So, What did I miss?

It's been over a month since I posted anything and I think I'm gonna do a Peter King style scattershooting about baseball.

5 Things I Think about baseball.
1. I think the Rangers made three excellent trades at the deadline. I'm sure that doesn't surprise anyone who reads this blog with any regularity (all three of you). Jon Daniels turned a 40 year old outfielder (Kenny Lofton) into a catcher better known as a hitter(Max Ramirez). Eric Gagne netted two solid players and another minor leaguer with big upside in 17 year old Engel Beltre. In the biggest trade, Mark Teixeira and Ron Mahay brought 5 players, each of whom have upside led by catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia. In this trade as well, the Rangers ended up a couple of players several years away. So, including this years draft, the Rangers have added a great deal of young talent. Talents that may not arrive for a couple years, but this sets the Rangers up long term. Before this year, they had a middle of the road farm system with little big time, superstar talent. But now Elvis Andrus is compared to Jose Reyes and Beltre to Barry Bonds (seriously, I've seen this written.) Are all these guys gonna make it for the Rangers? No, injuries and trades and just flat out stinking can happen anytime, but the more good players you have, the more likely you are to have some work out.

2. I think, no, I know Mark Teixeira was not going to resign with Texas, no way, no how and it's not totally his fault (or his agent's). I watched his first game with the Braves and I had rarely seen that kind of happiness when he was with the Rangers. Then he kinda goes scorched earth throwing the Ranger organization under the bus. Ok, Mark, we get it. Your happy to be out of Texas. As a fan, it's frustrating for the one who was your best player so anxious to get out of town. Unfortunately, Texas has been mismanaged for the last 8 years or so and the blame should be laid at owner, Tom Hicks. I've said this before. Only a philosophy change can bring about winning at the Ballpark. Hopefully JD can have the leeway he needs to do it. I think he can. The moves he made over this season in the trades and the draft have set up this team for strong future. I hope he has the chance to see it through.

3. I think 30-3 is what makes baseball so darn interesting. You realize that the same team that scored 30 runs last week, got no hit earlier in the year and the two previous games had struck out 30 times and scored 2 runs. In the five games since that game, the Rangers have scored 25 runs. The craziest stat to me is that in a game where the winning team scored 30 runs, Wes Littleton came in in the 7th inning ahead 14-3 and got the SAVE. In football, you can take a knee. In basketball, you can dribble out the clock. But in baseball, you gotta get the 27th out and until you do, the game isn't over. I'll tell you this though. As fan, and I'm sure as a player, you'd rather be on this side of history instead of the other.

4. I think I'm ready for Barry Bonds to crawl under a rock and go away. I was on vacation in Florida when he broke Hank Aaron's record. I watched it on the hotel television. It was pretty cool to see it live, but I didn't feel a whole lot of emotion. Basically I'm just glad it's over. I missed the McGwire/ Sosa chase in 1998 because I was living in Kazakhstan and I wasn't really that sad. I sorta feel the same way now. Meh.

5. I think the Astros are gonna be bad for a while. They aren't great this year and their farm system makes the Ranger system look awesome and overloaded with talent. They fired their manager and GM yesterday, but I don't think it's really gonna help. It won't be long before the Astros are Roy Oswalt, Lance Berkman, Carlos Lee, and a bunch of spares. They've had a great run with a World Series appearance, but they are in store for a bit of a dry spell.

Empty promises

Shortly after Mark Teixeira was traded to the Atlanta Braves, Tom Hicks let it leak that Teixeira had turned down an eight year, $140 million contract to remain a Ranger. Now Teixeira is under fire in Dallas, specifically from Gil LeBreton of the Fort Worth Star Telegram, for being less than honest when he said Texas ran its business like a small market club.

Why? How does the Rangers offer prove that they are not small market in the way the organization is run? Teixeira thinks he can get more elsewhere. Whether he eventually does is beside the point. In his mind, Hicks low-balled him.

But I don’t think that his specific contract is all he meant with the small market comment. I think he was really talking about expectations and excuses, as in the low expectations for success and the excuses make for it. Dallas is one of the largest metropolitan areas in the country, and yet the Rangers have a very modest payroll. Yeah, they bid for Matsuzaka, but they made a low offer that they knew didn’t have a chance. They have done the same with free agents. When you offer $100 for the Ferrari on the showroom floor, you aren’t really trying.

The player who has proven to be hypocritical has been Eric Gagné, who also turned down a contract, this time four years, $36 million. The difference? Gagné had said all season that he hoped to remain a Ranger. Given the chance to accept a very fair four year offer for a pitcher who still hasn’t answered all his injury concerns, however, he chose to go elsewhere. I don’t fault him for the choice—who wouldn’t rather play for the first place Boston Red Sox than the last place Rangers? I just wish he had been honest about his wishes all season, or at least kept quiet about it.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Texas Traders

The day that Rangers fans have been waiting for all season finally arrived. No, not the day they reached .500—we know better than to expect that. No, of course, I am talking about the trade deadline, and the big sayonara to Mark Teixeira. (I keep trying to come up with a clever way to mix ‘toxic’ into his name but haven’t figured out how to do it yet. Guess that is some Braves blogger’s problem now.)

So did the Rangers get a good deal? It appears so, but prospect-laden trades are always difficult to call, particularly if some of the players involved are in Single A. It’ll be years before some of these guys hit the majors, if ever. That makes for nice obscure trivia questions, but doesn’t do much for fans today.

