ESPN's 30 for 30 Rankings

I was a fan of the ESPN 30 for 30 series. The original idea, that there are tons of untold stories in sports that a lot of fans don't know about, is a good one (that they mostly stuck to). I also liked the idea to have directors pitch projects that were personal to them, as some of the best in the series were ones where you could see exactly where the director was coming from and relate. The series covered a broad range of interests, too, so anyone's list is going to look different. Two of my top five were not the most critically acclaimed in the series, but definitely up my alley interest-wise.

There were five I didn't see. Two I had no interest in (Tim Richmond: To the Limit, and Unmatched. Tennis and Nascar are towards the bottom of the sports interest spectrum for me. Thank God there wasn't a golf one.) Two I kind of wanted to but missed somehow (Without Bias and Guru of Go. I should have seen all of the basketball ones...) and one I was very interested in and am still trying to find when they replay it (Straight Outta LA, the Ice Cube one about the Raiders.) So those won't be on the list, but here's my rankings of the other 25, with some thoughts on select docs.

25 (and I'm sure 30 if I had seen the other 5)- Marion Jones: Press Pause (Michael Moore thought this "documentary" was one-sided. I love track and field, and have been forced to accept that half the race takes place in a science lab. But Marion Jones did more damage to the sport than possibly anyone, and I refuse to feel bad for her, and definitely am not inspired by her, John Singleton.)
24- Little Big Men (I fell asleep. Pretty boring.)
23-The Legend of Jimmy the Greek
22-The House of Steinbrenner (What happened to this being about stories I didn't know?)
21-The Band That Wouldn't Die
20-The Birth of Big Air (I bet this would be a lot higher if I was a bigger X Games fan.)
19-Fernando Nation (I wish they had focused a little more on the phenomenon of flash-in-the-pan baseball prospects, especially pitchers with a gimmick pitch. "Hideo Nomo Nation" would be an excellent 40 for 40.)
18-Pony Exce$$
17-The U (College football teams cheat. In the 80s Some of them weren't very good at cheating, and got caught. I get it. Pony Exce$$ gets docked below The U for having too much Skip Bayless.)
16-Silly Little Game (I've been playing fantasy sports since before I knew I didn't invent it, so I was looking forward to this one, but as you can imagine, the story of creating fantasy baseball does not lend itself to a lot of action sequences.)
15-Kings Ransom (We're swinging more to the "like" side of the pendulum now. this was a good story about small markets not being able to afford their superstar. At least Gretzky won Edmonton a few titles, first cough*Lebron*cough)
14-Small Potatoes: Who Killed the USFL? (I didn't know the USFL had that much of a toehold in the sports lexicon before seeing this.)
13-The 16th Man (Never saw Invictus, so this was interesting, but I depends if you'd rather see footage of the actual people, or Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon.)
12-The Best That Never Was
11-Four Days in October (The critics, I'm sure justifiably, accuse Bill Simmons of adding this one for personal reasons. As a Cubs fan, I was rooting for the Red Sox in 04, so I liked this a little more than your average Yankee fan probably did. It definitely gets away from the idea of telling stories people didn't know about, though.)
10-Once Brothers
9- Into the Wind
8-No Crossover: the Trial of Allen Iverson
7-Muhammad and Larry (There's not much to tell about Muhammad Ali anymore, but I didn't know a whole lot about Larry Holmes before this. As a boxing fan, I love stories about fighters I didn't get to see for myself.)
6-Winning Time (This was my childhood, along with the Pistons, Cavs, and Celtics. All the teams and players I grew up hating. Which is why I wish they had really unloaded on each other in the interviews. While the basketball parts are all exciting and fun to try to identify, the interviews don't add as much as I would like.)
5-June 17th, 1994 (I'm one of those people that remember exactly where I was on that day, and remember trying to watch the basketball game in the split screen. I didn't remember all the other stories from that day until watching this, and they started coming back to me.)
4-Jordan Rides the Bus (I am as big of a Jordan fan as they come, so I'm sure I liked this one more than non-Chicagoans. The best part of this one is the analysis of how the media portrayed the whole thing as a giant joke, even after MJ starts improving during the season. This was one of the few I wish had been longer.)
3-One Night in Vegas (This one got lukewarm reviews, but as many of you know I love boxing and hip-hop in equal parts, so I'm very much the target audience for this documentary. I could write a lot more about what either Tupac or Tyson meant to me growing up, but I'll digress and just say I wish for narrative reasons the actual boxing match had been a little more exciting.)
2-Run Ricky Run (Ricky Williams basically chose smoking weed over playing professional football. That is amazing to me, and I love how the documentary really respects what Ricky was doing when he was out of football instead of making fun of him. The best movies, books, TV shows make me think about something differently, and this one made me think about the idea of "priorities" differently.)
1-The Two Escobars (The Two Escobars is not just the best documentary I saw this year, it might be one of the best movies I saw this year. It certainly has the most gripping source material, as the whole saga could easily have been a good feature film even if it didn't actually happen. And I love the way the story loops around from the own goal at the beginning to all the events leading up to it, and why there was so much at stake. Great story, great storytelling, see it if you haven't yet.)

I hope ESPN doesn't stick too close to the title and keeps the series going. Especially because there's nothing else to watch on Tuesdays during football season.

Just don't let Singleton make any more.

Correct me if I'm wrong...

Bears have clinched a first round bye and still have a shot at the No. 1 seed with Giants, Falcons and Eagles losses this week. In order to do so they have to win, and the Falcons and Saints have to lose. Presuming the Bears win, if the Falcons win they will have a better record than the Bears. If the Saints win, they win their division and will have the same record as the Bears presuming the Falcons lose. The Saints and Falcons would have the same record, each beat each other, but the Saints would have a better division record.

Before continuing I should mention the Falcons play the Panthers, owners of the worst record in the league. The Saints play the Buccaneers. But hey, the Giants were handled by a quarterback who was coming off a concussion and the Eagles were beat by a quarterback making his first career start. Let's keep it going Universe, keep them breaks coming the Bears way.

Anyway...Bears and Saints (did not play each other this year) each win their Divisions and each get byes. Between two conference teams what does is come down to?

Division Records: Bears

Conference Record: Saints

I have a feeling it would be conference record, but correct me if I'm wrong.

No matter what I hope Lovie sticks to his word and plays his starters this week. Giving starters a break brings to mind 2005. Sweeping a division would be huge for the Bears going into the playoffs. Winning the No. 1 seed is a bonus...a big bonus. I would like the defense to show they can be lock down for both halves instead of just the second. Although if I had to choose I would go with the second. The offense could also use another game to get on the same page. It is also worth mentioning that the Bears will know if they can win the No. 1 seed before they play. Looking forward to a real intense defensive game this week against a real good quarterback.

Would the Bulls Have Beaten Hakeem and the Rockets in the 94 and 95 Finals if Jordan Never Retired?

So around here, when I ask this question, the answer is invariably something along the lines of "Of course, duh, why would you even ask that?"

