Josh Hamilton Is Still On Drugs

I got an interesting text message a few days ago. My buddy Max, in his always tactful manner, sent a text that said "There is no fuckin way josh hamilton is not on hgh", almost unquestionably due to Hamilton hitting 500 foot bombs out of Yankee Stadium during the 2008 Home Run Derby. When I received the message, I laughed it off, Max just being Max was what I thought, classic over-reaction, mixed with sarcasm, that's Max all over. But then all of a sudden it hit me, Max (whether he knew it or not) was dead on, Josh Hamilton is absolutely using performance enhancing substances, absolutely.

This is the point of the post where I say that I have never seen Josh Hamilton use performance enhancing drugs, nor do I have any sort of evidence to suggest Josh Hamilton is or ever has used performance enhancing drugs. In fact, outside of last week's text message, I have never even considered that Josh Hamilton might be using performance enhancing drugs. All that being said, I know Josh Hamilton is using performance enhancing drugs.

Here are the condensed facts (as you no doubt already know): Josh Hamilton was the #1 overall pick in 1999, because of injury and drug abuse Hamilton did not play organized baseball from 2003 until 2006 (and played only 15 minor league games in 2006), the Cubs selected Hamilton in the Rule 5 Draft and immediately sent him to Cincinnati for cash. This is when the craziness starts, Hamilton, despite only playing 15 minor league games in four years, makes the Reds team out of spring training and hits .294 with a .554 slugging percentage in 298 ABs. In the off-season Hamilton is traded to the Texas Rangers where in a little more than half a season puts up some huge stats: .310/.369/.552 with 21 HR and 95 RBI (as of the All-Star Break).

Hamilton's rebirth is the stuff of fiction novels (no, really, Bernard Malamud's The Natural). In fact, it's completely illogical that a player, regardless of physical gifts, could be completely out of baseball for four years and develop into an All-Star caliber player within two years of returning to the game. It just doesn't add up.

Let's looks at a player who compares very well to Hamilton: San Diego's Adrian Gonzalez. Gonzalez, like Hamilton, was the first overall draft pick (Hamilton in 1999 to Tampa Bay, Gonzalez in 2000 to Florida), both were drafted directly out of high school and both were first-time All-Stars in 2008. Like Hamilton, Gonzalez's first full season in the majors (2006) was a huge success, .304/362/.500 with 24 HR and 82 RBI (compared to Hamiltons .310/.367/.552 with 21 HR and 95 RBI in 93 games thus far in 2008). Unlike Hamilton, Gonzalez played in 712 professional baseball games from 2000 through 2005 , he had 2672 AB against professional pitchers, he spent a year in Rookie Ball/Low A, another year in High A, and three years between AA and AAA. Gonzalez spent five years working with professional hitting coaches, five years facing professional pitchers and five years working out in a baseball environment. Hamilton spent nearly four years doing drugs and not playing professional baseball, not working with professional coaches and not facing professional pitching... and Hamilton's first year big league numbers are across the board better than Gonzalez's. This makes no sense.

Check that, it can make sense. It can make sense if you believe that Hamilton is a supremely talented player, one that is so much more talented than good Major Leaguers (ex: Gonzalez) that he can catch and pass them by in just two years. Unfortunately, this is the exact type of thinking that dominated the steroids era. In the late '90s I believed that players could do superhuman things, I believed that Mark McGwire could hit 70 homers on skill and weight training alone, I believed that Barry Bonds could follow that feat three years later with 73 homers because of his baseball pedigree and I believed Roger Clemens could win his 7th Cy Young Award due to his legendary work ethic. I believed Ken Caminiti could have a 40 HR, 130 RBI season despite the fact that in the first 8 years of his career he never went better than 18 HR and 80 RBI. I even believed Rafael Palmeiro when he wagged his finger.

I had a lot of faith in baseball and was burned time and time again, so how can I now believe Hamilton is having a incredible, clean season when everything I have learned over the past ten years suggests otherwise? Josh Hamilton's story is one of resilience and resurrection, but just because it's a good story doesn't mean that we have to accept results that are completely illogical without the aid of performance enhancing drug. Ten years ago, I might have believed Hamilton was clean, but a lot has happened it ten years and I'm not willing to ignore those years just because it makes for a good story.

Jason Taylor to the Redskins?

Listen, I'm not one of these people who thinks Jason Taylor is the best defensive lineman of all time...what? Nobody thinks that? People just think he's among the best of our time, a class act, and a guy who can be a solid producer this year? Oh, yeah, I'm one of those people.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp08/news/story?id=3497248

It looks like the Skins may be interested, and somehow, defying all logic, they've actually got plenty of cap space to pick him up. That's the nice thing about the NFL (which is decidedly different from how the NBA works): spend a year and a half cleaning things up and any team can get into a favorable salary cap situation.

Anyways, being a Skins fan, and acknowledging that they've done very little to improve their defense this offseason, I'd be happy to see Jason Taylor join up for his swan song. Say what you will about Washington fans, the one thing they'll do as well as any other fans is embrace a new player. Hell, most Redskins fans were excited about what Mark Brunell could do with the team. I, being of sound mind and judgment, knew better, but it was nice, as it always is, to see the fans of my favorite team rally around each player. Not like Chicago, where Rex Grossman (deservedly) gets booed, or Philly, where everyone gets booed (deservedly or not).

Hopefully this'll be a quick process and we can start enjoying the brief Jason Taylor era at defensive end.

Richie Sexson? Are you serious?

Who's running the Yankees these days? Should we blame Hank or Cashman? As of this moment, I believe the deal is everything but done with Richie Sexson joining the Yankees lineup as early as this Saturday.

Out of all the players available to bolster an injured lineup, the Yankees chose Richie Sexson. The .218 batting average, .315 on-base percentage, .381 slugging percentage in 74 games this year Richie Sexson. Homeruns? Eleven, with a lovely 30 RBI. If you're looking for that crucial 9th spot in your lineup, sounds like you've found your guy.

Work has slowed down a little for me, so let me take a minute to point the Yankees in the right direction... Barry Bonds. Here's his stats from last year: 126 games, 28 HRs, 66 RBIs, .276 BA, .480 OBP, and .565 SLG. If the Yankees have any interest in scoring runs, they might want some base runners. Barry gets on base. At 42, he can still get it done. What? He hasn't played in half a season? Its great to know he's well rested and ready for work. At least bring the guy in for a work-out to see what he can do. If you want runs, you have to get players on base. This guy gets on base almost 50% of the time.

Maybe its because Bonds doesn't address the Yankees' need for a right-handed slugger to face left-handed pitching. HA... Richie Sexson... a slugger. This is, however, the only good thing I've read about Sexson all year. He's .344 BA with 5 HRs in 71 at-bats against lefties. In 2007, Bonds hit about .265 vs. LHP, but with 8 HRs in about 117 at-bats. Oh, but wait... ITS BARRY BONDS. He'll bolster the lineup PERIOD.

If Barry Bonds can still play, I can't think of a better fit. First, with an American League team. Then with a team with a bunch of pampered stars already. The media coverage might be tough, but he's going to get that regardless of where/if he lands.

Yankees, cut the crap with Sexson. You've got phone calls to make with Jeff Borris.

Marcus Camby just got traded for what?

Like most sports, the NBA is always under scrutiny from the government in order to keep safe their antitrust protection. But honestly, the flavor of socialism that permeates many professional sports these days is a bit nauseating.

The idea, of course, is parity, which is just a pretty word for "fairness." Everyone wants every team to have an equal chance to be successful, so you put a salary cap in place, since salaries are the best (and only) indicator of a particular player's value. Kirk Hinrich is "worth" $10 million. Paul Pierce is worth $18 million. But of course, it's a flawed system. Steve Francis isn't more valuable than Amare Stoudemire, or Ray Allen, or LeBron James, but he's paid more than any of them. And Andre Iguodala is playing at a level far above his $3.8 million price tag. So you get cap specialists and contract negotiators, everyone trying to squeeze as much as possible out of the cap.

But the NBA adds a twist, because they have what's called a "soft cap." That means, essentially, that you don't really have to stay under the cap; you'll just be limited in what you can do in the offseason if you're over it. So we've got a wide spread of teams, some that are over $10 million under the cap, and some that are $30+ million over. And when those teams get together to try to improve their situations, you get a trade like we've got right here: Marcus Camby goes to the Clippers, and the Nuggets get the right to swap 2nd round picks, not even in 2009, but in 2010.

"There must be more to it than that," you say suspiciously. Yes, of course there is more than that. By trading Camby, the Nuggets acquire a $10 million "trade exception," which means that the Clippers basically used their cap space as an item of value. Hence, Camby was traded in order to try to find a brighter future for the Nuggets, 2-3 years down the line.

Some people dislike the system that baseball uses, where there is no salary cap, just a luxury tax that gets redistributed to the rest of the league. Many of the same teams are competitive every year; likewise, many of the same teams are not competitive every year. And there are situations where one team will dump salary to another, sometimes even offering to pay a portion of it. But at least you can generally understand every move. Camby is a damn fine player, one of the strongest defensive players in the game. He shouldn't get traded for a Twix bar. Something's got to be wrong when that happens.

Philadelphia 76ers + Elton Brand = Conference Finals?

Now that the Elton Brand deal is official, let's investigate how the 76ers might do in the 2008-2009 season.

In 2007-2008, Philadelphia was the 7th best team in the Eastern Conference, earning them a first round matchup (and exit) against the perennial powerhouse Detroit Pistons. Certainly there's no debate that the acquisition of Brand makes them better, but how much better?

I say a lot. The 76ers now have legitimate stars at three starting positions (Andre Miller at PG, Andre Iguodala at SF, and Brand at PF), and a defensive force down low (Samuel Dalembert). If they can find a decent shooter (Willie Green probably isn't the answer), they'll have all the tools to be a contender.