Given Daniels’s record in big time trades, there was cause to worry. While he has done well in picking up rehab cases (see Sosa and Gagne), he has been on the short end of just about every trade he has made. But when he managed to swap Tex for the top three prospects in the Braves system plus a couple others, it doesn’t look too shabby. Hey, the Braves can stock talent—getting their top three prospects is saying something.

And flipping Gagne was a bonus. It appears the returning players aren’t of the same caliber as those acquired in the Tex deal, but getting anything for Gagne is a good deal. He didn’t have a meaningful future in Texas, so getting a few Boston flyers who might have a future here holds potential. The same is true for the Lofton trade. I am disappointed the Sosa is still in town, but I suppose he is the kind of player who could clear waivers and still be involved in a deal further down the road.

Jonboy, I know we’ve had our differences, but it seems you done good with this one—just don’t let it go to your head.

Listen to Norm Hitzges's take on the trade here.

Mark Teixeira- Jerk? Part 2 and who is the real blame for the Rangers problems?

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a post on Mark Teixiera being a big whiner because he was unhappy with Ron Washington after being one of the main players complaining about Buck Showalter. Well, just after getting off the disabled list, Teixiera is at it again. He basically said that he wants to play for a winner, with five years of non-contending is weighing on him.

Of course, this brought out the old school baseball writers complaining about Teixeira's complaints. Jean Jacques Taylor called him a chronic complainer. Gil Lebreton said it was contemptible.

Let me give a few disclaimers. Teixeira is not ever gonna be my favorite player. He comes across as a guy who is getting ready for his next big payday when he gets to decide where he goes. His being a toady to Scott Boras bully doesn't make things any easier. He just doesn't seem like one of those guys who will tell Boras what to do rather than the other way around. He's a mercenary. If he signs with the Orioles after next year, we'll all know that his "I want to play for a winner" is a bunch of garbage.

However, Mark is not the problem. I honestly don't think I can blame him that much for his complaints. Why because I agree with him. The Rangers have acted like a small market team for too many years. The real problem with this team is Tom Hicks. In 2001, he decided to play with the big boys and signed A-Rod. Seduced into wanting the "win now" he signed and traded for a bunch of spares that turned "win now" into "win never"- Andres Gallaraga, Ken Caminiti, Todd Van Poppel, Randy Velarde, etc. Then he put a ridiculous amount of money on who was possibily the worst free agent ever, Chan Ho Park. After these stupid signings that made Hicks synonmous with idiot owners like Peter Angelos and brought the Rangers three straight last place finishes, he decided that he's had enough, trades A-Rod and gives the Yankees $9 million a year for him to hit homeruns at Yankee stadium. The problem with this team is Tom Hicks.

I want to root for winner. I am trying to believe that the future is bright, but trading Mark Tiexiera is a step backwards. At the same time, if he's leaving and I think he is, you gotta get the best deal you can. Good luck, Mark in Atlanta or New York or Boston or where ever you end up.

Tinkering with the All-Star Game

The MLB All-Star Game has taken a beating the past few years, beginning with the infamous Tie Game. Bud Selig's solution to that problem was to give 'meaning' to the game by putting home field advantage for the World Series up for grabs.

First of all, Bud made a bad call the night of the Tie Game—it should have been played until there was a winner. Not enough pitchers? Tough rocks, you shouldn't have burned them up an inning at a time during the first nine. Besides, if your last pitcher is a little gassed, he'll likely give up the game winner soon enough. I think the game would have ended legitimately soon enough anyway. In the aftermath, Bud could have implemented an All-Star rule allowing for pitchers to be reinserted in the case of extra innings.

Instead, he put home field for the World Series on the line, which was Mistake Number Two. This is absolute nonsense. One event has nothing to do with the other, and does anyone really think that this artificial 'relevance' make a bit of difference in how players play? I doubt Michael Young was thinking about giving HFA to Detroit, Boston or New York when he hit the game winning RBI last year, and I know he wasn't thinking about earning HFA for the Rangers.

If this doesn't work, then how do we bring meaning to the ASG? Allow me refer you to Australia's National Rugby League, and their version of the All-Star Game, State of Origin. This three game series, spread out over the NRL season, pits a team from New South Wales against a Queensland team. Trust me, the players care when they are representing their home state.

Can we take this idea to MLB? Unfortunately, I don't think so. State or Origin works because it is state v state, and that doesn't work with fifty states, plus all the international players. North v South? East v West? No one really identifies with those labels. How about US v World? I wasn't a big fan of this when the NHL did it—seemed a little xenophobic to me. So the matchup that leaves us with is NL v AL. This used to be a matchup that did bring out the competitive nature of the players, but free agency and interleague play have killed that.

Many have suggested paying the winning team, but I don't think this will work. The players, particularly these All-Stars, make enough money. I just don't think that does it here. I'm not opposed to cutting a check to the winner of the Home Run Derby, but I don't think that will improve the competitiveness of the ASG.

If home field advantage failed and if I'm right about money failing, how do we make it competitive? I suggest we go the other way with it and not worry about it being competitive. Just make it fun. More backward helmet switch hitting on the fly, a la Larry Walker 1997. More on the field antics. Mike the players and let them talk. Who wouldn't want to listen to a catcher call a game or the dialogue between a pitcher and hitter with two outs and runners on late in the game?

In addition I love Kevin of All on the Field's idea of making it a three game series. Baseball is a series game, so why not the ASG? This would also fix the way manager's handle pitching staffs. If rugby league can play three games in the midst of their regular season, surely MLB can pull off three games during the All-Star break. When I become baseball's next commissioner, Kevin, you can be my assistant.

