EVIL~! alkeiper

Having actually watched that, Tomlinson was frustrated and wasn't thinking rationally. I don't think you can really fault a person for what he did.

I'm really tired of seemingly every single amateur review using the Graphics, Sound, Control, etc. format. If you're writing a five paragraph review of a game, you don't need to devote a full paragraph to the f'n sound. Just tell us what you liked and didn't like.

"FEELS LIKE" 6?! See, here's my way of looking at cold temperatures. Once it goes below 32 degrees, it just about all "feels" the same, the only difference is how long you can actually take it or not. But in terms of comfort level, 20 and 0 feel just the same. I think it kind of goes the same way for heat as well, when it's over 100. 105 and 115 feel just about the same, it's just one's just slightly more tolerable than the other. Of course in Miami it's all pretty much insufferable. There's a difference, believe me. You notice it if you spend 15-20 minutes outside.

The only time I've ever seen them was at Wrestlemania III and VI. Since those were huge stadium shows, the idea (I would guess) was to get the wrestlers to the ring faster and without exerting undue energy. My personal theory is that they used to carts because Andre the Giant couldn't walk that far to the ring.

Bobby Eaton comes to mind.

I think most of the above are unfairly maligned. There's politicking in professional wrestling of course. When I think least professional, I think someone who at least frequently takes "liberties" in the ring, or frequently no sells out of character. The wrestler has probably jumped promotions either because he frequently bails out, or the promotion simply can not handle his antics any longer.

I conversation with my friend CJ a week or so ago led me to discover how much boxing landed on YouTube. It's a treasure chest. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIun44xgYGo Round nine from Arturo Gatti vs. Mickey Ward I. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i8CGEOssUI Jack Dempsey vs. Luis Firpo. Possibly the wildest heavyweight championship fight in history. Dempsey's tactics are the reason the neutral corner rule came into existance, leading to the "long count" three years later. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOkSVaOilsc The Long Count http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbLqM3BDF2k Round 14 of Leonard-Hearns I. Classic announcer Don Dunphy on the mike. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Sj-5EZoMxc Round 15 of Holmes-Norton. George Foreman vs. Ron Lyle. If nothing else, do NOT miss round four.

Are you certain? You know there are statistics involved.

You're correct. It's Houston, San Antonio and Dallas. The Chicago Bulls rank best among the Eastern conference. And for those interested, it's not a complicated statistic. It's simply points divided over possessions.

I'm referring to Mike Schmidt's reported refusal to vote for any candidates. Besides Schmidt, that team had Pete Rose, Larry Bowa, etc. Maybe I'm overstating things but they just weren't a likeable bunch. As for Santo, he's the one player on the ballot who I'd not only vote for, but deserves the honor beyond the shadow of a doubt.

I have no idea if it's true or not. But a team playing an uptempo game would be a perfectly valid reason for a team allowed more points. It would certainly explain why Phoenix scores so many points. For what it's worth, John Hollinger's Defensive Efficiency statistics ranks Phoenix eighth (fourth in the Western Conference), putting them in the top third of NBA teams.

Mike Schmidt. Man those '80 Phillies were full of idiots.

The Veterans Committee picks (if any) come out next month. I'm reviewing the candidates in my blog in a three part series.

The Cubs signed Tomas Perez to a minor league contract!

Perhaps it's worth redrawing some rules/limits on signatures?

