him a past and won't embarrass him by giving you his numbers. But another young arm who is proven however, Phil Hughes, has an ERA of 13.94 in 3 starts, a 2.61 K/9 rate, and is on the DL for dead arm. Not good!! And if the Yankees expect to go into the playoff race with Big Fat Bartolo Colon and washed up Freddy Garcia, Rome is definitely on it's way to being burned down.
The Yankees credit much of their success in recent years to going out and spend, spend, spend. Their strategy for success has been to out-spend the competition and have the highest bid for the high-price free agents. They (Yankees) for a long time completely ignored their minor league farm system and have instead either traded away their highly talented prospects for proven veterans, or have conceded their draft picks for type A and B free agents. This had been a formula for success that proved to work, as the Yankees were consistent in winning division titles, and eventually a World Series title in 2009. It is frequently referred to as "reloading" on the run; trying to build back Rome in a day, or offseason. But now, with the current make-up of the New York Yankees' roster, and the potential 2012 free agent class, they may want to take a good look at the true meaning of “Rome wasn’t built in a day” and take it to heart.
In looking at the 2012 potential free agent list, I don't see how Rome (the Yankees) can be built in one day. First, the crown jewel of the free agent class is Albert Puljos. I don't see Puljos wearing a New York Yankee uniform. I don't think he wants to go their and be a DH or platoon with Teixeira for first base duties. The Yankees could sign Prince Fielder and DH him, but he is on the wrong side of 275, and I don't mean his batting average. Do the Yankees really want to spend $16m plus for an overweight DH? We are going to assume that the Yankees will pick up the $14m club option on Robbie Cano, so second base is covered. Jose Reyes would be an intriguing signing and quite frankly a good one for them, but are you going to tell Derek Jeter that he will not be the every day shortstop, especially after signing him to a 3 year deal? Third base is locked up for the Yankees with A-Rod for the next 7 years. The outfield market isn't filled with any world beaters as well. The only three outfielders worth giving a contract to is Ryan Ludwick, Carlos Beltran, and Grady Sizemore (assuming the Indians don't pick up his option). But Beltran and Sizemore are coming off major knee surgeries, and all are on the downswing of their prime. I'm going to spare you the list of potential starting pitchers and move to the closers, where there is pretty good players available. Heath Bell, Jonathan Papelbon, and Francisco Rodriguez are all free agents. However, Rivera is still Rivera, and if they choose to sign one of these guys, they would be asked to be the closer in waiting, as the Sandman is still putting opposing batters to sleep. Plus, the Yankees just spent $9m on Rafael Soriano to be their closer in waiting.
The Yankee I believe have seen the writing on the wall, and have quietly for a while. They have been trying to build Rome back up, and not just in one day, like they have in the past. As of this year, according to Keith Law of ESPN, the New York Yankees have the 9th best farm system in baseball. Everyone knows Jesus Montero is their catcher in waiting and have foregone trades involving Cliff Lee and others, because they believe in his talent. But if they have to move Montero to other position or via trade to acquire a veteran, Gary Sanchez is another highly-rated catching prospect they can play. Andrew Brackman, Manny Banuelos, Hector Noesi, and Dellin Betances are nice pitching prospects, and if Ivan Nova, Joba Chamberlian, and Phil Hughes live up to their potential, the Yankees could have a nice pitching staff and bullpen when mixed in with their ace, C.C. Robbie Cano is still only 28 years old and Teixiera is 31 and still has hits left in his bat. The sleeper could be Eduardo Nunez, who in is very short career is batting .286, and seemingly ready to take over at short. Curtis Granderson and Brett Gardner are still young (Granderson 30, Gardner 27) and not going anywhere soon. Slade Heathcott is a promising outfield prospect who needs a lot of polishing, but has the tools.
The Yankees' return to dominance lies in the hands of these young prospect, but it won't happen in one day. They will need to be patient with them, bring them along slowly, and let them develop to their potential. The Yankees will see some lean years ahead, but with those lean years, comes high draft picks, and if the Yankees draft well, it will only further speed up the process. But patience is the key to success. It's like the proverd said, "All things take time to create, and great thngs take a very long time." The Yankees have seen this play out before in the mid-1990's when they originally drafted and signed young prospects in the likes of Jeter, Posada, Rivera, Williams, and Pettitte. This core group propelled the Yankees to their dominance in the mid 1990's and early 2000's. The Yankees have built Rome once before, and there is no reason they can't build it again. They have the blueprint.
The Yankees' return to dominance lies in the hands of these young prospect, but it won't happen in one day. They will need to be patient with them, bring them along slowly, and let them develop to their potential. The Yankees will see some lean years ahead, but with those lean years, comes high draft picks, and if the Yankees draft well, it will only further speed up the process. But patience is the key to success. It's like the proverd said, "All things take time to create, and great thngs take a very long time." The Yankees have seen this play out before in the mid-1990's when they originally drafted and signed young prospects in the likes of Jeter, Posada, Rivera, Williams, and Pettitte. This core group propelled the Yankees to their dominance in the mid 1990's and early 2000's. The Yankees have built Rome once before, and there is no reason they can't build it again. They have the blueprint.
I do not consider myself a New York Yankees fan, however I do root for them to winning and respect the tradition and history that comes with them. I have no problem with the way they run their organization, nor do I blame them for the current state of Major League Baseball, like most baseball fan like to do. To most people, they are the Evil Empire, much like Rome was. But to me, they are smart business men, capitalizing on their good fortune. They are playing within the rules of baseball and fans of small market organizations resent them because their own organization can’t do the same. You can argue that through revenue sharing and luxury taxes, they (Yankees) are single handled keeping the bottom 1/3 of Major League Baseball organizations in business. However, all good things must come to an end. The Yankees' run of dominance will soon come to an end, but it will be back, and strong than ever. Rome wasn't built in a day. And neither will the new New York Yankees be either.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Talkin’ about my generation…and today’s generation...
