World of Beer, Rivalries, and Inevitable Disappointment

World of Beer is my new favorite place. The bar, which opened in November on the corner of Bayard and George Street in New Brunswick, has all sorts of different beers and more televisions than seems necessary. It's amazing. It's also where I watched tonight's Bears/Packers game.

I entered World of Beer at around 4:15 pm wearing my Mitchell and Ness throwback Walter Payton jersey with my brother Joel in his Jay Cutler jersey and his brother-in-law Amriel, who's a Giants fan. Our server, who was lovely, came up and asked how we were doing.

"Better now than I will be in about half an hour," I replied.

"He's being self-deprecating towards his team," Amriel clarified.

With Aaron Rodgers, Eddie Lacy and Randall Cobb all playing in the game, my expectations as a Bears fan were very low. One of the worst defenses I have ever seen going up against a perennial MVP candidate, his favorite target and a rookie of the year candidate running back seemed a little unfair. I thought Chicago would be blown out of the water and finish 8-8 with a mid-first round pick while Green Bay would win its third straight division title.

Then the game actually started. The Bears went three-and-out on their first drive (which started at the opposing 42), then got a raw deal on a call when they tried to down the ball close to the Packers' end zone. When the Packers started moving the ball with relative ease on their ensuing drive, the outcome seemed inevitable. On third and goal from the Chicago five yardline, Rodgers would hit Jordy Nelson, or Randall Cobb, or James Jones, or Andrew Quarless, or Donald Driver, or Javon Walker, or Antonio Freeman, or Bubba Franks...¹ and the Pack would go up by seven. He instead hit Chris Conte (who plays safety for Chicago) who made a legitimately good defensive play by breaking off his man and the Bears escaped without giving up any points.

"That pass had the Mark Sanchez seal of approval," Amriel mused.

It didn't matter that the Bears drove 80 yards following that interception for a touchdown. The Packers eventually responded when Jarrett Boykin returned a "fumble" for 11 yards amid the confusion because he did. It didn't matter that Jay Cutler hit Alshon Jefferey for 67 yards that led to a one yard touchdown run to put the Bears up 21-13. The Packers responded with a seven play, 80 yard drive to pull back within one because of course they did. Finally, on fourth and 10 from the Bears 48 yardline down by one point, Rodgers escaped from the fingers of the Chicago pass rush and hit a wide-open-from-busted-coverage Randall Cobb to put the Packers up for good because of course he did.

I was obviously still rooting for Chicago, but even as they led until the 32 second mark, there was always the nagging thought that I was hoping against hope. I am conditioned not only from years past but from watching the 2013 Chicago Bears to know that the odds were very much against them winning. It would not have mattered to me whether the Bears were winning by one or 100, or whether lost by five or by 50. I knew what was going to happen.

"If you told me that the Bears would need a stop from their defense on a final drive to win the game, I would put money on them losing," I reflected after the game. "If you told me they would score 28, without telling me the Packers score, I would know that that would not be enough."

Such is the story of the past few years of the most historic rivalry in the league. The Bears, after relying on the defense to bail out the offense time and time again (which didn't work), can field a legitimately scary NFL offense. It just so happens to coincide with a declining and porous defense and a period of relative dominance from their chief rival. Both the Bears and the Packers dealt with injuries and inconsistencies in 2013, but with the postseason on the line, the Packers proved that, for the time being, they still maintain the upper hand.

^{1. I blanked out for a minute there. What just happened? ↩}

The Bears, Free Coffee, and... Rooting for the Packers?!

If you couldn't tell by the title of this blog, by the header or by the theme that generally connects all of my posts, I'm a Chicago sports guy. I pull for the Bears, which, this season, has been exciting, infuriating, nerve-wracking and hilarious¹, sometimes all at the same time. Despite that emotional tumult though, I still enjoy cheering for my team. A main part of being a Bears fan is rooting almost as hard against the Packers as I do for Chicago. I'm angry at how good Aaron Rodgers is, I am amused by the fact that their defense is almost as bad as the Bears' this year² and it makes me happier when they lose. Under normal circumstances, I would be thrilled with the fact that the Rodgers-less Packers have not been good and probably won't make the playoffs while the Bears have a legitimate shot at the division title.  However, something about this season has brought up a series of very unusual reactions.

First off, I'm not even sure how invested I've been in whether or not the Bears win this year. The defense has been hit by so many injuries³ and hasn't been able to stop anybody. The offense has been inconsistent under first year quarterback whisperer Marc Trestman and might as well just kneel down in short yardage situations. There's a lot to look forward to in future seasons with Alshon Jefferey hauling in anything thrown within 50 yards of his gargantuan catch radius in just his second season,⁴ the offense showing flashes of brilliance and rookies on both sides of the ball playing pretty impressively. But, as they're constructed now, the Bears are booking a ticket to a first round shellacking against either Carolina or San Francisco if they even win the division. I'd almost rather they go 7-9 and have a higher pick in the draft than have them get embarrassed in the playoffs.

In yesterday afternoon's Cowboys/Packers game, Dallas seemed firmly in control of the game going up 19 as the third quarter wound down. Tony Romo looked like he does in every month before December and despite leading his team to its first touchdown of the day, Matt Flynn was generally looking like the Matt Flynn that lost his job to Russell Wilson (excusable), Terrelle Pryor (less excusable) and rookie Matt McGloin (not excusable), and served as the emergency backup to Buffalo's Thad Lewis and Jeff Tuel. As I fulfilled the blogger stereotype of sitting in my mom's basement, I found myself rooting for the Packers from the beginning. Even once they had gotten down late, I was counting the possessions and figuring out what they would have to do in order to come back.

Now, you might be thinking to yourself, "but Benjamin, you were just telling me three paragraphs ago about how much you dislike the Packers! Have you been lying to me this whole time? Can I ever trust you again? How do I even know what's real anymore?" You wouldn't be wrong. All you'd have to do is scroll up a bit and see that that's exactly what I said. But there's more to it than that. Against any other team, I would have been quite happy that the Packers were being dismantled. But they were playing Dallas. And the Cowboys are currently the only other team in the NFC East challenging the Eagles for the division title.

To be fair, this shouldn't matter to me. I'm not an Eagles fan, and while my parents are, until this year I never really cared about whether or not they won. My girlfriend has been living in lovely Rosemont, Pennsylvania since June attending a grueling and inhumane post-bac program at Bryn Mawr College so that she can go to med school and be successful.⁵ For those who don't know, Rosemont is located right around 25 minutes from Philadelphia, and apparently the Dunkin' Donuts in the area offer a free coffee the morning after an Eagles' win. 

Obviously, Philadelphia isn't the same team as Green Bay. But by beating Dallas, the Packers just gave the Eagles a better chance to take the division, which means more opportunities for them to win and for my girlfriend to get more free coffee. And more free coffee usually means a happier Sarah. And a happier Sarah usually means a happier Benjamin. I guess you could say then that I wasn't rooting for the Packers as much as I was rooting for free coffee. 

^{1. Sometimes I watch the games and laugh at how woefully bad the run defense is. I was laughing for the majority of the game against the Vikings a couple weeks ago because it was legitimately one of the worst played/coached games I've ever seen.↩}

^{2. Even with significantly fewer injuries to key players↩}

^{3. And wasn't even all that good in the first place↩}

^{4. Remember how he used to be fat? It makes me so happy and I love everything about that picture↩}

^{5. For the life of me I have no idea how she's doing it. At the moment she's finishing up finals in biology, organic chemistry and physics all at the same time. The fact that she hasn't gone completely insane can only be explained by some sort of sorcery.↩}

The Blackhawks,Transplant Fans, and Homes Away From Home

The Blackhawks clinched a 5-2 victory over the Phoenix Coyotes earlier tonight in which all four lines scored goals. Rookie Antti Raanta won each of the past two games in the first two starts of his NHL career. Chicago finished off its seven game road trip spanning two weeks with six consecutive wins.