Here's why. Over the course of the Bulls championship run, they never really had to face an elite center in the finals. The full list:

1991- Vlade Divac (season ppg: 11.2, finals ppg 18.2, mostly against Bill Cartwright, who averaged 32 mpg)
1992- Kevin Duckworth and Cliff Robinson (combined season ppg: 23.1, finals ppg: 20.6, split between Cartwright and Scott Williams)
1993- Mark West and Oliver Miller (combined season ppg: 10.9, finals ppg: 10.7, more Williams than Cartwright. Also, the Suns really liked to put Tom Chambers at the 5 in this series since the Bulls couldn't really make them pay on the defensive end)
1996- Sam Perkins (season ppg: 11.8, finals ppg: 11.2, mostly against Luc Longley. I'm aware either Ervin Johnson or Frank Brickowski started, but Sam averaged about 30 minutes a game at the 5.)
1997- The three-headed monster of Greg Ostertag, Antoine Carr, and Greg Foster (combined season ppg: 18.2, finals ppg: 12.8, although Foster memorably dropped 17 in game 3.)
1998- The three above plus Adam Keefe (season ppg: 23.9, finals ppg: 9.6, although both teams basically played without a center for quarters at a time in this series. The Jazz had a lot of Stockton-Hornacek-Russell-Chris Morris/Shandon Anderson-Malone looks, against the Bulls' Ron Harper/Steve Kerr, Jordan, Pippen, Kukoc, Rodman.)

So in most cases, the data shows opposing centers scored less than they averaged in the regular season, but on the other hand, that ain't exactly a murderer's row of centers up there. Total All-Star Games? 4 (Duckworth '89 and '91, Robinson '94, and Divac '01, which barely counts since it's 10 years after the finals in question.) So the conclusion I'm jumping to, which should be backed up by anyone who watched those series, is that the center position was largely irrelevant (Divac dropped 24 in game 3 of '91, and that's the only time a center scored 20 points in any of those games.)

Enter Hakeem. Hakeem dominated the finals in 94 and 95, never scoring under 20 points in any of the 11 games. By game, he scored 28, 25, 21, 32, 27, 30, 25, 31, 34, 31, 35. The first 7 against Patrick Ewing, the last 4 against Shaquille O'Neal, who were both excellent post defenders at the time. What would he have done to Bill Wennington (played the most minutes at center for the 93-94 Bulls) and Will Perdue (most minutes in 95)?

Of course, the counter-argument was made most succinctly by my friend Ben Saper the other night: "Well...we had Jordan."

An excellent point. I'm not going to wax poetic about MJ right now, there's plenty of time for that later. But while imagining what one of the most best centers of all time would have done to our pasty-white centers is fair, it's also fair to imagine what the most competitive player ever would have done with Vernon Maxwell and an aging Clyde Drexler.

I decided to use whatifsports.com. I used the 93-94 Bulls with 92-93 MJ in Pete Myers' place (I'm sure with MJ that year the Bulls would look entirely different roster-wise, but I'm not trying to figure out exactly how all the dominoes would fall.) and simulated a 7 game series. Whatifsports uses statistical analysis to figure out what would happen, so if you're one of those Joe Morgan types who doesn't trust machines, you might quibble with the results. Here's what I got, however.

Game 1: Rockets 103, Bulls 100. The Bulls hold Hakeem to a pedestrian 22 points, but the Rockets get a total team effort, with every starter in double figures (which wasn't unusual for them, they very nearly averaged that in the regular season, with Horry's 9.9 being the only exception.) Jordan drops 26, but Pippen has an off night with 12 points on 5-12 from the field, and 2-6 from behind the arc. Curious stat of the game here, Jordan and Pippen only play 37 minutes, BJ Armstrong led the way with 45. 93-94 theoretical Phil Jackson is kind of a moron.

Game 2: Bulls 98, Rockets 88. Scottie bounces back with a nice 20pts/14 rebs/5 steals(!) line. Jordan puts in 26, Grant and Armstrong chip in 13 and 12 respectively. Hakeem puts in 22 again, but doesn't get the help from his supporting cast as he did in Game 1 (17 for Maxwell, and 11 for Kenny Smith. Nothing else to speak of.) BJ plays 46 minutes again. Jeez, theoretical Phil, give Steve Kerr some minutes.

Game 3: Bulls 107, Rockets 95. OK, Phil, I stand corrected. BJ drops 22 on 3-4 from downtown and 5-6 from the line. MJ scores 23 (I don't think What if sports takes "absolutely taking over big games" into consideration when they come up with the stats.) Scottie with 19, Horace 16. Hakeem has 20, but the Bulls then do a good job shutting everyone else down. Apparently theoretical Phil knows something real Phil didn't and Bill Wennington only plays 2 minutes, with Cartwright and Longley splitting most of the minutes at center. (Also: Stacey King gets a minute off the bench! But doesn't record any meaningful stats.)

Game 4: Bulls 111, Rockets 91. There we go. 30 for MJ, BJ with 21 (I don't remember 93-94 BJ Armstrong being the dominant force he is in this series, but I think we're kind of cheating a little with having his 93-94 stats in here. His usage rate of 19.8% was the highest of his career, which I'm sure had no small part to do with MJ not being there.) Hakeem scores 22 again on 10-22 from the field. He only gets to the line 3 times, and he's been getting to the line a lot less in this series than he did during the year. Cartwright and Longley are apparently doing an excellent job playing straight up D without fouling him. (Stacey King watch: 1 minute, 1 assist, 1 steal, 0 points. Come on Phil, you won by 20, give Stacey some garbage time minutes.)

Game 5: Rockets 118, Bulls 110. Facing elimination, Hakeem finally takes over. The Dream drops 42 on 13-23 from the field, and 16-18(!) from the line (apparently I jinxed our center combo in the Game 4 recap.) The Rockets hold MJ to 19 on 9-20 from the field. Scottie drops 32 in the losing effort, although Grant shoots them out of the game with a 4-13 effort. (No Stacey King action in Game 5). The series goes back to Chicago Stadium for Game 6.

Game 6: Bulls 109, Rockets 102. The Bulls were down 13 after 3 quarters, then had a 4th for the ages (or at least very-92 like.) Maybe I gave whatifsports too little credit, as MJ has 35, 17 in the 4th quarter. Scottie has 12pts/14 boards (and is the Bulls leading rebounder in the series.) Steve Kerr finally gets a little action and drops 10. Hakeem has 31, but the Bulls once again focus on shutting down everyone else, and only Kenny Smith and Mario Elie score in double figures besides Olajuwon for the Rockets. Stacey King gets no love in Game 6. MJ wins his 4th consecutive Finals MVP, with 26.5 ppg in the series.

Hakeem averages 26.5 as well, both of them scoring 159 total. It came down to the supporting cast, and those Bulls were as deep as any. A little disappointingly, only Game 1 was close, but the series itself plays out in a very familiar fashion, with the Bulls toying with their opponents before closing out Game 6.

