3rd annual MLB predictions!

Hello and welcome back for another Major League Baseball preview and predictions post! Feel free to take these thoughts with you to your local sportsbook, just remember I'm the guy who predicted the Seattle Mariners would win the AL West last year. (In case there is any confusion, they ended up going 61-101. My bad.) My only warning is that I went all out this year, this post is a monster. So plan snacks and bathroom breaks accordingly.

AL East:
1a. Boston Red Sox
1b. Tampa Bay Devil Rays
1c. New York Yankees
4. Baltimore Orioles
5. Toronto Blue Jays

I'm not going to insult your intelligence and pick a definitive order of finish for the Sox, Yanks and Rays because, really, you can make a really good argument for all of them. I will, however, place them in my preferred order. Anyone who thinks they know how this will play out either needs something to write about or wants to stir the pot, so to speak. What I can say definitively, however, is that it's the Red Sox, Yanks and Rays - followed by the rest of the American League. Simple mathematics says that only two of those teams will make the playoffs, which is a shame because the third best team in the league is going to get left out. Such is life in the AL East.

1a) The Red Sox have undergone quite a metamorphosis over the past 15 years. In the mid-to-late 90's, it was an 0ffensive-minded team that lacked enough quality pitching and young talent in the minors. The past 4-5 years the team really shored up the pitching, and combined with a lineup that was still a force, won two World Series, and started pumping out the likes of Youkilis, Pedroia, Lester, Papelbon, Masterson, Lowrie, Ellsbury, etc from the minors. This year, the pitching is solid and deep, but the lineup that showed some weakness after the Manny trade remains largely the same. The laundry list of potential starters is about as good as any in baseball - Beckett, Lester, Dice-K, Wakefield, Penny, Buchholz, Smoltz (come June). The bullpen is also about as good as any in baseball - Delcarmen, Masterson, Ramirez, Saito, Okajima, Papelbon. Is all that pitching enough to support the lineup and enough to hold at least one of the Yankees and Rays at bay? We'll see. Biggest obstacles: 1) the health and effectiveness of Penny, Smoltz, Drew, Ortiz, Lowell, Varitek. 2) the AL East war of attrition. Potential upside: World Series champs.

1c) The Yankees went the opposite direction of the Red Sox over the last 15 years. After winning four World Series in the late 90's based largely on pitching and home-grown talent such as Jeter, Pettitte and Rivera, the team became an offensive force that lacked quality pitching and any discernable farm system. Over the last year or so, the Yankees have pulled themselves together (or rather blown everyone else away) with the signings of CC Sabathia, AJ Burnett and Mark Teixeira. Long term, I don't know that the Sabathia (large and in charge) or Burnett (reputation for injury/pitching best in contract year) are such a good idea, but short term will likely make a huge impact. Unfortunately, I must admit that the Yankees have the upside to be the best team in baseball. Good starting pitching, decent bullpen, good lineup. But... will they? Biggest obstacles: 1) Jeter, Posada, Damon, Matsui show their age 2) distractions and health (I'm looking at you ARod) 3) overall depth 4) the AL East war of attrition. Potential upside: World Series champs

1b) The Rays. No one wanted to believe in them last year until they made it all the way to the World Series. No one wants to believe they can do it again this year because they are young and have to deal with the Red Sox and Yankees re-loading. But the fact of the matter is that they return largely the same team that won 97 games last year. And the only real changes are upgrades - Pat Burrell replaces Cliff Floyd and, at some point, David Price will join the rotation. As such, I think it would be foolish to write them off based on youth. The only aspect of the team I am wary about is the starting pitching. I like Sheilds, Garza and co. I really do. But I thought they overachieved just a little bit last year and am curious to see if they can survive the AL East again this year. Sports Illustrated had an interesting article on defensive ratings, and Tampa Bay successfully overhauled the defense last year, which in turn made the pitching look better. Biggest obstacles: 1) "sophomore slump" 2) pitching depth 3) the AL East war of attrition. Potential upside: World Series champs.

4) Baltimore Orioles. This is a team that I think is starting to get it. They have been horribly run for years, but the rebuilding program under recently new GM Andy MacPhail has the team infused with young talent (Nick Markakis, Adam Jones, Matt Weiters, a number of "close" pitching prospects). Getting Markakis to sign long term is a big deal for direction/stability. They definitely aren't close this year - but they look like they are following the Tampa Bay route to success. I could see them making a leap in 2-4 years if they grow or acquire some decent pitching. That being said, it's an extremely young and inexperienced team, and the O's have completely tanked after the all-star break numerous times in the last five years. Potential upside: 4th place, AL East.

5) As Bill Simmons would say, the Toronto Blue Jays were thisclose for a few years. They had a good enough team to hang within 5-6 games of the Red Sox and Yankees, but just not enough depth in the lineup, rotation and/or bullpen to completely put it together. They still have Roy Halladay, really one of the best pitchers in baseball, along with Vernon Wells and hot prospect Travis Snider. But, quite frankly, long term injuries to Shaun Marcum and Dustin McGowan are going to kill any hope they had this year. The rotation is too weak after Halladay without them. The Blue Jays are in for a rough year, I think. Potential upside: 4th place, AL East

AL Central:
1) Minnesota Twins
2) Chicago White Sox
3) Detroit Tigers
4) Cleveland Indians
5) Kansas City Royals

For the life of me, I haven't been able to figure out the AL Central for years. I could see scenarios in which just about any team could win the division, but I think the Twins and White Sox are least likely to fail. So that gives them a leg up, for what it's worth.