And we won't let it end in a tie again.

The definition of insanity

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. By this definition the Dallas Mavericks are insane.

When we last saw the little Mavericks, the completing a waste of a 67 win season being run out of the gym by the Golden State Warriors. The Warriors got to every loose ball and rebound, ran the Mavs ragged with their dribble penetration, and hit every single shoot they threw up there, while the Mavs looked old and slow. But the Warriors juggernaut lasted one round and they were booted out by the Utah Jazz. So the Mavs lost to the team that lost to the team that won the Championship. A complete and total waste of a season.

Unfortunately, it looks like we are going to get the exact same team next year. First, in the draft, the Mavs who admittedly had little to work with in only #34, #50, and #60 picks in the draft, picked another slow white guy. They have been trying to get this exact player for decades! Change regimes and leadership and they pick slow white guys. Nick Fazekas carries on the long and glorious tradition of Uwe Blab, Bill Winnington, Cherokee Parks, Loren Meyer, Shawn Bradley, and Keith Van Horn. Every thing I've read about him is that he is slow. Chad Ford of ESPN said he's Dirk without the ATHLETICISM. Oh, he'll fit right in on the matador defense of this team.

After flirting with possibly trading for Kevin Garnett (a pipe dream that I'll get to in a minute), do they make big splash in the free agent market? No, they resign Jerry Stackhouse and Devean George. I don't mind the Stackhouse move so much as he seems to bring something that they lack, but to just bring back the exact same team from last year is not a good start.

Finally, I'm really tired of the Mavs getting caught in pipe dreams while seeming to leave realistic thoughts aside. This year it's Kevin Garnett. But are they gonna trade Devin Harris and Josh Howard for him? No and they probably shouldn't. Are the T-wolves gonna take Jason Terry, et al. for him? No and they shouldn't. It's foolish to focus on that expecting Kevin McCale to go back to being an idiot. If it happens fine, but don't leave other possibilities on the table. A couple of years ago they put all the eggs in the Rashard Lewis basket even though they couldn't more than the mid level exception while the Sonics could give him a great deal more money. Predictably, he took the Sonics offer.

If this is the team the Mavs go to war with next year, you're hoping for improvements from Harris, DaSagana Diop, and Maurice Ager. At this point, I think the team is behind San Antonio, Phoenix and maybe Utah. And with Seattle getting Durant and Portland getting Oden, the window is closing for this team. And the sad part about it is that it won't matter what they do during the regular season. The Mavs season doesn't start until April. Hopefully, they'll be ready.

Chris's Hall of Fame Nominees

PJ and Rus have already presented their nominees. Here are mine to complete the list.

Historical player: Roger Staubach (quarterback, Dallas Cowboys 1969-1979) In a word? Winner. Roger was the Cowboys starter for nine seasons, played in six NFC Championships, won four, and won two Super Bowls. Awards include a Heisman, six Pro Bowls and a Super Bowl MVP. The NFL achievements all followed four years of active service in the Navy, including time in Vietnam. He retired with a 83.4 passing rating, highest career average at the time. That day also marked the saddest day of my childhood.

Roger, along with Don Meredith and Troy Aikman, spoiled Cowboys fans, who have only recently learned how difficult it can be to find a franchise quarterback. Over the combined thirty years this trio played the game, the Cowboys fielded a Pro Bowl caliber QB, while other teams are still searching for their first.

And, boy, could he run.

Current player: Vince Young (quarterback, University of Texas 2002-2005, Tennessee Titans 2006-present) Going in to the 2006 Rose Bowl, all the talk was USC. Leinart was considered the best QB in the country, Reggie Bush has just been awarded the Heisman and USC was assumed to be the greatest team of all time. Then Vince took the field.

Football is a team game. More than any other sport, it requires each player to do their job for the team to succeed. But that night, Vince put on the greatest individual performance college football has ever seen, and beat the 'greatest team of all time'.

Then for some reason, everyone doubted him going into the NFL Draft. You'd think they would have learned. The Titans clearly did, drafting him and naming him a starter during his rookie season. The Titans started 0-5 (Kerry Collins started the first three games), but went 8-3 to end the season, missing the playoffs in a last week loss to New England. Eleven playoff bound defensive coordinators breathed a sigh of relief. Vince was not only named Rookie of the Year, but was also named to the Pro Bowl, no small feat in the AFC.

Don't expect anyone to doubt him a third time.

Favorite player: George Teague (safety, Green Bay Packers 1993-1995, Dallas Cowboys 1996, 1998-2001, Miami Dolphins 1997) By most standards, Teague had a perfectly average career in the NFL. But there was nothing average about his heart.

The day was September 4, 2000, and the once proud Cowboys were being embarrassed by the San Francisco 49ers. Terrell Owens scored a touchdown, ran to midfield and danced on the star. Emmitt Smith did the same later, staring down the 49er sideline, but the rest of the team was defeated. When Owens ran to the star to repeat the stunt on his second touchdown, Teague raced after him, leveling him at midfield. The hit earned him an ejection. As a Cowboy fan, I have never been prouder. Seven years later, I hope T.O. still feels that hit.

Putting it simply, Teague did the one thing that fans demand from athletes, but too often don't see: he cared.

I didn't set out to go all football. But PJ covered hockey, Rus took care of baseball (and saved me a Nolan Ryan nomination), so three football nominees it is.