Tony Oliva: Impressive career OPS+ of 131 over a 15 year career. Oliva made eight All-Star teams, finished sixth or higher in MVP votes four times, and won three batting titles. Oliva played his prime in an extremely tough offensive era. His peak is fairly impressive. However, Oliva does not rank in the top 100 of any offensive category except intentional walks. Only one of Oliva's ten most comparable players is in the Hall. That player, George Kelly, is considered one of the worst players in the Hall. As a right fielder, Oliva's totals just don't stack up. Al Oliver: Oliver is an interesting Hall of Fame candidate. Oliver hit .303 over his career, made seven All-Star teams and enjoyed three top ten MVP finishes. He wasn't a great player at any point however. Looking over center fielders in the 1970s, Oliver ranks behind Fred Lynn, Bobby Murcer, Cesar Cedeno, Amos Otis and maybe Rick Monday. Oliver is indistinguishable from several of his era, not the mark of a Hall of Famer. Vada Pinson: Like Oliver, Pinson accumulated great counting totals from being a good player for a long time. Pinson collected 2,757 career hits. Again however, there is little to support that Pinson was a great player. Pinson made just two All-Star games, and won just one Gold Glove, meaning his defensive capabilities can't carry him in. Pinson only finished in the Top ten of MVP balloting twice. His numbers do not merit induction. Ron Santo: Off all players on the ballot, Santo is the one player who absolutely beyond a shadow of a doubt deserves induction. At the time of his retirement, Santo ranked 5th among third basemen in hits, second in home runs, 3rd in OPS, and 2nd in RBIs. He also won five Gold Gloves. He was a dominant offensive/defensive player for five years. Luis Tiant: Best known for his role on the 1975 Red Sox, Tiant compiled a 229-172 record over his career. His career record is similar to Catfish Hunter's. The difference is that Catfish won 20 games five years in a row and had a better peak. The problem with Tiant is that he only appeared in three All-Star games and never came close to the Cy Young award. Over the span of Tiant's career (1964-82), he ranks 31st in ERA and 10th in wins. There were many better pitchers in that era. Joe Torre: Torre's a tough player to categorize. He played the most games at catcher, but only 40% of them. He split time at first and third base as well. He won a gold glove behind the plate, but was considered a poor defensive catcher. Torre played for nine All-Star teams and his 129 OPS+ would be excellent if you classified him as a catcher. Torre's a similar player in value to Gene Tenace, except that Torre played over 500 more games and won an MVP award. I'd vote for Torre. He's borderline, but he managed four championship clubs. Cecil Travis: I wrote a piece on Cecil Travis a couple weeks ago. I don't remember if I published it, but the essential point is that Travis was a budding superstar whose career was cut short after he suffered frostbite fighting in the 2nd World War. Travis might have enjoyed a Hall of Fame career. When he left for war, he had a .331 career batting average. I'm not certain though. I don't feel comfortable voting for him, given that dozens of players were great early in their careers but lost Hall of Fame careers due to attrition. Mickey Vernon: I don't see it. Unimpressive career totals, even accounting for a tough hitters' environment in Washington. Vernon won two batting titles and led the league in doubles three times, but he was not a dominant offensive force. He was the Mark Grace of his era. Maury Wills: Lou Brock got the record, but Maury Wills revolutionized stealing bases in the 1960s. Wills stole 104 bases in 117 tries in 1962. Wills was an average hitter (for a shortstop) and a decent glove man. I don't think it's enough to get him into the Hall however. Wills wasn't any better than Jim Fregosi, a great player in his 20s but a non candidate. Wills was also considered a negative in regards to character. Rundown: Santo and Torre alongside Joe Gordon and Jim Kaat from earlier rundowns. Four candidates from a group of 27.

No, that's horseshit anywhere. The only way the defense succeeds is if the offense fails, and vice versa. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy. Except in golf, where defense has never won a championship.

Every day the Phillies rotation sounds better and better. There isn't a deeper rotation in the NL east of the Rockies, outside of Chicago.