1) The Twins have befuddled me for years. I don't really understand why they're as good as they are sometimes, but this year I think they are the most balanced team in the division. The pitching is solid behind Liriano, Baker, Slowey, Perkins and Blackburn. They have one of the best closers in baseball, Joe Nathan, and the lineup is scattered with very good players (Mauer, Morneau) and very good talents (Span, Casilla, Gomez). I like this team, they might top out around 90 wins, but that should be good enough. Joe Mauer can't miss TOO much time, though. Potential upside: 1st place, AL Central, advance to the ALCS.

2) Although I think the White Sox will hang in there and give the Twins a run, I think they have a lot more questions. Mainly age and injury (see: Konerko, Thome, Dye) and the back end of the rotation (see: Colon, Contreras). I think there will be times this year when this team gets hot and you'll be unlucky to play them. I also think there will be times when they are very beatable. If those two modes even out, they'll be a slightly above average team and finish second - but the range of possibility is fairly large here. Potential upside: 1st place, AL Central, 1st round playoff exit

3) The Tigers are the other team I whiffed on pretty badly last year. Luckily so did most others. I still like the lineup, but the pitching will almost certainly do them in again this year. Is Justin Verlander going to go 18-6 like he did two years ago, or 11-17 like he did last year? Are they going to get anything from the back end of the rotation? Is the bullpen going to be terrible again? I think there are some big holes here. Potential upside: 3rd place, AL Central

4) The Indians are as confusing as any other team in this division. One year you think they are stacked and they finish fourth, another year you think they are weak and they nearly advance to the World Series. So what gives? No doubt a lot of talent (Sizemore, Martinez, Lee, Choo) but another team with a lot of questions. Is Cliff Lee that good? What amount of Justin Verlander Syndrome does Fausto Carmona have? Ditto for Travis Hafner. Is it really good for anyone if Carl Pavano is in your rotation as your 3rd starter? Upside potential: 1st place AL Central, 1st round playoff exit. I'm being really generous. I think the upside is better than the Tigers, but my expectations place them 4th.

5) I think if I were a fan of a constantly struggling small market team, I would choose the Royals. Some years you know it's going to be a really long season. Some years, you just don't know what you're going to get. It's been a while since a surprisingly decent 2003 season, but I could see Kansas City playing steadily enough to put up a solid mark this year. Very average across the board, but more consistently average than other teams. Also like youngsters Alex Gordon, Mike Aviles and Zack Grienke. Potential upside: 3rd place, AL Central, pushing .500

AL West:
1) Anaheim Angels
2) Oakland A's
3) Seattle Mariners
4) Texas Rangers

I don't think there's any question this is a two-horse race, and if the Mariners finish first this year, well, then I give up.

1) I mean, what can you say other than the Angels are solid and will most likely win this division again? Lackey (when he gets back), Weaver and Saunders, a good bullpen and a solid lineup will give the team enough balance to make the playoffs again. Do I think the 100 wins last year was inflated by a mediocre division? Yes. But until further notice, they're still the best team. Potential upside: 1st place, AL West, advance to ALCS.

2) The Oakland A's are a team a lot of people are going to be watching for a lot of different reasons. One reason is that they might be good. Adding Matt Holliday and Jason Giambi to a weak lineup, well, it helps at least. I don't know what to make of the pitching, a lot of young guys that I have really barely heard of - but when in doubt, don't doubt Billy Beane and young pitching. However, I don't think the team is going to be THAT good, which leads us to the other reason people are going to be watching - Matt Holliday is a free agent after the year, and if the A's tank, lots of people are going to come calling at the trade deadline. To be perfectly honest with you, I think it was a really interesting move to trade for Holliday, and I think Billy Beane is satisfied with the worst case scenario that the A's aren't far enough along to be good yet and having to trade Holliday. By trading pieces he didn't really want or need that much (Huston Street, Greg Smith, a single A prospect? Colorado got duped), Holliday can easily be moved at the deadline for a better return. So, either your team is vastly improved, or you get a better return on your investment. That's pretty much win-win for the A's. I'd love to ask Billy Beane if all he expected from the deal was to end up with better prospects in the future. Potential upside: 2nd place AL West.

3) No... no love for the Mariners, who embarassed me last year. The only thing they really have going for them is Felix Hernandez and, theoretically, Erik Bedard. The lineup is a strange mess of young, aging, and average talent. Carlos Silva is still in the starting rotation. Honestly, that's probably worse than having to rely on Carl Pavano. 'nuff said. Potential upside: 3rd place, AL West.

4) Ok, so, the Texas Rangers don't seem to get it. Every year, the pitching sucks. If you put the A's and Rangers together, they would probably have made a pretty badass team the past ten years. But the Rangers are always missing the pitching. Not that you don't believe me, but get this - last year, the Rangers scored more runs (901) than any other team in baseball (46 more than the Cubs). And yet, they had a run differential of -66, because they also gave up more runs (967) than any other team in baseball (83 more than the Pirates). That's astoundingly unbalanced, yet they enter 2009 with a rotation of Kevin Millwood, Vicente Padilla, Kris Benson, Brandon McCarthy, and Matt Harrison. I mean, really? Potential upside: none.


NL East:
1) Philadelphia Phillies
2) NY Mets
3) Atlanta Braves
4) Florida Marlins
5) Washington Nationals

The Nationals aside, this is a surprisingly solid division. Each of the other four teams have a number of things to like, as well as some big holes. I would think the wild card is probably going to come from this division.