Among non-playoff teams last year in the East, you could conceivably say that you expect Chicago, Miami, New Jersey, and Milwaukee to be noticeably improved. If Michael Beasley matures quickly for the Heat, they could be back in the mix, but I expect Philly to be better than all four of those teams when the season is over.

The lower-end playoff teams are pretty easy to judge. I do think that they'll be better than Atlanta, despite the fact that I love how they've built that team from the ground up, drafting talent every year and playing their best players, regardless of positions. The addition of Jermaine O'Neal makes the Raptors intriguing, but they still have nobody on the wings who can play.

Now we get to the tough ones. Washington played almost the entire season without it's best player in Gilbert Arenas, and despite my efforts to temper the enthusiasm, there's a buzz about this team in the D.C. area that hasn't been around in a while. And the Wizards have still got those three star players, with Antawn Jamison and Caron Butler to go with Arenas. Orlando's also got three stars, in Dwight Howard, Rashard Lewis, and Hedo Turkoglu. I'd realistically say this is a push, but since bloggers are supposed to be opinionated, I'll say the 76ers are above the Wizards and below the Magic, but all within 4 or 5 games of each other.

What about Cleveland? They're carried by a single superstar, with odds and ends to fill up the stat sheets, and a rookie who's not likely have more than a minimal impact. LeBron James is tremendous, and will likely carry them into the playoffs again, but as we've learned, you need more than one player to get far in these NBA playoffs. I'm actually going to bump Philadelphia above the Cavaliers as well.

Finally, we come to the upper echelon. There's no chance that Philadelphia is better than the Celtics, so let's just end that discussion right now. But what about Detroit? The Pistons have a new head coach, and their starting lineup is getting old. Richard Hamilton (who'll be 30 when the season starts) can still score, but his points per game average has slipped the past couple of seasons. The same can be said about Chauncey Billups (32) and his assists and Rasheed Wallace (34) and his attitude. The wheels have to come off this team at some point, and I think this year is as good as any. So I'm dropping the Pistons behind the Magic, behind the 76ers, and behind the Wizards and Cavaliers as well.

That makes Philadelphia the 3rd best team in the Eastern Conference in my book, behind Boston and Orlando. The alluring part of it is, if everyone's healthy, we could have four teams with three stars each in the second round of the Eastern Conference playoffs, and maybe for one goddamn year we wouldn't have to hear about how much better the West is than the East.

Better Trade: Harden or Sabathia?

This week we've had two big name pitchers traded from floundering AL teams to competitive NL Central teams: CC (apparently the periods have been tossed) Sabathia from the Indians to the Brewers, and Rich Harden from the Athletics to the Cubs. Which deal figures to be a better move for the team that acquired its respective starter? Let's investigate.

Your first thought should be, "Wait, this isn't even close. Sabathia is a defending Cy Young award winner, a proven, healthy, dependable starter that could be a number one for all but a few teams (and a number three on Arizona; Webb and Haren are insane). What has Rich Harden done but gotten hurt?" And you're absolutely right. There can be no debate about who the better pitcher is; it's Sabathia, without question.

Harden is certainly pitching well right now, though, and comes at a substantially cheaper price than Sabathia. Harden (along with Chad Gaudin) was acquired for Matt Murton, Sean Gallagher, and Eric Patterson (three major-league ready but unexceptional young players) and 2007 supplemental first rounder (#48 overall) Josh Donaldson. Yes, one of those players might develop into something, but the Cubs gave up essentially nothing to get one of the most impressive pitchers in baseball this year.

Meanwhile, to acquire Sabathia, the Brewers had to give up three legitimate prospects, including Matt LaPorta, the jewel of their farm system, and Rob Bryson, arguably their 2nd-best minor league pitching prospect. LaPorta has been playing in AA Huntsville, but with an OPS near 1.000 and the dearth of power in Cleveland's lineup, don't be surprised if LaPorta is starting in a corner outfield spot for the Indians by Labor Day.

So who made the better deal? Despite what they gave up, the Brewers still did the right thing. There's not a ton of room in their outfield with Corey Hart and Ryan Braun locked into two spots, and their need for another solid pitcher was much more severe than the Cubs. Sabathia also gives Milwaukee another left-handed starter, and in fact one who dominates left-handed hitters.

And if you're wondering whether the Brewers faithful are behind the deal, have a look at this article. Notice how LaPorta isn't even mentioned until three-quarters of the way down the page? And the other prospects aren't even mentioned by name.

One final thought. Sabathia seems like a perfect fit for the Brewers, doesn't he? The portly pitcher joining the team with big Prince Fielder, and daily sausage races? It just feels right.

To Every Washington Sports Commentator Who Can't Stop Saying Nice Things about Antawn Jamison: Stop.

Listen, I like Antawn Jamison. I think he's a nice player who can score and rebound from the power forward spot, and I think the Wizards got a pretty good deal on him at $12.5 million per for four years. But he's not a superstar, and folks need to just calm down about him.

Yesterday, on my drive home, I heard the Sports Reporters talk about Jamison's value and continue to cite, over and over again, that he's a 20-and-10 guy (that's points and rebounds for those of you scoring at home). And he was. Last year, he was one of only four players to average over 20 points and 10 rebounds a game.

But that was the first time in his 10-year career. His career averages are 19.6 and 7.9. He's never had more than 45 blocks in any season (or roughly one every other game), and doesn't shoot a great clip from the floor. He does get to the free throw line at a decent rate, and is a solid outside shooter. But he's not a superstar. Valid comparison players for Jamison are Lamar Odom, David West, and Mehmet Okur. Good players, players you'd rather have than a lot of other guys. Not superstars.

But to listen to the guys on Sports Reporters, you'd think we just re-signed Karl Malone. Their analysis of Gilbert Arenas, while equally praising, was at least more valid. They acknowledged Arenas' recent injury troubles, and that his contract would be an albatross if he crashed, but seemed to believe that the investment was necessary in order to give the Wizards the best possible team this season.

That might be true. With Elton Brand seemingly likely to rejoin the Clippers after their addition of Baron Davis, the number of players more valuable than Arenas who may be available would drop down to Arenas' jersey number. While I'm not crazy about investing a ton of money into a guy who's missed most of the past two playoffs with injury and who is a generally quirky and unpredictable guy, at this point, with the Wizards having virtually no room under the salary cap after the Jamison signing, re-upping Arenas probably gives the Wizards their best chance to succeed.

That said, I don't see this team becoming a top-tier Eastern Conference team without major strides by Andray Blatche and a solid showing by the just-drafted JaVale McGee. I'm not crazy about trading second round pick Bill Walker to Boston for cash, but I trust Ernie Grunfeld as much as I trust any personnel man in sports, so presumably he knows what he's doing.

Here's hoping that Jamison's a late bloomer, and we've actually got a 20 and 10 guy.

'Dem NASCAR Guys Ain't Got Much Use For Book Learnin'

So I'm watching Sportscenter on Sunday morning and the NASCAR highlights come on. Being a Sunday morning, I'm feeling lazy and the idea of changing channels is exhausting, so I decide to ride it out. Thankfully I did because I was treated with a gem from Camping World RV Sales 200-winner Tony Stewart's crew chief Dave Rogers.

Here's what the barely literate Rogers said: "A wise man once said, 'I see so far because I stand on the shoulders of giants'".

Seems innocent enough, so why am I complaining. Well, first, the quote that Rogers attempted (it should read "If I have seen futher it is by standing on the shoulders of giants") wasn't spoken by just some "wise man", it's attributed to Isaac freaking Newton. You know, the guy that is basically the father of physics and calculus, the tools that people smarter than Rogers use to make those cars go so fast. But, surprisingly, referring to one of the greatest geniuses in human history as a "wise man" isn't Rogers biggest mistake.

The problem is that (I think) Rogers was trying to compliment his crew, implying that his (and Tony Stewart's) success is the result of the efforts and sacrifices of every member of his team. That's great and admirable, except that's not even close to reflecting the actual meaning behind Newton's quote. The "giants" quote is almost universally accepted by historians to be the 17th century version of trash talk, with Newton mocking his physically challenged and intellectually inferior rival Robert Hooke. Somehow I don't think this is what Rogers meant to imply about his crew.

Installing Xbox Games

I was at Best Buy the other day, and I found something that seemed seedy; maybe you guys will see it differently. I was looking at Xbox 360 games, and noticed a sticker on one of them offering Best Buy's expertise in installing the game for customers.

What?

Doesn't the installation process for a console game consist of putting the game in the 360 and turning it on? I'm sure it's profitable for Best Buy to charge people whatever they charge for installations, but shouldn't the technicians have some sort of moral problem with it? They know there's nothing to it. If anyone pays to have a console game installed, the technician needs to make sure they only do it once, and they realize how silly it is to pay for that.

Generally I'm fine with exploiting the very stupidest of our fellow humans, but you should feel some kind of guilt when you do it this egregiously. I don't know, maybe I'm a sucker.

Yeah, I'm a sucker.

Oh, you were finished? Well, allow me to retort.

I didn’t realize the other Joe was gay for golf, but it’s always nice to have a debate, so let’s get into it.

There’s an aspect of golf and darts and other various sports that bothers me that I didn’t really mention in the previous post, but I’ll bring up now since it’s probably the pinnacle of my disdain.

YOU DON’T PLAY AGAINST ANYONE.

In darts, you’re not trying to outsmart anyone; you just toss metal at a wall. In golf, you’re not competing directly against other golfers; you’re just trying to play as well as you can play. If you’d like a comparison, think of it this way: Is it more gratifying to beat another player/team in a match on Halo, or to have each person play the first level of the campaign and declare as the winner whoever finished it faster? Golf, bowling, darts, figure skating, shot put, these are all “turn-based” sports, if you will. Say what you will about swimming, boxing, sprinting, tennis, or Greco-Roman wrestling, at least they’re head-to-head sports.