So I guess Bulls fans were robbed of an 8-peat. Hopefully Derrick Rose and company can find a way to make up for those 2 championships in the future.

What Happened to the Greatest Team Ever?

I don't know if I've ever seen a list of the greatest teams in NFL history that didn't have the 85 Bears number one. I don't think I've seen a list of the greatest teams in any sport that didn't have them in the top 3. So why did they only win 1 Super Bowl?

I don't have much first-hand memories of many players from that team. I do remember the later careers of those that played into the early 90s with the team (Singletary, Dent, Hampton, McMichael, Butler, various offensive linemen.) I know we got it done with one of the best defenses ever to play football, and Walter Payton. My understanding was that our passing attack was competent but not relied on, and I know from playing sporcle quizzes that the Bears' leader in 300 yard passing performances is someone named Billy Wade with 9, so McMahon couldn't have been asked to air it out too much. Also, I know that the biggest excuse given for the 86 Bears is McMahon being injured, which is a little confusing to me. Was McMahon critical to this team's success or not?

My first stop was here. This site has season synopsis for pretty much every season since '79, and recaps of each decade before. I'm not going to spend a lot of time recapping what happened each season, you can go there and read it if interested.

I started with '84, not knowing that McMahon was injured for the last 6 games of that season as well. The short version of '84 is this: the defense was already there (1st overall), the Bears led the league in rushing yards, but were 26th in passing yards. The Bears won their first playoff game over the Redskins, but without McMahon they couldn't make the 49ers pay for stacking the box against Payton, and Montana vs. Steve Fuller wasn't a matchup we were going to win.

So '84 is off the hook. They were a good young team that couldn't afford to be at less than full strength against Montana and co. Let's look at '86.

So, a little like '84, it looks like the Bears were rolling along until McMahon was out for the year with an injury, and they couldn't win in the playoffs without him. The season recap calls the hit that ended McMahon's season that year as a cheap shot, but I'd never seen it before, so I looked it up on YouTube.

Ho. Ly. Shit. What do you think Roger Goodell would do to Charles Martin if that hit happened today? I'm thinking he goes straight to public execution, forget suspensions and fines. I first thought I was watching the wrong clip, since when you watch that in real time, McMahon gets the pass off and takes a few steps off screen. Martin is following him, but it's clear he'll have time to stop. Before I saw the replay, I figured Martin must have just taken another step and launched himself at McMahon, which would still be a late hit even by 1986 standards, but would at least be understandable.

But no, this guy takes about 4 more steps before even putting a hand on McMahon, and even looks upfield and sees the play is over before tackling him. The announcers say it must be 1-2 seconds before he got hit, but when they showed it in real time, I timed it from when the ball left McMahon's hand and when the tackle started. I got 3.2 seconds. The only modern comparison I can think of for this play is Albert Haynesworth's face stomp. Just no way to even make the justification that you were trying to make a football play, you were just straight-up trying to hurt the guy. Haynesworth was suspended for 5 games. Martin was suspended for 2. If James Harrison did something like that to Tom Brady today, he would probably be banned from football, and Goodell might just put out a contract on him.

Sorry for the rant, it's just shocking how different the NFL was back then (Whenever there's a bunch of hand-wringing about how coddled athletes are today, remember that play.) But the strength of the Bears wasn't the passing game. They still had the best defense in the league and the best running back ever. Couldn't Doug Flutie quarterback them to victory against the Redskins?

I looked at the box score (after searching for play-by-play to no avail.) The three numbers that immediately jumped out at me were the 4 turnovers for the Bears, only 14 rushing attempts for Payton, and the Redskins rushing for 138 yards.

Someone was nice enough to upload video of all the Flutie pass attempts (or scrambles). Flutie only had 2 interceptions, but it could have been a lot more. It seemed that every throw that came out of his hand besides the TD to Willie Gault was wobbly or inaccurate. I have to say, though, he was not given a lot of time, either. I always thought of the Bears O-line as a strength, but the video seems to say otherwise. I was also looking to see if there were a lot of 8-man boxes, which would explain the lack of rushing attempts for Walter, but I wasn't seeing it. It really seems like he could have got the ball more.

Even though I couldn't see any of the defensive plays, I feel like they've got to take a lot of the fall for this one. The Redskins scored 27 points, then were shut out by the Giants the next week in the NFC Championship Game. They came into the game ranked 17th in the league in rushing, but gained 138 yards on the ground. Not having McMahon can't explain that one.

I came into this article expecting to come to the conclusion that McMahon was a little overrated. Looks like the opposite might be true, they really needed McMahon to keep the pressure off Payton. And the defense, for whatever reason, clearly didn't show up in the playoffs.

Payton retired after '87, and the window was pretty much closed. There was just no way to compete with the 49ers after that, and the Bears became a good-but-not-great team. So who's to blame? I feel like I have to take a shot at God here, but it looks like Ditka. Why the strange run-to-pass ratio? Why didn't the defense show up? This is the softest speculation possible, considering I wasn't able to watch the actual game, but if this was the case in 2010, I would be killing Lovie for it.

Thoughts from anyone with more insight than me is always appreciated. The Bulls post (would they have won in 93-94 or 94-95 against the Rockets with MJ?) should be up by Saturday. Cubs and Hawks coming next week. I plan on watching the last 30-for-30 tomorrow, too, so that may be up by tomorrow night, but I might also have Christmas shopping to do, so we'll see.

Bulls tear it up, bury 76ers - Aphorisms

If I was more ambitious, I would attempt to compare the dominance the Bulls exhibited tonight with that which the Bears had on display last night. I would talk about the smothering, disciplined, relentless defense of both teams. And the way that each team really responded and played for its coach after a disappointing loss the game before.

Spencer Hawes does very little.

Great job Luol Deng, as usual. I apologize for those of my friends who continue to not give you the credit you deserve for your consistent excellence on both ends of the floor all season long. Truly. Sorry about my friends. Luol, you are so dope. Since you got into the league I've noticed that the times when you are playing the best are the times when you are making the best decisions with the ball - when to slash, when to pull up, when to drive. Great decision-making, we saw the full arsenal from you tonight - I'll make sure I mention it to during our weekly blow-out with all of our friends at sub51.

DRose leads all PGs in blocks. He plays spectacular lock-down defense for at least three or four possessions a game now.

DRose had 22 points, 5 rebounds, and 12 assists in 29 minutes.

I haven't looked, but it seemed like Korver made all of his shots in the first half. When he gets off to a quick start like that, beware.

Great start to the game by the Bulls. Another point goes on the 'this is a well coached team' side of the board. A strong beginning to the game has been a point of concentration for Tibs recently, good to see the team responding.
Towards the back-end of the 3rd quarter the Bulls got a 40-point lead. Kurt Thomas picked up a foul on defense, and I loved everyone's reaction. He was so disappointed with the (questionable) call. Ronnie Brewer immediately pointed to himself - 'my bad' - for gambling for a steal and thus blowing his defensive rotation assignment, leaving Thomas to fend for himself. The Bulls were playing so hard, such focused and disciplined team defense. I love how disappointed they were with the mistake, and how little they cared that they led by 40. Wow. Gotta love it. This is the sign of a team that is very much in sync with its coach.