1) I've slotted the Phillies to win the division by default, being the defending World Series champs and having won the NL East the past two years. There's a lot to like about the lineup, to which they added Raul Ibanez to Jimmy Rollins, Chase Utley and Ryan Howard. They have a good closer, ok bullpen, an ace backed by four other pretty average starters. Good, but not great, and I don't doubt that this divisional race will last well into September again. Potential Upside: 1st place, NL East, advance to NLCS.

2) Clearly, the Mets had one huge glaring need at the end of last season when Billy Wagner went down - the bullpen almost certainly cost them a trip to the playoffs. With the additions of Francisco Rodriguez and J.J. Putz, you can also most certainly consider that problem fixed. The lineup looks really strong with a top 6 of Reyes-Murphy-Beltran-Delgado-Wright-Sheffield. But... the starting pitching doesn't look good after Johan Santana. I'll give Pelfrey the benefit of the doubt, but Maine was rather poor in spring training and Perez is notoriously inconsistent. Livan Hernandez will eat a lot of innings and give you very average results. Beyond that, if anyone gets hurt there isn't much depth past inexperienced Jon Niese. I guess my big issue is that radically improving your bullpen won't help if you don't give them a lead. Potential upside: 1st place, NL East, advance to World Series.

3) The Braves have a team this year whose success will depend on the collective success of a lot of decent but not superstar talent. The lineup isn't bad, but can Chipper Jones stay healthy? Can Jeff Francouer hit over .240? The bullpen was quite bad last year, but Mike Gonzalez and Rafael Soriano have had very good years before, and if they can both pull it together it will help the team a lot. They don't have an ace, but out of D-Lowe, Jurrjens, Vazquez, Kawakami, Glavine and Campillo, I think they could shake out a rotation that is overall more consistent than that of the Mets and Phillies. And they had an 11-30 record in one-run games last year, which points to a little bit of bad luck (and poor work from the bullpen). That being said, I don't like Javier Vazquez. So he eats a lot of innings and strikes a lot of people out, but he's an exceedingly average pitcher who is likely to win 10-13 games with a 4.00+ ERA, who completely self-destructed last year when Ozzie Guillen challenged him to step up for the White Sox at the end of last year, Chernobyl style. In order to have a good year, the Braves either need the switch to the NL to improve his stats, or for others in the rotation to outperform him and not ask much more than 4th starter stability from him. Anyways, if this team puts it all together, I think they can legitimately sneak out a division title. If not, they could very well finish 4th. Potential upside: 1st place, NL East, 1st round playoff exit.

4) The Marlins are a Braves-esque team that could be pretty good if things fall into place. The Nolasco/Johnson/Volstad/Sanchez/Miller rotation is likely going to be relatively average towards the back end, but it would not in the least surprise me if it turned out to be the strength of the team. The lineup is ok, the bullpen is ok. Most likely they won't break into the top three of the NL East this year, but could surprise. Potential upside: NL wild card berth, 1st round playoff exit.

5) You have to give the Nationals credit, in order to turn things around, you have to start somewhere, and adding a guy like Adam Dunn to the middle of the lineup is something to build on for a really bad team. They desperately need the farm system to produce something though, and haven't shown that they can do much of that yet. Overall the lineup is pretty average but will thump a team from time to time and the pitching staff as a whole is pretty weak. Maybe they can avoid 100 losses this year, but not much more to look forward to past that. Potential upside: last place, NL East.

NL Central:
1) Chicago Cubs
2) St. Louis Cardinals
3) Cincinnati Reds
4) Milwaukee Brewers
5) Houston Astros
6) Pittsburgh Pirates

1) Did you know that the Cubs haven't been to the postseason three years in a row since their last World Series championship in 1908? Well, here's another crack at heartbreak, Cubs fans. Chicago has a very good team, and although I wouldn't say they are decidedly better than the Mets or Phillies, they will probably finish with the best record in the NL by playing in a weaker division. Good lineup, good starting pitching. The only area of the team that is a little suspect is the bullpen, but Kevin Gregg, Carlos Marmol and Aaron Heilman could be solid. No excuse for this team to not win any playoff games again this year. Potential upside: 1st place, NL Central, advance to World Series

2) The St. Louis Cardinals are the Minnesota Twins of the National League for me in that they always seem to finish better than you would reason them to. I suppose having Albert Pujols in the middle of the lineup has something to do with that. Looks like a solid lineup and if Chris Carpenter has a successful return from injury, this team could definitely push for the wild card. If something derails the Cards, it will be pitching. Potential upside: NL wild card, 1st round playoff exit

3) The Reds are a trendy "surprise team" pick this year and I'm on board with that, though I don't think they'll make the playoffs. Joey Votto and Jay Bruce will help improve a kind of weak lineup, but losing Adam Dunn will hurt. It's always about pitching though, and the Reds appear to have the makings of a pretty respectable staff with Volquez/Harang/Arroyo/Cueto/Owings. They might be a year or two away, but the upside is there. Potential upside: NL wild card, 1st round playoff exit