But where's the basketball love? So I bent the rules a little, and am inducting a fourth player, without the express written consent of my co-110 Percenters. This brings our inaugural class to an even ten. Which is fitting, because 'ten' describes his game perfectly.

Tim Duncan (Forward-Center, San Antonio 1997-present) In a league infamous, fairly or not, for thuggery, Duncan is as clean as they come. I'll go ahead and guarantee that you will never see his name in a police blotter, and in today's world, that's saying something. But don't think for a second that the soft spoken Duncan is soft on the court.

I hate the San Antonio Spurs. But I certainly respect them, and that starts at the top, with Pop and Duncan. Duncan is the Spurs. Every adjective used to describe him also describes the Spurs. Some say boring, but I prefer fundamental, efficient, selfless, tough, flexible, relentless, you name it. Just don't forget winner: Duncan and the Spurs have four titles, and counting.

Russell's Hall of Fame Nominations

I guess it's time since I have computer access to put my nominations for the 110 Percent Hall of Fame. Since PJ did all hockey, I feel honor bound to do all baseball. The funny thing about a personal hall of fame is that everyone pretty much has to be a personal favorite. A historical baseball hall of fame that brought no notion of personal bias would have to be Babe Ruth or Ted Williams or someone like that. But because it's my hall of fame, these are all guys who I love to follow.

1. Historical- Nolan Ryan- Pitcher, 1966-1993 New York Mets, California Angels, Houston Astros, Texas Rangers. Important Stats: 7 no hitters, 12 1 hitters, 5714 Strikeouts, 324 wins.

He played for the Astros and Rangers in my formative years. I remember listening to no hitter #7 on radio. I also listened to him beat up Robin Ventura as well. Above all those things, he gave legitimacy to a Ranger franchise that had struggled for years and was the first to go into the Hall of Fame with a Ranger hat on. A true Texas legend.

2. Current- Craig Biggio- Catcher, 2nd Base, Center field, 1988-present Houston Astros. Along with Jeff Bagwell proved to be the heart and soul of a highly successful franchise in the late 90 and the aughts, finally winning the first play off series in Astros history and then the first World Series games in the state of Texas in 2005. But he was more than just a cog in the machine, he was the best 2nd baseman in the game for a number of years, capturing 4 Gold Gloves. He'll get to 3000 hits in the next week or so, he is 6th all time in doubles, 1st active in hits, 2nd active in runs scores, and he's a likely Hall of Famer according to baseball-reference.

3. Personal Favorite- Rick Helling- Pitcher, 1994-2006- Texas Rangers, Florida Marlins, Arizona Diamondbacks, Baltimore Orioles, Milwaukee Brewers. In an never ending search for pitching, the Rangers drafted Helling with the 22nd pick in the first round of the 1992 draft. In an ok trade, they traded him to Florida with Ryan Dempster for John Burkett, who helped them win the West in 1996 and has the only Rangers playoff win in franchise history). In a tremendous trade, the Rangers got him back for reliever Ed Vosberg, best known for scalping World Series tickets a few years later. Rick became the back bone of a rotation of a team that won back to back AL West titles in 1998 and 1999. He won 20 games in 1998 and on Sept 22 beat the Angels giving up 1 run in 8 innings to put the Rangers up 2 games with 5 to go. Ahh, the glory days of winning the AL West and getting swept by the Yankees. I always liked Rick and I followed him in the minors and when he came up and got his brain beat in at first. Then he came back and was the guy we were hoping for. He understood how to pitch in the Ballpark and hung in there to lead the team to the highest it's ever been (such that it is). Also, a Kazakh guy saw a picture of him in a baseball preview magazine I had when I lived in Kazakhstan and asked if he and I were brothers. Crazy Kazakhs.

Well, well, well....

Just last week or so, Chris and I had a small disagreement over Rangers GM Jon Daniels. And can I say something real quick? (Of course, this is my blog) Is it possible to put a moritorium on the young puns on Jon Daniels? I know he's young, but I'm really tired of him being called "Jon-boy" or "little Johnny" or anything like that. He is a general manager of a major league baseball team (yes, the Rangers are still a major league team) and he's not 8. Ok, rant over.
Today Rangers owner Tom Hicks came down on my side. He gave Jon Daniels a one year contract extension. I'm obviously on board with this move. Couple of caveats: I don't think that this a major move on Hicks part. There is little financial risk for Hicks. He can still very easily fire Daniels at the end of next year.
But the biggest thing the Rangers need right now is stability. I think it would be counter productive to start all over right now. But this gives Daniels more standing in front of other GMs as we approach the trade market. I really think this trade season even more than the next off season is going to determine if Daniels can keep his job. There are at least 5 players that have a strong chance of being traded by the Rangers (Teixeira, Gagne, Aki, Sosa, Lofton, maybe Blalock, Wilkerson, Millwood, Benoit). What he gets for these guys and any others that end up being traded is the proof of what he is doing. Hopefully, simple wins and loses are the only criteria for judging Daniels. I think this also says that Ron Washington will stick around for alittle while. Daniels hired him and I doubt that he would cut him off so quickly.
Finally, I really liked Daniels approach in this more recent draft. It had the markings of a GM who either knew he had security or he was more interested in helping the frachise than saving his own skin. He resisted the temptation to go after college players who could possibly give them help much sooner. Instead, he drafted three high ceiling high school pitchers that at the very least 4 years away. The Rangers are in desperate need to high ceiling pitchers. Daniels moved in that direction. In fact, the last two drafts have been very productive. Hopefully, the Rangers are on the right track.