Stacey King called Kurt Thomas 'big sexy'. Then, Kurt Thomas had a great game. In my mind there wasn't really a question about who to start at the 5, knowing that Taj was out - this is why Kurt Thomas is here. I love veteran players (Brad Miller, Joe Smith) who know their role and play within their limits. Let's not forget what he did with the Bucks last year when their starting center, Bogut, got injured. He is a great defender, plays within himself, and hits that pick n' pop 17-footer consistently. I'm excited to have him on our team; he will be on the court a lot down the stretch.

Teams in the NBA are built around stars. Each team has one or two. It's really too bad when the star that your team is built around isn't as good as many other stars - when your star isn't a superstar. We are lucky because we have DRose. But the 76ers are built around Andre Igoudala, and have been for some time. It's too bad - it's like you can only compare to other teams as favorably as your star can compare to other stars. That's the ceiling of your team's success. Portland - bummer. Brandon Roy and Lamarcus Aldridge just aren't that great.

For the first minute of the 2nd half the 76ers looked like a decent team, crisp and active on both ends of the floor. That was it for them. They were completely buried by the Bulls.

There hasn't been a player on the Bulls in a long time who steals the ball at the rate that Ronnie Brewer does.

At one point Stacey was describing Ronnie Brewer. In referring to how Brewer won't score 30 points, but will do all these other crucial things to help you win, he said, "Remember, the coaching staff sees it in plays on the floor." Plays on the floor. What a fascinating statistic to keep. I am not one of those fans who is particularly interested in statistics. I would say that, comparatively, I am much more loathe to bring up and rely on statistics to discuss sports and athletes and games than most of my friends. But I would definitely like to try to think about how to measure a play on the floor. I think it's important to think of both strata of the unit: team plays on the floor - a possession of great team defense and defensive rebounding; a nice offensive possession with good ball movement - and individual plays on the floor - a steal; an offensive rebound; a particularly good decision.

Coach Scalabrine! I know we've all heard that Tibs brought Scabbers with him from Boston, that as a player he's an extension of the coach. It's true, he's dope, I'm glad we have him on our team.

Beautiful outlet pass by Carlos Boozer (to Ronnie Brewer, off a steal in the 3rd when the Bulls were tearing it up). I've never seen him make a play like that before.

Something tells me that when he returns Joakim will be better than ever, and will have some very memorable monster games during the back-end of our season. That's just the kind of motivated competitive dude that he is. I also love that I am hardly going out on a limb by issuing this warning - surely there are few true fans who would disagree with me.

Darius Songalia sighting! I liked him when he was on the Bulls.

Great Christmas present from Neil to Stacey at halftime, but I wish they'd played the audio with the video. Neil Funk is very similar to Brian McManus.

Nice new commercial, DWade. That chemo kid is really saving your image.

The Bulls have lost only one game this year to a team under .500. I like the make-up of this team (John Paxson and Gar Forman deserve tremendous credit), the way their defense has been looking, and the fact that they really seem to play for and respond to their coach. They have the talent to beat anyone in the league. Plus they're all friends, and really seem to be enjoying working and playing together. I know it's easy when you win by 40 points, but still.

Gibson Out, TT to Start Michaelangelo's David in his Place

Either that or Kurt Thomas. They both have the same amount of ability and offensive prowess now, anyway.

TT...you're killing me here. Were you just not watching the Clippers game? Kurt Thomas is not the defensive presence he once was. Asik should start, backed up by Scalabrine. Don't play Kurt Thomas.

The rest of you, please win despite this stupidity. The 76ers play Andres Nocioni and Darius Songaila regularly, you should be able to beat them in your sleep. I really thought we were done winning in spite of our head coach but...here we are.

Bears-Vikings Liveblog

Bears clinch the division by beating Joe Webb. So why do I have such a bad feeling about this one?

As always, be patient if you don't see your first comment right away, as I have to set you as a contributor before you can post away.

A Couple Quick Liveblog Notes

So, since I read the time wrong, it would be a little silly to start a Hawks liveblog now, right? (I mean, that would be like starting a liveblog for an important game while it was going on and trying to synchronize up with it.) I don't really regret missing it, though, since I would have missed the end of the Jets-Steelers game. This has been an awesome day for football in general, and I'm going to have to check in to make sure the Patriots beat the Aaron Rodgers-less Packers just as bad as they beat us last week. I still want to get a Hawks liveblog in before I have to go back to work, but it looks like the next opportunity is...Sunday, January 2 vs. Anaheim.

Also, the Bulls/Wizards one will have to be postponed as well, since Sam reminded me we're continuing our annual tradition of seeing It's A Wonderful Life at the Music Box Theater that night. This is a lot of fun and certainly trumps a regular season Bulls game, so I'm going to push this one back to New Years Eve, vs. the Nets at 2:00. Start your pregame with a little Bulls action!

The next liveblog is the Bears/Vikings tilt tomorrow night. Come one, come all, and hope nobody breaks anything.

The Blame Game: Bulls-Clippers

So when I said before that I wasn't too worried about not having Noah for a few months, I was working off the assumption that we'd have Taj in his place. No Taj or Noah means, unfortunately, we are not very good defensively inside, and the Clippers took advantage of that (despite Baron Davis' best efforts.) However, that doesn't mean we could have won this game, but for...

Kurt Thomas/TT for playing Kurt Thomas 16 minutes, and the clutch minutes in the 4th)- 45%

Yes, Kurt Thomas did some good things. He set a few solid screens, drew a nice charge on Blake Griffin, got another foul on a pump fake under the basket. But I thought we got Kurt Thomas to play defense and get rebounds. 3 rebounds in 16 minutes is guard numbers, and it wasn't like it was Blake Griffin beasting him, which would be understandable. There was a key play in the 4th where Eric Gordon got position on Thomas and put the ball back up on him.

Defensively it wasn't much better. He played 6 feet off Griffin out of necessity, but still wasn't quick enough to help stop Baron Davis on the drive. The on-ball defense wasn't much better. My question for TT is, if Kurt isn't going to do anything on the defensive end, why not play Scalabrine and at least open the post up for Boozer? Or go small with James Johnson and push the pace? (OK, Griffin probably would have made the Bulls pay for putting JJ or Luol on him, but still, it would have been better than what happened.)

TT's ability to manage the clock/timeouts- 20%
30 seconds left, down 2. If you don't foul, they can use the entire shot clock get a shot up at the end, by the time you have the rebound, you need to go down the floor for a final shot in 4 or 5 seconds. And that's assuming they don't make the shot or get an offensive rebound, which both basically end the game. If you foul, worst case you're down 4, but have the ball with 27-28 seconds, and can look for a 3 or and-1 to try to make it a 1 possession game next time you foul.