4) I rooted for the Brewers to make the playoffs last year for two reasons: one, the team hadn't made the playoffs since (I think) the 80's, and two, the window for a team like this is only open for a short time. For the Brewers, that time was two years, they cashed in with a playoff appearance once, and it shut with a thud when C.C. Sabathia and Ben Sheets left. Any team would take a middle of the order of Braun/Fielder/Hart, but after Yovani Gallardo, there's not much to like about the pitching. The rest of the starters are decidedly average and the bullpen looks suspect despite the addition of all-time saves leader Trevor Hoffman. Hoffman can only do so much and doesn't generally give a lot of innings (in the last eight years, he's only cracked 60 innings twice - with a high of 63). Can't imagine this team being consistent enough to be a real threat. Potential upside: 3rd place, NL Central

5) It's been pretty much all downhill for the Astros since making a World Series appearance in 2005. Likes? Some components of the lineup - Berkman, Lee, Pence, and a lot of speed at the top if Matsui and Bourn can hit (big if). Dislikes? After Roy Oswalt and Jose Valverde, most of the pitching. And in case you haven't caught on yet, if I don't like the pitching, I generally don't like the team to do well. Turns out Russ Ortiz is only 35, as he makes his first appearance in the major leagues since 2007. It also turns out that he hasn't had an ERA under 5.51 since 2004. 5th starter is a weak spot for most teams, but... Potential upside: maybe 4th place, NL Central.

6) Poor Pirates. I mean, you just sort of start to feel bad for a fan base after a while, don't you? People are avoiding drafting Matt Capps in my fantasy leagues because, even though he's a good pitcher, everyone realizes he isn't going to get a lot of save opportunities. The biggest question here seems to be "where is Nate McClouth getting traded to in the next three years?" Potential upside: none

NL West:
1) Los Angeles Dodgers
2) Arizona Diamondbacks
3) San Francisco Giants
4) Colorado Rockies
5) San Diego Padres

This division is up for grabs, as usual, but I think the Giants join the fray as an outside shot. I don't think anyone reaches 90 wins, though.

1) You know I hate to do this, because I want to see Manny fail, but I still think the Dodgers will win the division. There are some variables - mostly can Clayton Kershaw nail down his potential and can Randy Wolf and James McDonald give you anything - but overall the lineup is very good and they are probably better than anyone else in the division. Probably. Potential upside: 1st place, NL West, 1st round playoff exit.

2) There's something to be said for run differential. It sounds pretty obvious when you say "if a team scores a lot more runs than it gives up, it probably has a good record" but last year's Diamondbacks spent most of the year in first place with a negative run differential after an outstanding first month of the season. Not surprisingly, they fell back to the pack, finished 82-80, and missed the playoffs. It's pretty simple with this team - if the young kids all learn how to hit, this could be a very good team. Webb and Haren are a very good top two starters, but the rest of the rotation won't carry a team that doesn't score runs. Potential upside: 1st place, NL West, 1st round playoff exit

3) I honestly thought the Giants were going to lose well over 100 games last year. They weren't good, but 72-90 far exceeded my expectations. Quite frankly, I don't know anything about half the players in the lineup - I think they're decent young players but I also think that means they're not going to be good enough to compete for a division title, but I just don't know. That being said, Lincecum, Cain and a healthy Randy Johnson is about as good a top-3 outside of the AL East as you can find, and if Barry Zito can dig up any resemblence of a major league pitcher (questionable), I can see them hanging around. I would not be surprised if they finished 72-90 again, but I think if any team is going to make a significant jump this year, it might be the Giants. Potential upside: 1st place, NL West, 1st round playoff exit

4) The Rockies probably kissed any real chance they had this year goodbye when they traded Matt Holliday in a classic three nickels for a quarter deal. They've got some good young players and an some ok pitching, but I just don't see it. Potential upside: 3rd place, NL East

5) Poor Padres fans. If they had been able to trade Jake Peavy during the offseason (watch out for this guy at the trade deadline), I don't think the payroll would have broken much more than $40 million. I like five players on this team a lot: Peavy, Chris Young, Cla Meredith, Heath Bell, and Adrian Gonzalez. After that... yikes. Potential upside: none

AL Playoffs: Red Sox vs. Twins, Yankees vs. Angels. Rays most likely other team to make it.
NL Playoffs: Phillies vs. Dodgers, Mets vs. Cubs. Braves, Cardinals, Diamondbacks possibilities.

Cy Young Awards:
In the AL, I think this is an on year for Josh Beckett and he pulls in his first Cy Young award after coming close two years ago. In the NL, Johan Santana is going to make the leap with a solid bullpen behind him. The only reason he didn't get serious consideration last year was pretty much the result of a bad bullpen blowing 5-6 wins that would have boosted his record significantly.

MVPs:
This is always hard to guess, but for the prediction-post's sake I'll try. In the AL, I'm going with the AL East - Kevin Youkilis, Mark Teixeira, Evan Longoria possibilities. In the NL, I can't see how anyone will pry it away from either Albert Pujols or Ryan Howard.

Let's go Sox!

My thoughts on the Matt Cassel deal

This weekend, the Pats traded Matt Cassel and Mike Vrabel to the Chiefs for a high second round pick (#34). At first glace, it's both a bit shocking and unbalanced, but given more thought and learning of other scenarios, I've decided I'm ok with the deal.

Other scenarios that have been raise include the Pats sending Cassel to Detroit for the #33 pick, and the Pats sending Cassel to the Broncos in a three-team deal for a first rounder, either #12 or #19 (not clear).

It's first important to understand 1) why the Pats tagged Matt Cassel with the francise tag (which guarantees him $14.65 million for next year) and 2) why they traded Mike Vrabel.

