A Pinstripe Predicament

Bringing the House illustration

Imagine that you are the owner of a Fortune 500 media company. You are interested in taking your company to the next level, so you decide to look for a young, talented person that you can groom into a star ad exec. On a recruiting trip to Harvard Business School, you encounter the prized jewel of the graduating class--a second-year MBA student who is nationally recognized as the "next big thing" in the industry. You immediately offer him a job upon his graduation, complete with an insane salary, a gigantic signing bonus, and a luxurious office. He accepts your offer, he graduates, and the marriage officially begins. Over the course of the next several decades, your star ad exec catapults to not only the top of his division, but the top of the company. In addition to closing the most and the largest accounts on a yearly basis, the ad exec has become the face of your company, which has now become the leading media organization in the country. When a person thinks of your company, he/she immediately thinks of the ad exec. They are one.

However, lately, the ad exec's individual performance has slipped to levels not only below his typical output, but below the average for exec's that earn similar salaries. Fortunately, the time has come to restructure his employment contract. What should you do? 

• Should you continue to pay him big money for a level of production that you could get from someone else for a lot less money? 

• Should you try to offer him less money and hope that he understands the offer as strictly a business decision with no hard feelings?

• Or should you simply let him go to another company and start a new chapter in your organization? 

• How will your millions of shareholders react to your decision? 

• Is your public relations department prepared to deal with the implications of your choice?

In essence, the New York Yankees are experiencing a similar predicament right now with its future Hall of Fame shortstop Derek Jeter. The beloved team captain's contract (10-year, $189 million) has officially ended, and it is now time for Yankees General Manager Brian Cashman and his crew to work with Jeter and his agent, Casey Close, on a new deal. Earlier today, November 23, sources confirmed that the Yankees offered Jeter a three-year, $45 million contract. Jeter has yet to publicly deny the offer, but Jeter and his agent have made it clear that the Yankees star wants a long-term deal (at least four years, preferably fix or six). As a result, it appears that the two sides remain at a nightmarish impasse.

For starters, I empathize with each side. If I were Jeter, I, too, would look for a long-term deal to secure my employment. As athletes get older, job security decreases significantly for various reasons, including lower production, higher risk of injury, and the appeal of younger talent. Athletes have only a small window of opportunity to earn money for their athletic ability; the great athletes are usually done by their mid-thirties. Thus, I understand the reasoning behind Jeter's demands. On the flip side, the New York Yankees, like every other baseball organization, is first and foremost a business. The aim of their business is to win championships and make money in the process. All decisions regarding player personnel must be made with this goal in mind. As a result, I can also see where the Yankees are coming from.

But let's be real here:  Derek Jeter and his ego are holding the New York Yankees hostage in this contract negotiation saga. Regardless of what you think about Jeter (I happen to think very highly of him), it is obvious that he is abusing his status as an all-time Yankees legend to milk as much money and as many years as he can out of this deal. Jeter and his agent can make all the arguments that they want to about Jeter's intangibles and non-quantifiable effects on the franchise. Jeter is the face of the franchise--we get it. But how can anyone justify paying top-of-the-line money for mediocre on-field talent? If advertising, branding, and image are worth so much, why not just divert some of the money that you would pay Jeter over to a group of elite marketing executives instead?

Baseball is, and always has been, a game of numbers. Frankly speaking, Jeter's numbers do not warrant the contract that he desires. Jeter is 36 years old and he just turned in the worst statistical season of his career. He was arguably the Yankees' weakest offensive starter, and his defense, despite a highly-questionable Gold Glove award, clearly deteriorated. Last season, Jeter had the third-highest salary among all players in baseball. Earning $22.6 million, Jeter out-earned teammate Mark Teixeira ($20.625M), Detroit Tigers triple crown threat Miguel Cabrera ($20M), Phillies slugger Ryan Howard ($19M), and the list goes on. Furthermore, when you compare Jeter to other shortstops in the league, it becomes even more clear that Jeter is overpaid; Phillies star shortstop, Jimmy Rollins, 32, will make $8.5M in 2011; Dodgers shortstop, Rafael Furcal, 32, will make $12M next season; and 26-year old Florida Marlins shortstop, Hanley Ramirez, widely regarded as the most complete player in baseball, will earn only $11M, half of what Jeter made last season.

The bottom line is that this is an extremely delicate situation for both parties. Derek Jeter has a lot of leverage, and it is clear to me that he is really trying to use that to his advantage. The Yankees, meanwhile, really want Derek Jeter back, but they don't need him back. And that may be the one piece of knowledge that guides them throughout this entire process. No one can predict exactly how this scenario will play out, but I am convinced that, when all is said and done, Jeter will be the one who compromises his wishes the most. While a player and an organization may appear to be one and to be equal (like an ad exec and his media company), a player is never bigger than the team, the organization, or the brand.

World Series Recap: Giants Follow BTH Keys to Success

Bringing the House illustration

In just five games, the San Francisco Giants ended the misery of a tortured but dedicated base. In what was perhaps the most surprising World Series matchup and outcome in the past ten years, the Giants decisively defeated a potent Texas Rangers club four games to one. While there were many factors that contributed to the Giants' victory, a handful of those stood out. More specifically, the Giants' first title since the franchise moved to San Francisco results directly from the team's ability to follow five keys to success as described at Bringing the House. How fantastic! Let's take a look.

Objective No. 1:  Limit Josh Hamilton

Grade:  A

After the American League MVP candidate dominated the Yankees in the ALCS, Bringing the House identified Josh Hamilton as the single biggest threat to the San Francisco Giants in the World Series. Sure, the Rangers have Cliff Lee (more on this later). But a starting pitcher can only affect the games in which he pitches in a seven-game series. A position player, however--and a dominant one at that--can affect each game in dramatic fashion. If the Giants had any shot at defeating the Rangers' vaunted offense, they needed to limit Josh Hamilton.

The Giants successfully shut Hamilton down, and made it look rather easy. The Texas slugger struggled at the plate and turned in a final line of 2-for-20 (.100 average) with only a single and a solo home run to his credit. Not only did the Giants' pitchers silence his thunderous bat, but they did not even have to walk him to do so; Hamilton walked only one time in the series. He also struck out three times and was caught stealing once. Any time a dangerous offense contains a key cog like Texas' contains Hamilton, you have to make sure to limit that person's production, and the Giants did just that.

Objective No. 2:  Patrol the Bases

Grade:  A

We thought the speed of the Rangers did not get enough publicity going into the World Series. They get a ton of press for being a power-hitting team, and rightfully so. But the speed of the Rangers really made a difference against an older and slower Yankees team in the ALCS. If the Giants had any hope of winning close, pitching-dominated games, they would have to neutralize the Rangers' speed by limiting leads and secondary leads and throwing out base runners.

The Giants defense did a great job at patrolling the bases. Not only did the Giants throw out two base runners on stolen base attempts, but they only allowed two successfully steals in the series. Furthermore, neither of those two base stealers came around to score. In essence, those steals were meaningless. What was a huge worry going into the series became completely irrelevant by the end.

Objective No. 3:  Win One Game Against Cliff Lee

Grade:  A+

Entering the series, Lee's playoff history was the stuff of legends. If the Giants hoped to win, or even compete for that matter, they would need to defeat the Rangers in at least one game of which Lee started.

In unquestionably the most shocking development of the World Series, the Giants not only defeated Lee once, but they defeated Lee twice. Emphatically.

In Game 1, the Giants chased Lee off the mound, in front of his own fans, after just 4.2 innings. The Giants smacked him for 7 runs on 8 hits and 1 walk. And in the deciding Game 5, the Giants touched Lee up for 3 runs on 6 hits in 7 innings. While the latter performance wasn't so much of a beating, let's put everything into perspective.

Lee was arguably the most dominant postseason starting pitcher ever. The Yankees, a team that boasted the best offense both last season and this season, could not even touch him over the course of two consecutive playoffs. But the Giants, a team that everyone believed swung chopsticks at the plate, defeated Lee twice, in Texas, in the two most important games of the series, the opener and the clincher.

The only comparison that comes to mind is in the world of mixed martial arts. If you're a fan of the UFC, consider Cliff Lee the B.J. Penn of baseball. Like Penn, Lee is one of the best in the sport and shines on the biggest stage. He completely dominated great lineups (Yankees, Rays, Rockies) like Penn dominated strong contenders (Joe Stevenson, Diego Sanchez, Kenny Florian). It got to the point where you wondered if anyone would ever defeat Lee. He was automatic and indestructible.