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Talkin’ about my generation…and today’s generation...: "For the final piece of my three part series on generational players, I want to discuss the possible omissions and castoffs that were left of..."
Talkin’ about my generation…and today’s generational players (Part 3)
For the final piece of my three part series on generational players, I want to discuss the possible omissions and castoffs that were left of the my lists. I understand that people have their varying opinions on what constitutes or defines a baseball player as “generational,” so I will do my best to think outside my box and try to look at this third piece from the prospective of others. While I am Mr. Armchair, I do respect other people’s opinion on matters and enjoy the constructive dialog baseball and sports brings.
For a quick review, a generational player is a player that comes along once in a lifetime and are not only great on the field, but carry with them a flair that makes them larger than life. They are not only admired by baseball purest, but capture the hearts of the average fan. For my list of old-time generational players, I had cited Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, Ted Williams, Bob Gibson, and Sandy Koufax. Now I know that not all of these players played in the same “generation” or era of baseball, but for the purposes of this blog, any baseball played before 1975 is considered one generation. So this may lead you to ask, where is Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Cy Young, and the rest of the turn of the century players. Well, I can’t really speak too intelligently about those players because not only did I never see them play, there is limited footage or highlights available on these players. Hell, there aren’t even many people still alive that can recount seeing these players play. Ty Cobb didn’t even have a number for the Detroit Tigers to retire because he played in an era where players didn't have jersey numbers. So for those purposes, I left that generation off this blog. At least with the old-timers I named above, while I never saw them play as well, I can at least watch a large sample size of footage and highlights of these players, as well as read literature, and listen and hear people recount how great they were.
So besides the first generation of players being omitted, there was one omission that I left off that needs to be added: Hank Aaron. “Hammerin’” Hank Aaron captured the nation when he broke Babe Ruth’s home run record, a record that was later broken by a player who is on the list of generational players from my era, Barry Bonds. While Hank Aaron is soft spoken and generally stays out of the limelight, he still has a presence about him that quiets a room, just like any of the other players on the old-timers list would. And just like this blogger did, whenever there is even a discussion about the best baseball players of all-time, Hank Aaron is rarely mentions. Has anyone looked at his overall numbers, and not just the fact that he broke the home run record? Hank Aaron has a career batting average of .305, 755 home runs, 3,771 hits, and 2,297 runs batted in. Folks, he is second all-time in home runs, top five in career hits and runs, and hold the Major League Baseball records for runs batted in and extra base hits. He's a 25 time All-Star, three time Gold Glove winner, and one MVP award. While some feel that his numbers are inflated because his career was so long (23 years), there is nothing wrong with consistency. If Hank Aaron is so forgotten, then does he qualify within our definition of a generational player? Maybe not. But I can't ignore these numbers and he did become a household name during his pursuit of Babe Ruth's home run record, even if it was negative attention.
Another omission which is obviously, but I will define my position for leaving him off, is Jackie Robinson. I realize what Jackie Robinson did for baseball may constitute him being labeled as a generational player, but I think it’s safe to say that Jackie Robinson is bigger than that. You can argue, and I would love to someday write a blog, dissertation, thesis, whatever on this topic, that Jackie Robinson is the most important person is American History. I know that is saying a lot, but think long and hard about it. And for him to simply make my old-time generational player list, I feel is somewhat disrespectful to his honor. Jackie belongs on a list that includes the likes of Abe Lincoln, Martin Luther King, maybe FDR, and the Founding Fathers. He was that important to American History, let alone Baseball.
I actually feel pretty comfortable with my list of generational players stemming from the 80’s, 90’s, early 2000’s, and future. Those players include: Cal Ripken Jr. (80-90’s), Ken Griffey Jr. (90’s), Mark McGwire (90’s), Barry Bonds (90’s), Nolan Ryan (80-90’s), Roger Clemons (80-90’s), Derek Jeter (90-00’s), Alex Rodriguez (90-00’s), Albert Puljos (00’s), Randy Johnson (90-00’s), Mariano Riveria (90-00’s), Even Longoria (future), Troy Tulowitzki (future), Tim Lincecum (future), Ichiro Suzuki (future), Stephen Strasburg (future), and Bryce Harper (future). All these players deserve the title of being labeled as a generational player. I would have probably moved Puljos from the 2000’s list to the future’s list and move Ichiro from the future’s list to the early 2000’s list (a mistake I caught and tried to cover up), but otherwise I’m confident in these players. The only two omission that I would consider are the three headed monster that was the Atlanta Braves starting pitching, with Greg Maddux, John Smoltz, and Tom Glavine, and Tony Gwynn. Together, the three headed monster (Maddux, Smoltz, and Glavine) were unstoppable and dominate, winning division title, after division title. However, you can argue that for how dominate they were, they only won one World Series, and only went there three times. As a collective whole, the three headed monster started the movement that we are starting to see more of today; having a starting rotation with three aces. Individually however, of the three, Greg Maddux would probably be the only one I would consider adding to the list.