The answer to #1, I think, is fairly easy. First of all, there are a number of teams looking for quarterbacks, and instead of letting Cassel walk as a free agent, they retained him (albeit at a very high salary) in order to trade him and get something (anything?) of value back. Second of all, one of those teams is the Jets. By tagging and trading, you can easily avoid Cassel walking across the street to a divisional rival. Given that they went through with trading him within weeks of placing the franchise tag on him and long before the season, is is assumed that there are no potential hang ups with Tom Brady's recovery for next year.

The trade of Mike Vrabel was both curious and surprising. He's been with the team since 2000 and has been an exceptional player on and off the field for the Patriots. Definitely a fan favorite. That being said, he's 34, his sack total dropped from 12.5 to 4 last year, and he counts about $4 million against the cap. On the one hand, the Chiefs probably want a veteran leader for an increasingly inexperienced team. In order to take on Cassel's big contract, they may have demanded the Pats throw something extra in. On another, the Pats may have wanted to dump his salary if they felt his skills were declining. My feeling is that it was probably a combination of both, and in that regard it helps both teams.

It is not insignificant to note that with the trade, the Pats cleared about $18 million in cap space, much of which they had purposely tied up in Cassel, and needed to clear that space sooner than later with free agency starting this weekend. Given Cassel's big contract and the need to move him fast would work against them receiving more, of course.

Factoring in the other trade scenarios - by choosing to send Cassel and Vrabel to KC for the #34 pick instead of just Cassel to Detroit for the #33 pick indicates to me that dumping Vrabel's salary was appealing to them. Not picking up a mid-first round pick is more curious and harder to defend. The contract for that player wouldn't bust your balls like a top-5 pick, and they got a very good player in that range last year (Jerod Mayo). But perhaps they didn't want to pay two first round picks (they also have #23). Also, if they traded him to Denver, he would be playing for the one man who would know exactly how to utilize him best, Josh McDaniels, who was the Patriots offensive co-0rdinator last year and new Denver head coach.

So, for the Patriots, they tagged Cassel, moved him relatively quickly, received the #34 pick in the draft, opened up another ~$3.5 million of cap space by including Vrabel (~$18 million total), and kept him away from the Jets. If you let Cassel walk, you don't have any of those assurances. So in the end, it looks suspect on the surface, but I say good deal.

Clearing out the attic

- Fantastic Super Bowl. I don't like the Steelers and wanted Arizona to win, but such is life and it was a good game. Here's my top ten Super Bowls since I started watching them with SB 30 following the '95-96 season, game excitement and outcome being main factors plus personal bias towards the Pats obviously. Steelers/Cardinals come in a surprising 4th.

1) Patriots 20, Rams 17 (SB 36)
- Huge upset, last second 48-yard field goal, Pats first SB victory. Enough said.
2) Patriots 32, Panthers 29 (SB 38)
- High scoring, back and forth during the 4th quarter.
3) Rams 23, Titans 16 (SB 34)
- One... yard... short. I can't imagine what it could have been like to be a Titans fan. Wait, yes I can, see #6.
4) Steelers 27, Cardinals 23 (SB 43)
- Exciting 4th quarter, last minute TD.
5) Patriots 24, Eagles 21 (SB 39)
- This might even be ranked lower if it weren't the Pats. It wasn't as exciting as the first two SB wins because I expected them to win the game. And they did. Yes, I was spoiled by this point.
6) Giants ... fuck (SB 42)
- Fuck.
7) Broncos 31, Packers 24 (SB 32)
- Elway's feel-good first SB win.
Nevermind, the rest weren't that good. Top 7 it is!

- John Elway aged fast. He looks like a guy on a moisturizer commercial whose skin is cracking and crumbling.

- Kurt Warner, you might notice, was QB in three of my top four SB's of the past 15 years or so. He won a game when the Titans were stopped a yard short of tying, lost a game on a last second field goal, and lost a game with a last minute TD. He's just as close to having three rings as he is to zero, so I guess at least he has one. A really interesting career, going from grocery store/NFL Europe to leading the Greatest Show on Turf Rams to backup QB to rookies Eli Manning and Matt Leinart to leading the Cardinals to the Super Bowl. And yes, I think the period between Rams and this past season kills him in the "is he a Hall of Famer" debate, but if he could ever squeak out 3-4 more solid years and another long playoff run, I'd have to at least reconsider.

- I have picked some European soccer games in ESPN.com's Streak for the Cash. One thing that stands out to me is what a neat idea promotion/relegation between leagues is. Like if the bottom three MLB teams next year were demoted to AAA and the top three AAA teams were promoted to the majors. I wish an American sport had this wrinkle, because it must make the season exciting for bad teams who are struggling to avoid relegation. It's not like Pirates fans have had much to root for the past 15 years, you know?

- I do not recommend catching the flu. Just sayin'. Also, is there anything more deflating than being sick and pulling the last tissue from the box? I don't think so.

- Occasionally I wonder about the origins of seemingly random holidays... here is what I found about Valentine's day:

"In Ancient Rome, February 14th was a holiday to honor Juno, Queen of the Roman Gods and Goddesses. The Feast of Lupercalia started the next day. During these times boys and girls were segregated. However, the young people had a custom that began on the eve of the Festival of Lupercalia. The girl’s names were written on pieces of paper and inserted into jars. Each boy then drew a girl’s name from the jar and they were partners throughout the Festival. After being paired, the children would often continue to see each other throughout the year and on occasion even fell in love and got married. Emperor Claudius II of Rome, also known as Claudius the Cruel was having a difficult time recruiting men as soldiers. He believed that the men did not want to leave their sweethearts and cancelled all engagements and marriages throughout Rome. St. Valentine, a priest of Rome at the time, secretly married couples. He was eventually caught, arrested and condemned. He was beaten to death and beheaded on February 14th, around the year 270."