After Chicago dominated the majority of the third period, the "let's go 'Hawks!" chants became deafening with about two and a half minutes left in the game. The crowd erupted when Marian Hossa potted an empty-netter with 45 seconds left to seal the victory. Thousands of red sweaters smiled and cheered as they exited the arena and went home.

Did I mention this game took place in Phoenix?

As a transplant fan, I have conflicting reactions when I try to fully rationalize the sheer magnitude of the Blackhawks' fan base. The only game I've been to in recent memory took place in Nassau Coliseum two years ago. All jokes about Islander fans aside, I estimate about a third of the attendees were in support of the road team. I cheered with those who were near me¹ and eventually Patrick Sharp came through with the overtime winner.

Last year I returned to Chicago for a basketball game with WRSU with a different kid who also happens to be a big Islanders fan.² We flew in on Friday and had a full weekend with the game not taking place until Saturday afternoon. Luckily for us, the Hawks were hosting San Jose on Friday night in what was set to be a tight contest between Western Conference powerhouses. Unluckily for us, we were both very poor college students³ who could very much not afford 80 dollar tickets. We settled for watching the game in a bar whose name I can't remember in the city around other fans. The bartender rang a bell each of the four times when the Blackhawks cued the Dagger and I, along with everyone else came away happy with the 4-1 victory.

Watching that game, in that city, surrounded by like-minded fans, was an awesome⁴ experience. I haven't really ever felt that way, considering I've never been to any Chicago sports game at home. I had it a little bit at some Rutgers home games, but I always felt like the fans were divided by their professional allegiances rather than united by the college program.⁵ I can only imagine what it would have been like to join the other 21,824 in attendance at the UC that night.

The Blackhawks in the current hockey landscape have developed a national brand. There is always a large contingent of Chicago fans at every road arena, and, sometimes, that group fully overpowers the local crowd turning into what feels like another home game. I feel very lucky to call myself a member of such a committed faction of supporters outside the Windy City. I'd like to think that we make every road game, back-to-back and circus trip just a little bit easier, and we've been rewarded for our efforts so far with two championships in four years, with hopefully more to come soon.

<sup>1. 'Near' in this case is subjective, considering the closest people were several rows away. Again, this is Nassau Coliseum we're talking about.↩

2. I was sports director of the WRSU, the students radio station at Rutgers. We were there for a men's basketball game at DePaul in what was then a matchup between two Big East cellar-dwellers. God that game was boring.↩

3. As opposed to now, when I'm a very poor college graduate.↩

4. I don't use this word lightly in this situation. I was actually filled with the emotion called 'awe.'↩

5. One particularly cold night game against USF I happened to be wearing a Chicago Bears coat. A girl further down in my row decided that rather than enjoy the atmosphere in the student section she would yell angrily at me about the Bears who were playing the Eagles that week. She was mean.↩</sup>

Marcus Smart, College Basketball, and One-And-Done Athletes

Right now I am sitting in my girlfriend's parents' den, watching Oklahoma State play Butler in the Old Spice Classic. My first reaction is that I wish I could be talented enough to play on scholarship at a school that sends me to Disney World to play basketball. My second reaction is that while I don't love college basketball, I do love watching Marcus Smart play basketball.

College sports were never all that interesting for me. I just couldn't pay attention to a system with so many teams and conferences that has as much yearly turnover as it does. I also happen to have attended a university that doesn't feature a team worth caring about. Rutgers men's basketball is objectively not good, with the RAC drawing more for the opposing teams than for the home squad. The quality of play in the NCAA is also not as complex as in the professional ranks, and the talent level just isn't the same.¹ I just never felt the draw.

That said, I still get the appeal. Marcus Smart just split an off-ball double team from the right wing and nailed a three-pointer from the top of the key with both trailing defenders getting hands in his face. Suffice to say, I am impressed. Smart, a sophomore, just wasn't this good last year. Now, he's leading the fifth ranked team in the nation in scoring. In a landscape filled with one-and-done phenoms, Smart stayed in school another season to work on improving his game.

Every player is going to be different. I don't claim to be in the heads of freshmen who would benefit from another year. There are many financial and social considerations that go into such a monumental decision. Still, Smart did what few college players seem willing to risk. By staying at Oklahoma State, he honed his talents to the point where he is one of the most feared guards in the country.²

I don't believe that Smart will start a lasting trend of college athletes staying in school. Jabari Parker, Andrew Wiggins and all of the other great young players are still expected to make the jump, and that's their prerogative. Still, American basketball will benefit from more players like Smart working on their games. Rookies in the NBA will be better prepared for stiffer competition, will be smarter on the defensive end, and will be more able to adapt to the more complex systems. In the process, the college ranks will be more entertaining due to the increased talent level. 

The one-and-done rule is not going to change any time soon. College kids want to make money instead of being consistently deprived on their own identity by a convoluted and messed up organization. I just hope that more students are willing to hone their talents so that we can see more players like Marcus Smart who can read a passing lane, steal a ball, corral his dribble around a defender, then whip a pass over his shoulder with his back to his teammate for a fast-break layup.³

 

^{1. This is perfectly understandable. Players improve with age and experience. some of the players have some more heart than in the pros, there the schemes are more intricate and you can't match the displays of sheer athleticism in the NBA.↩}

^{2. He, by the way, just caught an entry on the right block, made a quick move to the baseline and hit a wide-open layup after leaving his defender in the dust.↩}

^{3. Which Smart just did to the amazement of everyone watching.↩}

Derrick Rose, Depressing Chicago Sports, and What's Really Important

Being a fan of several struggling teams at one time is an interesting experience. The Bears are technically tied for the division lead at 6-5, but they already lost both games to Detroit, Jay Cutler is going to miss his third consecutive game due to injury and the defense can't stop anybody. The Bulls just lost Derrick Rose for another season, and don't have nearly enough talent to pick up the slack. The Cubs are still going through a major rebuilding phase and are still years away. The Blackhawks have been a bright spot in the professional ranks, but the landscape is predominantly pretty dreary.

Rutgers hasn't been much better, either. The football team has been blown out in three of four games to conference opponents and needed a fourth quarter comeback to beat a then one-win Temple squad. The men's basketball team¹ lost two of three to the likes of William & Mary and Fairleigh Dickinson. The women's team opened the season with a cupcake non-conference schedule and still managed to lose to UMASS. 

This is all pretty depressing, and yet I still tune in. I cringed every time the Bears tried to punch it in from inside the Rams' five during the second half on Sunday only to fail miserably almost every time.² I watched more Cubs games the past two seasons than I have my entire life and they lost 197 combined games during that stretch. I saw as much as I could of the Scarlet Knights' debacles against both Cincinnati and Central Florida wondering as they were happening why I was still watching.

The majority of sports fans consistently double as masochists, and I'm no different. I can't not-watch the games just because the teams are bad. It's not how I'm wired, and it's not why I watch in the first place. It's obviously preferable when the team wins, but that's not the important aspect here. It doesn't really matter if the Bears go 15-1 and shuffle through to a championship or shuffle through the likes of Rex Grossman, Jonathan Quinn, Craig Krenzel and Chad Hutchinson at quarterback in one season and go 5-11. What matters is that somehow through it all I still feel a connection to these guys. And this guy. 