But then Lee stumbled upon the Texas Rangers just as Penn stumbled upon Frankie Edgar. In the first encounter, the Rangers defeated Lee and Edgar defeated Penn and both results left you speechless. You literally did not believe what you had just witnessed. But the bigger illusion was what was left to come. In the second and last encounter, just when you thought and expected that Lee and Penn would both return to form and regain that mystique, they both stumbled again.    It was shocking and breathtaking at the same time.

Objective No. 4:  Other Bats Must Help Cody Ross

Grade:  A

If you take out a solo home run in a losing effort in Game 3, the Rangers shut down Cody Ruth Ross. Bringing the House correctly saw this coming and knew that the Giants needed their others bats to step up if they wanted the crown.

The other batters picked up Ross' slack and then some. Check out the following numbers:

• Five different Giants had at least 5 hits
• Six different Giants hit a home run
• Eight different Giants drove in at least 2 runs
• Five different Giants recorded a slugging percentage over .500
• Eleven different Giants scored a run

As you can see, the Giants not only had a lot of production, but the production came from a lot of different players. On the game's biggest stage, the entire offense showed up.

Objective No. 5:  Unleash the Beard

Grade:  A

The Rangers feast on bullpen pitching, so we thought that the Giants would need to get the ball to Wilson and Wilson would need to pitch lights-out for them to win this series. It turned out that the Giants offense performed so well that there weren't many save opportunities for Wilson. That being said, manager Bruce Bochy gave Wilson three appearances and The Beard delivered the following line:

2.2 IP, 1 H, 0 ER, 0 BB, 4 K

Fittingly, the only save chance that Wilson received was in the clinching Game 5. Not surprisingly, Wilson threw a perfect ninth inning, struck out two batters in the process, and locked up the team's first championship since 1958.

Congratulations to the San Francisco Giants!

How the San Francisco Giants Can Win the World Series

Bringing the House illustration

With the start of the World Series just days away, Bringing the House will dissect the keys to each team winning the title. First up:  the San Francisco Giants.

1. Limit Josh Hamilton

Hamilton, my pick for the American League MVP, had a quiet division series versus the Tampa Bay Rays. He finished that round 2-for-18 (.111 average) and only drove in one run. Just when everyone began to wonder whether Hamilton's late-season rib injury was simply too much to overcome, the star outfielder silenced all critics by delivering an MVP-worthy series against the Yankees. In Game 1, Hamilton started the game with a 3-run shot off of Yankees ace CC Sabathia to jump start the Rangers and send Arlington into a frenzy. In Game 3, Hamilton again ignited the offense by sending an Andy Pettitte offering into the bleachers for another first-inning home run. The next night, in pivotal Game 4, Hamilton hit two home runs to lead the Rangers to a 10-3 blowout. Hamilton seemed to have found his groove as he finished the American League Championship Series 7-for-20 (.350) with 4 home runs and 7 runs batted in. And just for fun, he also stole three bases.

I doubt the Giants followed the Rangers much throughout the regular season; the two teams are obviously in different leagues and San Francisco was occupied by an intense NL West race with the Padres and Rockies all season long. But as the number of remaining teams in the playoffs dwindled down, I would be surprised if the Giants had not caught the Rangers and their dismantling of the Yankees. And if they did in fact catch any of those games, they would have concluded, among other things, that Josh Hamilton is the single most important factor in the Rangers' success. How, then, do the Giants stop him?

Besides praying that Hamilton falls into a slump like he did against Tampa, there are two main ways to at least contain him. First, you could pitch around him or intentionally walk him like the Yankees did in the ALCS. The Yankees walked Hamilton a total of eight (8) times in the series. In Game 2, Hamilton went 0-1 with 4 walks, but the Rangers won in decisive fashion. Then in Game 6, Hamilton walked another 3 times, yet the Rangers still won and closed out the series. The Yankees took the bat out of Hamilton's hands, yet they still got pounded. Did the strategy backfire? No, not exactly.

The key to pitching around a player is to get the next guy out. Every great hitter in this league has another strong hitter behind him to "protect" him. That player's job is to punish the opposing team for walking the star batter. For most of the season and the entire playoffs, Vladimir Guerrero had the duty of protecting Hamilton. Let's take a look at how successful the Yankees were in getting Guerrero out after they had walked Hamilton.

Game 1 (bottom of the 3rd):  Guerrero struck out swinging
Game 2 (bottom of the 1st):  Guerrero struck out swinging
Game 2 (bottom of the 2nd):  Guerrero grounded out
Game 2 (bottom of the 4th):  Guerrero lined into double play
Game 2 (bottom of the 8th):  Guerrero struck out swinging
Game 6 (bottom of the 3rd):  Guerrero popped out
Game 6 (bottom of the 5th):  Guerrero hit 2-run double
Game 6 (bottom of the 7th):  Guerrero grounded out

Minus one hanging curveball from Phil Hughes in Game 6, the Yankees were able to retire Guerrero after they had walked Hamilton. The strategy, for the most part, worked very well. The damage in Games 2 and 6 were done long before Hamilton even stepped up to the plate. While the Giants have better starting pitching top to bottom than the Yankees do, there will be times during games (i.e. first base is open with two outs) when you would rather pitch to Guerrero than Hamilton. And if they do decide to give a pass to Hamilton, they need to make sure to get Vlad out.

In the event that the Giants pitchers want to go after Hamilton, they need to focus on getting ahead in the count with early strikes. You obviously want to get ahead of every batter you face, but Hamilton more so than others. For him, one strike makes a world of difference. Check out the following splits that detail Hamilton's batting average based on various ball and strike counts:

Count 0-0:  .398
Count 0-1:  .383
Count 0-2:  .128
Count 1-0:  .404
Count 1-1:  .392
Count 1-2:  .247
Count 2-0:  .500
Count 2-1:  .528
Count 2-2:  .358
Count 3-0:  .500
Count 3-1:  .636
Count 3-2:  .302

As you can see, his godly numbers comes back down to Earth once you get two strikes on him (with the exception of 2-2 counts). So the key will be to get ahead in the count and then work outside of the zone with nasty breaking pitches, which happens to be Tim Lincecum's general approach. As a general rule of thumb, just treat him like everyone treated Barry Bonds (at-bat) in his prime; San Francisco should know all about that.

2. Patrol the Bases

The Rangers and Giants are polar opposites when it comes to speed. Texas finished 7th in all of baseball 123 stolen bases on the season, whereas San Francisco finished dead last with only 55 swipes. The Giants have not seen the type of speed Texas possess mainly because the AL is simply a faster league than the NL. The American League teams that have the speed make it a point to use it, and when they do, it can dramatically affect a game.

In Game 2 of the ALCS, Rangers shortstop Elvis Andrus used his speed to wreak havoc against the Yankees in the first inning. First, Andrus reached on an infield single after beating out a dribble to Derek Jeter. Starting pitcher Phil Hughes then threw a wild pitch, which Andrus took advantage of by moving to second. After Michael Young struck out, Andrus stole third against the feeble-armed Jorge Posada. Two batters later, Andrus and Josh Hamilton orchestrated a beautiful double-steal and Andrus came across the plate for the game's first score. So in one inning, the Rangers manufactured a huge run without ever hitting the ball out of the infield; sounds like a luxury that may come in handy against the tough pitching of Lincecum, Matt Cain, Jonathan Sanchez, and Madison Bumgarner.

To defend the Rangers' speed, the Giants will really need to buckle down. It starts with making sure that the Rangers' top speed guys don't get on base. Andrus is far and away their fastest player, but Nelson Cruz, Julio Borbon, Ian Kinsler, and David Murphy all recorded double-digit stolen base totals this season. When those runners do get on base, San Francisco pitchers need to mix up how long they hold the ball before going to the plate and make sure they execute effective slide-steps. As good as all that sounds on paper, however, it may be irrelevant. The Giants had trouble with opposing base runners all season en route to allowing a 9th-most 115 steals. In the NLCS, the Giants gave up seven (7) steals to the Phillies while only throwing them out once. The Rangers have a clear advantage in this aspect of the game.