Tony Gwynn was a hitting machine. Our generations Ted Williams, Gwynn had a baseball swing that was so mechanically tuned and pure that he could hit a baseball into a bucket 200 feet away in the opposition field. However, as exciting as it is to see him hit singles up the middle and doubles down the line, unfortunately it doesn't translate to popularity amongst the average fans. And this was evident during his final season. Gwynn retired from baseball the same season as Cal Ripken Jr., and he even announced it shortly after Ripken did. However, Ripken was paraded around the league and was given standing ovations in every ballpark Ripken played in during his final season. Stadiums were sold out so that the average baseball fan to see him play one last time. Gwynn however, didn't receive the same fan fare. Maybe it was because he had the misfortune of retiring the same year as a true generational player as Ripken, but I'm sorry to say that I don't think that was the case. I love Tony Gwynn and I think he was a great baseball player, but just not a generational player.
I want to end on this note. I want to point out a glaring omission from my future’s list. If you notice, I don’t have any Yankees players. This is because the Yankees don’t home grown their players anymore. In the era of free agency and the almighty buck, the Yankees are built off of other teams not being able to keep their high priced free agents and possible generational players. The one exception that I also put on the list of future generational players was Robinson Cano. He may be the last great home grown Yankee to amount to anything. Robinson Cano could potentially be, when it’s all said and done, the greatest hitting second baseman of all-time. But unfortunately, playing next to possibly the greatest Yankee of our generation, and the high priced, purple lip gloss of A-Rod, Robbie Cano gets overlooked. He missed coming up in the era of the Yankee big 4 (Jeter, Petittie, Riveria, and Posada) and got over-shadowed by the high price acquisition era of A-Rod, Jason Giambi, C.C. Sabathia, and Mark Teixeira. So while Robbie Cano is great, the 8-year old fielding grounders at second in Lytton, Iowa has no clue who Robinson Cano is.
Well, here ends this series on generational players and I thoroughly enjoyed writing about the topic. I had a lot of fun researching stats and debating about which players to add. While the list of generational players is short, that doesn't mean that there aren't great baseball players. The game throughout its history has seen a lot of great players play its game. But there are just those who have played this game or are playing now, that make it extra special.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
For a quick review, a generational player is a player that comes along once in a lifetime and are not only great on the field, but carry with them a flair that makes them larger than life. They are not only admired by baseball purest, but capture the hearts of the average fan. For my list of old-time generational players, I had cited Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, Ted Williams, Bob Gibson, and Sandy Koufax. Now I know that not all of these players played in the same “generation” or era of baseball, but for the purposes of this blog, any baseball played before 1975 is considered one generation. So this may lead you to ask, where is Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Cy Young, and the rest of the turn of the century players. Well, I can’t really speak too intelligently about those players because not only did I never see them play, there is limited footage or highlights available on these players. Hell, there aren’t even many people still alive that can recount seeing these players play. Ty Cobb didn’t even have a number for the Detroit Tigers to retire because he played in an era where players didn't have jersey numbers. So for those purposes, I left that generation off this blog. At least with the old-timers I named above, while I never saw them play as well, I can at least watch a large sample size of footage and highlights of these players, as well as read literature, and listen and hear people recount how great they were.
So besides the first generation of players being omitted, there was one omission that I left off that needs to be added: Hank Aaron. “Hammerin’” Hank Aaron captured the nation when he broke Babe Ruth’s home run record, a record that was later broken by a player who is on the list of generational players from my era, Barry Bonds. While Hank Aaron is soft spoken and generally stays out of the limelight, he still has a presence about him that quiets a room, just like any of the other players on the old-timers list would. And just like this blogger did, whenever there is even a discussion about the best baseball players of all-time, Hank Aaron is rarely mentions. Has anyone looked at his overall numbers, and not just the fact that he broke the home run record? Hank Aaron has a career batting average of .305, 755 home runs, 3,771 hits, and 2,297 runs batted in. Folks, he is second all-time in home runs, top five in career hits and runs, and hold the Major League Baseball records for runs batted in and extra base hits. He's a 25 time All-Star, three time Gold Glove winner, and one MVP award. While some feel that his numbers are inflated because his career was so long (23 years), there is nothing wrong with consistency. If Hank Aaron is so forgotten, then does he qualify within our definition of a generational player? Maybe not. But I can't ignore these numbers and he did become a household name during his pursuit of Babe Ruth's home run record, even if it was negative attention.
Another omission which is obviously, but I will define my position for leaving him off, is Jackie Robinson. I realize what Jackie Robinson did for baseball may constitute him being labeled as a generational player, but I think it’s safe to say that Jackie Robinson is bigger than that. You can argue, and I would love to someday write a blog, dissertation, thesis, whatever on this topic, that Jackie Robinson is the most important person is American History. I know that is saying a lot, but think long and hard about it. And for him to simply make my old-time generational player list, I feel is somewhat disrespectful to his honor. Jackie belongs on a list that includes the likes of Abe Lincoln, Martin Luther King, maybe FDR, and the Founding Fathers. He was that important to American History, let alone Baseball.
I actually feel pretty comfortable with my list of generational players stemming from the 80’s, 90’s, early 2000’s, and future. Those players include: Cal Ripken Jr. (80-90’s), Ken Griffey Jr. (90’s), Mark McGwire (90’s), Barry Bonds (90’s), Nolan Ryan (80-90’s), Roger Clemons (80-90’s), Derek Jeter (90-00’s), Alex Rodriguez (90-00’s), Albert Puljos (00’s), Randy Johnson (90-00’s), Mariano Riveria (90-00’s), Even Longoria (future), Troy Tulowitzki (future), Tim Lincecum (future), Ichiro Suzuki (future), Stephen Strasburg (future), and Bryce Harper (future). All these players deserve the title of being labeled as a generational player. I would have probably moved Puljos from the 2000’s list to the future’s list and move Ichiro from the future’s list to the early 2000’s list (a mistake I caught and tried to cover up), but otherwise I’m confident in these players. The only two omission that I would consider are the three headed monster that was the Atlanta Braves starting pitching, with Greg Maddux, John Smoltz, and Tom Glavine, and Tony Gwynn. Together, the three headed monster (Maddux, Smoltz, and Glavine) were unstoppable and dominate, winning division title, after division title. However, you can argue that for how dominate they were, they only won one World Series, and only went there three times. As a collective whole, the three headed monster started the movement that we are starting to see more of today; having a starting rotation with three aces. Individually however, of the three, Greg Maddux would probably be the only one I would consider adding to the list.
