One of my loyal readers wants some Braves road woes talk, and I am happy to oblige. They suck on the road. End of story, sort of. They are 7-18 on the road this year, near the bottom of the league in that category. Everyone except Chipper stops hitting on the road. The real issue is that they have lost 17 straight 1-run games away from the Ted, which tells me that two things... bullpen has been unsteady and clutch, late inning hitting has been non-existent.
Good news though. The Braves decided to go with the all-navy hats yesterday with the grey unis, something I have been hoping for all year, and it paid off with an 8-1 win. They better have the same look going tonight vs. the Reds in Cincy. And does anyone else love the navy blue jerseys as much as I do? I wish they didn't get beat every time they wear them, b/c Bobby will probably hang those up for good if they can't bust a win out in 'em sometime soon.
And these days, no Braves post can go without a Chipper update. After 54 games (50 for him), he is hitting .420. Not a typo folks. The 36 year old is crushing. A couple of interesting items when you dig into his stats. (If you are interested, espn.com has a great stats page full of drillable statlines with a huge array of ways to sort and filter. And I just gave away the fact that I am a geek with no life) Chipper is hitting about .430 from the right side, .415 from the left. Unbelievable consistency from both sides. He leads the NL in walks for the month of May, but is not even in the top 25 for the year, which means pitchers are just now starting to pitch around him... fools I tell you! In addition to his walks, he ranks in the bottom 20 of all qualifying hitters (3.1 AB/game) in strikeouts, with a lowly 18. Unreal. And since this time last year, he has hit a cool .378, obviously best in the major leagues. Any MVP talk that starts developing this summer had better include alot of Chipper talk. Without him, these Braves are 8 games under .500 at best.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Instant Replay Anyone? Not me.
Welcome back loyal readers. I apologize for depriving so many(I mean both) of you of my rants and raves for a few weeks. With a busy work schedule and some travel mixed in, I had to put aside the soap box for a bit... But I'm back with a vengeance.
First topic of note: not the election, GW's former press secretary ripping him a new one (although I will get to that one sometime soon), or stupid stories about our needy population demanding more of my paycheck to buy cell phones and tv's. No, this post is about the new push in the sports media to bring in the dreaded, bring-the-game-to-a-snail's-pace instant replay in Major League Baseball. The all-american pasttime, the grand ole game, whatever you like to call it, has long been the bastion of tradition and americana. Aside from a few bogus updates to the game (the DH, for example), baseball has remained much the same as it was back in the late 1890's when it became part of our national culture. Players have gotten bigger, bats have got more pop, and the stadiums are now multimedia events for a family, but the rules of the game have not changed much.
We are now being bombarded with stories about the need for instant replay in the game. SI.com has a feature article right now about its imminent need to ensure the accuracy of the calls made. Sounds all swell, but that goes against the fabric of the game to me. Calls are going to be missed, as they have been for years. Calling a strike when a pitcher is throwing 99 mph is probably the most difficult task in all of sports officiating. Seeing whether or not a ball hit the chalk or just missed is right behind it. But 99.9 percent of the time, the call is correct. And when it is not, the players/teams deal with it.
The call now is for instant replays on fair/foul calls, home runs that hit/don't hit the foul pole, not necessarily for a computerized strike zone. But guess what: the New Deal in the 1930's was seen as a temporary fix to address the problems with the Great Depression, not send this nation into a feeding frenzy for billions of dollars every year in handouts, even almost 80 years later. My point being that it doesn't stop once the ball gets rolling. Replays for review will turn into replays for balls and strikes, which will turn into a digital strike zone. Heck, why don't we just get rid of umpires all together and call the whole game electronically?
Most of you probably think I am an idiot and should get with the times, much like the NFL, NBA, and other pro leagues have done. Have you watched one of these games though when the replay goes into effect? 15 minutes later, the ref in an NFL game comes back to say that the ruling on the field stands. Great. I just wasted 15 minutes of my life. Baseball is a slow enough game as it is, especially for the casual fan. And how much fun is it to watch Bobby Cox waddle out of the dugout to argue a call and get tossed? One of the great joys of life that is. What will he do now? Rip off a red stirrup from his leg and chunk it onto the field before the next pitch?
Keep the game the way it is. Missed calls have broken my heart, made me breathe a sigh of relief, and been a part of this game since day one. Let's not change that people. Just because we have the technology to be perfect doesn't mean its in the best interest to do so.