3. Win One Game Against Cliff Lee

No team has ever defeated Lee in the playoffs. Last year, Lee was 4-0 with a 1.56 ERA over 40.1 innings in the playoffs. This postseason? More of the same. Check out what Lee has done in three starts thus far:

ALDS, Game 1 vs. TB:  7.0 IP, 5 H, 1 ER, 0 BB, 10 K (Win)
ALDS, Game 5 vs. TB:  9.0 IP, 6 H, 1 ER, 0 BB, 11 K (Win)
ALCS, Game 3 vs. NY:  8.0 IP, 2 H, 0 ER, 1 BB, 13 K (Win)

Stop it, Cliff. That's just not fair. In fact, not only is it unfair, but it's unheard of:  Lee became the first pitcher in Major League Baseball history to strike out 10 or more batters three times in a single postseason. Current Rangers owner Nolan Ryan (ever heard of him?) even said, "[Lee is] the most consistent pitcher I've ever seen." Quite the compliment considering the source.

We can ogle over Lee's stats for days, but my point is this:   If the Giants want to win their first World Series since moving to San Francisco in 1958, they will need to defeat the Rangers in at least one game in which Lee starts. They don't have to knock Lee around with a handful of home runs or double-digit hits. Heck, they don't even have to get a single run off of him. But they have to win that game somehow, whether on a blown call or via late-inning heroics at the expense of Texas' bullpen. They just can't afford to chalk up two games as losses in this series simply because Lee is listed as the probable starter that night. And while opposing Lee with Lincecum boosts your chances, the burden ultimately rests on the offense.

4a. Can Cody Ross Continue His Magic?

Unless you are a Florida Marlins fan or followed fantasy baseball closely, you probably had never heard of Cody Ross before this postseason (and I suppose unless you are a Giants fan, Phillies supporter, or sports blogger, you still haven't). But Ross burst onto the stage in dramatic fashion over the past three weeks by providing a bulk of San Francisco's offense and some timely hits. In 34 at-bats, Ross has 11 hits (a .324 average), including 4 doubles and 4 home runs, with 8 RBIs. The Giants batters have recorded 27 RBIs this postseason, which means that Ross has nearly one-third of those. Sometimes the big stage brings out the best in players; sometimes people get hot at the right time. I think this is a combination of the two. But will he carry the momentum into the World Series where the pressure is exponentially greater? If the Giants are to win, he has no choice.

4b. Which Batter Will Step Up?

In the event that Ross' bat cools off, who will pick up the slack? This is his first postseason appearance and he is absolutely obliterating his career averages in the major statistical categories. He is nearly 60 points above his career batting average, over 70 points above his career on-base percentage, and over 300 points above his career slugging percentage. He is not just hot, he is on steroids fire. But all good things come to an end, and if this ride happens to end before the start of, or during, the World Series, to whom will the Giants look?

The ugly truth is that the Giants are not built for high-scoring affairs. The Giants have only one player who hit over .300 during the regular season (Buster Posey, .305). The Rangers, on the other hand, had three players, including the league's batting champion. The Rangers scored nearly 100 more runs in the regular season than the Giants did. And so far this postseason, the Rangers have six players who are slugging above .400 (including Cruz at .875), whereas the Giants only have three. Although the Giants do not want to engage in any slugfests with the Rangers, eventually they will have to outscore the Rangers to win the series. Someone besides Ross will need to play big.

5. Unleash The Beard

The Brian Wilson Bandwagon is more packed than ever. The charismatic closer has not only gained a huge following because of his infectious personality, but also because of his lights-out pitching. In 9.0 innings this postseason, The Beard has allowed only 4 hits without surrendering a run, and he struck out 12 in the process. Although he sometimes makes ninth innings exciting excruciating, he gets the job done at the end of day--just ask the Phillies. The 3-2 curveball that he threw to freeze Ryan Howard was the biggest pitch of Wilson's life to date, and it was downright nasty.

Wilson will be very important for the Giants because the Rangers have feasted on late-inning pitching so far this postseason. Specifically, the Rangers have piled on runs in the ninth inning of games, killing any chance of an opponent's comeback and taking all air out of opposing stadiums. In the ALCS versus the Yankees, the Rangers scored nine (9) ninth-inning runs. And while none of those runs were scored off Mariano Rivera (i.e. the closer), you won't win if you can't stop a team late in the game. The Beard has great stuff and he will need to bring it if he wants to shut down a potent Rangers offense.

ALCS Preview: Yankees vs. Rangers

The New York Yankees are one series away from having the opportunity to defend their crown. Tomorrow evening, the American League Championship series between said Yankees and the Texas Rangers begins in Arlington. While the ALCS does not have as much hype as the NLCS in terms of pitching matchups, the offensive star power in this series is second to none. Let's take a look at how the hitting, pitching, and managing of the two squads compare.

Schedule

Game 1 - October 15, 2010 @ 8:00 p.m. ET
CC Sabathia vs. C.J. Wilson

Game 2 - October 16, 2010 @ 4:00 p.m. ET
Phil Hughes vs. Colby Lewis

Game 3 - October 18, 2010 @ 8:00 p.m. ET
Cliff Lee vs. Andy Pettitte

Game 4 - October 19, 2010 @ 8:00 p.m. ET
Tommy Hunter vs. A.J. Burnett

Game 5 - October 20, 2010 @ 4:00 p.m. ET*
Game 6 - October 22, 2010 @ 8:00 p.m. ET*
Game 7 - October 23, 2010 @ 8:00 p.m. ET*

*If necessary, pitching probables to be determined

Starting Pitching

Much has been made about Cliff Lee not starting in Game 1 as a result of having pitched in the fifth and final game of the Rangers' first-round series against the Rays. Basically, what this means is that the Rangers will not have the luxury of matching ace against ace (Lee vs. Sabathia) in games one and five (assuming Sabathia pitches game five). However, this gives them the opportunity to throw Lee in Game 7, if they are fortunate enough to make it that far.

That being said, it all sets up some interesting pitching matchups at least through the first four games. Game 1 pits two left-handers against each other. Sabathia's name obviously garners much more attention, but do not sleep on C.J. Wilson. The reliever-turned-starter has been absolutely terrific all season long (.217 opponents batting average, 7.50 K/9, 3.35 ERA). And in his first career postseason start last week against Tampa Bay, Wilson gave the Rangers 6.1 strong innings, allowed no runs, scattered two hits, and struck out seven. I think Game 1 is absolutely pivotal for both teams, but more so for the Rangers in order to give themselves some confidence. My head says CC pulls it out, but my gut says Wilson and the Rangers find a way to steal Game 1.

Hughes versus Lewis is another solid pitching matchup, and Lewis is another pitcher that had a surprising year that many people outside of Texas simply do not know about. Despite Hughes' struggles late in the year, he was able to right the ship and fire seven scoreless innings last Saturday against the Twins; you could hear Yankees fans collectively sigh each time Hughes put another zero up on the scoreboard. I think Lewis has been the more consistent pitcher, but Hughes has more talent. It will be a good battle of wills.

Game 3 might present the best matchup of the series. Cliff Lee's playoff domination is well-documented. The guy is lights out in the postseason. He has killed the Yankees before, and based on his performances in the ALDS, he is poised to do it again. Pettitte was a complete wild card going into the Yankees' series versus the Twins, but a strong 7-inning, 1-run performance put any doubt to rest. I think Girardi made a very interesting decision by switching Pettitte and Hughes in the second and third games. I actually believe it will turn out to be a bad move; Pettitte is one of the best postseason pitchers in baseball history and I would rather win or lose with him than win or lose with Hughes.

Game 4 is a complete toss-up, but I give a slight edge to the Rangers with Tommy Hunter simply because Burnett is a 4-inning roller coaster every time he goes out to the mound. The knock on Burnett all season long was that, although he has great stuff, he does not have enough mental fortitude to pitch well each start. How do the Yankees expect him to remain mentally strong and focused on the biggest stage? I just don't see it happening.

I think the starting pitching edge has to go to the Yankees for two reasons. First, I think the fact that CC will pitch sooner and possibly more than Lee is a big deal. If the Yankees get up, say, three games to one, then CC will have the chance to pitch in a deciding Game 5, while Lee would have only pitched once to that point. And if CC closes that game out, obviously Lee would not get another start after that. Second, Pettitte is the third best pitcher in this series, and he will be a tremendous asset for the Yankees because of his experience and postseason success. Not only does he give the Yankees a good chance of beating Cliff Lee in New York, but he, like CC, could get two starts in this series, and that is a good thing for the Bronx Bombers; anytime you can get can pitch the all-time postseason wins leader two times in a series, you have to be confident.

