Sunday Overload

It's not often that I'm sad to be going to a Cubs game, but today comes close to pushing that barrier. Here's why:

Astros @ Cubs: 1:20pm.

Blackhawks @ Red Wings (Game 1): 2pm.

Rockets @ Lakers (Game 7): 2:30pm.

Magic @ Celtics (Game 7): 7pm.

And all afternoon ESPN is waving the white flag with bowling, last year's trick shot championship, timber sports, last year's world's strongest man competition, and women's golf. That's how you can tell ESPN knows no one will be watching . . . and that means that something sports-related is on other channels, and better.

In short, today is a day where I would like to be sitting at home with the remote and flipping between the 3 games going on all afternoon than watching one of them in a place where I might not even get score updates on the other two. I will be cheering for the fastest baseball game in recorded history . . . hopefully lots of first pitch ground balls.

Plus, I think one of my friends will end up with busted thumbs if the Celtics lose . . . so that adds to the anticipation. If the Rockets win, though, he'll probably be too despondent to care.

Let's! Go! Hawks!

Okay.

Now Manny is a dirty cheat. 

Trust Me

There are a lot of things not to miss in life, things that usually we don't bother worrying about.

If you want to see something cool, turn on the pregame coverage of Canucks/Blackhawks at 8pm (Central) tonight. Blackhawks' fans have a couple of traditions that rival anything you will see from any franchise, and the National Anthem is one of them - Versus showed it last Thursday when they had exclusive coverage of the game, and I suspect they will again tonight.

It is one of the more spine-tingling moments related to sports that doesn't actually involve anything happening with the players.

Thought on the Simmons campaign

Was reading part of Bill Simmons's campaign for the T-Wolves GM job at SLAMOnline, in a comment to which someone pointed out that the T-Wolves get the publicity Simmons is promising already, just by him having this campaign, so they can reap the benefits of it without talking to him. But I think the argument is lacking, which is what the post below (also posted as a comment to the Q&A with Simmons at SLAM) takes on.

As regards the Minnesota-gets-publicity-without-interviewing-Simmons argument, here’s one thing to consider: the entire campaign right now has parallels to the Thank You for Smoking scene where the main character Nick brings a briefcase full of cash to the lung cancer-stricken Marlboro Man. If Minnesota doesn’t even bother to interview him, they have to come up with a slam dunk candidate because of everything they’re passing up (this is the Marlboro Man taking the money and only giving half away - they look bad). If they hire him, they’re potentially selling out to pressure (taking the money). If they interview him, they tried - if they interview him with a confidentiality agreement about the interview, they can use the opportunity to explain to him that his chemistry won’t fit with theirs, or convince him he really doesn’t want the job (take the money, announce it, and give it to charity), and then there’s no hard feelings and the fans feel thought of. They can even get the same public benefits (almost - they get the benefit of gaining the Simmons fans as T-Wolves supporters if they hire him). But at this point, because they’re already benefiting from the publicity - at least enough to be discussed in comments sections, message boards, twitter, etc - they can’t NOT take the money (forgive the double negative), and paltry attempts to say “Thanks, but no thanks” send the message to their fan base that (assuming no great candidate comes along) they just don’t care to make things better. As a Chicago resident, I can tell you that telling your fans that is bad (see, particularly, the last ten years of history with the Blackhawks and their incredible turnaround from a fan perspective since new leadership took over). Bad economy+small market+Simmons having them in a bad position due to his somewhat sizable media position does not guarantee Simmons will succeed, but it does make it a bad situation for Minnesota if they don’t get someone better. He’s promised playoffs next year, and he’s offered to work for free - if you’re in a struggling market, take the publicity, run if he doesn’t deliver after a year, and show the fans you’re willing to go out of the box and try whatever it takes to win. The extra money you will get in other revenue streams makes up for for what he’s likely to cost you taking out the truly loyal season ticket holders, reducing prices to games if they miss the playoffs (which, under his plan, they won’t - so you’re basically betting your team is competitive long enough to only cost you his salary less the money from half-price tickets that would not have otherwise been sold less the concessions from people in the stands that would not have come otherwise less the other merchandise sold), and discounts on highly marked up jerseys of current players exchanged for those of former players (which, in turn, leads to more visibility in your community and a better brand). 