Nice story, except for that last part.

- Who doesn't love spring? If you don't like spring, ask yourself if you like puppies, s'mores, and the eTrade talking baby commercials. If the answer is no to everything, you don't have enough fun in your life.

- I am looking forward to my next Remdawg.

Any Given Sunday vs Dynasties

Normally, I would have written a post with my picks for the NFL playoffs, but I was so distracted over the 11-5 Patriots missing the playoffs that I simply forgot to do so before the playoffs started. This was lucky for me, because other than my pick of Baltimore to make the AFC Championship game, I would have looked otherwise pretty silly. I take solace in that I'm not the only one who has no idea how to pick these games.

As a Patriots fan, this year was particularly disappointing, what with Tom Brady going down seven minutes into the season and having the team go 11-5 and still miss the playoffs, not so much for those points in particular but in that the entire league has been wide open all year. It would have been a great year for Mr. Stetson to cruise to his 4th Super Bowl ring, but alas, I digress. The point I've come to consider is this: is the mayhem of this year's "any given Sunday" theme to the playoffs good for the league?

The NFL is a league that, in general, is the best equipped at this time to both promote and actually achieve parity on a regular basis. Between the salary cap, free agency and large rosters, and the overwhelming popularity of the league leading to reasonably balanced revenue streams, competitive balance allows good teams and doormats to change places regularly because the difference between the two is really not so great. Baseball pretends like the luxury tax was a step in this direction, but really there is no better time than this past offseason to illustrate the difference between the have's (Yankees) and have not's (Padres). Basketball is set up similarly to the NFL, but I believe given that a team only uses 9-10 players, if a team like the Celtics keeps Pierce/Garnett/Allen together or a team has a dominant force like MJ, Lebron or Shaq/Kobe, they're going to be some level of good no matter what, long term.

Now, I've always thought parity was a good thing. I never liked teams that were too dominant for too long. Who wants to see the Bulls win six championships in eight years? Who wants to see the Lakers, Cowboys and Patriots win three championships in four years. Or the Yankees four in five years (not me). Parity hit the NFL hard this year - there were no clearly dominant teams, and of the four teams that finished with the best records and received byes to the divisional round of the playoffs, three of them lost this weekend. San Diego was 5-8 at one point and needed a lot of things to go right just to make the playoffs, and knocked off 12-4 Indy. The Eagles needed a world of help in the last week of the season just to make the playoffs at 9-6-1, and find themselves in the NFC Championship game. And although it is not to say that I am not enjoying the games themselves, I find myself really not caring for any team in particular beyond my picks in a pool, and it is not for the lack of Patriots games.

See, I've come to realize that maybe having a small number of dominant teams at any one given time is good for a sport. It gives everyone who doesn't have anything to root for a villain, a rooting interest, generally for the underdog. In the mid-90s, it seemed that the Patriots were incapable of beating the Denver Broncos. I couldn't stand them. They were good, and they were arrogant. And I looked forward to games against them more than any other because I wanted the Pats to finally break through and beat them, time and again. Super Bowl XXXVI was exciting, not only because the Patriots were playing, but they were playing the Greatest Show on Turf, the St. Louis Rams. They were 17 point underdogs, yet I believed they could pull a gigantic upset because of how they had played the Rams in a seemingly insignificant loss in week 10. I'm absolutely sure Giants fans felt the same way in the Super Bowl last year.

Sometimes you have one clearly dominant team to root for or against. Sometimes they fail (Patriots '07, Rams '01, early 90's Bills) and sometimes they prevail anyways and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it (Patriots '03 and '04, mid-90's Bulls, late 90's Yankees). Sometimes you feel good about the dominant team (Elway's Broncos, late '90s) and sometimes you hate them (late 90's Yankees). But in every case, the dominant team evokes strong passion one way or another. Other times you have more than one dominant team that sets up yearly battles of the titans - Pats/Colts, Celts/Lakers (80's), Red Sox/Yankees, etc. Sometimes these are the best of games, given that even more than chamionships are on the line, but bragging rights in big rivalries.

The problem with baseball is that those dominant teams never rotate. The Yankees, Red Sox and other big market teams will usually hover around the top whereas the Royals and Brewers are generally just flashes in the pan. The NFL works better because those teams tend to rotate - from the Steelers, to the 49ers, to the Cowboys, to the Broncos, to the Pats - with the Rams, Chiefs, Bills, Giants, Packers, Colts and so on all mixed in. And most teams that are consistenly miserable for extended periods of time tend to simply be run poorly (see New York Knicks, Detroit Lions), which is not a product of the structure of the sport itself.

Bringing it back to my original point, one might argue that the NFL playoffs this year are exciting because you can't possibly guess what is going to happen next, but I'm not buying it. I could care less about watching two teams that barely made the playoffs facing off in the NFC Championship game. It would be a crime that two #6 seeds could meet in the Super Bowl. And in turn, I've realized that I miss the token dominant team, to either root for or against. So maybe when things seem the least balanced, they are in fact the most balanced of all.