Win or lose, sports have a way of bringing people together. I once spent an entire party talking to a guy I'd never met about whether Corey Crawford is good enough for the Blackhawks to win a Cup with him in goal or if they should pursue a trade for Cory Schneider.³ People have come up to me on the street, noticed my Chicago apparel, and apologized to me about Derrick Rose with such sincerity and pity as if mine was the torn meniscus. I've raised countless beers in the hopes that Rutgers could field consistently good teams, and expect to raise countless more.

Different teams win championships every year then go back to the drawing board to do it again. There will always be a new dynasty and historical performances. But when your teams aren't winning, it gives you a chance to focus on why you watch in the first place. 

^{1. Which, in its defense, is always bad, and I never put much faith in them.↩}

<sup>2. The Bears had 11 such plays during the second half, including 7 from the one. They scored on exactly one of these plays despite benefiting from three defensive penalties. To say that this was an exercise in futility would be an understatement.↩

3. As it turns out, sticking with Crawford turned out pretty well (link NSFW).↩</sup>

The Blackhawks, Hockey, and Being Generally Spoiled

I was never the biggest hockey fan. Sure, when I was much younger I would pull for the Blackhawks, and for whatever reason, the Avalanche, but the sport never quite pulled me in. I always much preferred the gridiron or the diamond to the rink.

That all changed when I got to college in the fall of 2009. I found out about ESPN text alerts and would get score updates to my phone. Combine that with my roommate's possession of NHL2011 on his PS3 and the fact that the Blackhawks were quite good, and I was on my way to getting hooked. That said, I still didn't actually know anything.

It's probably also not a coincidence that 2009-2010 was the year I finally got into it. The Blackhawks were terrible when I was growing into my fandom, and very few people are going to pick up and stick with a crummy team. It was easy to hate the Red Wings because they were the same as the Packers¹ in my mind, but I had not thought for one second about the Canucks before that season.² It also helped that a Sharks fan lived right down the hall in our dorm, so we maintained that healthy rivalry throughout the season.

I watched every minute of US hockey in the Olympics that February, and was obviously pleased when the Blackhawks won the Cup that spring, but I admit that I only kind of knew what was going on. I also didn't understand the specifics of the cap dump that ensued, but I could at least appreciate why it happened.

I've since learned much more about the sport, but I'm still a relative novice. I know the basics, and I can generally follow the action, but I'm still living in a bubble brought on by the fact that I haven't experienced anything other than excellence.

When St. Louis beat Chicago a couple weeks ago, I found myself thinking, "wait, other teams are allowed to have really good players too?" Meanwhile, I'll be tuned in to a random game from around league and think "that miscue/turnover/bad result just doesn't happen to the Blackhawks." Clearly I'm delusional because every team makes those mistakes, but it demonstrates how spoiled I've become watching this team.

I know how lucky I've been, and I feel more than a little guilty that I haven't had to suffer before experiencing such success. I know Islanders fans who probably secretly hate me to pieces, and there are probably Blackhawks fans who will just lump me in with other bandwagon fans who are just along for the ride. I don't feel like I deserve what Chicago hockey has produced the past few years, but I know I'm definitely not complaining.

^{1. I have since learned that the players actually feel more animosity towards the Canucks than the Red Wings, so that's where my divisional cross-sport metaphor kind of falls apart, but whatever.↩}

^{2. I now spend more time thinking about them and have determined determined that not only do I not like them, literally (actually) no one likes them. Not even their own fans.↩}

Brandon Marshall, Tim Tebow, and Jesus

I watched NFL Network's post-game coverage of the recent Bears/Giants with someone who doesn't watch sports as often as I do.¹ The show brought Brandon Marshall on set to talk about the game, his contributions, and whatever else they wanted. At one point, Marshall thanked God gifting him these abilities and opportunities for success. The person with whom I was watching retorted, "who does this guy think he is, Tim Tebow?"

The fact that this person does not watch as much as I do plays very heavily into the way I reacted to their remarks. At one point, it used to feel tacky, forced and unnecessary. Did these athletes really believe that Jesus was maneuvering them to the right positions to succeed in a game when he clearly has other, more important things to worry about?²

This isn't just a big-game phenomenon though either. It's commonplace to see a baseball player on a crummy team in a random July game cross himself after a base hit. Wide receivers are praising God as the cross the pylon at any point in the season. Three point specialists are kissing their fists and pointing to the ceiling after every made deep ball.

The more I watch, the less these statements faze me. It is my personal theology that God does not play an active, overt role in our lives, but functions instead in more of an unseen, ninja-like capacity.³ Who am I to say though what these athletes should or should not believe? I am lucky enough to have grown up in a well-off enough environment with two loving parents where I didn't ever have to worry about things like poverty and inner-city crime. The stories of athletes who basically come from the streets and play their talents into the kind of lifestyle many would kill for are a dime a dozen. Who are we to say that this is not, in fact, "God-given talent?"

Religion can play a powerful role in any person's life if they choose to allow for it to. If an atheist does not believe in the supernatural forces that many others do, that's fine.⁴ They are just choosing to live their lives differently. For those who accept it though, religion can provide comfort and direction. I obviously grew up in a very different environment with very different circumstances, but it is entirely within the realm of possibility that without their faiths many of these athletes would not have made it to the big stage. Without the guiding forces of their beliefs, they could easily have fallen victim to their difficult upbringings.

I try my best to never fault someone for their belief systems. The fact that I don't necessarily agree is irrelevant. If an athlete truly believed that Jesus gifted him with crazy agility and body talent, then so be it. We should be the ones thanking God that we can enjoy it.

<sup>1. Which is to say not at basically every minute of every day.↩

2. Although who knows, maybe Jesus would rather escape to sports over worrying about the really important stuff?↩

3. An eerily similar depiction can be seen in the "Godfellas" episode of Futurama.↩

4. Because I'm clearly the authority to whom people look when it comes to the affirmation of their theological beliefs.↩</sup>

The Cardinals, The Cubs, and General Feelings of Satisfaction

Rooting against the Cardinals is usually pretty futile.

They're the one team that somehow, some way seems to do everything right. They won the World Series in 2011 after David Freese hit everything and Texas decided they didn't actually want to win. They then let Albert Pujols walk in free agency, but recovered easily from letting one of the best hitters ever walk in free agency and drafted future (and probably current) phenom Michael Wacha with the compensatory pick. That's just the last three years. At this point, St. Louis's constant and eerily consistent success seems to be just as inevitable as death and taxes.

The Cubs, on the other hand, are dreadful. I've said before that it took me a little while to settle on being a Chicago fan, and that happened to come after their great 2003 run. The only successful teams I've really ever rooted for were in '07 and '08, and I didn't really know what was going on.¹ The Cubs I know fell apart because all their players were old and they didn't have a good farm system. The Cubs I know are basically the opposite of the Cardinals.

I came into the postseason having given up on rooting against St. Louis. I tried when they won in 2011, and I tried last year when they came back from being down 6-0 against the Nationals in the series clincher. This year, I just didn't have the willpower. I didn't care when they beat the Pirates in the Wild Card, and while I was rooting for Clayton Kershaw, I didn't really care when they beat the Dodgers in the NLCS. After they took game three, I figured another World Series would be inevitable and I would just avoid watching as much MLB Network in the offseason.

Then, when Boston's Koji Uehara picked off Kolten Wong² to win game 4 and Jon Lester pitched his second gem of the series to win game 5, I got a little excited. The notion that the Cardinals were somehow flawed was an extremely gratifying feeling. Ultimately, Shane Victorino decided to eat some planets for dinner, John Lackey gritted his way through 6 2/3 innings of one-run ball, and the series was over.