110% Hall of Fame Nominations

So Chris asked Russ and I to put something together that is good "off-season" talk for me, which is the 110% Hall of Fame inductions. This idea appeals to me a lot in that I like to see stuff like this debated and like to celebrate sports whenever I can. The format we were to follow was to pick a Historical Player, Current Player, and a Personal Fave.

This of course sent my head spinning because I can think of way too many players that fit in here. I thought I'd go off the beaten path a little bit and avoid obvious picks. So, Gretzky, Jordan, Montana, etc... not in my list. Way too obvious. So without further ado, and of course, they will all be Hockey players for me.

Historical Player: I didn't go back too far.. This player began his career with the Vancouver Canucks in 1983 and played for three seasons before being traded to the Boston Bruins where he eventually notched 344 of his 395 goals, and 590 of his 694 total points. He was a pioneer who was a prototype for what would be termed the Power Forward amassing 1241 PIM's to go along with his points. He topped 50 goals three times including the 1993-1994 season when he scored his 50th in his 44th game giving him the unofficial second shortest time to 50 goals (next to Gretzky). Injuries shortened a very bright career that he was making and in the end, even though his numbers were low for forwards inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame, he was inducted in 2005. My first nomination for the 110% Hall of Fame - Historical Player division is Cam Neely.

Current Player: Drafted first overall in 1988, he has played his entire career for one franchise. He has never won a major NHL award, but has finished as a finalist three times. He owns franchise records for games played, goals, assists, and points for both regular season and playoffs. This last season, he passed Joe Mullen to be the American-born goal-scoring leader. Next season, he will most likely pass Phil Housley for american-born points. He is the face of the Dallas Stars franchise and still as enjoyable to watch as ever. My Nomination for 110% Hall of Fame - Current Player division is Mike Modano

Fav Player: So, this last category is so open, it's really hard to decide. I thought about the people I like to see play. I thought about those that did something truly extrodinary, and I came up with with a few ideas, but one name kept jumping to the top of my list. He was originally drafted by the Montreal Canadiens, where he later became the Captain, won three Selke Trophies for best Defensive forward, and two Stanley Cups (including one as the Captain). He made his way to Dallas where his leadership and play helped the Stars win the Stanley Cup in 1999. today, he is currently the head coach of the Montreal Canadiens. My Nomination for 110% Hall of Fame - Fav Player division is Guy Carbonneau

Fixing the Finals in one easy step

As everyone knows, the NBA Finals were a little anticlimactic. A lot of people think the playoffs need to be fixed and everyone seems to know how to do it. I'm no different: I've got my suggestion, too.

Do nothing.

Look, we've been through this before. In the 90's the Bulls ruled. The 80's had the Celtics and the Lakers. Each time, fans talked about a competitive imbalance and the need to adjust. Each time, the imbalance corrected itself eventually.

The most common suggestion is seeding all sixteen teams in a super bracket, regardless of conference. There are two major problems here. The first is the current imbalanced schedule. If you switch to a super bracket, you have to go to a balanced schedule, which creates many other problems, starting with decreased emphasis on natural rivalries and an increase in travel.

The second major problem with the super bracket is what proponents actually champion: getting the best matchup in the Finals. In an ideal world, that would be great, but how would people have reacted if some combination of San Antonio/Phoenix/Dallas played for the championship? Yeah, it would be a great matchup, but you know everyone would be upset that there wasn't an Eastern team in it. They complain enough about 'late starts' for regular season and early round playoff games. What kind of noise would they make if it was the Finals? This plan has got serious flaws.

Bill Simmons has his own tricked up version of this, in which the last four spots in the super bracket are determined by a double elimination play-in tourney. He attempts to solve the playoff problem and the tanking issue. This plan might even possibly solve both. But it's too ridiculous and mocks any sanctity of sport that exists—it would be like if the BCS changed their formula every year. Oh, wait...

Everyone loved the Warriors first round upset of the Mavericks—this is the price you pay for that upset. When top teams bow out early, you shouldn't be surprised if it affects play in later rounds. The Utah/Golden State and San Antonio/Utah series probably would have never happened if not for that first round upset. Think George Mason 2006—Cinderella teams are fun until clock strikes midnight in a later round.

The only change that I wouldn't mind seeing is reseeding. Even with the first round upset, wouldn't a round two of Spurs/Warriors and Suns/Jazz, likely followed by Spurs/Suns have been better?

As for the hapless East, well, just wait. In a few years, the balance of power will swing back that way, just in time for everyone to deplore the Eastern Conference dominance.

King James, meet a real dynasty

Finals sweep.

Four championships in nine years.

Three in the last five.

And yet some would have you believe this team is not a dynasty?

I'm not sure what these people want. Consecutive titles, maybe? Yeah, that would be nice, but there is something to be said for consistently getting it done over a larger span of time. Besides, it's not like they stunk the years they didn't win--these past nine years also yielded six division titles.

Maybe they want scoreboard domination. Yeah, the Spurs win a lot of close games. Keyword in that sentence? Win.

I think what people are really looking for is flash. The Suns are NBA darlings because they play exciting, up tempo basketball. Unfortunately, this has produced no titles. Before them, the Mavs were flash. No titles. Go back further to Sactown. No titles.

What is this team's weakness? Do they have one? They play lockdown defense. They are aggressive on offense. They have too many weapons to focus on one player. Duncan is perhaps the best player of the past ten years, Parker has turned into a top five point guard, and the rest of the roster plays their roles to perfection. In addition, they draft smart, despite consistently picking at the end of the first round.