Edge:  Yankees

Relief Pitching

I give the advantage in the bullpen to the Yankees for three reasons. First, they have momentum. The Yankees bullpen had a great finish to the regular season and performed well in the ALDS versus Minnesota. Yankees relievers pitched seven total innings and allowed only one earned run. Meanwhile, the Rangers' bullpen was roughed up a bit versus the Rays; they pitched 14 total innings and gave up 8 earned runs, including one by heralded young closer Neftali Feliz. But the aforementioned stats lead me to my next point…

The Yankees bullpen is rested and fresh. Not only have they pitched half of the innings that the Rangers' pen has pitched, but two of their relievers, Joba Chamberlain and Sergio Mitre, have not even gotten any work! Sure, you could say that they may be rusty, but let's be honest, it simply means that the starters have gotten deep into ball games and that they have fully energized arms at their disposal.

And finally, I give the relief pitching advantage to the Yanks because they have Mariano Rivera and the Rangers do not. Rivera's presence will tilt the bullpen war in favor of New York in any series against any team simply because he is the best postseason relief pitcher in history. The numbers speak for themselves.

Edge:  Yankees

Offense

Most of the Yankees hitters so far this postseason are seeing the ball well and getting nice hits as a result. Guys like Robinson Cano, Nick Swisher, and Mark Teixeira, who produced all season long, are producing now when it counts (combined 12-for-25). However, there have been two big surprises to this point in the playoffs. First, the lack of production from Alex Rodriguez. A-Rod proved last postseason that he can be a big-time performer, and although 3-for-11 is not horrendous, it is not a line fit for an MVP, either. That being said, I think the Yankees have enough pop in their lineup to survive a subpar series or two by A-Rod. But perhaps even bigger of a surprise has been Curtis Granderson. The new Yankee turned up the heat late in the season and his hot-hitting has parlayed into the postseason. Grandy went 5-for-11 against Minnesota with a key triple in Game 1 to start a rally against Francisco Liriano. Granderson, after making some modifications to his swing, has suddenly found a sweet stroke against lefties, who historically have given him trouble. Well, Texas has two great lefties in Lee and Wilson, so Granderson's new swing and hot streak will be put to the test.

For the Rangers, two hitters have stood out thus far:  Ian Kinsler and Nelson Cruz. The irony is that Kinsler and Cruz have been, for the most part, disappoints this season. Kinsler was injured for part of the season and even when healthy lost all power and speed in his game. Cruz sped out of the gate quickly but then plateaued and fell back to mediocrity. In the ALDS versus Tampa, the two combined to hit 16-for-38 with 3 home runs and 9 RBI. But the rest of the lineup has been pretty quiet. Most notably, the Rangers are not getting production from two of their most important hitters, Michael Young and MVP-candidate Josh Hamilton. Young is only 3-for-20 and has struck out six times; Hamilton, still trying to find his groove after missing one month due to injuries, has been even worse at 2-for-18 with six strikeouts.

Again, I have to give the edge to the Yanks. They have a deeper lineup and only one of their hitters is slumping (A-Rod), and he is barely slumping. The Rangers offense relies too much on Young and Hamilton for them to endure another series of their struggles and still make it out alive. Finally, the Yankees hitters have more playoff experience, and that goes a long way. They know how to work the counts and they know how to disrupt a pitcher's rhythm. Ultimately, they are just more complete and have a better chance of surviving minor hitting blips.

Edge:  Yankees

Managing

I really have not seen Ron Washington manage much this season. He had the controversial moment before the season when he admitted to his cocaine use. But beyond that, I just don't know much about him and his managing style. I have seen Girardi manage plenty this year; I have doubted many of his decisions and have lauded many others. The bottom line is, he won a championship last season, and he has put his squad in a position to repeat. It is tough to argue against that. But I will reserve my judgment in this regard because of my lack of information. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of Ron Washington can shed some light on this matchup.

Edge:  N/A

Series Outlook

While I can imagine the Rangers pulling off the upset, I do not think it will happen. The Yankees are too deep on offense, too deep in the bullpen, and have considerable advantages with starting pitching experience and matchups.

Yankees win in 5 games and advance to the World Series to face the Phillies.

ALDS Preview: Yankees vs. Twins

Schedule

Game 1:  C.C. Sabathia (NYY) vs. Francisco Liriano (MINN)
October 6, 2010 @ 8:37 P.M. ET

Game 2:  Andy Pettitte (NYY) vs. Carl Pavano (MINN)
October 7, 2010 @ 6:07 P.M. ET

Game 3:  Phil Hughes (NYY) vs. Brian Duensing (MINN)
October 9, 2010 @ 8:37 P.M. ET

Game 4: TBD (NYY) vs. Nick Blackburn (MINN)
October 10, 2010 @ TBD

Game 5:  TBD

Offense

Everyone knows that the Yankees have a stacked lineup. Every spot in the order represents a tough out for opposing pitchers. But for whatever reason, the team has sometimes fallen asleep for stretches during the season. I think the key to the Yankees offense will be none other than Alex Rodriguez, who had a memorable postseason last year. A-Rod was recently named AL Player of the Month for September after he helped the Yankees secure their Wild Card berth by supplying enough power to get them through some lackluster games. But A-Rod is the key not only because of his ability to change games with one swing of his bat, but also because of his position in the lineup; if he performs well and puts fear in the Minnesota pitchers, Mark Teixeira will get better pitches to hit. And if A-Rod can manage to get on base at a consistent rate, MVP-candidate Robinson Cano will have plenty of opportunities to drive in Rodriguez, as Cano has done all season.

If the Yankees do fall in a rut with their power hitting, Brett Gardner gives them the option of playing "small ball" and manufacturing runs. Gardner has an impressive on-base percentage and, if he reaches, can cause havoc on the base paths--he ranked 3rd in the AL with 47 stolen bases this season. Gardner can also use his speed to leg out triples on balls hit to the gaps, or use his bat control to lay down nice sacrifice bunts. He gives the Yankees an element that they have not had in previous seasons, which is a luxury that could pay dividends.

As for the Twinkies, Joe Mauer is the obvious key to their offensive success. Mauer's power has regressed since last season, but his average remains unbelievably high and his at-bats are truly special to watch. But because former-AL MVP Justin Morneau has been officially ruled out of the first series, the Twins need people to step up and protect Mauer in the lineup. Left-fielder Delmon Young did the job all season on his way to career bests in batting average (.298), home runs (21), and runs batted in (112). But can Young continue his success in the postseason? As we all know, the playoffs are a completely different animal, and not all players are cut out for the spotlight. If it isn't Young, it will be up to a combination of the rejuvenated Jim Thome, Michael Cuddyer, and Jason Kubel. The Twins have found ways to win games all season, so although the lineup does not look intimidating on paper, you would be foolish to count them out.

Edge:  Yankees

Starting Pitching

It is difficult to figure out this aspect of the series. Obviously, the Yankees have the best pitcher on either team in C.C. Sabathia. The Cy Young candidate has postseason experience and is a legitimate workhorse at the top of the rotation. You can rest assured that manager Joe Girardi will pitch Sabathia in two games this series, most likely the in first and the fourth games (if necessary). Sabathia gets a clear edge over Liriano not only because Sabathia is one of the best in the league, but also because we don't know what Liriano will bring to the table. Although he was recently named Comeback Player of the Year, Liriano still has not been as consistent as the Twins had hoped this year. If he's firing on all cylinders, Liriano has the stuff capable of shutting down the Yankees lineup, but that's a big "if."

Once you move past the two staff's aces, it begins to get interesting. The Yankees have no idea what they are going to get Pettitte or Hughes. The veteran left-hander is coming off a long disabled-list stint and has only had three starts to work himself back into form. In those three outings, Pettitte only pitched well in the first one, going six innings at Baltimore and only surrendering one run. In his next two starts, both against the Red Sox, Pettitte gave up a combined nine earned runs in only 7.1 innings. On the other hand, Hughes really sputtered after the All-Star break. The young righty posted earned run averages of 5.17, 5.52, 4.22, and 4.85 in the months of June, July, August, and September, respectively. If the Yankees plan to make it past the Twins, they desperately need one of these two guys to step up and give them a solid performance. If that doesn't happen, the Yankees can kiss their title hopes goodbye.