I don't hate the Cardinals. The Cubs aren't good enough and I don't have the energy. For that one series though, I was finally happy to be rooting against them. The fact that they lost after catching an endless number of breaks over the course of the season somehow made them appear just like everybody else. It didn't matter that St. Louis was good enough to have the best record in the NL and made the World Series while the Cubs lost another 96 games and tied for the fourth worst record in the majors. For right now, the Cardinals are tied with the Cubs and the other 27 teams for second place, and that's just fine with me.

<sup>1. Not to mention the fact that they got swept out of the playoffs both years because of course they did. ↩

2. Another of the seemingly endless St. Louis cache of young, exciting talent. God they're annoying ↩</sup>

The Bulls, Season Openers, and What Should Have Happened

This year's introduction to the NBA was a boring ho-hum affair that no one really knew about. It featured two mid-market teams, one significantly better than the other, a promising yet flawed top pick and a team trying to be the first new Eastern Conference Champion in three years.

Did you know the Pacers beat the Magic last night in the first game of the 2013-2014 season? And it started an hour before the defending champs opened the season against their top rival? Do you know why anyone thought that was a good idea?

Either way, the real opener last night began at 8:00 pm Eastern time with Chicago trying to spoil Miami's banner raising ceremony much like the Blackhawks ruined the Kings' last year. If nothing else, it proved that being a Bulls fan for this season is going to be interesting.

Some think they have a legitimate shot at a title. Others rely more heavily on crackpot theories like "history" and "evidence" and "talent."

Here's how last night *should* have worked out.

1) Derrick Rose shoots 60% from the floor with 35 points, adds eight assists, four rebounds and four steals for a remarkable beginning to his comeback season.

2) Either Taj Gibson or Jimmy Butler posterizes Dwyane Wade just as Miami thinks it's about to go on a run.

3) The Bulls, in a Ditka/Thibs-inspired fervor, win by 40.

Instead, stupid reality had to come along and spoil literally¹ everyone's fun.

Playing against Miami when its defense rolls on all cylinders as it was is demoralizing, deflating and frustrating. I've played a lot of NBA 2K11 in the months following last year's Finals, and I almost forgot how sloppy basketball really is. In video games, one player has possession at a time, one player corrals a rebound, and I'm either winning by 20 or [error: other option not found]². In real life, the Bulls struggled to get into even their most basic half court sets and their defense looked lost and disorganized. Miami's impressive quickness and frantic traps made it shocking that Chicago could even muster the 95 points with which they finished. The Heat shot over 50% from the field, and eight players scored in double figures.

Still, it wasn't all bad. Boozer had an impressive evening, tallying 31/7/2/1/1 and at least four "grab-it-Jo!'s." He now leads the league in scoring, by the way. Jimmy Butler added 20 points and five steals despite being plagued by foul trouble. Rookie Tony Snell played seven minutes and didn't get the Stan Podolack treatment. Derrick Rose actually participated in a game of professional basketball and that's always nice.

Miami is obviously a great team, and last night provided a perfect example of what happens when they execute their strategies. The pace was far too quick for the Bulls to handle, they were only -1 in the rebounding margin, and they made over 55% from beyond the arc. That's not going to happen every time, but it's also by no means a rarity.

The Bulls lost to the Heat on the road in a contest where their starting five were all playing at the same time for the first time ever³ in the first of an excruciatingly lengthy 82-game season. Chicago probably won't play this poorly all year based solely on the fact that last year's team won a playoff series when literally⁴ everyone was injured.

But hey, if they do, at least the Blackhawks beat Ottawa last night.

<sup>1. Figuratively ↩

2. As it turns out, the only possible outcome is for me to be winning by double digits because I'm a sore loser who quits and restarts if I'm not winning because the game is unfair and rigged against me. It's also anti-Semitic ↩

3. This is primarily due to the fact that Derrick Rose was out all last year and Jimmy Butler was playing in his first "non-redshirt" season. ↩

4. Again, figuratively ↩</sup>

Andy Pettitte, Marlon Byrd, and the Hypocritical Baseball Media

I don't understand a lot of different things. I don't mean to put myself down, there are just aspects of life that don't compute with me. Some of those things fall under the broad category of "sports."

I don't understand Andy Pettitte. I also don't understand Marlon Byrd, though I admit it's to a lesser extent.

Pettitte is one of the most beloved Yankees to ever play the game. He's had an illustrious career in which he's racked up impressive stats, both in the regular season and in the playoffs. He never won a Cy Young, was only named an all-star three times, never led the league in strikeouts and only led the league in wins once (in his second season). He posted an ERA above 4 in exactly half of his 18 major league seasons.

He was also extraordinarily consistent throughout his elongated career. He started at least 26 games all but four seasons, and pitched over 200 innings in 10 of them. He never lost more games than he won, and only recorded single-digit win totals in his two injury shortened seasons. BaseballReference lists his career WAR at an impressive 60.9 (55th all time) ahead of Hall of Famers Whitey Ford (53.9, 79th) and Sandy Koufax (53.2, 82nd) and just behind Juan Marichal (61.9, 50th) and Dennis Eckersley (62.5, 46th).

Depending on who you ask, Andy Pettitte is either a shoe-in to be inducted into Cooperstown or is at least on the border.

Andy Pettitte also admitted to using HGH.

Marlon Byrd has obviously had a less illustrious career. In 11 years prior to 2013 he made one all-star team and batted over .290 five times. He was never a very patient hitter and therefore never had gaudy on-base numbers. He hit 39 and 43 doubles in 2009 and 2010 respectively, the only times he hit more than 30 in a season. Byrd was always a productive hitter who could stabilize the bottom half of the order and a quality outfielder who added legitimate value to any team.

Then this year in his age 35 season Byrd suddenly found his power stroke. He hit 24 home runs in 579 plate appearances after hitting 22 in his previous 1265. His .511 slugging percentage and 272 total bases are the highest of his career, and he just batted fifth for a team that's one win away from the NLCS.

Marlon Byrd was suspended for testing positive for the PED Taximofen in 2012.

Somehow, the fact that both of these players admitted to steroid use never seems to get mentioned. I'm already on record saying that steroid users should not be vilified for their past mistakes, nor to I blame them for seeking out a competitive advantage. I have found that I'm in the minority in that regard.

Baseball media and its fans have completely trashed numerous players' careers due to admitted (or in some cases, perceived) steroid use. Just ask anyone who was on this year's Hall of Fame ballot.

Somehow, Pettitte and Byrd have escaped this scrutiny. While I don't think it's necessarily deserved, the media seems to have decided that these two likable players are exempt from the career blemish of steroid use. Barry Bonds was a jerk to the media and never tested positive for steroid use. If inducted with an asterisk, his plaque would read "may or may not have cheated, we think." That's all hypothetical though, because I would bet that he's never even going to sniff the Hall.

Being a nice person shouldn't make you above scrutiny. Apparently in today's baseball media though, it kind of does.

Jake Peavy, the Trade Deadline, and my Second Favorite Day of the Season

I love the MLB Trade Deadline.

It's pretty consistently my second favorite day of every season.¹ The rumors are swirling, every player is going to be on a different team by 4:00 pm and it's going to be a whole new season! The 140 Club's Twitter updates should always be open, I constantly monitor my Twitter feed and I keep refreshing MLBTradeRumors.com just to make sure I don't miss anything.

If you root for a team that's, well, good, you probably don't find the trade deadline nearly as fun as I do. Your main baseball focus might be winning actual games instead of trying to exchange people who will help your team not be the worst in the league for other people who might have a chance to help your team win hypothetical games three years from now, but that would mean that you don't like having fun.

The Red Sox and Tigers detest your non-fun-loving tendencies. They just completed a seven-player, three-team deal with the White Sox that clearly changes everything for the rest of the season. Boston gets an injury prone, 32 year old pitcher with an ERA over four to go along with the rest of their injury prone starting rotation and a reliever with an ERA over 20 in seven appearances this year. Detroit gets a young prospect who wasn't starting every day in the first place and is hitting .205 in June. The White Sox got an outfielder with a ton of upside and a few other prospects that should help them out down the road.