“[G]olf requires more precision and concentration than any other sport.” Hmmm, really? Let’s take the same comparison with pitching in baseball and examine it. Starting with when the pitcher receives the ball from the catcher, he has to be mindful of his feet. A balk is about the worst thing a pitcher can do, and it comes from simply forgetting yourself for a split second. Then, he’s actually got to pitch, which is done very differently based on a hundred different variables: who’s batting, who’s on deck, is someone on base, if so, how fast is the guy, how many outs are there, what’s the count, what was the last pitch, what did you throw this guy last time in this situation, do you have any weaknesses behind you in the field, is the sun going to affect the batter’s ability to pick up the rotation on the ball, etc etc? Then, after getting all of your preparation together, he’s got to actually pitch, which is just as complex as swinging a club, and a millisecond or millimeter difference can take you from double play to gopher ball. Yep, golfing and pitching are pretty similar…except that when you hit a golf ball, you don’t have a 220-pound cyborg named Dan Uggla trying to turn your pitch around and send it into the bleachers. There’s a pond, but they tend to be a little more predictable…in that they don’t move.

And I like how Joe mentions that golf takes 4+ hours and football takes only 3, and that they get breaks in football, but fails to mention that football players actually have to touch other football players. I’m not arguing the fact that professional golfers are athletes; in order to play any sport well, you’ve got to build your body for that sport. And general physical fitness always puts you in a better position to be successful at a task that requires physical acumen (or so I hear; physical fitness isn’t my forte). In football, you have to prepare yourself for thirty live minutes of combat among 3 hours of walking around, studying, and getting yelled at, rather than four hours of walking, with 50 big swings and 25 small ones mixed in.

In fairness to golf, I’ve never played an organized game of golf in my life; just a couple of those par 2 courses (or as many call them, miniature golf courses). But you know what? I’ve never played an organized game of football. I’ve never played hockey on any level. I haven’t played any game of tennis that I wasn’t forced to play by some sadistic P.E. teacher. But I can appreciate the competitive nature of those sports, and I can understand people who enjoy those sports (I myself like that foose ball). I’m not saying that golf isn’t fun to play, because I don’t know, maybe it is. But I am saying that I don’t understand how people can want to watch golf on television. When I watch sports, I’m not trying to watch something “done well.” I’m trying to see someone beat someone else. Playing the best round of the day is great, but there’s no adversary nature to that. Golfers even seem to generally like each other, always shaking hands and smiling. Gag me. Bill Belichick may be a bastard, but there’s no doubt he makes football more fun. The more definitively teams are divided into “teams I want to see win” and “teams I want to see lose,” the more fun it is to watch games.

It may simply be that I have some genetic flaw (or lack a flaw that many other people have) that prevents me from being able to see why golf is important to so many people. I’m more of a team sport kind of guy anyways, so maybe that’s part of the equation here. One thing I’ve learned is that you can’t talk people into not liking something they like, so obviously my writing here is in vain. I just enjoy a good fight, and since your two hosts of Joe & Joe Sports tend to agree on so much, we have to highlight our rare disagreements. Especially when I’m right.

Fantasy Football Mock Draft - Complete

So here's the full fantasy football draft article, as per my promise from over the weekend. And don't worry; there'll be a retort to Golf-Lover Joe soon enough.

It’s never too early to start talking fantasy football, so that’s exactly what I’m about to do. I’ve already participated in several mock drafts; despite what you might think, you really don’t know anything until you get into a draft and see what happens.

What follows is my most recent foray, and I learned a lot from the first few that helped me figure out how to go into this one. I’ll be posting a new round once or twice daily (on weekdays) until we’ve got them all. Some quick math says the whole draft should be posted by the end of the month. I provide some tips as I go through the draft, but you should realize pretty quickly what my strategy this year is going to be. Want a clue? Don’t do what I’ve been telling you to do.

My picks are bolded …like this:

Round 1

1. LaDainian Tomlinson
2. Adrian Peterson
3. Brian Westbrook
4. Steven Jackson
5. Joseph Addai
6. Randy Moss
7. Marion Barber
8. Tom Brady
9. Peyton Manning
10. Frank Gore

Analysis: Historically, I’ve advised taking running backs in at least 2 of the first 3 rounds, and 3 of the first 5. And that can work. But this year, if you’re after pick #5, your first round pick probably needs to not be a running back. You can logically take Marion Barber, but think about this. Even if you take Barber or Gore, the people at picks 1-5 still have an advantage over you at RB. But if you grab Moss, Brady, Manning, or Reggie Wayne (and I rank them in that order), you can reliably say that you’ll have one of the two best players at that position. Think you’ll take a hit at running back? Maybe, but let’s see how things pan out.

Round 2

1. Willis McGahee
2. Clinton Portis
3. Reggie Wayne
4. Marshawn Lynch
5. Larry Johnson
6. Ryan Grant
7. Terrell Owens
8. Maurice Jones-Drew
9. Andre Johnson
10. Tony Romo

Analysis: This pick probably befuddles you even more than the first one. A couple of high level running backs are still around in Johnson and Grant, but we went with Wayne to lock in one of the most reliable and productive options at WR over the past five years. His numbers are right up there with the best in football, and he’s essentially taken over the #1 slot from Harrison. Owens is a fine pick here as well, but you just never know with Owens. Wayne is a lock. Still no running back, and you’re probably telling your children to hide their eyes from how this team will look in the end.

Round 3

1. San Diego DEF
2. Braylon Edwards
3. Steve Smith
4. Laurence Maroney
5. Larry Fitzgerald
6. Brandon Jacobs
7. T.J. Houshmandzadeh
8. Ronnie Brown
9. Marques Colston
10. Plaxico Burress

Analysis: So there he is, my first running back selection of the draft. I’m a big fan of Ronnie Brown; I think last year we just saw the beginning of what he can be. He’s a big time player in the running and passing games, and barring another injury, should be a great pick at this point in the draft. Is he Tomlinson? No. But you know, statistically, he was right there with Tomlinson before he got hurt, so you can feel good about Brown, despite not feeling good about the Dolphins (as none do).

Round 4

1. Anquan Boldin
2. Jamal Lewis
3. Chad Johnson
4. Torry Holt
5. Brandon Marshall
6. Drew Brees
7. Wes Welker
8. Derek Anderson
9. Michael Turner
10. Antonio Gates

Analysis: Around now is probably when you’d throw your hands in the air and say, “I don’t know what he’s thinking. Michael Turner was still out there, he could’ve locked up another starting running back!” Turner sure was out there, along with Darren McFadden and Willie Parker, but take a look at all the other teams. Six teams went with my (and most guys’) traditional strategy, and had two running backs by the end of the third round, including five of the seven teams that would pick before my next pick. They don’t want to get left behind at WR or QB, so they’ll be filling those positions over the next two rounds, as well as the occasional tight end. That means running backs will fall. Meanwhile, the drop-off at wide receiver after Johnson and Holt was severe. Johnson is younger, so I took him.

Round 5

1. Jason Witten
2. Carson Palmer
3. Greg Jennings
4. Roy Williams
5. Darren McFadden
6. Santonio Holmes
7. Ben Roethlisberger
8. Kellen Winslow
9. Marvin Harrison
10. Tony Gonzalez

Analysis: After all of my talk about how Turner, McFadden, or Parker would fall to me, sure enough, Parker did. And then I passed on him. How could I do something so incredibly stupid (or brilliant)? With Gates and Witten off the board, and many teams having filled a number of skill positions, tight ends figured to start going soon. Winslow is my favorite fantasy tight end after Gates, so I took a chance on Parker dropping through four picks by two guys who both had two starting RBs already. Does it work?

Round 6

1. Calvin Johnson
2. Roddy White
3. Willie Parker
4. Dwayne Bowe
5. Donovan McNabb
6. Hines Ward
7. Dallas Clark
8. Joey Galloway
9. Lee Evans
10. Reggie Bush

Analysis: The answer is yes, my gambit worked. Parker slid four more picks (including one tight end pick) and was available in the sixth round, one year after being a top 10 pick in most drafts. Needless to say, I’m happy to have him. So where do I go now, with one WR slot, kicker, and defense open? Stay tuned.

Round 7

1. Thomas Jones
2. Chris Cooley
3. Donald Lee
4. Matt Hasselbeck
5. Laveranues Coles
6. Jeremy Shockey
7. Vernon Davis
8. Earnest Graham
9. Minnesota DEF
10. Marc Bulger

Analysis: I go for another running back, of course. Listen, I wasn’t wrong back in my early days to tell you that you need to load up on running back. You do. But you have to make the right picks at the right times, and any poker player will tell you that the way to make money is to act in a way that’s different from everyone else at the table. So, early on when everyone is loading up on RBs, you take WRs and a QB. Then later, when people need WRs and QBs, you go for that running back depth. You should try to enter every season with at least 4 starting running backs. Graham was very effective in the second half of last season, and figures to be on top of the depth chart in Tampa Bay. I’ll take him.

Round 8

1. Donald Driver
2. Heath Miller
3. New England DEF
4. Chicago DEF
5. New York Giants DEF
6. Benjamin Watson
7. Pittsburgh DEF
8. Rashard Mendenhall
9. Dallas DEF
10. Edgerrin James

Analysis: A lot of the time, I’m not in favor of picking up defenses early. But with as bad as the Dolphins, Bills, and Jets offenses might be, and with solid talent all over, the Patriots defense is compelling. In retrospect, I might have been better off taking Mendenhall and locking up the Steelers’ running back situation, but I had hoped I could wait another round for him. Oh well, that’s the nature of a fantasy football draft. You analyze risk versus reward and hope for the best. I’m not mad about getting New England’s defense. Not mad at all.