For Minnesota, starting pitching is not as much of a mystery as the arms have been consistent throughout the season. Pavano, perhaps powered by his trademark facial hair, has had a resurgent year. But rookie left-hander Brian Duensing has been even more of a surprise. I think Duensing has a legitimate shot at winning American League Rookie of the Year, although the Rangers' Neftali Feliz will probably walk away with the award. The key for Duensing will be his ability, or inability, to get rid of the inevitable jitters that accompany a pitcher's first postseason appearance. If he can do that and give the Twins six or more strong innings, the Twins will be in good shape.

Edge:  Tie

Relief Pitching

The Yankees relief pitching was suspect during the majority of the season, but came on very strong as the season came to an end. Midseason acquisition Kerry Wood gives the Yanks a powerful arm to bridge the team over to legendary closer Mariano Rivera. The Yankees bullpen performed so well, in fact, that it was pretty difficult for Girardi to make his bullpen cuts. In the end, he decided to leave off Ivan Nova in favor of Sergio Mitre and Dustin Moseley. The two young arms will have the responsibility of entering the game for long relief in the event that one of New York's starters gets shelled early.

For the Twins, depth is the name of the game. They have three pitchers who can legitimately be starting closers on major league squads:  Jon Rauch, Brian Fuentes, and Matt Capps. The Twins will need consistently strong performances from those three, as well as from middle relievers Jose Mijares and Matt Guerrier, to finish games late against an experienced Yankees lineup. My only concern with the Twins' back-end arms is that they are all relatively inexperienced in the postseason and I think they have yet to show their true colors (translation:  I think they are overrated).

Edge:  Yankees (because of Rivera)

Managing

Although Girardi has made some very questionable decisions with regard to personnel in the past month, the man led his team to a championship last season, and that cannot be forgotten. Rod Gardenhire, on the other hand, has had very minimal success in the postseason, especially against the Yankees. That being said, this year may be a different story; Gardenhire is my pick for AL Manager of the Year based on what he has done with a Twins team that was forced to play through injuries to key players like Morneau, pitcher Nick Blackburn, and star closer Joe Nathan.

Edge:  Yankees (barely)

Series Outlook

I think the Twins have the potential do knock the Yankees out in the first round. But I don't think it will happen. I think Sabathia will give the Yankees two dominant starts and one of Pettitte or Hughes will supply a third victory, which will send the Twins home. Ultimately, I think the Yankees are just too experienced and too talented to have a let down this early in the postseason. Do I think the Yanks will win it all? That remains to be seen based on what matchups are presented. But for now, I think the Yankees will escape on to the championship series. I predict Yankees in 4 games.

Looking in the Mirror: How King Felix and C.C. Sabathia Have Forced Us to Reexamine Pitching Greatness

Lately, baseball analysts, writers and bloggers, and even current players and managers have engaged in a heated discussion concerning this season's American League Cy Young Award race. While everyone agrees that the award should be given to the league's "best" pitcher, nobody can agree on exactly how to define "best." What criteria, or stats, should be considered when evaluating a pitcher's season? And how much does each metric weigh in relation to one another? Perhaps no Cy Young discussion has called upon these questions more than the one in our midst today. Although you could arguably make a case for a handful of pitchers, two of those guys, Seattle's Felix Hernandez and New York's C.C. Sabathia, have received the brunt of the attention.

By now, everyone knows the story. King Felix dominated hitters all season long en route to leading the league in a plethora of pitching statistics. However, despite the gaudy numbers, Hernandez only won 13 games. Sabathia, on the other hand, collected 21 victories while posting strong, but not dominant, numbers. Regardless of which side of the argument you fall on, one thing is clear:  the discussion requires us to examine how we define success for starting pitchers. In other words, how much weight should we assign to wins and losses, and how much weight do we give to other statistics, such as innings pitched, strikeouts, earned run average, etc.?

Historically, the baseball world has judged starting pitchers based on wins. In terms of individual career accomplishments for pitchers, the 300-win club is second to none. Of the thousands of pitchers who have ever toed the rubber, only 24 of them have reached the 300-win milestone. Of those 24, twenty (20) have been eligible for Hall of Fame induction, and all 20 have been enshrined. For the record, the four to be determined are Greg Maddux, Roger Clemens, Randy Johnson, and Tom Glavine; three of those four guys are no-brainer first-ballot dudes, and the fourth is a juice-head. But for a variety of reasons, we may never see another 300-game winner, and because of that, voters and fans from this day forward must alter the way they judge pitching careers.

Well, the same adjustment must be made when we examine individual season accomplishments. The Cy Young, the pinnacle of single-season success for pitchers, has long trended toward pitchers with high win totals; from 1967 through 1990, only six (6) starting pitchers won the Cy Young Award after winning less than 20 games that season. From 1991 through the present day, that number skyrocketed to 17 starting pitchers who have won the award after winning less than 20 games. In recent years, the trend has been strongest, with eight of the past ten winners across both leagues winning the prestigious award with less than 20 wins. I do not believe that voters are purposely devaluing win totals, but instead they are placing less weight on win totals because they understand that, in the new era of innings limits and pitch counts, wins are simply tougher to secure.

Not only are wins tougher to come by, but the sabermetric movement has convinced many that wins are a misleading statistic. Anyone that watches baseball can tell you that wins depend on a variety of factors:  the starting pitcher must pitch deep enough into the ball game to qualify for a decision, the pitcher must exit the game while his team is ahead, and the bullpen must keep that lead and win the game, to name a few. But, to prove a point, the difficulty in obtaining a win can be illustrated using a recent example. Only July 1, 1990, Andy Hawkins of the New York Yankees pitched a no-hitter against the Chicago White Sox but lost the game. A baserunner reached on an error, and after Hawkins walked the next two batters to load the bases, a fielder committed another error that allowed all three runs to score. The guy did not allow a single hit over the course of eight innings (he was the visiting pitcher), and not only did he not win, but he lost. This tells us that a perfect storm is required to win a game; there are dozens of factors outside of his control that can increase or decrease his chances on a given night. Thus, wins are products of opportunity, much like saves. Granted, pitchers have more control over wins than closers do over saves, but you get the picture.

Sabermetric stats have tried and succeeded, as much as possible, to separate those outside factors from a starting pitcher's performance. Complete isolation is never possible, but with stats such as fielding independent pitching, wins above replacement, and batting average on balls in play, we can more accurately gauge a pitcher's performance minus the "other stuff." I urge you to explore sabermetric stats on your own on the internet at various websites, such as this one.

Ultimately, any award must involve a holistic examination of the candidates. You cannot simply look at wins just as you cannot simply look at earned run average or any more intense isolated stat. Having said that, I believe Felix Hernandez deserves the Cy Young more than C.C. Sabathia. I think the decision is not as hard as it seems and can be concluded simply by having watched the two pitch all year. But if you want the numbers, then search around because you will find breakdowns and analyses everywhere. I'll leave it up to you to research, but for now I just wanted to hone in on why we're arguing over the merits of the two great pitchers; that is, because we're transitioning from old to new perspectives on pitching greatness.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Numbers don't lie: AL Cy Young to King Felix (cbssports.com)
• CC Sabathia is the favorite, but Felix Hernandez deserves Cy Young attention (sportingnews.com)
• Felix Hernandez gets key Cy Young endorsements (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

The Five Most Exciting Plays in Sports

Like many Americans, I watch a lot of sports. I watch football, basketball, baseball, mixed martial arts, tennis, and hockey. Hell, every four years I even turn on some soccer. I watch kids (Little League World Series) and I watch celebrities mix it up with old-timers (MLB All-Star Legends & Celebrity Softball Game). Having consumed so many events, I have experienced millions upon millions of mundane, commonplace moments:

• Wilson grounds out to first.

• Jackson makes 10-foot jump shot.

• Williams runs up the middle for 2 yards.

• Lewis walks.

With so many boring moments, what keeps me coming back to the TV for more? For one, rooting interest. Anytime the Trojans, Seahawks, Mariners, or Lakers play, I tune in to root for them. Fantasy players also become rooting interests. As I write this article, the Phillies-Dodgers game plays in the background not because I cheer for either of those teams, but because Jimmy Rollins and Andre Ethier are both on my fantasy baseball squad. But what about the games in which I have no rooting interest? Why do I stick around? Let me answer that question using good ole fashion show-and-tell…



I watch because amidst all the ordinary plays and repetition, the sports gods sprinkle magical moments like Reggie Bush's touchdown run above versus Fresno State. I watch because every time I turn on the TV there is a chance that something special will happen. In almost every game, fans are lucky enough to witness an exciting play or moment that makes it worthwhile to sit through the boring stuff.