Before I begin, another word on Joe Gordon. Despite a short career, Gordon is one of only four second baseman to hit 25+ home runs in five seasons. The others are Rogers Hornsby, Ryne Sandberg and Jeff Kent. Mickey Lolich: Lolich's inclusion on the ballot is frankly puzzling. Lolich compiled a 217-191 record, not a great percentage for a candidate with that few wins. His sole qualification seems that for a two year stretch he compiled a 47-28 record with a 2.73 ERA. Using Lee Sinins' Runs Saved Above Average, his 52 RSAA over that stretch placed him eighth among pitchers. Only one of his ten comps are in the Hall, and that pitcher (Jim Bunning) had far superior ERAs. Sparky Lyle: With four closers in the Hall and more coming, perhaps we missed one or two? Looking over relievers with 200+ games finished in the 1970s, Lyle ranks 5th in WHIP, 2nd in ERA, 2nd in saves, 2nd in RSAA, and 7th in strikeout/walk ratio. He won a Cy Young award in 1977. I can't endorse Lyle however. He was not the best reliever of the 1970s, instead competing for second among John Hiller, Mike Marshall, and others not considered candidates at all. None of his ten comparable pitchers are even candidates. The numbers just don't support this one. Marty Marion: It is difficult to gauge Marion because his value rests on his defensive abilities. Contemporaries felt highly of Marion. He won an MVP award and finished in the top ten three times. He gained selection to eight consecutive All-Star games. Two caveats apply however. One, Marion only played thirteen seasons. Second, his best years occured during World War II when much of his competition was overseas. When there was no war, his OPS+ fell below 80. He simply was not a great player. Roger Maris: Maris carries most of the loudest arguments towards his induction, and they may become louder yet with the steroid controversy looming over the new record holder(s). My position is that if that 61 did not appear on Maris's record, he would not be within a mile of the Hall of Fame. He won two MVP awards. He only appeared on four All-Star teams and only received any MVP support at all in one other season. None of his ten comparable players are in the Hall. Maris was a great player for two seasons. If two seasons of greatness are the standard of the Hall, then there are MANY other players who would deserve the honor. Carl Mays: Carl Mays threw the pitch that killed Ray Chapman. He also compiled a 207-126 record, not many wins but an impressive winning percentage. Mays is another player in the "lost it early" group. Mays never dominated the league however, only finishing first in a handful of categories. He pitched for the Red Sox dynasty of the teens and the Yankees' dynasty of the early '20s. I suspect his win/loss record is due in part to pitching for great teams, and his other stats give him little extra support. Minnie Minoso: Bill James' favorite candidate. The Minnie Minoso argument states that he didn't stick in the Majors until he was 26, and had a Hall of Fame career afterwards. If we take that statement for face value, how does Minoso rate with other left fielders, age 26 and older? I'm unimpressed. Minoso rates among the leaders, but those above him include illuminaries such as Bob Johnson and Luis Gonzalez, who are not serious candidates. Some like to support Minoso's candidacy by isolating his statistics in his 30s. Unless he collected 200 hits a year from ages 21-25, he would not have gotten 3,000 hits. Minoso finished in the top ten of MVP voting five times and made seven All-Star teams. Looking for a similar player, I spotted Ken Singleton. Minoso received more acclaim due to his speed, but they were roughly equal in value. Singleton is not a viable candidate. I can not support Minoso either. Thurman Munson: Do you make an allowance for Munson passing away early? I don't believe you should, that Munson's case should be treated like any other injured player. But let's set that aside for the second. Using the same trick we used for Minoso, how does Munson compare with catchers up to the age of his death? Munson fails to impress in this regard. He rates 19th in OBP, 7th in hits, 11th in RBIs, 16th in RCAA, and 11th in Runs scored. Many non-Hall of Famers rank above him. Munson's slugging percentage fell off the table in 1978, so it's doubtful he had much left to contribute in his career. He wasn't good enough in his peak to merit induction. Don Newcombe: Another pitcher with a brilliant peak, Newcombe compiled a 149-90 record. He debuted at the age of 23, so I doubt you can give him much of an adjustment for the color line. Newcombe had a few good years, even winning the MVP in 1956. He doesn't rate among the top five pitchers of his era however, and his record received a huge boost from the offense that played for him (four Hall of Famers, plus Gil Hodges). 149 wins is way too few for a serious candidate unless he dominates like Sandy Koufax or Dizzy Dean. Lefty O'Doul: O'Doul hit .373 over a four year period from 1929 until 1932. That is superficially impressive, but the average hitter in the Baker Bowl in that era hit nearly .320. Phillies hitters in the 1930s received a greater boost from their environment than hitters enjoy at Coors Field today. O'Doul only reached 10 seasons thanks to four fruitless years as a pitcher early in his career. As a player, he is undeserving. HOWEVER, many argue that O'Doul deserves a boost because of his role as an ambassador to baseball in Japan. If you believe Buck O'Neil deserves the Hall, than O'Doul could merit induction under the same criteria. The Rundown. None this round. Jim Kaat and Joe Gordon last round.

Yes actually. Some players are patient and wait, while some batters will jump on the first pitch if it was a good one. Wade Boggs was notorious for almost NEVER swinging at the first pitch.

We don't deliver that many warnings now. Besides, I'd like to think you can have a discussion without resorting to name calling. We have a separate forum for that if you really feel the urge.

That's the nice thing about XM Radio. They've been mainly concerned with celebrating Gwynn and Ripken.