Tony Gwynn was a hitting machine. Our generations Ted Williams, Gwynn had a baseball swing that was so mechanically tuned and pure that he could hit a baseball into a bucket 200 feet away in the opposition field. However, as exciting as it is to see him hit singles up the middle and doubles down the line, unfortunately it doesn't translate to popularity amongst the average fans. And this was evident during his final season. Gwynn retired from baseball the same season as Cal Ripken Jr., and he even announced it shortly after Ripken did. However, Ripken was paraded around the league and was given standing ovations in every ballpark Ripken played in during his final season. Stadiums were sold out so that the average baseball fan to see him play one last time. Gwynn however, didn't receive the same fan fare. Maybe it was because he had the misfortune of retiring the same year as a true generational player as Ripken, but I'm sorry to say that I don't think that was the case. I love Tony Gwynn and I think he was a great baseball player, but just not a generational player.
I want to end on this note. I want to point out a glaring omission from my future’s list. If you notice, I don’t have any Yankees players. This is because the Yankees don’t home grown their players anymore. In the era of free agency and the almighty buck, the Yankees are built off of other teams not being able to keep their high priced free agents and possible generational players. The one exception that I also put on the list of future generational players was Robinson Cano. He may be the last great home grown Yankee to amount to anything. Robinson Cano could potentially be, when it’s all said and done, the greatest hitting second baseman of all-time. But unfortunately, playing next to possibly the greatest Yankee of our generation, and the high priced, purple lip gloss of A-Rod, Robbie Cano gets overlooked. He missed coming up in the era of the Yankee big 4 (Jeter, Petittie, Riveria, and Posada) and got over-shadowed by the high price acquisition era of A-Rod, Jason Giambi, C.C. Sabathia, and Mark Teixeira. So while Robbie Cano is great, the 8-year old fielding grounders at second in Lytton, Iowa has no clue who Robinson Cano is.
Well, here ends this series on generational players and I thoroughly enjoyed writing about the topic. I had a lot of fun researching stats and debating about which players to add. While the list of generational players is short, that doesn't mean that there aren't great baseball players. The game throughout its history has seen a lot of great players play its game. But there are just those who have played this game or are playing now, that make it extra special.
Mr. Armchair Speaking
Monday, May 9, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: The Lakers implosion should lead to Lakers explosi...
Mr. Armchair Speaks: The Lakers implosion should lead to Lakers explosi...: "In a display that resembles most Hollywood tragedies, the LA Lakers went down in flames to the Dallas Mavericks in a 36 point defeat, an imp..."
The Lakers implosion should lead to Lakers explosion
In a display that resembles most Hollywood tragedies, the LA Lakers went down in flames to the Dallas Mavericks in a 36 point defeat, an implosion of epic proportions. For this Laker hater, it was a sight worth missing the Giants beat the Rockies and Ryan Vogelsong pitching six innings of no hit ball. While at the gym, I couldn’t take my eyes off of the TV screen as three pointers after three pointers went in. I have never done so much meaningless and unfulfilling cardio in my life. I had about as many sweat beads as Lamar Odom and Andrew Bynum had forearm shivers. There was one thing though very apparent on my face, the biggest smile one can see. So now that the Lakers are out of the playoffs and won’t be anywhere near the championship trophy, Phil Jackson’s kids can ship those XII (#12) lids they had made for him off to some African nation where the NBA sends the rest of the championship gear they always have made for the eventual losing team. In reality, the Lakers have much bigger problems ahead.
Following the Lakers implosion, much was discussed about that Lakers pending explosion. It is no secret the Lakers are getting old and their window of opportunity to win another championship has come crashing down. But what lies ahead for the Lakers? By the time this is posted, Coach Phil Jackson (Zen Master) will already be on his Harley, heading north up Interstate 5, on his way to his Unabomber cabin in Montana where he will, in the words of Dallas Mavericks’ coach Rick Carlisle, “meditate and smoke peyote.” The Lakers are way over the luxury tax and whenever a new CBA is hammered out, the projected salary cap will be so low that the Lakers will be forced to move some of their important championship parts.
Last week, Laker great and hall of famer Magic Johnson said that if the Lakers were to lose the series against the Dallas Mavericks, that management should strongly consider breaking up the Lakers and start the process of rebuilding. He was criticized by the Zen Master for the timeliness of his comments. However, I don’t think anyone is arguing with the content of what Magic said, and this blogger completely agrees with him. The Lakers should be blown-up. Management needs to completely re-tool and start over now while they can still salvage some mended, broken pieces. As a Kings fan, I’ve watched my team in the past try desperately to over-spend on mediocre free agents just to keep the hope of making the playoffs alive, instead of just starting over fresh. The Kings paid for it and are now, 5 years later, just starting to come up to respectability. Lakers, don’t make this same mistake, for your fans sake.