But which of these events is the most incredible? What is the most exciting play in sports? In order to create a fair and ultimately more interesting debate, I set the following criteria:

• The play cannot be a broken play or a unique highlight (i.e. the Bush juke and run from above does not qualify, but the generic "breakaway touchdown run" does qualify)

• The play cannot draw its significance from the moment or from the circumstances surrounding the play (i.e.  cannot be a game-winner, buzzer-beater, walk-off, etc.)

• It cannot be a fight or brawl or any other extracurricular activity

• The play must occur during the natural flow of the game (i.e. no penalty shootouts/shots)

After brainstorming all of the possible candidates and weeding out a bunch of them using the criteria that I set, I present to you the top five most exciting plays in sports, starting with…

5. Punt/kick return for a touchdown

Although special teams units do not get the attention that offensive and defensive units receive, special teams is often considered the x-factor on the gridiron. A dynamic special teams package has the ability to dramatically alter the score and momentum of a game. I find it unique because it is a play that can never be scripted and seems to have a flow to it that is absent during set offensive plays. While the majority of punt and kick returns are blown up early during the play and stuffed for minimal gain (0-10 yards on a punt return, 10-25 yards on a kick return), a small amount of returns are executed smoothly enough to generate six points. Sometimes its as simple as following your blockers through the wedge, and sometimes it takes a little more fortune (YouTube "Music City Miracle"). But one thing is clear, some kick/punt returners simply have a knack for breaking loose; Bush did it in college; Devin Hester and Josh Cribbs do it in the NFL. Check out DeSean Jackson's punt return for a touchdown against Tennessee back during his college days…



4. Outfield assist

An outfield assist is a huge defensive play that usually saves a run or two. These plays excite me because they develop very quickly (something rare in baseball) and because they are so close aka "bang bang." There is also some bravado involved in these moments. Base runners, especially the quickest ones like B.J. Upton and Juan Pierre, like to think they can raise terror on the base paths at their own will. They take liberties and trust that their speed will take them safely into the next base. But the guys who patrol the outfield have other ideas. "You think you can run on me? I dare you." The defenders with the huge cannons, like Ichiro Suzuki, Delmon Young, and Jeff Francoeur, relish the challenge. If fans are lucky, it will be a challenge at home plate that ends in a collision. Finally, if you get the chance to look at a replay of the assist from an angle that allows you to see both the fielder collect the ball and the base runner run the bases, it can be very cool.

3. Dunking on a defender

There is nothing more embarrassing in sports than being dunked on by another player. I understand that sometimes, for shot blockers, its an instinctive reaction to go and protect the rim. But often the decision just results in two points, humiliation, and a new poster for sale in sports memorabilia shops. The best thing about these plays is that they feel like Earth-shattering moments. The rim gets rocked, the athletes get amped up, and the fans go crazy. Every time I see it happen, I love it and can only say things like, "Wow…did that really just happen? That was ridiculous!" And I simply cannot help myself from rewinding the tape and watching it once more. Here is one of my favorites, from my boy D-Wade…



2. Breakaway hockey goal

It happens in the blink of an eye and usually off a mistake by an attacking team. In fact, the opportunity seems to appear out of thin air. The breakaway goal is awesome because it is so rare, yet so simple in concept. It's one-on-one, attacker full speed ahead versus the goalie. A save by the goalie in these situations is very impressive, but a goal is definitely more exciting. The attacker often uses some sort of deception to get the goalie off balance. It's the one time in a hockey game where it seems as though time stands still and every pair of eyes is on the same part of the ice. Very cool. Check out Pavel Datsyuk's breakaway goal this past season against Phoenix…



1. Pick-six in football

An interception returned for a touchdown is without a doubt the most exciting play in sports! I am giddy just thinking about it. First, like the breakaway goal in hockey, a pick-six comes out of thin air. Nobody ever expects or foresees an interception, much less a pick-six. It can happen from anywhere on the football field and a split-second after the quarterback releases the football you suddenly realize your starting safety has it going the other way. It's an awesome feeling. And if you have the chance to see the play develop, you can see the defender anticipate the ball and read the quarterback. The athletic prowess involved is like no other.

Second, unlike the others on this list, the defense is the one that puts the points on the board. And usually those points come at the end of a dramatic runback that leaves you speechless. Sometimes its simply a foot race, but other times it looks like the defensive player is navigating his way through a maze with blockers and defenders falling left and right. But, as a fan, that's what makes it so intriguing--the play is not too fast for you to follow, so you get a chance to cheer on the player as he weaves through the defense and bolts to the end zone. Sometimes it can even be comical, such as when a linemen happens to intercept the pass and he finds himself rumbling and stumbling the other way.

Finally, no other play shifts momentum like the pick-six does. A defense can be against the rope in its own end zone and manage to pull one down, run it back, and completely alter the tone of the game. It is the one play that sucks the life out of the offense; pay attention after a pick-six occurs and you will see players on the offense  look like they had just seen a ghost. Speechless. In shock and awe. I managed to find a couple videos of great pick-sixes. The first one features my all-time favorite defensive player, Ed Reed. And the second features Rey Maualuga during the first half of USC's rout over Ohio State in 2008.





I hope you enjoyed the list! Do you agree with my rankings? Would you move any of the selections up or down? Perhaps there is a play that I left out? Please share your thoughts! Thanks.

PR Disaster: The Pervasive Mismanagement of High-Profile Athletes

Image by Keith Allison via Flickr

As part of a campaign politics course that I took at USC, I read a book titled "Hardball," written by political commentator and news anchor Chris Matthews. In the book, Matthews talks about the various lessons that he has learned during his time in politics through both personal and vicarious experiences. He develops his ideas through countless examples in politics that either directly or indirectly demonstrate the validity of the lesson at hand. Although he gears the book toward managing politicians, I think it applies very well to sports figures, too; both sets of people attract abnormal public attention on a daily basis. Inappropriate comments made by a Congressional leader during a hearing will undoubtedly be deconstructed on Meet the Press or The O'Reilly Factor just as negative comments made by a basketball player regarding poor officiating will air on SportsCenter. That being said, I want to take a particular concept that I came across in "Hardball"--hanging a lantern on your problem--out of politics and into the world of sports.

Here are some direct quotes from Matthews that describe exactly what it means to "hang a lantern on your problem":

• "…it's always better to be the bearer of your own bad news."

• "…if a question has been raised publicly about your personal background, you need to address the issue personally."

• "…when in doubt, get [the bad news] out."

• "[Hanging a lantern on your problem]…protects [you] from being surprised and embarrassed by hearing it from someone outside."

In summary, if there is a blemish on your resume, you, personally--not the media, not your teammates, not an anonymous fan--should reveal the shortcoming to the public. And if you cannot be the first to deliver the news, you need to acknowledge the news then either admit to it and apologize or provide adequate evidence to dispel it. Then move on and begin repairing your image. If you don't follow these steps, you supply your enemies and critics with dangerous ammunition in their war against you. Case in point:  Tiger Woods.

Much has been made about El Tigre's drama. You know the story already:  the prolific golfer drove his (expensive) SUV into a tree after midnight last Thanksgiving. He was then found lying on the curb, unconscious, with more cuts and bruises than Rihanna after an argument with Chris Brown. But what transpired next was the most intriguing; Tiger's PR team, whose name is now the You're F****ed Foundation, went into hibernation and took Mr. Woods with them! They literally disappeared from the face of the Earth for about three MONTHS. Now, I'm not suggesting that Tiger and his crew could have dealt with the rumors/speculation within the hour that the news broke. But why not that same day? What the hell could they have been doing?

Listening to ESPN Radio last night, the host, a woman whose name I forgot, claimed that the reason why Tiger fell so hard, so fast, is because he had given the public a "bill of goods." She claimed that Tiger sold himself as a legendary golfer, dedicated dad, faithful husband, smooth businessman, etc. And I agree--Tiger did create that image for himself. But I don't believe that the "bill of goods" lead to his downfall. Rather, it was his inability to hang a lantern on his problem. As a nation, we waited for him. We waited for his PR team. Hell, we would've been satisfied with his dad descending from heaven to provide us some clarity. We just wanted an answer! Some truth amidst all the rumors and speculation! (For instance, why did he sleep with woman #4 before he slept with woman #5? Woman #4 is so much hotter. Please tell us WHY?!) But instead, we got silence. Well, almost…

• PGA Tour veteran Ben Crane:  "This is not surprise to anyone who knows Tiger. He's a phony and a fake and he can't retain that squeaky-clean endorsement deal any longer."