Of course, if you have a timeout, you can count on getting a rebound and calling a timeout, moving the ball up to halfcourt and drawing up a play. But you don't have timeouts left at the end of the game when you use them all with 2-4 minutes left to draw up fadeaway 3s for a guy that's 1-4 and hasn't shot since the 2nd quarter. For the love of god, save timeouts for the end of the game, TT.

Omer Asik-10%
We also aren't going to survive without Noah if Asik doesn't play better than that. 3 points, 6 rebounds won't cut it in 22 minutes. Come on, Asik, at least play well enough to make yourself a decent trade chip.

Kyle Korver- 10%
Hit open shots, Korver. That's pretty much your only job.

CJ Watson- 5%
I need to stop doing this, but I analyzed CJ's plus/minus in an email instead of on the blog this week. I can't find a website with CJ's +/- broken down by game, but I bet there's a high correlation between the Bulls winning "CJ time" (the time Derrick's out and CJ is in at the point) and winning the game. CJ was -11 tonight.

Keith Bogans- 5%
Asik's line was bad, but Bogans' was worse. 0 points, 1 rebound in 14 minutes. And again, I didn't see the defense making up for it. But there somehow aren't any minutes for JJ...

The "wait-for-Derrick-to-bail-us-out" mentality- 5%
Something you notice about great teams: they aren't afraid to have role players take key shots (Robert Horry, Derek Fisher, etc.) The Bulls still sometimes pull open shots down to pass back to Derrick (Boozer does this at about the 2 minute mark, then Derrick misses a tough running shot with his left. Boozer had an open 12-footer he'd been hitting all game.)

Absolved:

Derrick Rose- Would have been nice to have that 2nd free throw, but Derrick shouldn't have to bail out the Bulls every time they try to blow one at the end.
Luol Deng- Missed some key shots, but again, good offense and solid defense (although Ryan Gomes/Rasual Bulter is not the toughest matchup for Deng this year.)
Carlos Boozer- 25 on 12-20 from the field. Maybe we should have run some plays for him in the 4th quarter?
Baron Davis- Some of those plays at the end of the game were ridiculous. Donald Sterling is a despicable human being, but if I was Davis' owner I would heckle him, too.

Vent in the comments. And remember the Bulls-Wizards liveblog is Wednesday night.

Bulls-Clippers Open Thread: The Bulls Play Against VDN tonight. This is a Good Thing.

Despite the fact that the Bulls are down 10-2 early, I have complete confidence VDN will do just enough stupid things to allow the Bulls to win this game. Also, let's count how many Blake Griffin-Shawn Kemp comparisons we hear during the game (1 by Stacey King, Neil Funk claims he hadn't heard that comparison before. Does he live in a cabin in the woods in between games?)

Upcoming Programming Schedule and Some Random Thoughts

Having 2 weeks off of work means I'm actually going to have the time to write some longer, semi-researched posts. I was thinking of exploring one question I have for each of the franchises I follow (if one of you White Sox-people wants to add one for them, that's fine too.)

Bulls- What would have happened in the 94 and 95 finals if Jordan had been there?
The Bulls are the team I had the toughest time thinking of a question for. In my sports viewing consciousness (1989-present) The Bulls were great, then they sucked, now they're getting good again, and in each case it was always very obvious why. But more than any of the teams the Bulls actually played in the finals, the Hakeem Rockets at their peak would have been a great matchup.

Bears- Why did the core of the 85 Bears only win 1 Super Bowl?
If the Greatest-Show-On-Turf Rams ushered in the age of parity in the NFL, everything before that was the age of dynasties. Almost every team from the 80s and 90s that won a Super Bowl won more than one, or at least made it to another one. And even without Chicago bias, the 85 Bears frequently top the "Greatest teams of all time" list. So what the hell happened? Seriously, like I said above, my viewing window started in 89 (The 49ers destroying the Broncos in Super Bowl XXIV is my earliest football memory) so I honestly don't know. I'm most excited for this one.

Cubs- How much of 2003 should I actually blame on Bartman?
The best baseball book I've read since Moneyball is Are We Winning? by Will Leitch. In it there's a great chapter that made me rethink that play. Leitch revisits it and does a great job viewing the play from Bartman's perspective. I was excited for the 30 for 30 on Bartman, too, but ESPN dropped it from the series for some reason, so I doubt it'll ever actually see the light of day. Anyways, it's 7 years ago now, so maybe the wounds have healed enough that it won't be masochistic to intentionally spend time thinking about that game.

Blackhawks- What did I miss when I wasn't paying attention?
My father passed on a love of the Cubs, Bears, and Bulls to me, but I remember liking the Roenick/Chelios Hawks of the early 90s, too. I think, like a lot of sports fans, the bond with my father was a big part of shaping my sports interest, and since he didn't really care about the Hawks, it was hard for me to, especially during the years when the owner was actively sabotaging the franchise. Another big part of it is probably the fact that I'm pretty good at basketball, baseball, and football, but have never been a very good skater and haven't played a lot of hockey in my life. So I missed from about 93/94 up through the resurgence in 09 (the first playoff run roped me back in.) I want to know what I missed out on in the last 15 years of not being a hockey fan.

Other future posts:
I have one more of the 30 for 30s to watch that I'm interested in (Pony Excess, the SMU one that just aired.) I'll have seen I think 25 of the 30 at that point, and want to make a top 5 list of them.

Also: Liveblogs! I really like the format, and want to make it a more regular part of the viewing experience, not just for big games. Here are the ones I'm targeting:
Sunday, 12/19, Hawks vs. Kings (Pending Conall's participation. I need someone with a little more hockey depth of knowledge involved)
Monday, 12/20, Bears vs. Vikings
Wednesday, 12/22, Bulls vs. Wizards (I know it's random, but there are reasons why I can't do most of the other games over my break, and I don't want to go that long without one.)
Saturday, 1/1, Bulls vs. Cavs (your hangover should be over by then, and we can check in on college football during the commercials)

The Bulls game I'm most excited about between now and the end of my break is Bulls vs. Knicks on Christmas. As Sam will probably strangle me if I even suggest watching that game live (11AM central), it will probably have to be DVR'd. The last DVR liveblog was ok, but I highly doubt we can sync everyone's Christmases up in order to watch that game together, so we might have to comment on that one the old fashioned way.

Another Liveblog I'd love to do is have everyone watch a classic Bulls game and Liveblog it. Leary and I watched the 93 and 98 games on the Bulls Championship DVD this summer and had a blast, it would be fun to do that on a larger scale. I'll take suggestions for games/times to watch in the comments.

Whew, that was longer than I thought it would be. Time for some random thoughts while watching the Bulls dismantle the Raptors (who are, admittedly, pretty bad.)

If Joakim Noah needs surgery, I want it to happen NOW. We need a healthy Joakim for an extended playoff run, but we don't really need him to go above .500 in December and January (look at the schedule). There are a LOT of teams we can beat without Joakim on the schedule coming up, and he'll need time to shake the rust off before the playoffs start. Be smart and do it now, Bulls, or don't do it at all. But if there's a 1% chance it needs to be done, do it. Don't play around with the health of our 2nd franchise player.