The Lakers have a lot of tradable assets that teams may still give up decent value for. Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum would garner some quality assets if moved. The Lakers have to at least keep one of those bigs, and If I had to choose, I would keep and build around Bynum. He is much younger and while a head case, he has great potential to be a dominate center in the NBA. Lamar Odom and Ron Artest won’t get you much, as they are nearing the end of their prime and have huge contracts. You may have to end up either keeping them or buying out their contracts. I would keep Odom as he offers many dimensions to his game, but I would cut the cord with Artest. He clearly has lost a step as evidence with his defense against J.J Barea. Artest was so frustrated with trying to defend him that he raked him in the face at the end of Game 2, causing him to be suspended for Game 3. I guess for Barea's sake, a rake to the face is a lot better than getting a table leg to the heart (I know, cheap Jim Rome reference; QUEENS BRIDGE!!).
It won't be easy however trading these four, as they are all tied up in long term contracts for huge sums. Bynum has 3 years at $13.7 million, Gasol 4 years at $17.8 million, Odon 3 years at $8.2 million, and Artest 3 years at $6.3 million (contract amounts are per/year). And these are just their so-called tradable assets. They still have the bad contracts of Luke Walton for 3 years at $5.2 million, Steve Blake 4 years at $4 million, and Derek Fisher 3 years at $3.7 million (contract amounts per/year). There is one tradable asset that I didn't mention, and I think at this juncture, it should be talked about.
This is where I would detonate the bomb if I were the Lakers. I would solicit offers for Kobe Bryant, and at least see what he would get you back on the market. If you could get 80 cents on the dollar for Kobe, I would consider pulling the trigger on a deal. Before people fly off the handle on me and tell me I’m crazy, here is my explanation. Kobe Bryant is without a doubt still a high quality player, but he is not the player of 2-3 years ago. He also has a contract with 4 years remaining at $24.8 million per year. I’m not going to deny that he is one of the greatest of all-time, but he is also a selfish, arrogant player who isn’t easy to win over. It would take a lot for a coach other than the Zen Master, and for some reason Coach K, to win the respect of Kobe Bryant. With the Zen Master retiring, who are the Lakers going to bring in to be their new head coach, and how will he mesh with Kobe? This blogger is convinced anyone the Lakers try to bring in will just be a nightmare. I’m also convinced Kobe will not be able to play for any coach, with the exception of maybe Coach K, like he played for the Zen Master, and I mean in terms of effort. Michael Jordan couldn’t do it either. When MJ returned to basketball to play his 3 forgotten years with the Washington Wizards, they hired Doug Collins away from his plush TNT gig because for one, the Zen Master was employed already, and two, Doug Collins was the only other coach MJ respected enough to play for, and even then, that didn't work out. Kobe is the same way. So unless the Lakers can convince Coach K to leave Duke (almost again), they better either have Kobe interview their next head coach, have Kobe be the first player-coach, or off load him for workable assets in return. Their may be one saving grace within the Lakers organization, and he sits to the left of Coach Zen Master.
The in-house coaching candidate that may be able to solve this seemingly inevitable problem is Brian Shaw, current assistant coach. He has been groomed by the Zen Master to take over the helm whenever he departed. Shaw can slide one chair to his right and keep that ship sailing with Kobe on it. If they try to outsource their coaching job and look to someone who isn't familiar with the triangle, that person is doomed for failure. Kobe supposedly has a good relationship with Shaw and can conceivably play for him. Shaw is at least an ex-player who was at one time a Laker, so he knows the system and what it means to be a Laker. He can teach and coach up younger prospect, while still maintaining the happiness of Kobe. It could be the ideal situation for Shaw and Kobe; but only if Kobe is willing to be patient and surfer through a couple years of just being competitive and nearly missing playoffs. Can he do it? I think we’ll find out; sooner rather than later.
Mr. Armchair Speaking.
Following the Lakers implosion, much was discussed about that Lakers pending explosion. It is no secret the Lakers are getting old and their window of opportunity to win another championship has come crashing down. But what lies ahead for the Lakers? By the time this is posted, Coach Phil Jackson (Zen Master) will already be on his Harley, heading north up Interstate 5, on his way to his Unabomber cabin in Montana where he will, in the words of Dallas Mavericks’ coach Rick Carlisle, “meditate and smoke peyote.” The Lakers are way over the luxury tax and whenever a new CBA is hammered out, the projected salary cap will be so low that the Lakers will be forced to move some of their important championship parts.
Last week, Laker great and hall of famer Magic Johnson said that if the Lakers were to lose the series against the Dallas Mavericks, that management should strongly consider breaking up the Lakers and start the process of rebuilding. He was criticized by the Zen Master for the timeliness of his comments. However, I don’t think anyone is arguing with the content of what Magic said, and this blogger completely agrees with him. The Lakers should be blown-up. Management needs to completely re-tool and start over now while they can still salvage some mended, broken pieces. As a Kings fan, I’ve watched my team in the past try desperately to over-spend on mediocre free agents just to keep the hope of making the playoffs alive, instead of just starting over fresh. The Kings paid for it and are now, 5 years later, just starting to come up to respectability. Lakers, don’t make this same mistake, for your fans sake.
The Lakers have a lot of tradable assets that teams may still give up decent value for. Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum would garner some quality assets if moved. The Lakers have to at least keep one of those bigs, and If I had to choose, I would keep and build around Bynum. He is much younger and while a head case, he has great potential to be a dominate center in the NBA. Lamar Odom and Ron Artest won’t get you much, as they are nearing the end of their prime and have huge contracts. You may have to end up either keeping them or buying out their contracts. I would keep Odom as he offers many dimensions to his game, but I would cut the cord with Artest. He clearly has lost a step as evidence with his defense against J.J Barea. Artest was so frustrated with trying to defend him that he raked him in the face at the end of Game 2, causing him to be suspended for Game 3. I guess for Barea's sake, a rake to the face is a lot better than getting a table leg to the heart (I know, cheap Jim Rome reference; QUEENS BRIDGE!!).