• Golf great Tom Watson:  "It's bad for our game. It's something he needs to get control of and a handle on and make some amends and show some humility to the public…"

So while Tiger and his staff slept the months away, the media, fans, and other golfers took shots at the guy. Rumors that were not addressed turned into truth. Women who potentially slept with Tiger were crowned official mistresses. All because he didn't hang a lantern on his problem.

We have seen this mistake repeatedly in sports. In 2007, Alex Rodriguez emphatically responded "No" when Katie Couric asked him if he had ever used steroids, HGH, or any other PED. Over a year later, after reports surfaced that showed A-Rod had in fact used PEDs, the Yankees slugger negated his 2007 comments and admitted to ESPN's Peter Gammons that he used PEDs from 2001 to 2003. A-Rod and his PR team dropped the ball on several accounts. First, he had the chance to address the speculation and bear his own bad news, but failed to do so. And not only did he fail, but he lied in the process. It's one thing to dance around the issue (Barry Bonds) but it's another thing to lie and later be caught.

In our media-driven society, athletes are never safe. The news cameramen are everywhere, and when they are on break, average, unassuming citizens turn into nosy paparazzi wielding camera phones and hidden tape recorders. What then, is a high-profile athlete to do (besides stay away from controversy)? All together now:  Hang a lantern on your problem.

Jordan Rides the Bus: A Review and My Observations

Image via Wikipedia

Last night I watched the newest installment, Ron Shelton's "Jordan Rides the Bus," in ESPN's "30 for 30" sports documentary series. The piece explored Michael Jordan's first retirement from the NBA and his subsequent career playing professional baseball. While I consider myself a lifelong NBA fan and an absolute diehard MJ supporter, I was simply too young to understand the ramifications of his move back when it happened; I was about six years old at the time. The only thing I remember about that time period is an Upper Deck baseball card of Michael Jordan in a White Sox uniform that I happened to procure (to this day one of my favorite cards in my remaining collection). Thus, when I heard that this piece dove directly into the retirement/career change, I highly anticipated its premiere.

As a whole, "Jordan Rides the Bus" was a solid production and an informative work that any NBA fan should watch. There has always been a lot of speculation over why Michael Jordan decided to retire and play baseball. In this documentary, Shelton does his best to set the record straight. That is, MJ retired for a combination of reasons, namely:  1) he was bored with basketball and had lost his passion for playing; and 2) his father, who was murdered shortly after Jordan won his third NBA championship, had always dreamt for MJ to play baseball, so this was a decision to honor his dad. As a kid, I don't remember any mention of the murder of MJ's father. And perhaps that is for the better because I doubt any parent would want their child watching a news story of a man found dead in a creek. But that is such a vital component of the MJ story and I am glad that I learned of it. Finally, from a production standpoint, I wish the producers had the chance to interview MJ, today, about the events. I noticed that in many of the "30 for 30" pieces, the subjects of the documentaries are rarely featured in present-day interviews. It would have been great to hear from the man himself as he undoubtedly could provide insight/knowledge/information that you simply cannot get from analyzing videotape or talking to friends.

From a sports perspective, here are some things that intrigued me:

1. When MJ went to Chicago Bulls and Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf to inform Reinsdorf of his decision to retire and try baseball, Reinsdorf suggested that MJ talk to coach Phil Jackson about the decision. Reinsdorf felt that Jackson would be able to offer valuable advice/insight to the young star. Jackson, in his meeting with MJ, said, "You have to understand…you are depriving so many people who enjoy this sport [of] the opportunity of such a great amount of pleasure." Two things jumped at me when I heard that line. First, although the Zen Master is completely correct in his assessment, that is truly terrible advice. I wonder how much MJ even considered that in making his decision. I understand the sentiment that professional athletes play "for the fans," but in MJ's situation, was that even an appropriate thing to say? Sprinkled in Jackson's comment is the foundation for today's team/owner/city mentality that a professional athlete is simply property. When LeBron decided to leave Cleveland for Miami, Cavs owner Dan Gilbert and Cavs fans were irate because they felt LeBron owed them his services. They felt he belonged to them. The Ménage à trois between sports franchises, players, and fans, is unique and certainly special. But people need to keep things in perspective.

My second reaction to Jackson's comment is this:  Imagine if MJ had stayed in the NBA and played full 1993-94 and 1994-95 seasons. Would the Bulls have won eight championships in a row? As unimaginable as the feat seems, if there's one team that could have done it, it was MJ and his Bulls. By all accounts the year off for MJ was valuable to his basketball career--Jackson says MJ became a much better teammate when he returned for the second three-peat. So, being on the conservative side, let's say MJ, suffering from burnout in 1993-94, doesn't win that season, but wins the next season (1994-95). That means in a span of eight NBA seasons, MJ and the Bulls would have won seven titles, including a four-peat. A four-peat? Does that even exist? If that had happened, I don't think we would ever see a more impressive team accomplishment in the modern era.

2. What is today's equivalent of MJ's move to baseball? Think about the components of this career change. For one, he left the top of one sport to go to the middle of another sport. Second, he left money, success, dominance, and everything else that came with being the NBA's top player for road trips on busses with no-names and ballparks that seat roughly 10,000 fans. Third, he moved to a sport that emphasizes completely different skills. And fourth, he left a media that loved him and never questioned him to a media that doubted him and wanted to see him fail. Because baseball is so unique as a sport, the only transitions even comparable to MJ's are another basketball star to baseball or a football star to baseball. And because it's too easy to use a basketball-to-baseball comparison (LeBron, Kobe), let's try football to baseball.

The only equivalent I can think of is Tom Brady moving to baseball (to hit, not pitch) after he had won his third title in four years with the Patriots (2004-05 season). Like Mike, Brady was the unquestioned leader and most valuable component to a team that had a stranglehold on its sport. And like Mike, Brady had a flawless public image and a unique way with the media. Brady does have a more established baseball background than MJ (Brady was drafted by the Expos as a catcher). But the point is you throw Brady in without having any at-bats in the past 10 years, at a somewhat high level in the sport, and see what he can do.

But if someone were to try it, I don't think it would generate as much fanfare as MJ's move did. Sure, if Brady tried baseball, SportsCenter would go crazy and probably take us to every at-bat live. But would minor league stadiums sell out? Doubtful. In the one season MJ played with the Birmingham Barons, the attendance tripled. Home and road games had the "Stephen Strasburg effect" for a guy who had not picked up a baseball bat since high school! He wasn't a highly touted prospect with once-in-a-lifetime raw talent, highlight videos, or gaudy amateur statistics!

3. The most incredible part of all of this is the following:  Michael Jordan won three consecutive titles with the Bulls, then took a year and a half off to play professional baseball, and came back and won another three consecutive titles. That's greatness. That will never, ever happen again in any professional sport. He didn't take a year off to rest and recuperate his body like Favre. He spent that year toiling in baseball stadiums and under the scrutiny of sports media. Yet he came back and picked up right where he left off. Amazing. The greatest ever.

Related articles by Zemanta

• "Jordan Rides The Bus" Debuts on ESPN (chicagoist.com)
• Michael Jordan's year in baseball (espn.go.com)

K-Rod's Approach to Dealing with the In-Laws

Image via Wikipedia

After suffering a torn ligament in the thumb on his throwing hand, New York Mets closer Francisco Rodriguez, affectionately named K-Rod, will miss the remainder of the 2010 season. K-Rod's teammates, coaches, fans, and fantasy owners (myself included) will never forgive K-Rod for this disgraceful exit from what had been developing into a solid season for the guy. We are disgusted because this was not an injury sustained in typical baseball player fashion; he did not attempt to carry luggage that was too heavy; he did not drop a weight on his finger; nor did he tear the ligament while stretching to grab a tissue. Instead, K-Rod injured his hand while laying the smack down on his father-in-law in the family room of the team clubhouse. Stay classy, Francisco.

It has been a tumultuous past couple of days for K-Rod. He was arrested and taken into custody after a recent Mets game. He was then suspended for two games by the team. He served the suspension, came back, and got in one inning of shutout ball. Then news spread of the apparent injury, and poof, his season is now over. Now, the Mets are trying to figure out a way to recover some of the money that K-Rod was due to receive, claiming that the injury was non-baseball related (are they ever baseball related?).