It was speculated on in the last liveblog, but JJ must have done something we're not aware of to not be getting playing time. He's played 5 minutes in the last 8 games, with 6 DNP-CDs. The Bulls were in control of this one the entire game, it was the perfect opportunity for JJ to get some game action. I just hope it's not that TT doesn't like him.

I said it this summer when I wasn't blogging so much, so unfortunately there's no real record of it I can stand on, but Boozer really fits in well with the squad we have. The one thing we have needed recently is someone that can make teams without a good defensive big man pay (like the Raptors). Ever since that first debacle against the Magic, Boozer has been looking like the right guy for the job. Mike Wilbon wrote about it today, but I wonder how I'd feel about the Bulls had we signed Lebron instead this summer? (that was my 2nd choice for a Bulls question)

The Blackhawks defense sucks. Seabrook was embarrassing Monday night, and Keith wasn't much better. What the hell is going on back there?

Wrong Cleats

Apparently the Bears 'D' was not wearing appropriate cleats during the 1st half. Taking it either one of two ways.

1. If they had worn the right cleats maybe they wouldn't have been spanked so bad.

2. M*$^@#(%uckers!!!

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/news/story?id=5923609&campaign=rss&source=CHICAGOHeadlines

Bulls-Pacers/Hawks-Avalanche Liveblog. Actually Live This Time!

Why liveblog two random regular season games against somewhat average teams? Because my lesson plans are set for tomorrow, and I have nothing better to do. And Lord knows you have nothing better to do, either. So come join the commenting fun, especially if you're sitting by a computer and would be watching anyway.

If you put in a comment and it doesn't show right away, be patient. The first time you comment I need to approve the comment, but I can set it after that to make it so you can comment all you want.

See you at 7:00!

Bears vs Pats Open Live Open Thread

Look at that field. WHITE OUT. Also my dad wants to know why it's called the 2 minute warning rather than the 2 minutes warning.

More Broadcaster Stupidity

Not sure who's calling this Lions-Packers game on Fox, but after Rodgers' interception (really Jennings' interception, that ball hit him in the hands):

Play-by-Play: "That's Rodgers' first interception in 5 games."
Color: "What's more, the Lions had gone 5 games without an interception, so something had to give."

The Packers not throwing an interception and the Lions not intercepting a pass are not mutually exclusive, so...no. Something did not have to give.

Today in Things You Don't Want on Your Resume

Eric Studesville, new Broncos head coach:

"Bears offensive quality control (1997-2000)"

Ouch.

Bulls-Timberwolves Open Thread

I won't be able to watch much of this one due to a holiday party, but it seems like a trap game to me. Comment away.

Cover It "live" Bulls-Lakers

This is sort of a test to see if we can get away with this, basically. But here are our thought in "real-time" (I'm using all these quotations because we're actually starting it late.)

Jalen Rose Devalues Lorrie's Michigan Degree

Jalen: "This is the year of the haves and the have-nots. There are 16 teams over .500, and 14 teams under .500"

This might be the single least-interesting stat ESPN has ever given me.

"He just wouldn't look right in another uniform,"

-A.J Pierzynski on Paul Konerko.

Thank you to all parties involved on making this happen. It is a great opportunity for both sides to win as well as cement PK as one of the best known players of the Sox. He'll be 38 (that old, really) when his contract is up, but he's due to get 1 million a year 7 years after that. Sounds like he may retire in a Sox uniform? He made it easier on the Sox so they could afford him. Wanting to come back didn't hurt either. All characteristics of a player who want to win for this city.

I'm not too crazy about the money it took to get AJ, Dunn and PK on board, but each one one of them moved money around to make it so PK could come back. "The purse strings are a little tight" according to Williams who is going, "all in" and they could still use a right handed reliever with Putz signing with Arizona. Just another exciting off-season for the Sox.

Hopes are always at their highest when everyone's 0-0.

Cubs Corner the Market on Hefty Carloses, Order Marmol to gain 50 pounds

I know Carlos Pena isn't really that big, but whenever I see him in my mind I see a Mike Lavalliere-type waddling to first base.

So we're going to pay $10 million for a first baseman that hit below the Mendoza line last year, huh? It's a little sad that I'm not even that mad about it. Mainly because what better option do we have? I wish we had a decent first baseman in the minors that could come up with Starlin Castro and Tyler Colvin. One thing us Cubs fans haven't been is patient, but I'd be fine with letting a rookie take his lumps this year if it meant we saw what we had down the line. But that player doesn't exist.

So, Carlos Pena. Last year's slash numbers: .196/.325/.407. 28 home runs, though. Also, he had plantar fasciitis all year, so hopefully we can see a little upswing in those numbers. They say he's a decent fielder, but those fielding numbers are definitely a drop-off from Derrek Lee. The good news is he walks a lot, something the Cubs as a whole very much need to work on, and also it's a 1 year deal, so if he completely flames out, it doesn't hurt us for years to come.

Now let's find some starting pitching, shall we?

Bulls vs. Thunder 12/6

Very happy the Bulls won, but can't help feeling they could have done better against a team that shot below 40% along with Durant sitting the majority of the 3rd quarter. It did not feel like the Bulls played the full 6o minutes, especially at the end of the game. I understand trying to hold them off, but sometimes that leads to letting the other team back in the game, which I felt almost happened last night. Also, if I were at the game, I would be upset that the Bulls were one point away from getting me a free Big Mac.

All that aside, holding OKC to 90 points and below 35% shooting is pretty good. There were quite a few great defensive series forcing OKC to take a lot of bad shots. OKC was putting a lot of pressure on Rose, but that was fine since Boozer was coming up big for the Bulls. If only Noah wasn't "put in a box" the Bulls could have had their two big men with double-doubles. Still, it doesn't look like the Bulls are going to start getting calls going their way anytime soon and even if they started going to the line more, they have to make free throws. Under 60% last night from the line...terrible.

A good win to avenge the game 1 loss. Deng is still playing great and Rose + Boozer in the paint = money. Please comment as your analysis will probably be more in depth than my cliché ridden post.

Go Bulls

BULLS BULLS UNBELIEVA-BULL, INCREDI-BULL, INBOOZE-BULL

YES YES YES. YES YES YES.

How great is it to see Rose have a guy he can dish it off to? How great is it to see Luol having brilliant consistency on the arc and getting offensive rebounds and putting them in? How great is it to see Taj coming off the bench and ruining the opposition? How great is it to see Boozer draining shots in a Bulls uniform??
The score was close in the first half, but I never thought the Thunder had a chance the way the Bulls were playing. And how great was that to see? The Thunder are very good, but the Bulls are better. This was a real team win. The pressure just is not entirely all on Derrick anymore, and he loves it. It got to the point where it seemed like he was tossing it to Boozer just to watch him put it in the basket. Boozer. What can we say about Boozer? Relentless. Relia-BULL. A true post player. So good to see him playing on our team. 29 pts, 12 boards, drawing fouls. What a jump shot. Thank you, Carlos.