It won't be easy however trading these four, as they are all tied up in long term contracts for huge sums. Bynum has 3 years at $13.7 million, Gasol 4 years at $17.8 million, Odon 3 years at $8.2 million, and Artest 3 years at $6.3 million (contract amounts are per/year). And these are just their so-called tradable assets. They still have the bad contracts of Luke Walton for 3 years at $5.2 million, Steve Blake 4 years at $4 million, and Derek Fisher 3 years at $3.7 million (contract amounts per/year). There is one tradable asset that I didn't mention, and I think at this juncture, it should be talked about.
This is where I would detonate the bomb if I were the Lakers. I would solicit offers for Kobe Bryant, and at least see what he would get you back on the market. If you could get 80 cents on the dollar for Kobe, I would consider pulling the trigger on a deal. Before people fly off the handle on me and tell me I’m crazy, here is my explanation. Kobe Bryant is without a doubt still a high quality player, but he is not the player of 2-3 years ago. He also has a contract with 4 years remaining at $24.8 million per year. I’m not going to deny that he is one of the greatest of all-time, but he is also a selfish, arrogant player who isn’t easy to win over. It would take a lot for a coach other than the Zen Master, and for some reason Coach K, to win the respect of Kobe Bryant. With the Zen Master retiring, who are the Lakers going to bring in to be their new head coach, and how will he mesh with Kobe? This blogger is convinced anyone the Lakers try to bring in will just be a nightmare. I’m also convinced Kobe will not be able to play for any coach, with the exception of maybe Coach K, like he played for the Zen Master, and I mean in terms of effort. Michael Jordan couldn’t do it either. When MJ returned to basketball to play his 3 forgotten years with the Washington Wizards, they hired Doug Collins away from his plush TNT gig because for one, the Zen Master was employed already, and two, Doug Collins was the only other coach MJ respected enough to play for, and even then, that didn't work out. Kobe is the same way. So unless the Lakers can convince Coach K to leave Duke (almost again), they better either have Kobe interview their next head coach, have Kobe be the first player-coach, or off load him for workable assets in return. Their may be one saving grace within the Lakers organization, and he sits to the left of Coach Zen Master.
The in-house coaching candidate that may be able to solve this seemingly inevitable problem is Brian Shaw, current assistant coach. He has been groomed by the Zen Master to take over the helm whenever he departed. Shaw can slide one chair to his right and keep that ship sailing with Kobe on it. If they try to outsource their coaching job and look to someone who isn't familiar with the triangle, that person is doomed for failure. Kobe supposedly has a good relationship with Shaw and can conceivably play for him. Shaw is at least an ex-player who was at one time a Laker, so he knows the system and what it means to be a Laker. He can teach and coach up younger prospect, while still maintaining the happiness of Kobe. It could be the ideal situation for Shaw and Kobe; but only if Kobe is willing to be patient and surfer through a couple years of just being competitive and nearly missing playoffs. Can he do it? I think we’ll find out; sooner rather than later.
Mr. Armchair Speaking.
Friday, May 6, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Say Hey...It's Your Birthday!!!
Mr. Armchair Speaks: Say Hey...It's Your Birthday!!!: "Today is May 5th, Cinco de Mayo to most people. Really, it's an excuse for most people to get hammered in the middle of a work week and eat..."
Say Hey...It's Your Birthday!!!
Today is May 5th, Cinco de Mayo to most people. Really, it's an excuse for most people to get hammered in the middle of a work week and eat mini tacos. While I'm sure there is more significance to Cinco de Mayo for the Hispanic culture, and by no means do I mean to diminish it.
Tomorrow is May 6th however and it happens to be the birthday of the greatest living baseball player, hall of famer, and the great, Willie Mays. While I can't say that Willie Mays is my favorite player, since I have never seen him play live in person, I can say that I admire and respect the heck out of the man, both as a baseball player and person. When I was in the 4th grade, my very first report that I ever wrote for school was on Willie Mays. I have an autograph plaque which resides in my mancave, the only room in the house I'm allowed to decorate and call my own. My wonderful fiance even bought me his recently published autobiography, the only one published in which he authorized and took part in. I love this man, and I never met him nor seen him player.
He is arguably the greatest all-around baseball player to ever play the game. The first five-tool player, his combination of hitting for average, power, speed, and defense was unheard of for a player in his era. Playing in the pitchers era, he ended his career with 660 home runs, 12 gold gloves, 29th all-time in stolen bases, and 3,283 hits. He is best known for making the greatest defensive play of all time, game 1 of the 1954 World Series, chasing down a deep fly ball to center off the bat of Vic Wertz, then hurling it back into the infielder, preventing the advancement of the runners on base. It preserved the win for the Giants, and propelled them to win the World Series, the last time the Giants had won the World Series until 2010.
What really made Willie Mays such an icon however is how he entrenched himself into the community. He became not only the face of the franchise for the San Francisco Giants when they moved out west from New York, but he became the face of the city as well. He still remains one of the most notably public figures in San Francisco, still working as an ambassador for the Giants at community functions and for charitable foundations. His home is San Francisco, his house located at 24 Willie Mays plaza, and fans treat him with fatherly respect.
He is a true hall of famer both on and off the field, and tomorrow, May 6th, Willie May's birthday, I just wanted to take a quick second to....SAY HEY!! Happy Birthday, Willie.