There are so many angles you could take with this story:  a disaster for a team whose season has been a large disappointment; a contractual minefield through which management and K-Rod's agent must now navigate; and a selfish, shameful decision made by a father and husband. But the one that perhaps interests me most is the fact that this serves as yet another example of a baseball player getting injured doing something so completely random--others include a player scalding himself while ironing a shirt that he was wearing on his body; a player falling out of bed and crashing into a nightside table after nightmares of being covered by spiders; and a player suffering back spasms while violently sneezing. You can't help but ask the question:  what is it about baseball players that makes them prone to such ridiculous injuries? It is a silly phenomenon unique to baseball. And only God knows why.

Related articles by Zemanta

• K-Rod has torn ligament in thumb, needs surgery (sportsillustrated.cnn.com)
• Mets Considering Attempt To Void K-Rod's Contract (mlbtraderumors.com)

Update: ESPN's Jayson Stark Agrees With Me!

Back on July 26th, I wrote that baseball needs to expand its use of instant replay to include, at the very least, fair/foul calls and "trap" catches in the outfield. Well, after a recent Phillies-Marlins game in which a blown fair/foul call drastically changed the outcome of the game, it seems as though baseball analysts, or at least one (Jayson Stark of ESPN) agree with my sentiments.  Earlier today on ESPN.com, Stark published "Baseball Must Expand Its Use of Instant Replay".

Finally...Number 600

Image by Keith Allison via Flickr

It took him awhile, but Alex Rodriguez finally belted the 600th home run of his fine career earlier today in New York versus the Toronto Blue Jays. A-Rod had not homered since July 22nd, and the milestone blast ended a 9-for-46 slump. I am sure the homer lifted a King Kong-sized monkey off of his back. As he pursued the mark, every at-bat of his was aired live by ESPN; each plate appearance that I saw (and there were many) was painful. Rodriguez never seemed comfortable and with each ground out or third strike you could see the frustration in his body language. That all changed today on a 2-0 pitch from Shaun Marcum that caught too much of the plate. A-Rod drove it deep to right center field and gave the Yanks an early 2-0 lead.

Hours later I visited ESPN.com and saw articles and comments from writers, analysts, and fans trying to put the historic milestone into perspective. Every article and snippet made some mention of steroids and tainted records. The lead article even went so far as to imply that the day would have been more special had A-Rod been clean. And perhaps it might have. But I think there was too much focus on PEDs and A-Rod's past.

Let's remember that only seven players in the history of Major League Baseball have reached the 600 home run mark. Seven. That's not even enough players to fill in a lineup card. That's less than 0.1% of players in the history of the sport. And he did it faster than any of the other six players (35 years, 8 days old).

I doubt you will find many A-Rod fans outside of New York. I consider myself a fan of his, but it pains me to say that after he spurned my Seattle Mariners for the biggest payday in sports history. But personal feelings and moral issues aside, how can you not appreciate the achievement? 600 is 600. Mark McGwire, as juiced up as he was, couldn't reach that mark (583). It isn't easy, clean or unclean. So let's put the steroid issue aside (until his Hall of Fame date) and enjoy the spectacle.  Congrats, A-Rod.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Alex Rodriguez hits home run No. 600 (sportingnews.com)

MLB Trade Deadline Review: Help or Hurt?

Image via Wikipedia

At this time every season, the contenders indirectly separate themselves from the pretenders.  The top teams deal to strengthen their weaknesses; the teams with the playoffs in their reach make a move to find the missing piece that will put them over the top; and teams in the cellar unload high-priced veterans in hopes of bringing in young talent for the future.  While baseball fans and analysts across the country endlessly debate which teams "won" and "lost," I think it's too early to make such conclusions.  Instead, I put teams into one of two categories:  "Help" or "Hurt."  In the following paragraphs, I will evaluate the moves made by several teams.

Texas Rangers:  Big Help

Of all teams involved in the mid-season bartering, the Rangers helped themselves the most. Nobody believed that the Rangers would be in first place at this point in the season, and the team made big trades that would give them the best chance to remain in first the rest of the way. The first move, and by far the biggest, was trading for star pitcher Cliff Lee from the Mariners.  Lee is arguably the best pitcher in the game. His strikeout to walk ratio is absurd. He dominates in big games that matter (ask the Yankees).  And he's been dealt at this point before in the season, so he can make the appropriate adjustments to joining a postseason race and playing with new teammates and coaches.  Anytime you land someone of this caliber, it would come as no shock to think that you instantly upgraded your team. But why is Lee such a valuable addition? Because the Rangers need pitching more than any other first place team. The Rangers are in first for two reasons.  First, they have a juggernaut offense led by Josh Hamilton, Vlad Guerrero, and Michael Young. And second, they have gotten surprising pitching contributions from C.J. Wilson and Colby Lewis.  But to win down the stretch, or at least have the confidence to win, you need proven players. The veteran arms on the Rangers staff--Harden, Feldman, and Holland--have either been hurt or simply underachieved.  So Lee not only gives you a dominant Game 1 starter, but he gives you presence, confidence, leadership, and experience. This will take pressure off of Wilson, Lewis, and Tommy Hunter down the stretch, not to mention the bullpen (Lee is among the league-leaders in complete games).

In addition to Lee, the Rangers went after veteran contributors on offense and in the field. Bengie Molina is a seasoned veteran behind the plate who has shown some life with his bat as of late.  Jorge Cantu is a guy who can play first or third and drive in runs.  And Cristian Guzman is a good defender who plays both positions in the middle of the infield, makes contact at the plate, and has some speed on the base paths.  Ultimately, the Rangers shored up their biggest weakness in the best possible way and gave themselves more flexibility at the plate and in the field with proven veterans.

New York Yankees:  Enough Help

Anyone who has followed the pinstripes this season knows that their biggest hole is in the bullpen. Joba has been a disappointment, Chan Ho Park has been relatively worthless, and whenever you have to rely on Chad Gaudin to bridge you over to the 9th, you have to be concerned.  Well the Yankees took a gamble on a back-end guy and brought in Kerry Wood. Although Wood has struggled a bit so far this season as a closer in Cleveland, the potential is there. I think the Yankees should have gone after someone like Matt Capps (went to the Twins) instead, but Wood was what they got.

The Yanks don't really have any weaknesses in their lineup, unless you count a disappointing Curtis Granderson, who is finally showing signs of life. They passed on big prizes like Adam Dunn and Jayson Werth and instead traded for Lance Berkman and Austin Kearns.  Berkman is a proven offensive monster who may benefit from a change of scenery and the chance to win it all. Kearns will likely spell Granderson when the Yanks face lefties. Ultimately, this just gives the Yanks some extra depth, which can never hurt.

Minnesota Twins:  Needed More Help

Each of these three teams are in the thick of division races and had obvious missing pieces/holes to fill. The Twins needed a starting pitcher, the Rays needed a bat, and the Giants needed offensive help as well.

Supposedly the Twins could have gotten Cliff Lee for highly touted prospect Wilson Ramos. They declined. Then they turned around and traded Ramos for Matt Capps. I understand how important the bullpen is, an Capps has had a solid year closing in Washington. But the Twins already have Jon Rauch, who has stepped in nicely for the injured Joe Nathan.  And the Twins had a chance to put together a starting rotation that could lead them to the World Series. Imagine throwing Lee, Pavano, and Lirano for the first three games in a series. With the Twins' potent offense, that would be a recipe for success. But instead, they will have to settle with Scott Baker or Kevin Slowly instead of Lee.

San Francisco Giants/Tampa Bay Rays:  Helpless

Finally, both the Giants and Rays needed a bat in the middle of their lineups. Both teams were rumored to be pursuing Adam Dunn, but Dunn didn't move because the asking price of was too high. The Rays pursued Jayson Werth as well, but Werth was taken off the market after Victorino went down in Philly.  The Giants were supposedly going after the Blue Jays' Jose Bautista, but nothing came of that.  I just cannot fathom why neither team brought in a bat.  The Giants made the most of things by bringing in a mediocre relief pitcher from the Pirates. But I wouldn't be so easily fooled if I were a Giants fan. That team, along with the Rays, blew their opportunity.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Trade-deadline lessons: Nine things to take away (cbssports.com)
• Yankees and Rangers Position Themselves For Playoffs, ALCS Matchup? (bleacherreport.com)