Round 9

1. Patrick Crayton
2. Nick Folk
3. Green Bay DEF
4. Shayne Graham
5. Jacksonville DEF
6. Adam Vinatieri
7. Nate Kaeding
8. Chris Chambers
9. LenDale White
10. Rudi Johnson

Analysis: Not too much to say at this point, just filling out my team with depth where I believe it to be most worthwhile. Chambers is a solid veteran who probably won’t explode for big time stats, but should be a nice reliable option to round out the starting wideouts. I looked at Rudi Johnson here, but decided that situation was too murky to get involved in.

Round 10

1. Stephen Gostkowski
2. Bobby Engram
3. Jerricho Cotchery
4. Jonathan Stewart
5. Matt Forte
6. Eli Manning
7. Kevin Smith
8. Mason Crosby
9. Fred Taylor
10. Jake Delhomme

Analysis: I’m a little bit ashamed to say it, but I’m a Jets fan, so I like to grab one or two every year, since they’re normally not too expensive and can sometimes be a nice surprise. Cotchery has had back-to-back solid seasons, so there’s reason for optimism here.

Round 11

1. Rob Bironas
2. Kevin Curtis
3. Aaron Rodgers
4. David Garrard
5. Bernard Berrian
6. Jay Cutler
7. Santana Moss
8. Julius Jones
9. Reggie Williams
10. Todd Heap

Analysis: More evidence to suggest that drafting running backs early, especially in a public league, can be a mistake. Jones is likely going to be getting the majority of carries in Seattle, and here he is sitting there at my pick in the eleventh round. I’m happy.

Round 12

1. Philip Rivers
2. Vince Young
3. Javon Walker
4. Anthony Gonzalez
5. Reggie Brown
6. David Akers
7. Owen Daniels
8. Justin Fargas
9. Matt Schaub
10. D.J. Hackett

Analysis: This was after the news came out about Walker getting beaten up and robbed in Las Vegas, so that may explain why he fell so far. But he’s got #1 receiver talent and the opportunity to prove it. I have to think that he’ll feel more comfortable and perform better after getting out of Denver, where his friend and teammate Darrent Williams was shot and killed right in front of him. Hopefully the recent attack hasn’t done any permanent damage, and Walker can get back to doing what he does best, which is catch touchdowns.

Round 13

1. Josh Scobee
2. Nate Burleson
3. Derrick Mason
4. Jerry Porter
5. Tennessee DEF
6. Bryant Johnson
7. Tony Scheffler
8. Selvin Young
9. Josh Brown
10. Baltimore DEF

Analysis: Not much to analyze, just taking a chance on a potential starting running back. I’ve only got one starting position left open (kicker), and I think you all know when to get a kicker.

Round 14

1. Ronald Curry
2. Desmond Clark
3. John Kitna
4. Jason Campbell
5. Alge Crumpler
6. Ted Ginn
7. Isaac Bruce
8. Joe Jurevicius
9. Greg Olsen
10. Terry Glenn

Analysis: Kitna was the twelfth best quarterback last year, and the offense figures to be high-flying once again, if for no other reason than the Lions still have no defense and a bunch of quality receivers. For one or two weeks out of a season, I’m comfortable handing things over to Kitna.

Round 15

1. Donte Stallworth
2. Phil Dawson
3. Shaun Alexander
4. Seattle DEF
5. Felix Jones
6. Neil Rackers
7. Indianapolis DEF
8. Leon Washington
9. Arizona DEF
10. DeAngelo Williams

Analysis: Exactly. A couple of previous comments of mine come to fruition here. First, when I said you know when to take a kicker, the answer is, “after the draft.” Don’t draft a kicker, because in the past three years, the best kickers in fantasy football have been Mason Crosby, Robbie Gould, and Neil Rackers, none of whom was drafted at any reliable rate in that year’s drafts. Just grab a kicker right before the season starts, and always be willing to rotate them out. They’re worthless. Second, I’ve taken another New York Jet, and Washington is a guy I really like. I’m hoping they give him at least a 50/50 split, because Washington has great potential to be a fantasy force.

Final Roster
QB – Tom Brady
RB – Ronnie Brown
RB – Willie Parker
WR – Reggie Wayne
WR – Chad Johnson
WR – Chris Chambers
TE – Kellen Winslow
K – open
DEF – New England

BN – Jon Kitna
BN – Earnest Graham
BN – Julius Jones
BN – Selvin Young
BN – Leon Washington
BN – Jerricho Cotchery

Analysis: I love this team. Not like, love. Having two great wide receivers puts me above most other teams in that regard, and Tom Brady should be as good as anyone under center. And nobody can argue that a combo of Ronnie Brown and Willie Parker can’t be one of the best 1-2 punches in your league. Between Graham, Young, and Jones, I should have two starting running backs on my bench, and Cotchery can fill in as needed for bye weeks and such. LOVE.

Why Golf Is Relevant

If you thought I was going to sit idly by why Joe bashed golf, well, most of the time you would have been right. But not today. Even with Tiger Woods missing the rest of the 2008 season, people, including me, are going to continue to watch golf... and here is why.

First, the idea that golf is comparable to darts is ridiculous. No, wait, not ridiculous, something stronger than ridiculous, maybe ludicrous, yeah, I'm going with that. Sure the tasks are similar, "Put a small item into a small area", but that's exactly what a pitcher in baseball is trying to do and I don't think anybody would say that baseball athletes are equivalent to dart tossers. Make no mistake, golfers are athletes. Propelling a golf ball 300+ yards is a full body activity and golfers like Camilo Villegas, Aaron Baddeley and, yes, Tiger Woods, are showing that fitness and athleticism are just as important in golf as in any other sport (yep, you are saying "what about John Daly's fat ass?" and to that I say: David Wells, Charles Barkley and Tony Siragusa).

Additionally, golf requires more precision and concentration than any other sport. As far as precision is concerned, baseball is often called "a game of inches" and this is no doubt true, but golf is much, much finer. A few hundredths of an inch makes the difference between a precise stroke and one that finds the deep rough. Another few hundredths of an inch makes the difference between a ball that stops ten feet from the pin and one that rolls right through and into a green-side bunker. The ability of a player to control his muscles to deliver a quality strike time and time again is one of the most difficult tasks in all of sport and I know this because very few people can actually do it. This also speaks to the intense concentration it takes to be a professional golfer. With rounds typically lasting more than four hours, there are few sports that require their athletes to concentration for this length of time. Football, baseball and basketball games rarely last more than 3 hours and all these sports have long breaks during which players can regroup and refocus if things aren't going correctly. Having to maintain the mental focus to perform a difficult and precise task is the very essence of sport.

On to the argument that nobody will watch golf now that Tiger is out. Umm, no, that's not true. While Woods definitely brings alot of focus on the sport, PGA tour events will continue to be widely watched, analyzed and appreciated. The two remaining majors will definitely garner attention, with the history and uniqueness of the British Open and the always competitive PGA Championship. But those two events aside, golf will remain very, very popular. How do I know this? Well, like everything else, just look at the money. Again, Tiger is the best at bringing in dollars (in both golf and all of professional sports, making a jaw dropping $127 million in 2007), but guess who was the second highest grossing professional athlete last year, that's right another golfer. Phil Mickelson made over $62 million in 2007, which is well behind Tiger, but over 50% more than the next closest athlete, Lebron James. The interesting thing about Phil is that over 80% of his earnings came from endorsements, not winnings. That means companies ponied up alot of dough to have Phil endorse their product because they know alot of eyes are going to be on their guy. And over $50 million means that ALOT of eyes have to be on your guy. With that much money invested in a guy that isn't Tiger, you can rest assured that the PGA remain on the public's mind and on Sportscenter (sorry Joe), even without the best player in the world.

Ty Lawson is staying at UNC.

http://www.tylawson.org/steele.php

Unfortunately, it looks like Ty Lawson won't be available when the Wizards draft at the 18th pick in the NBA's 2008 draft this Thursday night. Current projections have the Wizards going big at their pick, selecting either Roy Hibbert, the center out of Georgetown or Darrell Arther, power forward from Kansas. Neither of them makes the team substantially better, but I guess that's what happens when you're at the beginning of the non-lottery portion of the draft. You get okay players and just stay around the 12th best team in the NBA.

Switcheroo

I've been looking at the previous posts concerning the fantasy football draft I was posting round-by-round, and while I think they're good, they would probably be better served by being all posted together. The chronology will make it easier to see how the draft progresses, and you won't have to search around other, unrelated posts. So on Monday morning, I'll post the whole draft, along with all of my comments, in one massive post. The intro and the first couple of rounds will be redundant, but I'll include them just so you can remember where we were in the draft when I left off.

See you Monday.

Who's happy that Tiger is going to miss the rest of the golf season? This guy!

Now, that’s not to say that I take direct pleasure from the pain that others endure. That’s almost never the case. But I thank my lucky stars that Tiger Woods won’t be playing in any more tournaments this year. Am I a Tiger-hater? Not at all. Do I really like Phil Mickelson, or Ernie Els, or Vijay Singh? Nope. How, then, can I be so delighted that Tiger Woods has been sidelined?

Because I hate golf. You know what doesn’t matter? Golf. I mean, no sports really matter, in the grand scheme of things, but golf is completely irrelevant, even on a sports level. Think I’m wrong? Ask yourself how many golfers you actually legitimately care about. What’s the number? One? Maybe two or three that you really want to see either win or lose? Out of how many? Hundreds? And if one of those golfers isn’t Tiger (or if you remove Tiger from your list), how many tournaments come by that those golfers are even relevant? Maybe 20%, if you’re talking about Mickelson or Els? Trevor Immelman won the Masters this year for his second win ever, I bet he’s one of yours.

No, the reality is that people pick up the story of the week every single tournament. Paul Goydos was the story at The Players Championship in May, and Rocco Mediate was the story at last week’s U.S. Open. And there’s another story every time golfers get together. I’m not trying to come down on the people who play golf and get these brief moments in the spotlight; I live every day hoping for those moments, and they never come.