With the Baseball Writers making their decision, the Baseball Hall of Fame discussion turns to the Veterans' Committee ballot. The Veterans ballot occurs every other year, and is voted on by all living Hall of Famers, as well as writers and broadcasters. Currently, I believe the system is ill-constructed. There are too many vaguely qualified candidates on the ballot and no way to reach a consensus. The system would be much improved by taking the top ten vote getters and running a second, run-off ballot. As it stands, I doubt this system will result in any new inductees. Dick Allen: One of the most controversial players in the history of baseball. Allen seemingly created trouble wherever he landed. Often, teams were eager to get rid of him despite his tremendous production. His talent is unquestioned. In 1966, Allen slugged .632 when the league as a whole slugged .399. Allen led the league in OPS four times, slugging three times, and On Base Percentage twice. His adjusted OPS ranks 21st all time. Unfortunately, he had a relatively short career. Bill James argues that Allen was more trouble than he was worth. I'm not sure what to make of it. Right no, I'd have to say no. Bobby Bonds: Until Andre Dawson and Barry Bonds, Bobby was the greatest combination of power and speed in the history of baseball. Bobby, like Dick Allen, had a relatively short career. Unlike Dick Allen, he was not a dominant player. He did not win an MVP and he played in just three All-Star games. He wasn't great, and he wasn't very good for long enough. Ken Boyer: Boyer is a tremendously underrated player, one who receives little acclaim because he played in an era of low offense and contributed across the board. For seven years, Boyer hit 23-32 home runs a season and collected 90+ RBIs. At the same time, he won five Gold Gloves at third base. Boyer finished in the top ten of MVP voting three times, winning the award in 1964. I can't endorse Boyer, but it is closer than people realize. Rocky Colavito: A feared power hitter in his prime, Colavito hit 40+ home runs in three seasons. He finished in the top ten of MVP voting four times. Again, Colavito had a short career, retiring at the age of 34. Rocky led the league in home runs once, RBIs once, slugging percentage once. None of his ten comparable players are in the Hall of Fame. Colavito just wasn't good enough at his peak to merit induction. Wes Ferrell: 193 wins and a 4.04 ERA is not generally remarkable. Ferrell did win 91 games over four seasons. He pitched in a genuinely difficult era for pitchers. The most remarkable statistic about Ferrell is his hitting. Ferrell hit .280/.351/.446 over the course of his career, league average numbers out of the pitching spot. His .601 winning percentage is impressive, but he just didn't last long enough. Ferrell pitched just 8 games after turning 30. Curt Flood: Flood essentially retired rather than accept a trade to the Philadelphia Phillies. He challenged baseball's reserve clause and lost. Again we have a player who enjoyed a short career. During his career, Flood was a league average hitter with a sensational glove. Flood was possibly one of the top five defensive outfielders of all time. However, I can't see how half a season of that makes a Hall of Famer. Joe Gordon: Yet another short career guy. Gordon gets a pass for two seasons however because he served during World War II. Gordon was absolutely a Hall of Fame talent at his peak. He won an MVP and finished in the top ten four other times. He made the All-Star team nine times, every season except his first and last years. Gordon played on five championship clubs. Given credit for the war years, I think Gordon deserves induction. Gil Hodges: A popular player, but only the 5th or 6th best player on his club. Hodges only finished in the top ten of MVP balloting twice, and never really got close to winning. Hodges never led the league in a significant offensive category. Hodges accumulated a lot of RBIs because he played on great teams, but he was not a great player. The only way he merits induction is if you give him credit for managing the Miracle Mets. I can't see it. Jim Kaat: Kaat is an interesting case. He wasn't a great pitcher, just a very good one who lasted a LONG time. That might not sound impressive, but I've always maintained that if it were easy to stick around and accumulate numbers, more pitchers would do it. Kaat's numbers are similar to Robin Roberts and Ferguson Jenkins. He's borderline, but I would vote for him. 283 wins is enough. Rundown: Jim Kaat and Joe Gordon in this batch. Mickey Lolich through Lefty O'Doul in the next batch, and we'll finish with Tony Oliva through Maury Wills.

I'll indulge you with my own ballot. IN Cal Ripken Tony Gwynn Mark McGwire Alan Trammell Goose Gossage Andre Dawson Bert Blyleven OUT, but close Dale Murphy Lee Smith Jack Morris Dave Parker

You mean elected, or actually never on the ballot?