Avery Johnson has attempted to imitate San Antonio's defense in Dallas and done so fairly successfully. But after watching the playoffs, I'm convinced he's copied the wrong aspect of the Spurs game. He should be installing their offense. Every player on this team drives to the basket. They attack. They are relentless, they are strong, and when they get bumped, they don't resort to jump shots. What a concept.

Say what you want. Say they aren't a dynasty.

They'll just keep sizing rings.

Fixing the Rangers in five easy steps

The Texas Rangers need some serious help. Fortunately, they are only five steps away from being a contender.

Step One: Tom Hicks, sell the team. Want to spend more time with your new soccer team, Liverpool? Fine by me. Sell the Rangers—I’d recommend Mark Cuban. Love him or hate him, but the guy wants to win. There is no reason why a team in the sixth largest market should have the 21st ranked payroll. Also, according to Jim Reeves of the Fort Worth Star Telegram, Nolan Ryan is also interested. Instant cred. Either one would be a vast improvement over Hicks, who is killing this team, with a little help from his friends. Which leads us to...

Step Two: Fire the GM. In 2004, the Boston Red Sox broke an 86-year curse by winning the World Series. Theo Epstein was the team’s GM, hired two years earlier as the youngest GM in MLB history. In 2005, Hicks thought that if he hired an even younger GM, the Rangers would win, too. And it might have worked if it wasn’t for those meddling kids...

Jon Daniels is in over his head. If you listen to him speak, he sounds like he is wishing things to get better. He’s counting on breaks to even out and start going their way. Sorry, Jon, ain’t gonna happen. You make your own breaks. In the past two years, Daniels has traded away Chris Young, Coco Cordero and John Danks. You’re telling me those three guys wouldn’t help this staff? Breaks? This team is just broken.

Step Three: Fire the manager. Word was that Ron Washington blew everyone away in his interview. He did the same in the spring, suckering everyone in the DFW area in with his energy in infectious attitude. And then April rolled around.

Like Daniels, Wash is also in over his head. He may have been a great coach with Oakland, but he’s no manager. You know the brilliant coordinator in the NFL who is a total failure as a head coach? That’s Wash. Maybe he and Wade Phillips can be BFF since they have that in common, but I’m hoping he won’t be around that long. I’m telling you, they should have gone with Trey Hillman. Go Nippon Ham Fighters!

Step Four: Trade. Trade Teixeira. Trade Gagne. Trade Sosa, Lofton, Frankie Cat. Trade anyone over 25 for prospects. Doing things halfway has turned the Rangers into the worst team in baseball with no farm system to speak of. Blow it up completely and commit to youth. This naturally leads to...

Step Five: Get a plan and stick with it. The Rangers have changed direction countless times in the past decade. Evan Grant of the Dallas Morning News reports that they have had six scouting directors since 1995—continuity has been a foreign concept with this team. They had a great opportunity at the draft, with six of the top 80 picks. Time will tell, but I’m not optimistic. The Rangers are too focused on pitching. I know what you’re thinking: their pitching stinks—they need to focus on it. Not so. They need to draft the best player available every single time, regardless of position. Stock those players in the minors and develop them. If you need a pitcher in a couple years, trade for him then, but no more reaching for pitchers in the draft. So what did the Rangers do? Four of their first five picks were pitchers. Maybe four out of five times the best player was a pitcher, but I have my doubts.

So there you have it. Five easy steps to greatness. Other than that, they’re golden.

Yea Anaheim...

So, I'm actually happy that Anaheim won. Even though I picked Ottawa to win in 7, Anaheim took it in 5. I'm happy for Teemu, I'm glad that Alfredsson didn't win (when did he turn into a jerk?), and I think it's funny that a Canadian team has lost to a non-conventional team for three straight cups. (Calgary lost to Tampa Bay, Edmonton lost to Carolina, and now Ottawa has lost to Anaheim). I don't have much more to write. I just want to show that when I'm wrong, I can stand up and say it. I was wrong.

NBA Finals

Ever since the Mavs wasted a 67 win regular season, I have been completely disinterested in the playoffs. But now that the Finals are here, well, I'm still completely disinterested.

Lebron is exciting, but he's got no support. And is it just me, or did Cleveland look satisfied with winning the East? The East? Should anyone really be that proud of that?

But I suppose it is my duty to provide a prediction of the Finals, half-hearted as it may be. Spurs win, call it five. Duncan and the Spurs are too good. Maybe next year, Lebron.

When's training camp open?

Mark Teixeira- Jerk?

It's time to trade Mark Teixeira. He really is the most tradeable player on this team and the one who is going to bring in the most in return. He is on the verge of being a superstar, although he's been on the verge for a couple of years now. Don't get me wrong. He's really really good, but he's not Vlad Guerrero or A-Rod. Mark's numbers last year were down in every category except strikeouts. Despite that, he is a real live middle of the order masher who can carry a team. He's also a gold glove caliber first baseman.
But he's a free agent after 2008 and there is almost no chance that's he's gonna resign with the Rangers. His agent is the the baseball anti-Christ and it's becoming clearer and clearer that he doesn't want to be here. Here is where I get the notion that he needs to be traded.
Last year, it was well known that the players were unhappy with Buck Showalter and his micromanagement and overbearing personality. When Buck was fired, the players were pretty happy and there was near unanimous happiness with the hiring of players manager, Ron Washington. Well, it didn't take long for Mark to get tired of Washington.
He seems to unable to be happy with anything. He sounds alot like those athletes that drives everyone crazy. And I'm not talking about criminals like Pac Man Jones. But athletes who have never been told no and think no one can ever tell them anything.
If they were winning, this crying would not be coming out right now. Someone once said that winning cures cancer. This cancer in the clubhouse could be cured if they started winning.
I'm tired of losing and I'm tired of players crying about managers and owners whining about losing money and gms making stupid trades and players stinking it up. They need to cut their loses on 2007 and get the best deal they can for Teixeira.