Mr. Armchair Speaking.
Tomorrow is May 6th however and it happens to be the birthday of the greatest living baseball player, hall of famer, and the great, Willie Mays. While I can't say that Willie Mays is my favorite player, since I have never seen him play live in person, I can say that I admire and respect the heck out of the man, both as a baseball player and person. When I was in the 4th grade, my very first report that I ever wrote for school was on Willie Mays. I have an autograph plaque which resides in my mancave, the only room in the house I'm allowed to decorate and call my own. My wonderful fiance even bought me his recently published autobiography, the only one published in which he authorized and took part in. I love this man, and I never met him nor seen him player.
He is arguably the greatest all-around baseball player to ever play the game. The first five-tool player, his combination of hitting for average, power, speed, and defense was unheard of for a player in his era. Playing in the pitchers era, he ended his career with 660 home runs, 12 gold gloves, 29th all-time in stolen bases, and 3,283 hits. He is best known for making the greatest defensive play of all time, game 1 of the 1954 World Series, chasing down a deep fly ball to center off the bat of Vic Wertz, then hurling it back into the infielder, preventing the advancement of the runners on base. It preserved the win for the Giants, and propelled them to win the World Series, the last time the Giants had won the World Series until 2010.
What really made Willie Mays such an icon however is how he entrenched himself into the community. He became not only the face of the franchise for the San Francisco Giants when they moved out west from New York, but he became the face of the city as well. He still remains one of the most notably public figures in San Francisco, still working as an ambassador for the Giants at community functions and for charitable foundations. His home is San Francisco, his house located at 24 Willie Mays plaza, and fans treat him with fatherly respect.
He is a true hall of famer both on and off the field, and tomorrow, May 6th, Willie May's birthday, I just wanted to take a quick second to....SAY HEY!! Happy Birthday, Willie.
Mr. Armchair Speaking.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Mr. Armchair Speaks: The Greatest Comeback in Sacramento History!!!
Mr. Armchair Speaks: The Greatest Comeback in Sacramento History!!!: "May 2 nd , 2011 was judgment day for the people of Sacramento and all fans of the Kings. The owners of the team, the Maloof family, had unt..."
The Greatest Comeback in Sacramento History!!!
May 2nd, 2011 was judgment day for the people of Sacramento and all fans of the Kings. The owners of the team, the Maloof family, had until 5:00pm to decide whether they were going to file relocation papers into NBA league offices, with the intent on moving the Sacramento Kings to the city of Anaheim; or stay in Sacramento and give the city one more year to come up with a plan to build a new entertainment and sports complex. At approximately 8:40am in the morning on May 2nd, news broke that the Maloof family chose the latter. They decided to stay in Sacramento for this year and give Mayor Kevin Johnson and the city more time to develop plans to build a new entertainment and sports complex, now their number #1 priority. The city, lead by the play of Mayor Johnson, rallied from behind after being down by a huge deficit. Here is how the greatest comeback in Sacramento Kings history unfolded, told through a 4th quarter comeback.
February 19, 2011: Commissioner David Stern acknowledges that the Maloof family has engaged in conversations with officials from the city of Anaheim regarding a possible relocation to the city. It sets off a wide array of alarms to the people of Sacramento and Kings’ fans that the biggest fear we all have had in the back of our minds ever since the Maloofs bought the team, were slowly becoming a reality. START OF THE 4TH QUARTER, DOWN 12 POINTS.
February 21, 2011: Mayor Kevin Johnson holds a press conference to confirm reports that the Maloofs have explored a possible relocation to the city of Anaheim, but that no deal is in place. The Mayor expresses his displeasure about the secretive nature the Maloofs are going about this situation and he openly reaches out to the Maloofs to conduct open dialog regarding the relocation and calls for a meeting. 10:46 LEFT IN THE 4TH QUARTER, DOWN 15 POINTS, MALOOFS HIT A THREE OFF A TURNOVER.
February 24, 2011: The Maloofs announce they will seek an extension of the March 1st NBA deadline to file for relocation. Mayor Johnson concludes that seeking an extension signals that no deal has been finalized and that the Maloofs are seeking an extension only to give themselves more time to work with the city officials from Anaheim on a relocation deal. 9:57 LEFT IN THE 4TH QUARTER, DOWN 20 POINTS, MISSED SHOTS BY SACRAMENTO LEAD TO MORE POINTS.
February 28, 2011: A local effort and campaign to keep the Kings appropriately titled “Here We Stay” is started and overnight, billboards and signs are plastered throughout town with the titled slogan. The campaign also sells out the home game against the Los Angeles Clippers, and fans in unison chant the slogan along with other messages in an effort to get through to the Maloofs, hoping to change their minds. At the same time, another local campaign efforts starts up titled, “Here We Build.” This effort is designed to draw in local support for a new entertainment and sports complex by allowing fans and the business community to start pledging any dollar amount they want to help build a new complex. The effort is an immediate hit, drawing in over $200,000 worth of pledges in its first day. 9:21 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, DOWN 17 POINTS, SACRAMENTO NAILS A THREE FROM THE CORNER, BUT WILL IT STOP THE BLEEDING.
March 1, 2011: The NBA grants extension for relocation filing deadline to April 18, giving the Maloof family more time to work out a deal with the city of Anaheim and Henry Samueli, owner of the Anaheim Ducks and CEO of the corporation that runs the Honda Center. 8:23 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, STILL DOWN 17 POINTS, THE GAME SEEMS TO BE SLIPPING AWAY FROM SACRAMENTO.