This team is deep. Everyone contributed. Korver was on fire in the first half. Luol was consistent throughout the whole game--which on that note, I also don't think consistency should be a controversy attached to Luol anymore. He's been incredible every game this season. Last night Luol was awesome. Draining 3's, offensive boards, and playing great D. Complete game for Lu. And Rose. Our beloved PG. Thank you for shining so brightly every night. Even with 11 pts, he had 9 assists, and is just....sighhhh. Our point guard. Out point guard who exploits the opposition's defensive mistakes, our point guard who murders you in the paint, our point guard who makes everyone better around him.

Discrepancies?
1. Derrick not getting calls. Old news. But for real. When is that going to change? Will and I spoke yesterday and he brought up something that Stacey King brought up last night: that Rose is so strong that when he drives the basket his stride is never broken by the players fouling him. So it's hard for the refs to see the contact because Rose's body doesn't show it. I guess. You're right, Will. It is time for Gar and Paxson to send in a tape of all the fouls on Rose that were never called so the league can look this over.
2. CJ. Come on, man. You don't need to be Rose. Just be someone that we can rely on to run our offense. He came in twice last night. Both times he turned the ball over right away and got benched. Neat. I'm glad TT isn't settling for mediocrity, though, and benching him if he doesn't see production out of him. That's awesome. But we do need a back-up PG we can rely on. Come on, CJ.

And for the record, on the topic of discrepancies, Asher and I have one about Asik(it's time to make this public, Asher). I think he's a great new player for the Bulls' bench, and is really growing quickly. He goes hard to the basket, plays great defense, blocks shots, gets key rebounds, and is very aggressive in the paint. He's even fixed his main problem which was getting into foul trouble. In every game I see evidence of Asik being awesome, and getting better and better. I think it's only uphill from here and he's really going to bud into something special for us. Asher thinks otherwise. Granted it was a few weeks ago when this was all said, and maybe he hadn't had a chance to really get a good look at Asik's game, but Asher said that he is "as coordinated as a baby giraffe with down syndrome." To follow that, he has promised that if Asik ever "resembles anything close to a special player" he will "take me to Chinatown and buy me a happy-ending." Asher, I don't how much a happy-ending is in Chinatown, but I think you could start by getting me a reservation.

Announcers: Rod Marinelli is Awesome. Also, Bears Getting Torched by the Lions

"All the Bears defenders will talk about Rod Marinelli and say he's all about attitude, but he also breaks down plays and makes the players better, and he's also a specialist with the defensive line."

"Well, expertise is certainly how you would classify him. Was he a great head coach? I don't know, how many great head coaches have been in Detroit with all the losing? I know this, he's arguably the best defensive line coach in all of football."

The Bears have 1 sack (for 1 yard) and 0 turnovers on Drew Stanton today.

My Patience With TT is Waning...

Maybe I set my expectations way too high. I think after the VDN debacle, I was expecting the 2nd coming of Phil Jackson. TT is 18 games into his NBA career, and has a winning record. There's really no reason for me not to expect him to improve as well.

That being said, some of the habits I've seen from him so far fall in line with the things that irritated me most about VDN.

1. Players with no clear roles.

What's Keith Bogans' job on this team? I was under the impression he was our defensive 2-guard. But this is not the first time this season Bogans has played the first 7 minutes of the 1st and 3rd quarters, and no other time during the game. When the Bulls need stops at the end of the game, it's been Ronnie Brewer on the court. Which is fine, Brewer's been pretty good defensively. But then why isn't he starting? What good do we get out of having Bogans on the court to start each half?

From talking to other Bulls fans, I think I'm much higher on James Johnson than most people. I'm just really afraid that if we keep treating him like he's Tyrus Thomas, he's going to end up like Tyrus Thomas. JJ makes mistakes, and will take a dumb shot every now and then. However there hasn't been a game he's played all year where he didn't at least infuse some energy on the court and pick the pace up, and the Bulls are a better team in an up-tempo game. I just don't think JJ should be picking up DNP-CDs like he did tonight in games like this.

2. Using timeouts wisely.

I was at the game again tonight, so I didn't have the graphic with the amount of timeouts left in front of me. However, I did notice that with 24 seconds left, down 5, we were out of timeouts. Henry Abbot of TrueHoop wrote an excellent piece about the importance of late timeouts here, and this is a perfect example of that situation. We were helped immensely by Courtney Lee and Brad Miller splitting their free throws, and had either of them hit both, a timeout or two left could have extended the game. Also, while Derrick did manage to get open for his game-tying three, I'm sure TT wished he could have drawn up a play with 10 seconds left.

3. Waiting too long to make adjustments.

Carlos Boozer was absolutely getting killed on the screen-and-roll with Lee and Luis Scola, not showing at all, which directly led to some easy finishes for Lee or an open three as everyone else had to rotate. In the OT, he started with Noah and Taj up front (until Noah fouled out) and we didn't have that problem any more. I'm not sure why someone didn't suggest Taj taking Boozer's place earlier, but we probably wouldn't have needed OT if that was the case. (Side note: The crunch time lineup is going to have to be Taj and Noah up front until Boozer picks up his defense. Until then we'll have to treat him like 2005 Eddy Curry, providing offense in the first 3 quarters and letting Chandler come in for D in the 4th).

I hope TT's learning curve is quicker than VDN's was. I have faith that it will be. But I think the Bulls championship window is coming up sooner than we think, and we're going to need TT to not be getting out-coached anymore.

Losing a Grandpa: RIP Ron Santo

The crappy thing about trying to be a part-time blogger is when something happens and you don't have time to write about it, since you have an actual job to do that they pay you for. As a result I've gone back and forth about what I want to write about Santo dozens of times today. I could talk about the complete injustice of Ron not being in the Hall of Fame, but that's like talking to a wall at this point. The sabermetically inclined have made their case, the old-timey "3,000 or 500" people have made theirs, and neither side is budging. I am not old enough to have memories of Ron actually playing, although I did enjoy watching him in "This Old Cub" (which I highly recommend everyone watches this weekend.)

Then I thought about doing a top 5 Ron Santo moments. So I was wracking my terrible memory to try to come up with which important Cubs games I listened to on the radio. Although I much prefer watching, I came up with a few: The 98 wild card tiebreaker vs. the Giants (on the bus on the way back from a dual meet at Waukegan.) Much of the 4 wins in a 5 game series with the Cardinals in August of 03 (including Sammy Sosa and Moises Alou's walkoff back-to-back jacks).
But much of Ron's memorable moments were the same. The most memorable one, of course, is the Brant Brown call in 98. (Poor Brant Brown, I'm sure, has been googled more times today than ever in his life.) I was watching this game on TV, so I don't remember exactly when I heard this call, but it's a great snapshot of Santo's broadcasting style.