What I described doesn't sound like a huge blockbuster but we don't know how much of an impact it's going to have. Peavy and Iglesias could be for their new teams what Manny Ramirez was for the Dodgers in 2008² or, to a lesser extent, what Hunter Pence was for the Giants last year. Either way, contenders try to obtain players that they hope will make them better, and considering adding major-league-capable talent for prospects is automatically a short-term upgrade, the intentions clearly make sense. 

The flip side is when  you root for a team like the Cubs. They were really bad last year. They're still not good this year (a little bit better, but still). They just lost three straight to the Brewers, blowing late leads in both games of yesterday's double header. Luckily for them, the trade deadline is here which means that they will only be getting worse this season. Right field, center field, closer, lefty-specialist and other backup positions could all be up for grabs by this afternoon for whatever scrubs decide that now is their time to take the reins.

July 31 can often signal new life for selling teams. As Grantland's Michael Baumann pointed out yesterday, Texas was 12 games under .500 at this time in 2007 and decided to sell Mark Teixeira to the Braves. The Rangers weren't going anywhere with the roster as it was constructed, so they decided to exile their best player for a bunch of mid-level prospects. Those guys ended up developing into Elvis Andrus, Matt Harrison, Neftali Feliz and Jarrod Saltalamacchia, three all-stars and guys who helped the Rangers win two AL pennants in the next five years. 

That's the key. Texas did in 2007 what every bad team is trying to do today. No one as productive as Teixeira is available, but not as many teams are selling. Texas may have put the Cubs in a similar situation when they acquired Matt Garza earlier. The haul the White Sox got for Jake Peavy could push them over the top and we could see an all-Chicago dynasty ravaging both leagues starting in 2015.³

 

Cubs color commentator Jim Deshaies highlighted what I love most. He said that he wanted to just start a ridiculous, completely unfounded rumor and see if anyone rolls with it. I thoroughly enjoy all the rumors, starts, stops, negotiations, bluffs and, ultimately, the deals. The general baseball landscape probably won't be all that different this year, but you never know which all star might have popped up in that seemingly innocuous trade from a few years back.

^{1. Second obviously to opening day. My least favorite is usually that one day in mid-April when the Cubs are eliminated from playoff contention.↩}

^{2. Still bitter about that. Ramirez wasn't the only reason the Cubs got swept by those Dodgers in that NLDS but he's certainly a big one.↩}

^{3. We almost definitely will not see such a dynasty, but a boy can dream, no? ↩}

The NFL, Injuries and Overexposure

When you ask most fans if they have a favorite sport, the answer is usually a resounding "yes." In that regard I, at the moment, am not most fans.

As recently as two years ago my answer would have been football¹, but that's no longer the case. The sport is still basically the same (albeit a few relatively minor changes) so maybe I'm the one that changed. It's hard to pinpoint one thing that's given me such pause, but there are definitely some aspects of the game that warrant introspection from its fans.

A quick disclaimer before we get started: I admit to the occasional hipster-ish tendency. Sometimes I like things (bands, TV shows, etc.) a lot until I find out that basically everyone else likes them too and that makes me like those things less. I accept that this is a part of my personality, and while it might contribute to my current feud with the most popular sport in America, I do not believe it holds significant value.

Despite these inclinations, I think the way the NFL is represented in the media is entirely unique. This goes beyond "that kid I don't like so much likes 'How I Met Your Mother' and because of that I don't like it as much." The banality and repetitiveness of its coverage is approaches on brainlessness. How many times in the past eight years has the question, "is Eli Manning an elite quarterback?" been asked?

ESPN is partially to blame for this overexposure, but is by no means the only culprit. The NFL as a media organization has done an incredible job saturating the market with its product making it impossible to escape its considerable reach. At least from this fan's standpoint, it's that reach that has taken away from the game. Seeing too much of one thing in too small an amount of time can ruin anything, whether it's a song that you've heard too many times on the radio, that one kid who just always seems to be there all the time or an actor who seems to be in literally² every single show. Coverage is in so many places at so many different times that its quality has been so watered down presumably due to a lack of new information or a lack of effort for something deeper.
Jeremy Maclin (torn ACL/MCL), Dan Koppen (torn ACL), and Dennis Pitta (fractured hip) are already out for the season due to major injuries sustained in the first couple days of training camp. A few other less eye-catching names have also hit this list, not to mention the other bumps and bruises that might force other players to miss regular season time. Most camps only opened late last week.

Injuries happen in every sport, but the severity and long-term negative impacts of the NFL seem to outweigh all of them. While the entertainment value of one sport versus another is an argument for another day³, the eye test tells me that a lot fewer baseball and basketball players are dying in their mid-fifties than football players. I have yet to hear about the Cooperstown Legend shooting himself in the chest so that brain doctors can use his brain for their concussion research.⁴ That the NFL was warned as early as thirteen years ago that their helmets might not even have been the best ones for the job seems to be cause for concern. And yet, football is growing more and more popular. The Super Bowl breaks its own TV ratings record every year.

The injuries, concussions, lockouts and lawsuits in the past few years have only proven the old "no publicity is bad publicity" adage. Football continues to grow and be the most popular sport in America and is even making headway into the UK. Maybe my threshold is lower than most people's, but I can't imagine this golden age lasting forever.

<sup>1. American football, not soccer. Never soccer. Ever.↩

2. Figuratively↩

3. That's never a good argument. No one wins. Let me like my sports and I'll let you like your sports. If you don't find my sports entertaining nothing I say is going to change your mind.↩

4. The verdict is still out on the long-term effects for the heavy steroid users from the MLB. Stay tuned.↩</sup>

Matt Garza, Reinforcements and, as always, Hope

I like Matt Garza just as much as the next guy. He always seemed nice enough in interviews, but mostly he's a good pitcher who didn't make any negative headlines on my favorite team. Granted, neither I nor the next guy have ever met Matt Garza.¹ No matter how much I liked him as a Cub, I'm really happy he's now a Ranger.

Garza was traded on Monday in a deal that helped infuse more depth into the Cubs' minor league system. Third baseman Mike Olt is just a year removed from raking at the AAA level and is a former top prospect. Righty CJ Edwards hasn't allowed a home run in his 18 professional starts. Justin Grimm has some pretty ugly numbers in 17 starts this season but he's still just 24 and could be a solid back-end rotation piece. The player to be named later could be Neil Ramirez, another young pitcher with success so far in the minors.

The cache of exciting talent only seems to keep growing. They're still a few years off from even considering being competitive, but with Starlin Castro and Anthony Rizzo already making the big time and plenty of others waiting in the wings, there's reason to believe that quality baseball might not be too far on the horizon.

Garza's departure signals the beginning of a fire sale of veterans that is sure to hit the North Side. Kevin Gregg, Alfonso Soriano, David DeJesus, Cody Ransom and Nate Schierholtz could all be dealt before next Wednesday's deadline, but none will bring back as good a package as they just received. Either way, the farm keeps improving and this front office keeps giving itself more options for the future.

The Cubs attained the best record in baseball in 2008, winning 97 games before being swept by Manny and the Dodgers in the NLDS. They won 83 games in 2009, and haven't had a winning record since. That one blip of success had a lot to do with getting lucky with some trades from past seasons. The problem was, no one was there to take the reins once the wheels fell off. In 2009, Baseball America ranked the farm system 27th.The roster's "new blood" featured duds such as Jake Fox, Micah Hoffpauir and Sam Fuld. They were ranked 14th in 2010, but with no one close to the majors, most of those notable players have since either been traded away² or seen their production drop considerably.³ All of these factored into the crummy situation in which they've found themselves since.