First topic of note: not the election, GW's former press secretary ripping him a new one (although I will get to that one sometime soon), or stupid stories about our needy population demanding more of my paycheck to buy cell phones and tv's. No, this post is about the new push in the sports media to bring in the dreaded, bring-the-game-to-a-snail's-pace instant replay in Major League Baseball. The all-american pasttime, the grand ole game, whatever you like to call it, has long been the bastion of tradition and americana. Aside from a few bogus updates to the game (the DH, for example), baseball has remained much the same as it was back in the late 1890's when it became part of our national culture. Players have gotten bigger, bats have got more pop, and the stadiums are now multimedia events for a family, but the rules of the game have not changed much.
We are now being bombarded with stories about the need for instant replay in the game. SI.com has a feature article right now about its imminent need to ensure the accuracy of the calls made. Sounds all swell, but that goes against the fabric of the game to me. Calls are going to be missed, as they have been for years. Calling a strike when a pitcher is throwing 99 mph is probably the most difficult task in all of sports officiating. Seeing whether or not a ball hit the chalk or just missed is right behind it. But 99.9 percent of the time, the call is correct. And when it is not, the players/teams deal with it.
The call now is for instant replays on fair/foul calls, home runs that hit/don't hit the foul pole, not necessarily for a computerized strike zone. But guess what: the New Deal in the 1930's was seen as a temporary fix to address the problems with the Great Depression, not send this nation into a feeding frenzy for billions of dollars every year in handouts, even almost 80 years later. My point being that it doesn't stop once the ball gets rolling. Replays for review will turn into replays for balls and strikes, which will turn into a digital strike zone. Heck, why don't we just get rid of umpires all together and call the whole game electronically?
Most of you probably think I am an idiot and should get with the times, much like the NFL, NBA, and other pro leagues have done. Have you watched one of these games though when the replay goes into effect? 15 minutes later, the ref in an NFL game comes back to say that the ruling on the field stands. Great. I just wasted 15 minutes of my life. Baseball is a slow enough game as it is, especially for the casual fan. And how much fun is it to watch Bobby Cox waddle out of the dugout to argue a call and get tossed? One of the great joys of life that is. What will he do now? Rip off a red stirrup from his leg and chunk it onto the field before the next pitch?
Keep the game the way it is. Missed calls have broken my heart, made me breathe a sigh of relief, and been a part of this game since day one. Let's not change that people. Just because we have the technology to be perfect doesn't mean its in the best interest to do so.
Monday, May 5, 2008
I love animals, but...
are you serious about this? Going through the AJC online this morning, and came across this gem of a story. http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/stories/2008/05/04/peta_0505.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab
For those of you too busy to click the link, PETA wants the jockey of the euthanized Kentucky Derby Runner Up, Eight Belles, to be suspended and have the $400,000 prize money revoked. They say that, and I quote, the horse was 'doubtlessly injured before the finish'. Really? Was a PETA psycho actually on the horse? Or wait, maybe they can read the horse's thoughts and sensed pain in those ankles. Either way, these guys are obviously way more intelligent than us mere mortals. I can't even tell what my dog is thinking. Actually that's a lie. He is thinking how much more he likes Summer than me, but that is another story.
These PETA clowns are a disgrace. Some of their causes may be worthy, but just like with the Democrat party, they have been hijacked by fools and nutjobs. This is a horse race. Been here for longer than your stupid organization. Will be around after PETA goes the way of the garbage can, I mean recycling bin. It sucks that a horse died, but we'll all go on just the same. It was an accident, and accidents happen.
For those of you too busy to click the link, PETA wants the jockey of the euthanized Kentucky Derby Runner Up, Eight Belles, to be suspended and have the $400,000 prize money revoked. They say that, and I quote, the horse was 'doubtlessly injured before the finish'. Really? Was a PETA psycho actually on the horse? Or wait, maybe they can read the horse's thoughts and sensed pain in those ankles. Either way, these guys are obviously way more intelligent than us mere mortals. I can't even tell what my dog is thinking. Actually that's a lie. He is thinking how much more he likes Summer than me, but that is another story.
These PETA clowns are a disgrace. Some of their causes may be worthy, but just like with the Democrat party, they have been hijacked by fools and nutjobs. This is a horse race. Been here for longer than your stupid organization. Will be around after PETA goes the way of the garbage can, I mean recycling bin. It sucks that a horse died, but we'll all go on just the same. It was an accident, and accidents happen.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
NFL Draft Day!!
Does anyone else out there find it funny to see how much hoopla surrounds the NFL draft day? I was listening to Buck and Kincaid on 680 am this week and heard that they would be broadcasting live on Saturday from the Hudson Grille in ATL, 'so come on out and join us to watch the draft'... seriously? Anyone who wants to spend an entire Saturday afternoon watching a DRAFT has no life. period. Half the guys that get picked will never sniff an NFL starting job. I'm all for spending an afternoon watching actual football, but this is ridiculous. And for the record, the Hudson Grill will be packed today.