Stanley Cup Finals

So, the time has finally arrived when soon, PJ will have nothing to talk about on the blog. The NHL Stanley Cup finals are here and start tonight. I wanted to get my pick in early, but I am still deciding which I'm going with. I suppose I could pull an ESPN and post numerous picks all contradicting each other, but I think I'll break it down.

Offense: With apologies to the Finnish Flash (do people ever call him that anymore?), the Senators behind Alfredsson, Heatley, and Spezza, are the favored when it comes to scoring.

Defense: Pronger and Niedermayer make the defense for Anaheim very stout. Even though Ottawa's defensive corps is solid, they don't have the two work-horses.

Goaltending: As good as Emery has been, Giguere can be a game-changer. I'd have to lean toward J.S. cause he goes by his initials.

Depth: The Senators are a deeper team and that separation got larger due to some injuries for Anaheim.

Coaching: Both Carlyle and Murray are good coaches and I'm not sure that there is an advantage here.

Final Analysis: I think Ottawa will win in seven games. Normally I go with Defense and Goaltending which would be Anaheim, but I just think it's Ottawa's year.

Dallas angst

I have heard a lot lately about the woes of various cities, so I thought I would pitch in with my Dallas sob story. But first, a disclaimer: I am fully aware that historically I have nothing to complain about. We've got five Super Bowls, a Stanley Cup, an NBA Finals appearance and multiple MVPs. More often than not, we've been competitive.

But recently, we haven't been so lucky. Oh, there have still been successes, but we've been kicked in the jimmy quite a bit lately.

A quick aside: Hey you, Boston fan. Yeah you. Shut up. Quit crying about the NBA Lotto. Maybe those three shiny new Lombardi's and the Sox breaking the Curse have spoiled you, but the NBA doesn't owe you a top two pick. It isn't your birthright. Deal with it. Isn't it bad enough that we endured your blatant tanking? Must we endure the crying now, too? That New York fan you despise? You are the same dude in a different color personalized jersey. Go get a tissue and blow your nose already. Bill Simmons, I'm talking about you.

Let's start with the Cowboys. When Tony Romo stepped in, it looked like the stars might be aligning. So to collapse in December like they did, followed by a mishandled snap on a chip shot of a field goal against Seattle in the playoffs, was a little hard to take. It was good news when Parcells left, but underwhelming when Wade Phillips stepped in. Dallas politicians actually managed to not sabotage the Super Bowl bid, despite their best efforts, but I'm not counting on the Cowboys being the first team to play at home for the big one. Overall, three jimmy kicks.

Next up is the Stars. This is probably the mildest because they had an average regular season and lost in the playoffs as a six seed to a better team. But to tease the fans by winning three straight only to lose in Game Seven was a little cruel. If you were told that your goalie would get three shutouts in a best-of-seven series, you'd take that, wouldn't you? Me, too. One jimmy kick.

The Mavs. What's left to say? They had a historic regular season and followed it up with a historically bad playoff performance. You might say you'd take 67 wins every time. I say 67 is an insult after the first round choke. Four jimmy kicks. Ouch.

But the worst comes from the Texas Rangers. The Rangers, you say? They didn't tease you with success only to fail miserably in the end. No, this is more a tale of what might have been.

The last (and only) time the Rangers were really good, their general manager was Doug Melvin. But after three playoff series losses to the Yankees he was fired and John Hart began running the team into the ground. Before last season, Jon Daniels took over that role and has continued the process. But at least he found a different way to do it. Under Hart, the team was neglected－Daniels trades the team to death.

Doug Melvin? He has assembled a team in Milwaukee that is tied for the second best record in the National League. Milwaukee!

To make it that much worse, another candidate for the Rangers GM position in 2001 was Dave Dombrowski. When he didn't get the job, he took over in Detroit and remade a bad team into World Series contenders in five years.

But don't think I'm placing all of the blame on the GM: the managers have done their part as well. It appears the the Fire Showalter Blessing isn't going to come true this time. And Ron Washington sure was contagiously enthusiastic in his interview and throughout spring training, but it sounds pretty hollow now that they have the worst record in the AL and second worst overall. We'll never know now, but I thought homegrown Trey Hillman would have been a better hire at the time. Overall, I give it five kicks in the jimmy.

Maybe Griffey should have given his jock strap to a Dallas resident.

Hey Cowboys! Shut Up!!!!

It never fails. A team under achieves and the head coach or manager is fired and every under achieving player comes out of the wood work to throw the coach under the bus. It become self evident that because of that idiot coach, who had no idea how to handle such an awesome talent, is a complete fool and the new coach is a genius who is going to get the optimal performance out of each and every one of the players who just couldn't bring themselves to try under the old loser moron idiot.

Case in point: My beloved Texas Rangers are terrible. This time last year they were 20-19 on their way to 80-82 third straight third place finish in the AL West. For pretty much the whole year, they looked apathetic and unemotional. Buck Showalter exercised his usual brand of anal retentive managing that drove players crazy. But players can take just about anything if they are winning, but the Rangers (true to their history) were just mediocre. And Buck was fired, deservedly so.