The plan makes perfect sense in theory. Eventually, just like in '08, they will be able to field a watchable team. When that happens, rather than repeating the disaster that followed '08, the accumulated resources should provide enough organizational depth to ensure sustained success. Having more pieces can only decrease the odds of a similar fiasco.

Nobody, no matter how promising he may seem, is a sure-thing. Development and future production are projections that can only be made based on past results, and injuries can hit even the most finely tuned athletic machines. Geovany Soto was the 2008 NL Rookie of the Year, but hasn't since come close to replicating that performance. They key to consistent winning is the luxury of not relying on one guy to get you over the top. One prospect can be a bust, but it seems a little too pessimistic to believe that all of them will be.

<sup>1. I've never met this "next guy" so I could be wrong about that. They could be buddies, I'm just assuming they don't know each other.↩

2. Ironically, guys such as Chris Archer, Hak-Ju Lee and Sam Fuld were shipped out for Garza in the first place. Oops?↩

3. Brett Jackson immediately comes to mind in that category. He's batting just .223 so far this season with 77 K's in 242 PA ↩</sup>

The Cubs, The Second Half, and Broken Air Conditioning

I experienced some temporary hell earlier this week. The air conditioning in my apartment building broke Sunday morning due to a blown transformer at the start of a week where every day has been be over 90 degrees and at one point Thursday was forecast to hit an even 100. Luckily, the people whose job it is to fix these things did their jobs and by Tuesday we were back to setting the thermostat to a cool 65.¹

The Cubs have been without air conditioning since 2010. They've had losing seasons each of the last four seasons, and this year doesn't look like it will be any different. Heading into the second half, they are exactly where many people expected they would be. They showed a little more fight than in the first half of last year, but they still sit nine games under .500 and project to be worst following the fire-sale of productive and inexpensive veterans during the upcoming trade deadline fervor. It's going to be a long and dreadful rest of the summer for the Wrigley Faithful. For some reason though, this year feels different.

Maybe it's that some of the moves that still-new-in-front-office-regime-years Theo Epstein and friends have made have already borne fruit. Anthony Rizzo has had a tough sophomore campaign but is still an excellent prospect who should be a cornerstone for the next decade. Scrap heap pickups such as Scott Feldman and Paul Maholm were exchanged for promising young arms Jake Arrieta and Arodys Vizcaino. Sean Marshall and Ryan Dempster, holdovers veteran from the last regime, brought back Travis Wood (the team's only all-star this year) from the Reds and Christian Villanueva (currently the farm system's top third base prospect according to Jonathan Mayo of MLB.com) from the Rangers.

Other than Wood and Rizzo (to an extent), none of the players this brain trust brought in are proven in any way. Baez, Almora, Vizcaino and Cuban defector Jorge Soler have all missed significant time due to injury this season. 2007 third overall pick Josh Vitters has been toiling away in AAA and has not developed the way the team expected. Brett Jackson has struck out more than 100 times in each of his three full seasons in the minors (including a whopping 158 in 2012) and has already racked up 77 in just 61 games this year. Both made underwhelming MLB debuts last September.

Even with all that could go wrong, this still feels different. The "Lovable Losers" moniker that has been attached to this team for so many years doesn't feel as appropriate anymore. Even in 2008, when the team won 97 games en route to a division championship, something was going to go wrong.² The Cubs are going to tank the end of this year and have another top-10 pick. Next year will be better, but probably not by enough to really get excited.

2015 is a long ways away. Obviously, not every prospect is going to live up to the hype. Even so though, with Wrigley Field getting set to enter the 21st century with its renovations, this front office is trying to do the same with its roster. A few pocket seasons of success just aren't going to cut it anymore. Many fans have been sitting with broken air conditioning for far too long, and while Theo and company might not be the ones to bring people into the cold, they're at least hiring the right people to do so.

^{1.We don't pay for utilities so we can crank up the air as much as we want. It's amazing↩}

^{2.That something was that the lineup forgot how to hit and both Dempster and Zambrano got shelled in games one and two. Then everyone on the team got really old, really quickly, and there was no one in the farm system to fill in the blanks.↩}

"Real" vs. "Fake" Sports Fans

I'm a Chicago sports fan, because just like my brothers, I was born in Chicago. The difference there is that they had formative experiences in that town. Our parents failed at brainwashing us into being Philly sports fans, and since all my brothers' friends were Cubs and Bears fans it only made sense that they were too.

We moved to Long Island when I was just about to turn three years old in 1994. My friends were all Rangers and Giants fans. I still remember being jealous of Benny Shapiro's awesome Wayne Gretzky  Rangers jersey.¹ I admit that I bounced around with my sports fandom. Depending on the week, I could've been a Titans fan, a Jaguars fan, a Panthers fan, a Broncos fan, you name it. I had a stint as a Marlins fan just because someone gave me a blank hand-me-down  jersey that I really liked. 

Eventually around middle school, I settled on Chicago sports. As such, when I wake up tomorrow morning, I'm still going to be elated that the Blackhawks are Stanley Cup Champs, I'm still going to be depressed that the Cubs suck² and I'm still going to go with Michael Jordan in the debate-that-isn't-really-a-debate against LeBron for the best basketball players ever. I'm going to hate the Packers and I'm going to be uber jealous of the St. Louis Cardinals.³

When the Nets moved to Brooklyn, they had a lot of bandwagon fans follow them not only from across the country, but from their own backyard when Knick fans decided to jump ship. There were more Heat fans when LeBron James and Chris Bosh united with Dwyane Wade in Miami than probably ever before. These newly minted fans are often derided as being "fake" by so-called "real-fans," which brings me to the question: what are the rules to being a sports fan?

A real fan watches his or her chosen team's every game win or lose, has an encyclopedic knowledge of its history and owns lots of memorabilia and clothing. They dress up for games, come early and stay well past the end, and make sure everyone around them knows they're cheering loudest. Fake fans have no idea when their teams are playing, leave games early and don't know any of the history.


I posit that there's no such thing as a "real" fan. I would like to think that I know a lot about my team, that I follow them closely and that I'm at least generally connected with the history. That said, I live in New Jersey and have lived on the East Coast since I was just about to turn three. I've never been to Wrigley Field, and I have a hard time watching as many games as I'd like. I've never even been to a Chicago home game.

I worked with a kid at the radio station for a couple years who had a unique way of looking at sports. He was born in Chicago, but chose his favorite teams based on a specific player and has since stuck with them. He loves Jon Beason, so he's a Panthers fan. He's a Celtics fan because of Paul Pierce, even though he grew up in the Windy City with the greatest player ever at the height of his powers.⁴

Another buddy of mine is a St. Louis Rams fan because when he was first getting into football the Jets were really bad and he didn't like the Giants. He liked offensive games, and the Rams at the time had the best offense in the league. He got hooked and has stuck with them despite a lack of familial or geographical connections to the team.

Are we any less "real" than the people who grew up their entire lives following these teams? The distinction between "real" and "fake" fans is becoming increasingly blurry. More people have more access to more teams across the globe and the additional exposure can either strengthen or blur lines of loyalty.

I admit that I've found people so annoying that I can't be in the same room as they are just because I find the way they go about being fans annoying. But at the end of the day, they still like to watch sports in effectively the same way I do though they might express it in a different way. As long as they let it happen, any sports fan, whether they are new to a team or have supported one their entire life has the capacity for the wide range of emotions fandom offers.

It kind of makes calling anyone a "fake" fan feel petty, no?