Anybody get to see Bobby Cox get tossed last night? It was his ever-growing record 136th ejection of his illustrious career. I know I am a homer for the Bravos, but I have to say Cox has to be the greatest player's manager ever in baseball. I think most of t
he guys on the team would take a bat to the head for him, b/c they know he would do the same. I love it, because the only reason he argued last nite was to keep his pitcher from getting tossed. Arguing balls and strikes from the dugout? What kind of view is that? But he kept his pitcher in the game, and the Braves came back for the victory.
he guys on the team would take a bat to the head for him, b/c they know he would do the same. I love it, because the only reason he argued last nite was to keep his pitcher from getting tossed. Arguing balls and strikes from the dugout? What kind of view is that? But he kept his pitcher in the game, and the Braves came back for the victory.Tuesday, April 22, 2008
I'm rooting for Hillary
That reads funny, coming from me. But in any case, I hope she wins PA tonight. I hope it empowers her to continue her futile campaign and further divide the Dems through the early summer. I watched some of that debate last week, and I have to say that I really believe those two hate each other. What was sad was listening to Charlie Gibson spend the first 30 minutes asking questions about 'God and guns' and Jeremiah Wright. Legitimate concerns for voters, but I wanted to hear some policy talk, but by 8:28 I was bored out of my mind and decided to watch some Family Guy instead.
That is kind of the story of this race. We are so inundated with coverage of their comments and relationships that I don't want to hear another word about Obama or Hillary. I think that is the media's plan: Let's talk about God and guns and Jeremiah Wright so much that it numbs the masses to a point that they don't care anymore that Obama is an elitist, pompous POS. We can now convince ourselves that these issues are no big deal because we don't want to hear one more word about them.
On a lighter note...
Congrats to John Smoltz of the Bravos for collecting K number 3000 tonight. I'm kicking myself for not heading down to the game. He got his first strikeout when I was 9 years old. He is
getting old. But he still throws 93 with a sick slider and even nastier splitty. If you don't know what that is, I'm not going to tell you.
He has been the staple of the Braves since they began their run of success, and other than Chipper I say he is the crowd favorite. And just for the record, I wanted our dog's name to be Smoltz, but Summer wasn't a big fan. So I had to take Brave #2 instead.
That is kind of the story of this race. We are so inundated with coverage of their comments and relationships that I don't want to hear another word about Obama or Hillary. I think that is the media's plan: Let's talk about God and guns and Jeremiah Wright so much that it numbs the masses to a point that they don't care anymore that Obama is an elitist, pompous POS. We can now convince ourselves that these issues are no big deal because we don't want to hear one more word about them.
On a lighter note...
Congrats to John Smoltz of the Bravos for collecting K number 3000 tonight. I'm kicking myself for not heading down to the game. He got his first strikeout when I was 9 years old. He is
getting old. But he still throws 93 with a sick slider and even nastier splitty. If you don't know what that is, I'm not going to tell you.He has been the staple of the Braves since they began their run of success, and other than Chipper I say he is the crowd favorite. And just for the record, I wanted our dog's name to be Smoltz, but Summer wasn't a big fan. So I had to take Brave #2 instead.
And while we are on the sports topics, congrats to the Hawks, who looked like an NCAA team vs. the Celtics on Sunday night. Better luck tomorrow night. If you missed it, they lost by about 24.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Hawks in the playoffs?
Did I read that correctly? I believe so. Get excited Atlanta, because your 2007-08 Hawk team has finally redeemed all of the failures of the past 12 years, making Atlanta a basketball city once again!!!
Or has it? Truth be told, the Hawks backdoored their way into the 8th and final playoff spot this year, with a losing record to boot. Sure, they ended the longest current playoff drought of any team in the NBA by qualifying for the postseason, but does that mean this year has been a success? They improved by four games from last year, and last year they were... terrible. Good news is the Eastern Division holds arguably 2 of the best teams in the NBA and not much else. In the Western Conference, the Hawks would have finished in 11th, and about 12 games out of the playoff race.
I hope they can pull out a victory over the heavily favored Celtics in at least one game, and if they can make this series respectable it will give them all kinds of confidence going into next season. So good luck Hawks, make Atlanta proud, sort of.
Sunday night's game will be on TNT for those of you interested. I might catch a minute or two of the game, if only to see what hideous sport coat that moron Craig Sager is going to wear while doing his sideline analysis. Its sad when the only time the NBA is even remotely appealing to me is during the postseason. Actually just the finals. Then teams actually play defense, its amazing.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Bob Barr for Prez?