But I do mean to trivialize their accomplishments. The sport of golf is only marginally more impressive than darts. You play golf outdoors, and tend to not be on your fourth Crown and coke, staring at that buxom blonde across the bar when you’re playing golf. The tasks are the same, though. Put a small item (a golf ball, or the tip of a dart) into a small area (cup, bullseye) on a relatively large field (hole, dart board). You get at least two tries in golf, and just one in darts, but you’re splitting hairs at that point. It should come as no surprise that people enjoy playing Golden Tee (which I think is retarded) and beer pong, as well as darts, when drinking. When your mind is feeling lazy, you want to play a simple game. There are few people who want to break out a chess board after they’ve been drinking, or who bring Risk to the bar.

And don’t make me laugh and call it a spectator sport, when it’s anything but. What kind of spectator sport demands complete silence while the player is getting ready to perform? Think about those kinds of moments in other sports: setting up for a field goal in football, taking a free throw in basketball, throwing a pitch on a full count. Those are among the loudest moments you’ll see in a competitive game, because the crowd is trying to rattle the competitor. In golf, it’s considered bad form to make any noise at all while a player is getting ready to tee off, which is fortunate, because nobody cares enough to actually want to rattle anyone.

The most ridiculous part of professional golf is that everyone’s favorite player is the same guy: Tiger Woods. What kind of bogus sport is that, where everyone’s cheering for only one guy? Even in tennis, which has a lot of the same flaws as golf, not everyone cheers for Nadal or Roddick or Federer, just as not everyone cheered for Agassi or Sampras or Borg or Ashe or McEnroe. Everyone had their own favorites, and the clashes made for great TV and great debate. But when everyone likes the same guy, there are no debates, there are no great matches. People cheered for Rocco Mediate because they knew nothing about him. “Who’s this nobody challenging Tiger? Let’s see what he’s got!”

So back to the point of this post: why am I happy that Tiger Woods has gotten himself hurt and won’t be around? Because I’m sick of golf taking up 3 minutes of SportsCenter, or thirty minutes of a sports radio show. I don’t give a whirl about how Justin Leonard was able to stave off a late surge by Biggle McBaggyPants. I don’t care about Tiger doing it either, but at least now, a lot of the big sports people will be in the same boat. The guys on Around the Horn always comment about how a golf tournament isn’t legitimate unless Tiger is playing in it. Hopefully that means they won’t talk about any for the next six months. I want golf to slip into the sports subconscious; bring it back if you must when Tiger is back, but let me have this time. Let baseball and football and basketball have this time.

Fantasy Football Mock Draft - Round 3

Round 3

1. San Diego DEF
2. Braylon Edwards
3. Steve Smith
4. Laurence Maroney
5. Larry Fitzgerald
6. Brandon Jacobs
7. T.J. Houshmandzadeh
8. Ronnie Brown
9. Marques Colston
10. Plaxico Burress

Analysis: So there he is, my first running back selection of the draft. I’m a big fan of Ronnie Brown; I think last year we just saw the beginning of what he can be. He’s a big time player in the running and passing games, and barring another injury, should be a great pick at this point in the draft. Is he Tomlinson? No. But you know, statistically, he was right there with Tomlinson before he got hurt, so you can feel good about Brown, despite not feeling good about the Dolphins (as none do).

Fantasy Football Mock Draft - Round 2

Round 2

1. Willis McGahee
2. Clinton Portis
3. Reggie Wayne
4. Marshawn Lynch
5. Larry Johnson
6. Ryan Grant
7. Terrell Owens
8. Maurice Jones-Drew
9. Andre Johnson
10. Tony Romo

Analysis: This pick probably befuddles you even more than the first one. A couple of high level running backs are still around in Johnson and Grant, but we went with Wayne to lock in one of the most reliable and productive options at WR over the past five years. His numbers are right up there with the best in football, and he’s essentially taken over the #1 slot from Harrison. Owens is a fine pick here as well, but you just never know with Owens. Wayne is a rock. Still no running back, and you’re probably telling your children to hide their eyes from how this team will look in the end...

...oh, who am I kidding? If you care this much about fantasy football, no woman would sleep with you. So barring an adoption (likely a result of a string of escalating dares), you've got no children with eyes to shield.

Fantasy Football Mock Draft

It’s never too early to start talking fantasy football, so that’s exactly what I’m about to do. I’ve already participated in several mock drafts; despite what you might think, you really don’t know anything until you get into a draft and see what happens.

What follows is my most recent foray, and I learned a lot from the first few that helped me figure out how to go into this one. I’ll be posting a new round once or twice daily (on weekdays) until we’ve got them all. Some quick math says the whole draft should be posted by the end of the month. I provide some tips as I go through the draft, but you should realize pretty quickly what my strategy this year is going to be. Want a clue? Don’t do what I’ve been telling you to do.

My picks are bolded …like this:

Round 1

1. LaDainian Tomlinson
2. Adrian Peterson
3. Brian Westbrook
4. Steven Jackson
5. Joseph Addai
6. Randy Moss
7. Marion Barber
8. Tom Brady
9. Peyton Manning
10. Frank Gore

Analysis: Historically, I’ve advised taking running backs in at least 2 of the first 3 rounds, and 3 of the first 5. And that can work. But this year, if you’re after pick #5, your first round pick probably needs to not be a running back. You can logically take Marion Barber, but think about this. Even if you take Barber or Gore, the people at picks 1-5 still have an advantage over you at RB. But if you grab Moss, Brady, Manning, or Reggie Wayne (and I rank them in that order), you can reliably say that you’ll have one of the two best players at that position. Think you’ll take a hit at running back? Maybe, but we'll see how things pan out.

Radio Show

We posted a new radio show last night. Topics of conversation were:

• Who was the better all-time defensive lineman: Michael Strahan or Warren Sapp?
• How much credit can we give Tim Donaghy's allegations of misconduct in the 2002 NBA Western Conference playoffs?
• Can the Lakers come back to win the NBA title? (Obviously this has become easier to answer today)

We've gotten pretty good at keeping our shows under an hour now, so you have no excuse to not listen....oh hell, you've got plenty of excuses, but listen anyways.

The All "Former Cleveland Indians Prospects" Team

I've been noticing the names of a few former Cleveland Indians prospects on "Baseball Tonight" box scores lately. Things like Milton Bradley 2-3 2HR and Ryan Ludwick 2-4 2HR tend to standout. This got me thinking if I could put together a major league team with former Indians prospects (note: I'm talking prospects here, not guys like Omar Vizquel, Jason Michaels or Kevin Millwood who left due to free agency or were ineffective at the big league level). Anyway, not only could I put together a team, but it's a pretty good team, check it out (2008 stats in parenthesis):

1B - Ben Broussard (ave .159, obp .225, slug .268)
2B - Brandon Philips (.273/.319/.496)
SS - Joe Inglett (.281/.347/.391)
3B - Kevin Kouzmanoff (.266/.311/.405)
RF - Ryan Church (.300/.365/.522)
CF - Brian Barton (.242/.339/.343)
LF - Ryan Ludwick (.310/.379/.647)
C - Chris Coste (.315/.374/.556)
DH - Milton Bradley (.338/.456/.642)

SP - Jeremy Guthrie (era 3.40, whip 1.20, k/9 5.9)
SP - Tim Lincecum (2.15, 1.22, 9.0)
RP - Brian Tallet (2.49, 1.38, 7.8)
RP - Andrew Brown (2.45, 1.20, 7.4)

Others: John McDonald, Maicer Izturis, Josh Bard

Ok, a couple of things. First, I hate putting Ben Broussard on this list, he's awful, he was awful in Cleveland and he'll probably be awful for years to come. Fortunately for the Indians, they made the right choice with Ryan Garko and Broussard is their best former first base prospect currently in baseball.

Second, adding Tim Lincecum to the list is kinda unfair. He was drafted by Cleveland in 2005, but didn't sign (rumor has it the difference between the two parties was a few $100k). This happens pretty regularly with top college prospects/guys that are tough to sign, so it's probably something every team has done. We won't be mentioning him any further.

Third, I was floored by the raw number of former Indians prospects currently in the bigs. I could have also included guys like Jody Gerut and Russell Branyan, but I don't think that really changes things. Still, I've listed 15 guys (16 minus Lincecum) and that seems like alot.

Ok, so what does this all mean. First, the Indians have a great minor league system. I don't think any baseball people will disagree with that. Almost all of their recent success has come from the cultivation of prospects like Grady Sizemore, Victor Martinez and Fausto Carmona. In the course of evaluating talent there are going to be some hits and misses, so even the best GMs (Ok, maybe not Billy Beane) are going to have "the one that got away". But look at that list again, there are 5 guys slugging near or over .500, there are two guys with OPS over 1.000, there is one guy that represents half of the second basemen ever to hit 30 homers and steal 30 bases. That's not missing on a few guys, that's a disaster.

Of course, if the Indians already have talented players in place even top-prospects will have to be traded away to "win now" or will simply run out of options with the club and be forced to move on. That is not the case here. Take a look at the Indians depth chart here. According to my high tech calculations, the current Indians position players are much better than the guys listed above at three positions (C, 1B and CF) and the rejects are much, much better at four positions (2B, RF, LF, DH). Jhonny Peralta is more proven than part timers Joe Inglett or John McDonald, so he gets the nod at SS (although if Peralta is going to hit .230 and be a defensive liability, one might wonder "why not go with a defensive guy?") and Kevin Kouzmanoff is better than Casey Blake. So the grand total is 5-4 in favor of the rejects. Not good.