^{1. Benny was really, really short (even for an elementary schooler). That jersey was very, very large. He was swimming in it}

↩

^{2. Though they are improving. Just eight games under .500! In Theo we trust!}

↩

<sup>3. I can admit that it's really hard for me to hate the Cardinals. I obviously root against them, but a team that does everything right, doesn't make any headlines, and seems to just do things "the right way" all the time really don't get my blood boiling
↩
4. I don't get it either.</sup>

↩

Chris Davis, Roger Maris, and Steroids

Chris Davis is having a really good season so far. His 33 home runs in 90 games lead the Majors. He had 33 home runs in 139 games played last season. He had 12 in 87 games in 2011. Before you try to speculate about his absurd  power numbers though, he's not on steroids.

That's the kind of environment in which baseball finds itself. Davis hasn't put on any extra weight, nor has his head grown. He's always been viewed as a power hitter with immense potential, but until last year he never realized it. His swing looks exactly the same, he has protection in the lineup with an impressive O's offense, and, perhaps most importantly, he's entering his physical prime in his age 27 season.

A-Rod and Ryan Braun are a different story. With the Tony Bosch/Biogenesis suspensions expected to be levied in late July/August, multiple legacies are on the line. A-Rod's image, considering his playoff woes (not including 2009, which is a discussion for a different day), his up-and-down personal life and his injuries probably can't get worse. Another PED fiasco on his record would just be the dagger in the heart of one of the most statistically mind-boggling careers in MLB history. 

Braun, on the other hand, has a lot more to lose. The former National League MVP could have been in the clear a  year after being exonerated from similar charges on a technicality. Instead, the second connection brings up the same labels attached to Rodriguez. He has a ton of talent, but in the end he's a liar, a hypocrite and a cheater.

The mindset of a steroid user in any sport shouldn't be difficult to analyze. Major League baseball had a then-record high in average attendance in 1994 (a strike-shortened season) with close to 31,000 people going to games. Then in '95 and '96, that number dropped to about 25,000 and 26,000, respectively. The numbers were still climbing, but baseball was not experiencing the same success it had before the strike.

With popularity falling and people turning more and more to the NFL and to a universally popular Micheal Jordan-led Bulls team, it makes sense that the drug-testing policies loosened up a little bit. All of a sudden, Mark McGwire, Raphael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa, Jose Canseco and everyone else were mashing home runs. Total ERA in the MLB went up a full run from 1989 to 1999.  Both McGwire and Sosa broke the single season home run record in 1998 in a race that was magnetic, electrifying and legitimately brought new fans to the sport. I was seven years old during that race and I vividly remember watching Slammin' Sammy mash homer after homer only to fall short of McGwire's infallibility.

If you're Ryan Braun, or A-Rod, wouldn't you want to be remembered in that way? Rodriguez was a must-watch ticket every single time he stepped in during his prime. As a Cubs fan, Braun was one of the scariest players on any opposing team.¹  Along with Prince Fielder, Braun was half of arguably the best 1-2 punch in any lineup in the Majors. If I'm a baseball player, I want other fans to be terrified of me, and I want my own fans to adore me. I'll take any edge I can get, and if that means steroid use, then so be it. Whether or not unnatural substances gave him an advantage, A-Rod almost single-handedly won the Yankees the 2009 World Series. Steroids may have helped them reach that pillar of excellence and prestige and earned them a ton of money. If steroids are going to turn me from very good to Hall of Fame-caliber, I might be taking that risk too.

Who is the true home run king? Is it Barry Bonds with his single-season 73 and his 762 career dingers? Is it Hank Aaron with his 755? What about Roger Maris, who peaked from 1960-1962 with 39, 61 and 33, but didn't hit more than 28 in any other season?²

It's a question that goes beyond power numbers and cuts to the core of a player's "integrity." Baseball more than any other sport is tied to tradition and "playing the game the right way." These terms are all bogus. Using steroids is no different to me than smoking pot or taking Adderall. If it's against the substance abuse policy and they get caught, then they should get punished. McGwire and Sosa are being retroactively vilified for something the league let happen. Bonds was never formally convicted or charged with anything more than obstruction of justice. Sosa was the only one of the three who was ever suspended for performance enhancing measures, and that was only because of a corked bat later in his career that the commissioner could not ignore.

If a baseball player uses steroids, he should be punished, but not because it says anything about his character or his respect for the game. He broke the rules and he probably didn't do it out of spite. In all likelihood, he did it because he was rehabbing a nagging injury, he was getting old, or he wanted to be remembered as one of the all-time greats. I don't have a problem with steroid users until they get caught, and I don't have a problem with them once they serve their suspensions for breaking the rules.

There's clearly an extra stigma attached to steroid-users, and that might be the root of the problem. Steroid users become great, those who don't are simply good enough. Players are not going to suddenly stop looking for competitive advantages. Don't punish players from history for the league's lack of enforcement. If they created such a black mark on the sport, then prevent it from ever happening again.

^{1.Even though he was still second in his own division to Albert Pujols}

↩

^{2. See what I did there? Right back to the Davis discussion - a player with one exceptional year is now extremely suspect, but since it was in 1961 Maris must have been clean}

↩

The NBA Draft: A Reaction

Just like with most things in sports, fans take amateur drafts a lot more seriously than executives. Front offices are realistic with their picks. They have scouts everywhere in the world, are looking for very specific things and generally have pretty realistic expectations regarding their decisions. Fans, on the other hand, live and die with every pick. The right guy will guarantee 12 straight championships while the wrong guy will doom the team to a fate worse than hell itself: losing at a game.

Amateur drafts are funny, because in the end, everything is a crapshoot. For every LeBron James, there were multiple Kwame Browns and Michael Olowokandis. For every Peyton Manning, there were multiple JaMarcus Russels and Tim Couches.

The point is, nobody actually has any idea of what they're doing, which is why projecting this draft is so difficult.

Fate somehow determined that the 2013 NBA draft would feature basically no one all that exceptional, which makes sense because there were no exceptional teams in college basketball this year. The weak crop of players led to a record 12 international players being taken in the first round. Compare that to next year's draft, likely headlined by "future stars" Andrew Wiggins and Jabari Parker.

That said, someone could tell you today that Anthony Bennett will perfectly complement Kyrie Irving and Dion Waiters, and that the Cavs are building such a strong dynasty that they won't even want LeBron back in 2014. Others could tell you that he'll barely crack five minutes per game on a crummy lottery team. While the reality is probably somewhere in the middle, both camps will fight tooth an nail to make sure you know what they think.

That's why the draft is so much fun. It only adds to a fan's compulsive desire to argue about anything. Some teams draft based on need, some get the star power, and some make you scratch your head and say, "yeesh, I hope they know what they're doing out there..." Either way, it gives us a chance to argue about things that cannot be proven. Don't believe me? See if these projections sounds realistic:

1) The best player in this year's draft will be new Washington small forward Otto Porter because playing with young teammates John Wall, Bradley Beal and Jan Vesely will allow for him to develop alongside them. His scoring and rebounding abilities will vault him into a perennial top-5 talent in this league.

2) The 76ers got the steal in the draft by trading for Nerlens Noel and selecting Michael Carter-Williams. MCW's height gives him the advantage over smaller opponents while Noel's shot-blocking and rebounding abilities will make him a force down low for years to come. In receiving a first round pick from what many expect to be a pretty bad New Orleans team in next year's drat, Philadelphia is well on its way to bringing glory back to the City of Brotherly Love.

Can you disagree with either of those? Of course you can! Can you back it up with evidence? Of course you can't! I didn't really use any facts in making my claims and you wouldn't in trying to refute them. Plenty of players rack up stats in college and then don't pan out in the pros, others have reasonable-yet unspectacular college careers and become all stars at the next level.