In short, if someone came to you as the owner of a small business in a competitive national market and said, “I will work for free for a year in this industry which I have studied extensively and lived on the fringe of, during which I will improve your business, give you national exposure on a level that will at least be more comparable to a mid-market team, improve your brand image and help to rebuild your core customer base, so long as I can write a book about that year, and then afterwards we will negotiate about a contract for future years, and I’ve already announced to the national audience I have that I am making this offer to you and laid out four steps for you to take,” whether or not some portion of the national audience (potentially equivalent to his fans) thinks the guy is a d-bag, do you just refuse to hear him out?

Until further notice

I'm standing by my stance on Ramirez. Sure, there are bad reasons for why someone would take what he took. There are also some legitimate reasons, like an increase in sperm count.

I'm not saying I'm right. Just that the explosion of outrage on these here interwebs is contrived, more than mildly annoying, and another symptom of what happens when people's jobs are tied to page views and getting the "scoop" or "definitive opinion" up faster than anyone else: they write and post stupid things.

Was Manny on the juice? Maybe. A logical (though not fully credible, as there's no proof) argument can be made. But without that proof, Manny saying he meant to increase his sperm count and because he was thinking it was for his 'nads he was too stupid to check it against the banned substances policy is equally valid.

That's perhaps the least comprehensible thing about it: in this day and age, even the stupid should know better. Are we to believe Manny is that stupid? (I'll pause while Yankee fans nod vigorously.)

Maybe. But we'll never know. He will serve his suspension. He will return just in time for Independence Day and the stretch run. And if the Dodgers can hold it together until then (and since nobody seems to think they won't win the division without Manny, I don't see that not happening), he will return perhaps more inspired than he was when he left Boston.

Yay. A rested and inspired Manny Ramirez blowing his way through July, August, September, and October.

For all the things being written now, will any of it matter if Manny hits .453 through October and leads the Dodgers to a title?

The "Right" Way

Disclaimer: Yes, I hate the Dodgers. The stadium is ugly, the fans are lackluster (in fact, half of them just clicked over to see if anything had happened with Kobe), and I once got badly sunburned there. That said,

I would like to congratulate Manny Ramirez. Sure, he led the charge to dismantle the Cubs, and just today has been revealed to have failed a PED test, leading to a fifty-game suspension. The day after his team won their 13th straight home game to open the season. But when the information came in, he handled it like an adult. He set out, in short order, what he did, what he thought he was doing, that it was his fault, and that he was sorry to everyone who cares about the Dodgers. And he consulted his union, then decided not to appeal. No whining that no one told him what the policy said, or that some doctor/company/trainer told him the drugs were okay and he shouldn't be penalized for it (NFL players, I'm looking at you). Instead, he's taking a bad situation, and handling it like a *gasp* professional.

Whether or not you think Manny is a dirty cheat (and I don't, for the record), he is setting out a model course of action for every player who accidentally violates the PED ban in baseball.

Unless, of course, it comes out that he actually did test positive for steroids. Then he's just a dirty cheat. And some part of me will feel strangely redeemed.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4148907&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines

Thank God for the Yankees

Between them having to lower ticket prices to get fans to come, getting swept in Boston while letting someone steal home, and being one of the few teams with a worse ERA than the Cubs, I almost need them around.

When your supposed closer of the future faces five batters, and the only out he records is on a sacrifice bunt, and no one on the opposing team has to hit because he walks the other four, and the rest of your bullpen also helps walk in runs, you are pretty sure it's a good thing you didn't watch the game.

As of Saturday, when the Cubs got the crap kicked out of them by the Cardinals, I declared the 2009 season officially over.

Today, that is reaffirmed. I'm going back to heckling other teams. 

Yankees suck!