But like I said above, if the Cleveland front office traded away these prospects in the name of winning in the moment it would be tough to blame them. It would also be tough to criticize if these guys were traded for better or more "sure thing" prospects. Again, this is not the case here. Of the 15 guys listed above, five were waived or unprotected (Inglett, Ludwick, Barton, Coste and Guthrie). For the other ten, the Indians currently have five major leaguers to show for it and it's tough to classify these five guys as major league quality. They are: Shin-Soo Choo, Josh Barfield, Franklin Gutierrez, Andy Marte and Kelly Shoppach. In fact, Marte and Shoppach were dealt from Boston for Coco Crisp, David Riske and Josh Bard, so it's very tough to say they were aquired for Bard (note: Crisp could have been considered as a prospect, but with three seasons with 400+ ABs in Cleveland I felt like he was pretty well established, and he sucks. Riske is also a major leaguer, but, again, established.). The "franchise five" are hitting a combined .232 with a whopping 5 home runs and 25 RBI in 111 games. Of these five, none are better than the "rejected" player at his corresponding position (if you consider all outfield positions equal, Gutierrez and Brian Barton are pretty similar, but to the best of my knowledge, Gutierrez has never been considered one of Baseball America's Top 100 prospects like Barton was in 2007). So to summarize, that's 15 major leaguers with Franklin Gutierrez to show for it.

As an Indians fan, it's tough to look down that list and wonder if one of those 15 players could have been parlayed into a player that would have pushed them over the hump from being a team that went to game 7 of the 2007 ALCS to American League Champions (even more frustrating is that maybe they only needed one player to give them one more regular season win to finish with a better regular season record than Boston, pushing game 7 to Cleveland instead of Beantown). It's also frightening that Indians management has a history of giving up on highly ranked prospects when they struggle early in their careers (especially with the current ineffectiveness of once revered prospects Josh Barfield and Andy Marte). For a small market team that acknowledges that they can't afford to make mistakes, I see too many in the past of the Cleveland Indians and, even worse, I see the potential for more in the near future.

Of course maybe I'm blowing this all out of proportion, maybe this happens all the time in baseball and maybe I'm only seeing the Indians failures because they are the team I'm most attuned to. With that in mind, I'm going to make this a mini-series here at Joe and Joe Sports, looking at two more teams: the low-budget hero Oakland A's and the mid-market disappointment Baltimore Orioles. Hopefully, this will add some perspective to the Indians situation as well as give some insight into the success rate of front offices around the league. At the end I'll try to bring everything together and provide some conclusions (or maybe not), so check back soon.

Great Piece on Barry Bonds

Tim Brown (the sportswriter, not the former Raiders wide receiver) has written a very compelling article on the hypocritical nature of baseball's desire to distance themselves from Barry Bonds. Many of you feel differently than I do about Bonds, but Brown manages to perfectly capture my sentiments. It's a quick read, but it'll make you think about your standpoint, and wonder if maybe Joe was right all along....

....this Joe, not the other one. There's no wondering about him, he's always right.

Due to Technical Difficulties....

...our show last night was canceled. Someone lives in an apartment building that gets affected by thunderstorms. We're hoping to get a show in tonight or tomorrow night, but schedules are tight, so unfortunately we can't make any guarantees except this: there will be more shows.

Someday. :)

Show Scheduled: June 3, 2008

Get ready for a Joe & Joe Short tonight, focusing solely on the NBA Finals. We'll talk about the matchup, give our predictions, and maybe look back a little bit at the classic Lakers/Celtics matchups of the 1980s. Not unlike Michael Ian Black, we love the '80s.

Show starts at 8:00 PM.

The Goddamn Patriots

Full disclosure as always, I can’t stand the New England Patriots. The initial reason I didn’t like them was because of Tom Brady’s smug attitude after the Raiders/Patriots game in which he fumbled the ball but it was called back on a bogus “tuck rule” that hadn’t been seen in the NFL in twenty years. His quote: “I was throwing the ball.” People have said that he had sarcasm in his voice, but I heard no such tone. That was enough for me to dislike Brady and his team, and they haven’t done anything since then to make me like them.

But this “SpyGate” stuff is just absurd. So many times the opportunity has existed for the Patriots to man up and take their punishment, and put everything behind them. But of course, they haven’t done that. They’ve whined, they’ve skirted the issue, they’ve claimed innocence, and they’ve said the signals don’t offer much of a real advantage. And because of that, they’ve left the door open for the issue to continue to haunt them. They could really use someone with some political background on their public relations team, because no politician would be dragged down for this long.

Way back in September, when the suspicions of impropriety first began to surface, everyone took them seriously, probably more seriously than necessary, in fact. I remember hearing folks on ESPN’s Around the Horn calling for blood, saying head coach Bill Belichick should be suspended for a game, or a season, that the Patriots should lose multiple draft picks, and that the team and Belichick should be fine upwards of a million dollars. I believe the idea was that, with the NBA betting scandal just recently put to rest, and with baseball still enduring the heart of the steroids controversy, the NFL needed to get out in front of this and make sure it didn’t linger.

The actual punishment seemed valid; $750,000 total is a pretty large amount of money, and losing a first round draft pick is a very serious blow. A mea culpa by Belichick at that point, along with a sincere apology, and we might have been done with it there. But instead we got “misinterpreted the rules” and “we’re moving forward.” Those are fine if you’re a dictator or candidate, but as a member of an institution (the very institution who you are alleged to have cheated), you need to seem sincere and humble in your apology, or it’ll come back to bite you.

Fast forward to the Super Bowl, and you’ll remember that was the first time allegations came out concerning taping the Rams’ walkthrough before the 2002 Super Bowl. The Patriots said it wasn’t true, and Matt Walsh, the video assistant who blew the whistle on the whole thing, didn’t say anything. But since then, they’ve whined about it causing a distraction for the players before facing the eventual NFL champion New York Giants. Hey, bummer, you’re in the Super Bowl and people are talking about you. Act like you’ve been there before.

And now, Matt Walsh, someone who Belichick claims he couldn’t pick out of a lineup, has come forward with tapes (plural) and spoken with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, as well as a few members of the press, in an effort to uncover the truth. And what is the truth? The Patriots had been engaging in the taping of defensive signals for no less than 7 years. The questionable “advantage” of the tactic is completely irrelevant; if you get caught speeding on a highway, it doesn’t matter if you weren’t actually putting anyone else in danger. The law dictates that exceeding the speed limit is illegal and punishable, not only when people are actually put in danger, but any time, because the action itself is dangerous (as deemed by the governing body). Taping opponents’ defensive signals isn’t cheating only if you’re getting an advantage; it’s cheating any time you do it because the action itself is improper (as deemed by the governing body).

The kicker for me, though, the thing that made me decide to make this blog post (though it’s a few weeks old), was the whole scenario with the Boston Herald printing the largest apology in sports history, or at least so I’m told, concerning the unfounded allegations that the Patriots had taped the Rams’ walkthrough in 2002. Everyone talked about how irresponsible it was for the newspaper to print that the tape existed before verifying, and how Patriots owner Robert Kraft was right to feel vindicated after the correction.

Umm, did I miss something?

The Patriots did get punished by the league as noted above, right? And Matt Walsh dictated the lengths to which they would go to get the signals and avoid detection, right? And Belichick, despite all of the hemming and hawing about its usefulness and that it was just a misunderstanding of league rules, has essentially admitted to everything that Walsh has claimed, right? So the Patriots were legitimately guilty of everything they were accused of, except for the taping of the Rams’ walkthrough (and that’s not to say there wasn’t a tape somewhere of the Rams’ defensive signals, just nothing from the walkthrough). Wow, total vindication there, Bobby Kraft.

Isn’t that sort of like being charged with 100 counts of jewelry theft, and only getting convicted on 99 of them because the victim found one of the bracelets they thought was missing? I mean, you’re still guilty as sin, New England. You just sound ridiculous when you say, “We're relieved that this is over and you see that this is nonsense and we were unfairly accused and we're moving on,” as Kraft did following the Herald apology.

If you’re a New England Patriots fan (and at this point, I hope we’ve got some of you reading because you need to take your medicine), you’ve got to own up to the fact that your glorious stretch here will be forever sullied by “SpyGate.” Your team did something wrong, and by refusing to admit to it, they came to look like a bunch of babies, with Belichick as the Tommy of the group.

I am not in favor of trying to take away the Super Bowls from the Patriots as some of my more fiery colleagues are. I think a fair punishment at this point would be probation. Not some kind of sissy probation, though; I'm talking about college football style probation: ban them from the postseason for three years. If we're going to say that the NCAA should be tougher on big time programs who break the rules, why not hold the biggest programs (NFL teams) to the highest standard? And I'll tell you this: banning a professional team from the playoffs will get the attention of every owner, coach, and player. There'll be none of these claims of misunderstandings, because everyone will double-check everything they do. If a team wins titles because of cheating, then you have to eliminate the incentive, by depriving them of the opportunity to win titles.

I'm looking forward to another NFL season where I'll be rooting against the Patriots every week. Go Skins!

Memorial Day Weekend

I'm heading to Atlantic City for the long Memorial Day weekend, hoping to come back with at least the clothes that I arrived with. Anything on top of that (you know, like cash) is just a bonus. We're staying at Resorts on Thursday night for free, as I'm finally taking advantage of the money I've lost in the past and getting a free weekday room. Then, Friday/Saturday/Sunday nights, we're going to the Showboat, which had slightly lower prices than the other casinos with vacancies.

There was some discussion when we were making plans about staying in a crummy hotel as opposed to one of the casinos. Initially I figured a hotel/motel would be better because of the price, but a few factors changed my mind:

• Convenience. There's nothing quite like walking out of your room, taking an elevator, and immediately placing bets. Hotels can get close, but they can't match it.
• The "Fancy" factor. I've stayed in a couple of very nice hotels, but casinos are just a little bit better. The room we got at Resorts a few years back was just huge, and while you don't use much of that space, you feel more comfortable with it there.
• Safety. Atlantic City is not a nice town. If you go more than one block off the boardwalk, you're asking for trouble. Staying at a casino means that you never have to set foot on the sidewalk if you don't want to, and trust me: you don't want to.
• Price. I know what you're thinking. Casinos, Joe? They're always so expensive. And you're right, staying in a casino is substantially more expensive than staying in a motel. But really, what's the value of that price? You'd still be paying around $200/night at the crummiest of places in Atlantic City, and if you're going to be shelling out that kind of cash, don't you at least want to enjoy the place you're paying for? You work hard for the money. You'd better treat you right.