Personally, I think this draft will be remembered for adding some key role players to already good teams, a couple all-star cameos, and that's about it. It might not be historically memorable, but how many drafts ever really are?

LeBron's Headband, Mike Miller's Shoe, and Silly Miami Fans

Last night there was an excellent basketball game between the Spurs and the Heat. Tim Duncan had an incredible first half, then disappeared in the second. Lebron had a terrible (for him) first three quarters, then dominated in the fourth the way only he can. The Heat won in overtime, and pushed the series to a game seven.

My enduring images of the game though will be a headband-less LeBron, a shoe-less Mike Miller, and an overreaction on social media. After all, San Antonio led by three with 20ish seconds remaining, there was no possible way a team with the best shooter ever would be able to tie it up, right? Especially against a team that has had trouble on the offensive glass in every game this season? (Hate to say I told you so but...)

I can't have been the only one to notice that the story on Twitter was not about the game, but about the peripherals. James's headband. Miller's shoe. To be clear, this was not only friends, but also media personalities stressing these non-stories. Maybe this is just me, but I expect my sports to, well, still be about sports sometimes. The beauty of social media is that it allows fans, analysts and everyone in between, whether professional or amateur, to interact in real time. Twitter can give a viewer something new to look at, a new focus or a different perspective that can change or at least muddle a complex impression of an event. In this case though, it can also bring attention to the fact that LeBron looks really old (he is already 28 after all) without a headband, and that San Antonio had this game locked up to the point where people could head home for the night.

Maybe I'm asking for too much seriousness from a game. But I'd bet that there's a middle ground where amusing tidbits can be mentioned as side notes to credible commentary.

Following that rant, here's what I noticed about the Spurs:

1) Tim Duncan was overpowering in the first half when the Spurs made a concerted effort to get him the ball, then couldn't do much in the second half when the Heat realized that they should probably double team the surefire hall of famer who almost had a 30/10 in the first half.

2) The Spurs forgot that they won game five behind an absurdly fast paced offense that was entirely predicated on preventing the Heat's halfcourt defense from locking them down. In the fourth quarter and overtime, San Antonio used at least 20 seconds off the shot clock on over ten of their possessions, indicating a much slower pace. This allowed James to stick on Tony Parker like glue and forced bad shots late in the clock.

3) After only giving up 65 points through three quarters, the Spurs gave up a whopping 30 in the fourth quarter alone. Miami shot 64.7% from the floor that period, San Antonio shot 35%. For everyone saying how well tuned a machine the Spurs were on offense, they looked like they were on life support in the fourth quarter and just couldn't catch their breath.

Here's what I noticed about Miami:

1) If the Heat lose in game seven, a valiant effort by Chris Bosh throughout this entire series will have gone to waste. He's been a better rebounder this series than in the entire postseason leading up to this series, and made several key defensive stops down the stretch. When James and the supporting cast are making jumpers from the outside, Chris Bosh should be grabbing offensive boards and dishing out to shooters. It's what kept Miami in the game in the first place as he had the assist on the late Ray Allen 3-pointer that tied the game. Even if they win game seven, he's still not going to get any credit, but at least he'll get a ring out of it.

2) If it wasn't clear before, Miami has an on/off switch. If someone can give me a different explanation for the   disparity between their play in the first three periods and the last two, then I'd gladly welcome it. If the Heat are playing defense the way they were for the fourth quarter (and not the first three) then no one is beating them.

3) Even with the great fourth quarter, Miami got really lucky that both Manu Ginobili and Kawhi Leonard only made 1/2 free throws late. San Antonio lost because of those free throws. An extra points here or there, and Allen doesn't tie it, and LeBron doesn't bring them to within three in the first place.

4) Credit where credit is due. LeBron James has received a lot of scrutiny for his career based on his fourth quarter performances. Last night he submitted an exceptional performance, not all of which shows up on the box score. If he isn't guarding Tony Parker, the slash and kick game is still an option, Miami's defense gets discombobulated, and Danny Green is open for maybe just one more dagger.

Those Damn Yankees/Heat/Lakers/Patriots/you get the idea...

Sports aren't fun unless someone is either winning or losing. It's why I don't like soccer, and why I can almost tolerate the shootout rule in hockey. I especially like it when specific teams are on the losing end, and am equally infuriated when those same teams win. Most of those teams are division rivals (Packers, Red Wings, Cardinals, etc.), but there are a couple of exceptions. I don't like the Canucks because, quite frankly, no one likes the Canucks.¹ I don't like the Atlanta Hawks because they employ Josh Smith and used to employ Joe Johnson, two of my least favorite basketball players. Other than that? I'm a pretty peaceful fan. You like your teams and I'll like my teams and as long as we can agree that the Canucks are jerks, we'll get along.

The point is, nowhere in the above paragraph did I mention anything about the Yankees. Nor did I mention the Heat, the Lakers, the Angels, the Dodgers, (both trying to be Yankees-west and currently failing) or any other team that has been accused of buying players and championships. I used to hate the Yankees, but only because my family hates the Yankees. But I'm a Cubs fan. The Cubs are in the National League, the Yankees are in the American league. They might play each other in one series during the entire season.

"But Benjamin, the Yankees always spend so much money and are currently paying A-Rod to not play more than the Astros entire organization combined! Clearly that makes them evil!"

This is a popular sentiment. When you dig a little more deeply though, you realize that payroll doesn't tell the entire story. The Astros are really, really bad, decreasing their motivation to pay anyone any amount of money. The Yankees, on the other hand, needed A-Rod to win their only championship of the last 12 years in 2009. The baseball Giants, on the other hand, have won two World Series in three years, ranking 8th and 10th in payroll. Everyone in baseball has money, it's just a matter of spending money on the right people. The Yankees signed Sabathia, Texiera and Rodriguez. The Cubs signed Alphonso Soriano. Which of those are going to help you win a championship?

The Heat are a different story. I don't think people hate The Heat. I think they hate LeBron for doing what so many people would've done in his place. Only the Spurs have been able to stay consistently good at adding pieces with late-round draft picks. The best way to get to be good in the NBA is by being really, really bad and hoping for a transcendent draft pick opportunity. Just ask the Bulls and Derrick Rose. Or the Cavs with LeBron or now with Kyrie Irving. Look at the 2009-10 Cavs roster though and tell me they would ever win a championship.² LeBron looked at that crap-sandwich, looked at teaming up with one top-5 talent and another top-10 talent in a beautiful area with not a lot of taxes. LeBron bolted Cleveland because they couldn't get him any better help that Antawn Jamison. I could never blame a guy for that.

Unless you root for a division rival or have considerable playoff  history with one of these teams, I don't understand the hatred. It's not-so-thinly veiled jealousy. The Cubs haven't won since 1908, the Yankees have 27 rings. You're darned right I'm jealous. I don't care if they get another one though. Kudos to them for doing what the Cubs can't. Good job by the Heat/Wade in getting LeBron (and Bosh) to come to them. The Bulls tried, and failed.³ Hating the way either of these teams goes about their business is naive and petty. Don't hate the Yankees. Don't hate LeBron. Don't hate the Heat. Hate the fact that your team isn't smart enough to work a greedy, money-grubbing system as well as they have.



<sup>1.Not even Vancouver likes the Canucks. Try to name me another team in any league that everyone, even its own fans, hates. I'll make it easier for you. You can't.
↩
2. After LeBron, their top-4 in total minutes played were Mo Williams, Anthony Parker, Anderson Varejao and JJ Hickson. They won 61 games.
↩
3. I don't think you would've seen the same animosity had LeBron signed in Chicago and teamed up with Rose. The Bulls wanted both James and Bosh, but couldn't get either.↩</sup>