March 2, 2011: Mayor Kevin Johnson meets with the Maloof family before a home game against the Portland Trailblazers. The following day, he holds a press conference letting everyone know that he met with the Maloof family and confirmed that they have engaged in serious talks with the city of Anaheim regarding a possible relocation. He is blunt and somber as he describes the situation as “having one foot and four toes out the door.” The fight to keep our Kings has official begun. 8:03 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, DOWN 22 POINTS, DEFEAT SEEMS INEVITABLE, BUT HOPE REMAINS AND IS ENCOURAGED BY OUR LEADER.
March 3, 2011: Word gets out that the Maloofs have hired an attorney to start trademarking possible franchise names. The “Anaheim Royals” is talked about as the most likely new name for when the teams is relocated there. 7:37 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, DOWN 22 POINTS STILL.
March 29, 2011: The city council of Anaheim votes unanimously to approve the sale of $75 million worth of bonds to help with a potential relocation. $25 million will be spent on renovations to the Honda Center, the supposed new home of the Sacramento Kings, and the other $50 million will help the Maloofs with the relocation fee that will be levied on them by the NBA. The city of Sacramento sends a letter to the city council of Anaheim asking them to stop negotiations with the Maloofs. President of the State Senate, Senator Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), also announces that he will pursue legislation to insure that the debt owed to the city of Sacramento by the Maloofs is paid in full before a move can be finalized. 6:55 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, DOWN 18 POINTS, SACRAMENTO STILL DOWN BUT THE DEFENSE STARTS TO COME ALIVE WITH A COUPLE OF STOPS.
April 13, 2011: In an emotional night, the Sacramento Kings lose to the Los Angeles Lakers in overtime 116-108 in front of a sold out, standing room only crowd. It is thought of as the last NBA basketball game ever to be played in Sacramento, as the future of the Sacramento Kings in Sacramento still remains uncertain, but hope is still alive. The fight isn't over. 5:46 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, DOWN 18 POINTS STILL, SACRAMENTO MUST MAKE A RUN.
April 14, 2011: The NBA Board of Governors’ meeting is held in New York and both the Mayor and the Maloofs are there to present their cases. Mayor Johnson makes his pitch and lays out details regarding three different scenarios in which an NBA can stay in Sacramento, details of a new arena, and promises from the business community. In his pitch of possible scenarios, Mayor Johnson informs the Board of Governors that Billionaire Robert Burkle has offered and is willing to either purchase the Kings from the Maloofs and keep the Kings in Sacramento, or purchase another franchise and relocate them to Sacramento. The NBA Board of Governors is intrigued. 5:08 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, NOW DOWN 14 POINTS, SACRAMENTO SHOTS ARE STARTING TO FALL.
April 15, 2011: The NBA Board of Governors grants another extension, this time until May 2nd to file for relocation. This extension however is more slated toward Sacramento’s favor, as Commissioner Stern names a relocation committee, chaired by Clay Bennett, owner of the Oklahoma City Thunder. The Commissioner instructs the chair to go to Sacramento and conduct a fact-finding mission to see if basketball in Sacramento can survive and that the promises laid out by the Mayor in his pitch are valid and obtainable. 4:34 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, DOWN 11 POINTS, MOMENTUM IS CLEARLY IN SACRAMENTO'S FAVOR NOW.
April 21, 2011: Relocation chair Clay Bennett and an NBA lead attorney make their way out to Sacramento to conduct their fact finding mission. They meet with political and business leaders. Mayor Johnson presents Chairman Bennett with a list of local business that have committed to sponsorships, luxury suites lease, and season tickets, totaling $9.2 million for next year. They come away impressed but no decision or recommendation is made. Fans show their support by wearing purple and holding signs throughout town. 3:45 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, STILL DOWN 7 POINTS, SACRAMENTO IS STILL FIGHTING.
April 22, 2011: Commissioner Stern announces that after meeting with Chairman Bennett and NBA lead attorney, the recommendation is for the Sacramento Kings to stay in Sacramento for at least one more year and give the city one last chance to show it can develop and finalize plans to build a new entertainment and sports complex. The Maloofs however still remain silent and rumor has it they still are seeking a deal for relocation. 1:53 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, NOW DOWN 5 POINTS, MALOOFS ARE FALLING APART.
April 26, 2011: Mayor Johnson meets with business leaders and announces that he now has secured over $10 million in long term commitments to support the Kings through tickets and sponsorships. Also, surrounding area county leaders met and talks of a joint-powers authority to help finance a new complex is being discussed. The region and city are all-in, pot committed, to keeping the Kings. 0:14 LEFT IN THE 4th QUARTER, DOWN 3 POINTS, SACRAMENTO PULLS WITHIN A BASKET, FINAL POSSESSION, TIMEOUT SACRAMENTO.
May 2, 2011: A decision and announcement is made. The Maloof family announces that they intend to keep the Kings in Sacramento for at least one more season, giving Mayor Johnson one last opportunity to develop a feasible plan to build a new entertainment and sports complex, and make good on his promises. The city now has an unofficial deadline of March 1st of next year to get a new entertainment and sports complex plan finalized, or the Maloof will have no choice but to again file for relocation. They also state that they received assurances from the NBA that if a new entertainment and sports complex plan is not finalized or in the works by March 1st of next year, the NBA will support them relocating. But for now, the Kings will be in Sacramento for next season. TIE GAME!!! THREE IS HIT AT THE BUZZER!!! SACRAMENTO FORCES OVERTIME!!!
Now, can Sacramento pull out a victory? We have 5 minutes and counting.
Mr. Armchair Speaking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)