Best wishes for everyone this weekend. Have a fun and safe holiday, and we'll see you Tuesday.

Show Scheduled: May 20, 2008

We'll be doing a full Joe & Joe Sports episode tomorrow night, starting around 9:30. Potential topics:

• NBA conference finals matchups
• Who to hold on to and who to cut loose in early fantasy baseball

Use the widget to the right, or click here to check out past episodes, and to tune in tomorrow night!

The Washington Wizards Should Trade Gilbert Arenas

Gilbert Arenas is a great player. Joe told you all about how well he's played, and that he's still relatively early in his career. And he wasn't really wrong in describing him to you. He gave you the facts, and the facts clearly state that Arenas is a top tier player.

But he's got to go.

First things first, let's deal with the basketball side of things. Arenas has averaged 27.7 points per game over his past three full seasons (not including this past year, when he only started 8 games). Arenas also averaged 20.3 field goal attempts per game during that stretch. As a comparison, Allen Iverson, the premier scoring point guard in basketball, averaged 30.2 points per game and 23.4 attempts per game. I see Iverson as a more valid comparison for Arenas than Kobe Bryant, since Kobe is a legitimate two-guard, and Arenas is supposed to be a point guard.

And there's the first problem I have with Arenas. He's covering a position that, to be fair to everyone, he doesn't play. He's most effective individually when he's got the ball in his hands, but he's not much of a distributor. Arenas' career high assists per game is 6.1, lower than Iverson's average in any of the past five years. Stephon Marbury, an alleged team-killer because of his lack of a willingness to pass the ball, played for a decade before his assists per game average dropped below 6.1 per game. I'm not saying that Marbury was a better player in his first ten years than Arenas is today....or am I?

The real problem for me is that the Wizards have to position him as at least the unofficial point guard, because if he doesn't have the ball in his hands, he's not doing what you're paying him to do. But what good is a guy playing point guard if he's jacking up 20 shots a game? Find me an NBA championship team that's had a point guard like that in the last 20 years. The closest I could find was Isiah Thomas in the 1989-90 season, when he averaged 18.4 points and 16.3 attempts. But he also had 9.4 assists per game, 50% more than Arenas' best season.

The thought that they had a point guard may have also led to the Wizards picking Oleksiy Pecherov (with 319 total NBA minutes) over Rajon Rondo in the 2006 NBA draft. Rondo is obviously no Gilbert Arenas, but as I've suggested, the Wizards don't need an Arenas.

"Injury-prone" may not yet be a hat that Arenas wears, but after last year where he missed the playoffs altogether, and this year when he played 94 minutes in 4 games and then shut himself down, it may be time to get fitted. Joe says it's part of the same injury; maybe so, but if it's lingered for over a year now, at what point does it become a legitimate concern? Do you have to hit Mark Prior status and miss multiple seasons before you make a conclusion? Taking a chance on an inevitable max contract on a guy whose last NBA action was pulling himself from a playoff series because of injury is risky. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.

Now, let's take a step back from Arenas' numbers and look at the big picture: the Wizards haven't won anything with this crew. They've lost three straight first round matchups against the Cavaliers (to my dismay and Joe's delight), including the 2005-06 series when Arenas, Caron Butler, and Antawn Jamison were all healthy and effective, averaging 71.7 points between the three of them during the series. If they can't win with their "big three," then why would you want to keep them together? For a while, just getting into the playoffs was a treat for Washington basketball fans, but that time has passed. We want to see a team moving forward, getting better, and positioning itself to take the next step towards the NBA finals (I'm not delusional; just reaching the finals is a great achievemnt for 90% of the teams in the NBA). So if these guys can't do it, we've got to get some guys who can.

And how's this for a transition, getting rid of Gilbert Arenas gives the Wizards the opportunity to get some other guys. Arenas deserves and will get a max contract, and as many of us know, you get an extra year and some more money if you sign with your current team (which is the reason you see sign-and-trade deals). So, for Arenas to get a true max contract, he'll have to sign with the Wizards and then get traded to another team. (The sign-and-trade concept also allows teams without cap space to acquire free agents, as a result of the NBA's salary cap rules).

This could be a great situation for the Wizards, as the one thing Joe and I do agree on is that Jamison is not an elite frontcourt player, which means the Wizards don't have one. Among the high-caliber frontcourt players who could be available in their own sign-and-trades: Jermaine O'Neal, Elton Brand, Emeka Okafor, as well as other potential free agents like Baron Davis, Ron Artest, Andre Iguodala, Shawn Marion, and Josh Smith. Are all of those players more valuable than Arenas? No; in fact, it's debateable as to whether or not any of them are more valuable than Arenas. But I'd rather have at least a couple of them, like Brand, Marion, and Smith.

Would a sign-and-trade actually get the Wizards anything, though? I mean, Rashard Lewis' sign-and-trade netted the Sonics just a second round pick. But Joe Johnson was traded for Boris Diaw and two first round draft picks, and Kenyon Martin was traded for three future first round picks. Given Arenas' tremendous talent, it's fair to expect that the Wizards would be able to work something out where they get solid value in return.

Additionally, even after a sign-and-trade, the Wizards would likely still be a few million dollars under the salary cap, giving them the option to pursue another mid-level role player, such as an energy forward or a bench shooter. That opportunity to shift the talent around from small to big is a rare one, and I think it's one that Washington has got to take advantage of. Especially if the Clippers are as dumb as they look and would be willing to part with Brand for Arenas.

As I said, the point that Joe made about Jamison not being an elite frontcourt player is correct, but let me give you some more information about this player that Joe was so quick to bash. As he said, Jamison was one of four 20-10 guys in basketball last year, and he did sport by far the lowest FG% of any of them. But Jamison doesn't shoot from under the basket, he shoots jumpers and 3-pointers. Shaq's field goal percentage has always been higher than Rashard Lewis', that doesn't mean that Lewis is innately worse than Shaq. Jamison is a rare rebounder who also shoots from the outside. In fact, you could add up the 3-pointers made by the top 23 other rebounders in basketball and not equal the total 3s made by Jamison. He also had more steals than any of the other top 22 rebounders. So let's give him a little credit.

Additionally, as Jamison is a Wizards' free agent and has spent more than 3 years on the team, the Wizards can re-sign him at any price up to a max contract if they so desire. So the choice isn't so much between Jamison or Arenas; it's between Jamison and Arenas or Jamison and whoever they could get for Arenas.

Now, try this fantasy on for size. Arenas gets traded for Brand. Starting lineup is Antonio Daniels at point, Butler as a tall shooting guard, Jamison as a tall small forward, Brand as a heavy power forward, and Brendan Haywood in the pivot. I'm not saying that's the best starting lineup in the league, but I am saying that's an extremely balanced squad in terms of both offense/defense and inside/outside. I like that five a lot better than Arenas, DeShawn Stevenson, Butler, a smallish Jamison, and Haywood. Stevenson, Nick Young, Darius Songaila, and Etan Thomas would make up a nice bench, and you'd have a nice target in the draft/free agency of a backup point guard.

Gilbert Arenas has done fine work for the Wizards. But for this team to take the next step, they've got to move Agent Zero.

The Washington Wizards Should Keep Gilbert Arenas

Why should the Washington Wizards maintain the services of Gilbert Arenas? The short answer is 29.3, as in 29.3 points per game, Gilbert Arenas scoring average in 2005-2006. That is an elite number. How elite? Well only three players have topped it since 2005-2006. Maybe you have heard of those players, it's Kobe Bryant, Allen Iverson and Lebron James, that's it. In three seasons only Kobe Bryant, Allen Iverson and Lebron James have gone higher than 29.3 ppg. Plain and simple, Gilbert Arenas is an elite scorer in the NBA.

There are two arguments that one can use against the Wizards keeping Agent Zero, the first one is that Arenas is over the hill, injury prone or just can't score 30 points a game for entire season again. The idea that Gilbert is past his prime is laughable. Kobe is three and a half years older than Arenas and nobody is telling the 2007-2008 MVP that he is past his prime. Also, Kobe has had three of his top five scoring seasons since turning 27, coincidently the age Arenas will be next year. Gilbert may not be Kobe Bryant, but he certainly isn't over the hill.

Is Gilbert Arenas injury prone? Maybe. The MCL injury that ended his 2006-2007 injury lingered into 2007 eventually causing him to have surgery, missing most of the 2007-2008 injury. Really only sounds like one injury to me, so rather than brand the guy with the "injury prone" label, let's just see how next season goes after Arenas has had an entire offseason to recover.

Can Arenas score maintain a 30 ppg scoring average again? Looks like it. After the aforementioned 29.3, Gilbert scored at a 28.5 ppg clip in 2006-2007 and hasn't been fully healthy since. His 19.3 in 2007-2008 looks like a pretty big drop off, but looks can be deceiving. In the nine games that Arenas came off the bench for late in the 2008 season, he scored at a rate of 0.57 points per minute of floor time. While this is down from his impressive 0.72 pt/min in 2006-2007 and 0.69 pt/min in 2005-2006, it's certainly not bad for a guy that wasn't even close to 100%. In fact, over the course of a 40 minute game, it's only the difference of six points, something I can easily see Arenas overcoming when he returns to full health. Even if Gilbert only comes back to score at a 0.57 pt/min clip, that would have probably put him somewhere around the 8th best scorer in the NBA, somewhere around Dirk Nowitzki and Michael Redd. If Michael Redd is the ground floor, it's definitely worth it for the Wizards to see how high the Gilbert Arenas elevator can go.