Regarding my man-crush on Dustin Pedroia

So, on occasion over the past year or two, I have struggled a little bit with my love for sports. I love playing sports for the pureness of "sport" - for physical activity and skill, for respectful competition between two or more people or teams, for the camaraderie within a team. And, well, if you know me, I like to win, too.

My struggle peaked this summer with the Manny Ramirez/Red Sox fiasco. Goodness knows how the story is twisted by the player, organization and media, but all indications are that Manny essentially quit on the Red Sox to force a trade so that he could get his option years on his contract voided, thus becoming a free agent with the ability to cash in on a bigger contract to finish out his career. When his wish was granted, because he was single handedly destroying the Red Sox clubhouse, he became a poster boy for everything that is good about a veteran player for the Dodgers... and he hit the holy hell out of the ball for the rest of the season.

I was offended, as a fan. Here's a guy who has made $160 million over the past eight years, more than I can even fathom making in about eight lifetimes. And although I appreciate everything he did for the Sox over the seven and a half years that he was with the team (two World Series titles? Buy that man a drink), in the end he not only quit on his teammates, he quit on me too. They always say sports are a business these days, but you know what? The fans are invested in a different way. And the players don't have to, but I can sure tell you that if I had the opportunity to play professional sports, I'd be busting my ass for not only my teammates and our individual and team goals, but for all of the fans who came to see me perform. The harsh reality is that most of the time it's a one way relationship. The fans pour their heart into a team, and sometimes they don't get anything back.

When Dustin Pedroia made the Red Sox as the starting second baseman out of spring training in 2007, he got off to a rough start. He hit about .175 through the first 4-6 weeks, and Dave Mandel and I were pretty sure that he was the worst player in Major League Baseball. Turns out we were wrong. Very wrong. But more importantly, he became the first Red Sox player that I truly loved to root for and watch play, and I've been following the Sox since about 1990. Don't get me wrong, I loved Pedro in his heyday because he dominated. He was a badass and he knew it. I loved Manny because he could hit the ball a country mile, and I loved Big Papi because he could too, and he was incredibly charming. I loved Mo Vaughn, the Hit Dawg, kind of the precursor to Big Papi. But Dustin Pedroia was this short, average looking guy that came along and succeeded for no apparent reason whatsoever other than the fact that he played the game the right way, and he played it hard.

About a week ago, Pedroia signed a contract extension that could be worth up to 7 years and $53 million. He gains in the short term by immediately increasing the value of his team-controlled years, but probably loses in the long run by giving up his first two years of free agency. If he maintained his level of play, between arbitration and free agency, he may very well have been able to gain a lot more financially. But according to the Boston Globe:

"I know that if I would have gone year to year, yes, I would probably have made a lot more money," Pedroia said. "I understand that without a doubt. But I'm here in a place that I love. My family loves it. They treat us unbelievable. It's like a family here. I'm happy with this."

"My first thought about the whole thing was, I play for the best team in the major leagues," said Pedroia, who hit .326 with 17 home runs and 83 RBIs this past season while earning $457,000. "Who wouldn't want to play for the Boston Red Sox? We're going to have an opportunity to win every single year. The fans are the best; the city embraces their team. So, why not? It fits."

He might not hit the ball 500 feet, but isn't that a guy you could pour your heart into rooting for?

Tasty leftovers

- Sam Cassell picked up two technical fouls and was ejected from the Celtics win over the Orlando Magic on Monday, 12/1. I found this noteworthy/humorous because that gives him two more technical fouls that total minutes played (zero) in 19 games this year. He's essentially now scored one point for the Magic while not playing in a game for the Celtics. My head hurts.

- I can't wait for the NY Giants to lose a game so I can point out a key turnover or play and say "boy, they really shot themselves in the leg."

- The Indianapolis Colts could very, very easily be 5-7 right now, except they're 8-4 and are going to turn in the weakest 12-4 year I've ever seen in my life. Yet, I can also very easily see a scenario in which they knock off Denver and then Tennessee in the playoffs and meet the Steelers in the AFC Championship game. The AFC wouldn't have stood a chance if Tom Brady hadn't gone down 7 minutes into the season. This still makes me sick.

- I told one of my now multitude of bosses today that I spent 7 hours, 21 minutes in the car driving from Framingham, MA back to Nyack, NY on Sunday. She proceeded to tell me about her trip from Vermont to Long Island, back out to Rockland County again. Conny 1, Nathan 0.

- I've said this many times before, but I could eat turkey and stuffing sandwiches until the end of my days.

- Turns out James Bond drinks Coors Light.

- So the White Sox traded Javier Vazquez (12-16, 4.67), who imploded last year when Ozzie Guillen challenged him to step up in crunch time, and Boone Logan (4-4, 5.70 in relief) to the Braves for Jo-Jo Reyes (3-11, 5.81), Brett Lillibridge (.220, 4 HR in AAA), and another prospect. I thought if the Red Sox found a way to dump Julio Lugo it would be the best "taking out each other's trash" trade of the offseason, but I don't know if you can top this one.

- I went candlepin bowling last week and was thinking about the seemingly random phenomenon known only to people from Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine. According to Wikipedia, the most reliable source on the planet, the highest ever sanctioned score is a 245 out of 300. I've often wondered why candlepin never caught on anywhere else, and whether it would if I were to open a random candlepin bowling alley somewhere. To continue this completely directionless bowling thought, I have never been and have no idea where to find duckpin bowling, but think I should seek it out sometime. Or what if I opened a bowling alley that offered all three styles? That would be different.