I need to expound a bit more on last night's post. As I said last night, Bob Barr may be making a run at the Libertarian nomination for prez this year. There are two reasons why at this time I will not be supporting his candidacy for president, despite the fact that I agree with him on many issues. He is a proponent of reducing the size of gov't, and getting rid of programs and entitlements that have negative impact on our economy and society. He is a staunch supporter of privacy rights, home schooling, and other 'individual' issues, promoting that America is great because of its people, and not b/c of its government. He is against the Real ID Act, and promotes states' rights. Good stuff. Back to the 2 reasons. 1, his (and Libertarians as a party) position on foreign policy, and 2, the current ineffectiveness of third-party candidates for the presidency.
Where I have issue with Bob Barr and the majority of Libertarians is in their view of foreign policy and truly recognizing what I believe to be a major threat: radical Islam. Now I know you are thinking that I have been brainwashed by my republican handlers and am just spouting the company line. (BTW: I consider myself a conservative, not a Republican. Big difference) Others will say that we haven't been attacked in six years, so it is not so big a threat anymore. I believe there is a reason we haven't been attacked, and that is because we have been attacking them on their turf and protecting our own.
The conundrum on this issue is in determining which ideal takes precedence: protecting our freedoms at all costs versus protecting our country, and this is a legitimate argument. Do we derive our decisions from our staunch support for privacy, keeping government at all levels out of our lives and potentially enabling outside invaders to take down our republic? Or do we protect ourselves at all costs, sacrificing personal liberties to keep our houses and jobs and hope that we can trust our government not to pull a Big Brother on us and run our lives? Honestly, I don't know the answer, maybe a mix of both. And I believe many true conservatives will have to make that decision if they honestly evaluate Bob Barr as a candidate come November, because he brings such a different view to the table.
Barr's candidacy also brings up another issue, and that is the ineffectiveness of a third party becoming a major player in our political scene. In my naive and often idiotic opinion, I don't see this ever happening in this manner. All a third party does right now is essentially elect one of the major party candidates every four years. I don't see the Libertarian party becoming effective by nominating Barr for president. Much like most political efforts, this needs to be from the ground up. Harvey Birdman noted in his comments last night that its 'voters like you' who keep a third party from becoming viable. In some form, yes that is true, but I believe that a third party must grow its roots through local, state, and congressional elections before it will ever become a real challenger for the White House. And I am in favor of guys like Barr and Joe Liebermann breaking away from their former parties to support the people and issues that they believe in. But at this point, I don't believe that voting for a third party candidate for President will have any positive impact on the issues that are most important to me.
Where I have issue with Bob Barr and the majority of Libertarians is in their view of foreign policy and truly recognizing what I believe to be a major threat: radical Islam. Now I know you are thinking that I have been brainwashed by my republican handlers and am just spouting the company line. (BTW: I consider myself a conservative, not a Republican. Big difference) Others will say that we haven't been attacked in six years, so it is not so big a threat anymore. I believe there is a reason we haven't been attacked, and that is because we have been attacking them on their turf and protecting our own.
The conundrum on this issue is in determining which ideal takes precedence: protecting our freedoms at all costs versus protecting our country, and this is a legitimate argument. Do we derive our decisions from our staunch support for privacy, keeping government at all levels out of our lives and potentially enabling outside invaders to take down our republic? Or do we protect ourselves at all costs, sacrificing personal liberties to keep our houses and jobs and hope that we can trust our government not to pull a Big Brother on us and run our lives? Honestly, I don't know the answer, maybe a mix of both. And I believe many true conservatives will have to make that decision if they honestly evaluate Bob Barr as a candidate come November, because he brings such a different view to the table.
Barr's candidacy also brings up another issue, and that is the ineffectiveness of a third party becoming a major player in our political scene. In my naive and often idiotic opinion, I don't see this ever happening in this manner. All a third party does right now is essentially elect one of the major party candidates every four years. I don't see the Libertarian party becoming effective by nominating Barr for president. Much like most political efforts, this needs to be from the ground up. Harvey Birdman noted in his comments last night that its 'voters like you' who keep a third party from becoming viable. In some form, yes that is true, but I believe that a third party must grow its roots through local, state, and congressional elections before it will ever become a real challenger for the White House. And I am in favor of guys like Barr and Joe Liebermann breaking away from their former parties to support the people and issues that they believe in. But at this point, I don't believe that voting for a third party candidate for President will have any positive impact on the issues that are most important to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)