Enter Ron Washington. Also known as, the savior. A funny looking savior, but savior none the less. All during spring training, the players were going on and on about how much looser they will be able to play this year. Washington brings a different attitude to the team and baseball will be fun again. The flowers were going to bloom, birds would sing over the Ballpark, and the World Series was just around the corner. We even had the Buck Showalter affect in our favor! Victory would be ours. Well, apparently, playing looser doesn't mean playing better. They are 10 games under 500 and only the Royals and the Nationals have worse records. Maybe down the road, the change will come and they start to come around, but I'm not optimistic at this point. In fact, I'm feeling really bad about the Rangers, but that's a post for another time.

This post is about the Cowboys. The Cowboys underachieved last year, at least in the last five games in which they got their heads handed to them three times, especially on defense. After four years of decent football, but hardly the excellence that was expected when he came, Bill Parcells quit. He had improved the team from when he got it (3 straight 5-11 seasons under Dave Campo) but only made the playoffs twice and didn't win a playoff game and the team seemed to loose steam down the stretch each year he was here. He wasn't that great of a talent evaluator as his drafts were either ok (2005- Ware, Barber, Canty) or terrible (2004- Rogers, Peterman). So I was personally pleased when Bill left. I was also a bit underwhelmed by his replacement, but I'll reserve judgement.

Some players aren't being so reserved. I can understand being optimistic about the future. This is a talented team who should be ready for a strong season. Expectations will be high for this team and if they fail to make some noise in the playoffs, it will be profound disappointment. They are at this point a Super Bowl contender in a fairly weak NFC. But I want them to shut up and get ready for the season. I'll leave Terrel Owens stuff aside. No one was surprised when he threw Parcells under the bus. But at least he produced (drops aside.) Others who didn't produce are crying about their roles and I'm tired of it.

Julius Jones, a talented back who has not really produced the way we expected when they passed on Stephen Jackson and other backs to get him in the 2nd round.

"Maybe I was being told a little bit where to run and wasn't really able to use my instincts," Jones said at minicamp. "Maybe I listened to (Parcells) a little too much and was kind of running like a robot."

Kevin Burnett, a second round pick at linebacker who made a grade total of 31 tackles, 1 sack, and 1 pick and has seen linebackers drafted in the first round each of the last two years says this

"I don't know where I'm gonna be," said Burnett, who did play inside in college at Tennessee. "Hopefully I'm playing and hopefully I'm a Dallas Cowboy. I want to play. I don't want to be somebody who stands and plays 30 special-teams plays a game. That's not why they drafted me. I damn sure take offense to playing 30 special teams snaps a game.

Add to this the longing for better times from Greg Ellis and Marcus Spears. Now again, I understand disappointment over the last couple of years and high expectations for next year. But here is my message to the Cowboys. Shut up and get ready to play. Just because there's a change, even if it's the right change, doesn't mean that there is going to be improvement. If you improve, win the division (which they haven't done since 1998), win a playoff game or two (which they haven't done since 1996), play for the championship, (which they haven't done since 1995), play for the Super Bowl (which they haven't done since 1995), win the Super Bowl, then complain about Parcells all you want. But by then, it probably won't matter.

Mark Cuban called me a moron

When Mark Cuban was asked if he had any questions about Dirk Nowitzki's ability to lead the Dallas Mavericks he replied, 'No, not at all. Not even a little bit. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a moron. You can print that.'

Guess he was talking about me.

There is no question in my mind about Nowitzki's disability to lead. He's a great player that has made failed attempts to lead in the past, but he just doesn't have it in him. And I'm OK with that.

There has been a lot of talk the past few weeks about Nowitzki's inability to lead, but that is not his problem. Leadership does not have to come from your best player. It's nice if it does, but it isn't necessary.

Nowitzki's fatal error is that he is not aggressive. The Mavs can fill in leadership from other players, but if their best player refuses to take the ball to the basket, they are doomed to fail. In Game 3 of the 2006 Finals, the Mavs reverted to their jumpshooting ways, and it happened again in the Golden State Warriors series, and that starts with Nowitzki. He went from regular season MVP to playoff MIA overnight.

So that's why Nowitzki's got to go. It isn't about a lack of leadership, but rather a lack of aggressiveness. Having a seven footer who can shoot from the outside is only dangerous if he has the complimentary inside game. Dirk could do it, but he has consistently refused to, particularly in the playoffs.

With Nowitzki, the Mavs will always win 55 plus, but they will never win a title. If they are content with being a perennial good to great team, then by all means, maintain the status quo. But if the goal is a NBA title, it's time to say goodbye.

What should they do with him?

Some have suggested a trade for Kevin Garnett. I don't see that as an improvement. KG and Dirk are the same animal. Or more accurately, the same non-animal.

I do not know the details of draft pick trade values, so I can't propose a specific deal. But I would agree to trade everyone save one point guard in a package for the number one pick in the draft. Do whatever needs to be done to match salaries, and make 'em a Godfather offer. Then I would select Greg Oden.

Would this be a step backwards for a few years? Certainly. Oden will spend a few years continuing to develop his game, plus the Mavs will have to restock at the other positions.

Will it eventually result in titles? Without a doubt. Oden will win multiple titles in his career.

Will the Mavs actually attempt such a trade? Not a chance. Because Cuban isn't the moron that I am.