Me, myself and I

Hi everyone. It came to my attention last night that I've really slacked off on the blog, as I've only posted three times this year, and two of them were massive baseball predictions posts. Even when I wrote those posts, I wasn't really interested in posting something about myself or trying to come up with something funny to say, I was really just posting for the sake of posting. Since it has been so long, I went back and read a number of posts, and it was both interesting and disturbing. There were reminders of good times and of poor decisions. And while I started the blog originally to entertain the five of you reading, I think much of it comes across as cynical and/or negative. I don't write about myself often because I don't generally care to advertise my personal thoughts for everyone. But it was an interesting exercise in self-reflection at a period of time in my life that I've been doing a great deal of that to begin with.

Everything came crashing down in the last few months. With the exception of a select few, you missed the storm simply because I didn't tell you.

My job is in a bit of a state of flux because my boss didn't get a slam-dunk proposal funded, what with funding starting to run a little thin with the poor economy. So, unfortunately, I won't be working for Conny any longer beginning December 1st. This has been draining because I've spent an inordinate amount of time at work recently trying to wrap up her most recent project, because I want to finish the job I started and it's important to me to do a good job. I just wish I had a few more weeks. Luckily there are other people here at Lamont who are in need of assistance, so it's not like I'm out of a job. But December I will be working on a project that is really not related to anything I've been doing (although it will be more practical and I do like that), and though I'll be picked up by another person to start the new year, clearly working on "soft money" (ie, grants) is not as secure for me as it once was. I'd say pretty good chance at this point that I go back to school next fall for teaching. I still have a little time to make sure that's the right decision, but I feel pretty good about the idea.

I took my previous landlord to small claims court a few weeks ago over not getting my security deposit back, and lost. I didn't think the judge handled the case that well, but I wasn't shocked by the result either because I didn't have an airtight case, mainly because I wasn't careful enough to protect myself from something like that happening. Live and learn, I guess, but very few times in my life have I ever been so angry about something. I mean, I certainly needed the money back, but it wasn't even about that anymore. My landlord sat there under oath with a (poorly prepared) wild concoction of fabrications and lies, and quite frankly it was shocking. I just can't fathom why I deserve to be treated so disrespectfully, or how someone can treat others like that as if it's no big deal. I'm not perfect, but I try really hard to be a good person. But when this kind of thing happens, I can't help but lose a little faith in people, and wonder why should I be a good person if I'm going to be the one who ends up getting screwed over? I don't even have an answer to that question, but I also know that I couldn't live with myself if I didn't continue to hold myself to certain standards, and if I can touch just a few people now and again, then in the end it is still worth it.

This is actually chronologically out of order because it happened prior to my court case, but the story seems relevant now. A few weeks ago I ran out of gas on the way to work. I know, I live about 7 miles from work, I'm just an idiot sometimes, and I'm ok with that. I was probably about 3 miles from the nearest gas station, so I grabbed my 1-gallon gas container and started hiking up 9W, which is a busy road. Countless number of people drove by me as I walked up the road, kind of embarassed by my situation. Then one car pulled up next to me and asked if I needed a ride. It was a couple, probably in their late 40's, and they hadn't even just stopped, they had driven by and turned around. They gave me a ride to the closest gas station, and I still had to walk back, but I really appreciated it. We didn't even exchange names, just some pleasantries, and I'll never see those people again. I thanked them profusely, but I could tell they just felt like it was the right thing to do and that it was no big deal. That act of random kindness gives me something to hold onto, that maybe it seems that they are few and far between sometimes but that there are still good, kindhearted people in the world. And it makes me want to continue to try to be like the people in that car.

Some other things have gone on that need not be discussed in this space, but suffice it to say that right now, at this moment, I feel like I'm starting from scratch. That's a little disconcerting because I'm definitely not quite where I imagined myself at 26, but at the same time it's not necessarily upsetting either. I don't regret any of the decisions I've made over the last few years, regardless of the fact that many of them didn't turn out the way I hoped. It's kind of like when I played Nintendo as a kid and hit the reset button when things were going poorly. The game always started again, and the feeling was always that with a fresh start, maybe I could beat it this time around, which was somewhat liberating. I've hit the reset button. I'm going to find something to do that I enjoy and is worthwhile. I'm going to volunteer somewhere again, finally. I'm going to go to the gym this winter so that next summer I can be a "runner" again. I'm going to surround myself with my old and new friends that I trust and remind myself that quality is more important than quantity. I spent about 22 years finding myself and 4 more making good decisions that have turned out poorly (if such a thing exists), but more importantly learning from them as well. Now, I think I'm ready to finish becoming the person I've always wanted to be. I've always been close, but I can't let close be good enough.

Friday night my fortune cookie said "May life throw you a pleasant curve." I think it finally has, and I hope there are more coming.

Andy: That's the beauty of music. They can't get that from you. Haven't you ever felt that way about music before?
Red: I played a mean harmonica as a younger man. Lost interest in it though. Doesn't make much sense here in prison.
Andy: Here's where it makes the most sense. You need it so that you don't forget.
Red: Forget?
Andy: Forget that there are places in this world that aren't made out of stone. That there's something inside, that they can't get to, that they can't touch. That's yours.
Red: What're you talking about?
Andy: Hope.
Red: Let me tell you something my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane.

Andy (later): Remember, Red, hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies.

~The Shawshank Redemption