The second argument is that the Wizards would be better off building around Caron Butler and Antwan Jamison and developing Roger Mason Jr. or Deshawn Stevenson into the combo guard that Arenas is. Caron Butler is under contract until 2011-2012, so he is definitely part of the Wizards long-term plans. The debate is between Antwan Jamison (currently a free agent) and Gilbert Arenas (a free agent if he options out of the last year of his contract, which he has indicated he will do). The choice here is Arenas. While Jamison is coming off a 20 point, 10 rebound season (matched by only 3 other players in the NBA this season: Dwight Howard, Al Jefferson and Carlos Boozer) he isn't an elite NBA big man. Yet somebody is going to pay him like an elite big man, probably somewhere near $20 million per season. Jamison shot a miserable 43.6% from the floor this year (Howard, Jefferson and Boozer were all over 50%). In fact, of the 18 players that averaged at least nine rebounds per game in 2007-2008, only Zydrunas Ilgauskas had a lower point to shot attempt ratio than Jamison. This puts a little tarnish on Antwan's 20 ppg. While Jamison's rebounding ability is legit (although playing more than 1 min/game more than any of the other guys averaging at least 9 reb/game), he is historically known as a guy that doesn't play a lot of defense, something you would ideally like from a power forward. So it comes down to a choice, the Wizards can either pay for an elite scorer or a defensively challenged, poor shooting power forward.

The combination of Caron Butler and Gilbert Arenas will pick up most of Jamison's scoring load, while the developing, defensive-minded Andray Blatche and the returning Eton Thomas can clear the boards and provide a toughness down low that the Wizards haven't had in some time. This is a much better solution than retaining Jamison (with his aforementioned flaws) and having a gaping hole at point guard. If you haven't been convinced yet, consider that the 2007-2008 Wizards team was basically the Jamison/Butler option, and how did that work out?

Update: Cleveland Browns Draft Analysis

It looks like the Browns didn't have a pick until the fourth round, so, gracious and generous as he is, my partner has decided it would be a more valuable use of his time to pick a fight with yours truly about whether or not the Wizards should sign & trade Gilbert Arenas than to comment on whether Beau Bell (LB, UNLV) can solidify a rushing defense that gave up 130 yards per game on the ground. My guess is he can't, but best of luck to him.

Joe's hoops post should be up tonight or tomorrow.

Washington Redskins Draft Recap

Hold on, before you go crazy and start expecting draft recaps for every team, stop right there. I'll be doing a draft recap on my hometown Washington Redskins, and my partner will try to get you some analysis on his hometown Cleveland Browns. For everyone else, you'll have to do your own research.

FIRST DAY

Round 1: The Skins traded out of the first round, and while they didn't have any picks, I did want to say that trading down may have been a mistake. They only acquired later picks this year, and no picks for next year, which would have been a better call, I believe. They were able to get some solid prospects later in the draft, and I'm not suggesting that they should have necessarily kept the pick, but I think they should have pursued future commodities, not just more, worse commodities.

Round 2: This is where the Skins made their hay. They acquired Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly, two wide receivers who could develop into #1 guys, and a tight end in Fred Davis who has some attitude concerns but has definite playmaker ability. I've heard a lot of local commentators say that Washington made a mistake in drafting three receivers and not taking a lineman early in this draft, and I've heard national commentators commend the Skins for a great draft and give them the highest rank in the NFC. I think the truth, as always, lies somewhere in between. It might have been a mistake to focus so much on one aspect of the team early on, but it's fair to say that they believed that Davis and Kelly were the best players on the board at the point where each of them were drafted.

Worth noting also is that Washington ended the season with the 20th rated points per game average in football, placing them as the second worst among playoff teams. For anyone who watched the Skins last year, I don't have to tell you how lethargic the offense looked 95% of the time. Adding playmakers in the passing game was definitely a valid priority for this team, and you take them when you can get them. I don't fault the Redskins for seeing a need and attempting to address it.

There was a bit of an outcry that the defensive line needed help getting pressure on opposing quarterbacks, but the numbers reflect a very solid defense last year. They had the 11th best points defense, and the 8th best yards defense. The seven teams ahead of them were Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Indianapolis, New England, Tennessee, Baltimore, and the New York Giants, all of whom sport notoriously effective defenses. So while certainly the Skins could use a premier pass rusher, who couldn't? When it came down to it, a premier pass rusher wasn't available at those picks, and I'd be much more unhappy with my team if they made bad value picks that happened to fit one of multiple points of need. I'll take a few chances in the passing game with three guys who were all looked at as potential first round picks at one point in this pre-draft season.

SECOND DAY

I don't know much about most of these second day picks, but the Skins did make a splash by taking an early Heisman hopeful in Colt Brennan. I can't say for sure what he's going to look like in the pros, but in the sixth round, a guy who sported a college career 167.6 passer rating and completed 70% of his passes is a worthwhile risk. I think generally the second day quarterbacks (Dennis Dixon, John David Booty, Josh Johnson, Brennan) may look at least as good as the first day guys (Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Chad Henne, Brian Brohm) when all is said and done. Watching the development of young quarterbacks is always one of the more interesting storylines of a draft to look back at.

So that's the situation. I like the way the Skins draft looks on paper right now, and that's the only way we can look at it at this point. It'll be very interesting to see what sort of playing time each of those three early picks gets, with Santana Moss, Antwaan Randle-El, and Chris Cooley locked in as the starters. Don't be surprised if that's one of our main topics come NFL preview radio show time.

Portal

I tried to think of a witty title for this post, but I was up late playing the aforementioned game, and I'm too tired now at work to be creative.

Portal is part of The Orange Box, a 5-game pack from the makers of Half-Life. In addition to Portal, it includes the previously released Half-Life 2, as well as two follow-up "episodes," and Team Fortress 2, a multiplayer shooter game that involves characters with different roles (medic, engineer, soldier, 6 others). While I'm excited about playing the rest of the games in the suite, Portal is the only game I'm going to discuss right now.

The basic concept of the game is one of solving puzzles. Think of a first-person version of The Adventures of Lolo or Solomon's Key. The equivalent of Solomon's wand in this game is the Portal gun, which you don't have fully together until level 7 or so. Using the portal gun, you can create two ends of a portal, one orange and one blue. The two portals link to each other, so you can transport yourself to many different places in the world, and you'll have to do just that to progress in this game.

The first 15-20 challenges are refined, constructed rooms, designed specifically to test the player in a training sort of context. There are still deadly foes, so your life is on the line, but the game auto-saves after every minor accomplishment, and it offers a manual save anywhere in the game, so you won't have to worry about "lives" like in old NES puzzle games. After the final "test" room, you begin the more intense and more Half-Life style portion of the game. You still use your portal gun to move forward in the game, but things are much more dangerous, and you'll have to dodge bullets and pistons to stay alive.

One of the more endearing aspects of this game is GLaDOS, the artificial intelligence that guides you through the test rooms, and becomes the main antagonist by the end of the game. It's a robotic female voice that offers advice, quips, and sometimes outright lies about your progress in the game (such as the one room that she states is impossible). She's very funny, as are a few other aspects of the game, such as the machine gun drones who whine when you disable them. GLaDOS also sings a song at the end of the game that really embodies the attitude of the game. If you're itching to hear/see it, YouTube has got a bunch of videos of the end credits (the song is called Still Alive). For those of you who own Rock Band for the 360, it's a free download to add the song to your game.

The one shortcoming of the game is that it's very short. I played for two hours one night, then beat it the following night after another hour. But even though the game doesn't last very long, it's got a decent amount of lasting appeal, as I could definitely see going through the game again in a month.

A link I've found when reading about the game is here. It's a blog with a lot of Portal-inspired media, like songs and sound clips. Some pretty neat stuff on there, worth checking out I think.

NFL Draft Top 10 Recap

Oh, who really cares about predictions? We've all got only partial information, and it only takes one unexpected pick to throw a whole sequence awry. And when you take a chance on the #2 pick and miss (as we did with Gholston), the rest of your predictions will suffer accordingly.

When you think about it, though, Chris Long was definitely the right pick for St. Louis at #2. He's as good a talent as Gholston, but more importantly, he's got good character and is very charismatic. That will go a long way towards giving the Rams' defense a face that they haven't had in a long, long time.

I'm still surprised that an elite level defensive tackle like Glenn Dorsey fell all the way to the fifth pick and the Kansas City Chiefs. I don't think McFadden is as talented as Adrian Peterson (Min), nor is he as focused. Part of the reason Peterson was such a tremendous player last year was that he brought his A game every week. McFadden didn't do that in college, and isn't likely to change that in the pros. I like Dorsey as a long term big time player on that KC defensive line.

The Jets, the team that did acquire Gholston, got a premier defensive line presence. With Shaun Ellis and the newly acquired Kris Jenkins as the other projected starters, the Jets will have one of the best front 3's (among 3-4 teams) in football. That being said, I've over-projected the Jets as far as wins and losses for 5+ years now, so I'll temper my expectations.

But enough about the wrong. We got the first pick right (after the Dolphins had already signed Jake Long to a deal), and we correctly predicted that the Falcons would draft the top QB, Matt Ryan, in an effort to distance themselves as much as possible from Michael Vick. I like the pick from a team image standpoint, but not so much from a football standpoint. I think there were better ways to make this team better, and while getting a long term replacement for Vick is important, nothing makes people forget like winning. That's got to be front and center for the Falcons going forward.

What I took away from this draft more than anything was that I don't really like the NFL draft as much as the NBA draft. The NFL draft involves a lot of players I know nothing about, a lot of teams I don't care about, and a lot of analysis that seems awfully repetitive by round 2. You really only need that pros and cons page to tell you what you need to know: good speed, good leaping ability, suspect hands, lazy route-running. That's your average first round wide receiver.

But with either draft, the fun really enters when you do your research, so I'm looking to spend a lot of time reading about basketball prospects and team needs. That way, maybe we can get more than 2/10 right come NBA draft time.