For non-Cubs fans, the Cubs were in the middle of a close pennant race. They were at 88-70 with 4 to play, the Giants were at 86-72, and the Mets were at 88-70. (The poor Mets would then lose out and not even make the tiebreaker. Neifi Perez had a clutch hit to beat them on the last day of the season.) A win puts a stranglehold on the season. The Cubs were up 7-5 going into the bottom of the 9th. Rod Beck, who was awesome that year, was on the mound. Brant Brown came in to replace Glenallen Hill in left field for defensive purposes. Beck gets a groundout, then allows a single and a double, followed by an intentional walk to Jeremy Burnitz (haha, what a silly sentence to write) to load the bases. Beck had spent the entire year setting up jams for himself, then pitching out of them, so I still felt reasonably confident. He got Grissom to pop out to 3rd base, then Geoff Jenkins came up and hit a routine pop fly to left field.

Listen to the call again. It's Ron in a nutshell, and what we love about him. It's the exact way I would have reacted if I was in Ron's seat, and it's pretty much what I (and I'm sure a majority of Cubs fans) were saying when it happened. And pretty much all the great calls I can remember from Ron were variations of this call. From the lesser "Aw geez" for slightly bad things, to "Jesus Christ!" when the wheels were really falling off, to the whoops and cheers for good plays that preceded Pat Hughes telling you what actually happened. I trained my ear on big pitches to listen to Ron's reaction more than Pat's call. "PleaseletRoncheerPleaseletRoncheerPleaseletRoncheer..." is a mantra I can recall saying to myself on more car rides or listen-to-a-late-Cubs-game-as-I'm-falling-asleeps than I can remember.

I just heard a Sportscenter Anchor say "younger Cub fans are more familiar with him as the unabashedly biased broadcaster who openly rooted for the Cubs from the booth." He said it with a negative connotation, and I hear this from the established media all the time. "Homer" like it's a bad thing. "No cheering from the press box" bullshit.

Fuck That.

I want my broadcaster cheering from the press box. I want him to be going through what I'm going through, to be just as invested as I am. I want him to care about the team he's caring more than stupid established traditions and ideas of unbiased journalism. Ron wasn't calling games for both audiences, he was calling them for Cubs fans.

Ron is probably going to be replaced by Dave Otto or somebody boring like that, and I'm sure that whoever it is will go the expected route of being buttoned-down and respectable. And what I'm going to miss most about Ron, more than his ability to say something kooky and not even realize it, more than the way he would entertain me with a rambling, Abe Simpson like story during a 10-1 blowout, will be the fact that I won't have someone in the booth genuinely reflecting what I'm feeling, and not being afraid to show it. Rest in peace, Ron. Cubs games on the radio truly aren't going to be the same any more, and to me, that's one of the saddest things I can think of.

The Blame Game: Bulls-Magic

What a disappointment. First Sam and I get there an hour early, but are still too late for the Joakim Noah bobblehead giveaway, then the Bulls come out and gave easily their worst effort of the year so far. Let's see where the blame lies, shall we?

Joakim Noah- 50%

Joakim's bobblehead ended up with as many rebounds as he did. This is the first time Joakim's ever ended up without a board when he's played more than 7 minutes (he played 26). The Magic played a very similar style of offense as they did in the 2009 playoffs, where they basically dumped it in to Dwight Howard, and if the double team came, they kicked it out to the shooters. It worked against Cleveland, who kept falling for the trap and leaving Rashard Lewis and Hedo Turkoglu open. It didn't against the Lakers, who left Pau Gasol alone on Howard and made him try to beat them. He couldn't. Tonight, unfortunately, Joakim was no Gasol. Even though Howard didn't put up a very impressive line (5-12 for 13 points and 12 boards), it was obvious the Bulls were afraid of Howard being left alone with Noah, which led to the Magic being 10-21 from beyond the arc (a few of those were contested Jameer Nelson 3s, but most were the result of late rotation on the collapse.) I expect more from Noah at this point. If you're going to be the heart and soul of the team, when you don't bring it, almost nobody is bringing it.

Anyone assigned to guard Vince Carter- 25%
Mainly Keith Bogans and Kyle Korver, a little Ronnie Brewer, although I think Brewer was mainly matched up with Pietrus or Richardson. Vince Carter looked like the 2000 version tonight, which he really shouldn't against a good defensive team. Some of those baskets I blame on Noah (the 2nd and 3rd buckets of the game for the Magic were both easy put backs on boards in front of Noah, I believe), but Carter was also getting to the rim whenever he wanted. The 2010 version of Vinsanity shouldn't be able to do that, even against Kyle Korver.

TT- 10%
Speaking of which, why was Korver spending so much time guarding Vince? He didn't have his shot tonight (2-5 from the field, -25 on the night) yet he played the second most minutes behind Derrick. Couldn't JJ have gotten some minutes in the first half? He came in and brought some great energy with a couple of nice blocks and hustle plays at the end of the 3rd quarter, once the game was already decided. (Being JJ, he then undermined himself with a dumb 3, dumb foul, and a missed dunk from too far away when he could have just layed it up, but he still at least looked like he came to play tonight.)

Whoever decided Carlos Boozer was ready to play- 10%
God, I hope it's just that Boozer isn't 100% yet, and that's not what we're paying 14.4 mil a year for. Too slow on the defensive rotations, and he didn't have any type of post moves, not on Howard, Lewis or even Brandon Bass (who, by the way, was a beast tonight). All Boozer's points came on jump shots, which while nice, doesn't really give him a reason to get minutes over Taj Gibson, especially since Taj is a much better defender. If Carlos is 100%...we might have signed the wrong Jazz power forward.

Derrick Rose- 5%
Two reasons for Derrick being here
1. Jameer Nelson abused him at the defensive end. I know Derrick's defense isn't his strong suit, but if we do happen to run into the Magic in the playoffs, they could exploit that matchup all day.
2. The tried-and-true method to beat the Magic is get Dwight Howard in foul trouble. But I can think of very few times Derrick went to the rim and tried to draw a foul on Howard. That should have been our offense for most of the first half, but I don't think Dwight even picked up a foul until the very end of the half.

Absolved-
Taj Gibson- The Bulls were much better defensively when Taj was on the court. He was a -11, but when you by 29, everyone's +/- is ugly. I wish there was a +/- for rebounding, because I bet Taj was the only Bull anywhere near the positives there.
Luol Deng- Lu was 2-8 from the field, and late on a few rotations to get back to Lewis, but I give him credit for at least shedding the soft label for one night and being the only player to attack the basket.
JJ- Like I said above, the complexion of the game changed a lot for the better when JJ came in, then he showed why he didn't play until garbage time with some bonehead plays. I have high hopes for JJ, though, as soon as he gets the mental mistakes out of his system, we could have even more depth on the wing, plus another guy that can guard a Lewis-type big wing.

Let's put this one behind us and make a statement against the other behemoth in the East right now, Boston on Friday night.

Bears-Eagles Open Thread

I like what I'm seeing so far. Martz is calling plays that take advantage of Philly's blitzes, and the front four are getting pressure on Vick. Keep this up and we could have a nice 1 game lead on our hands at the end of the day.

Umm....Tom?

What the hell is a guy we signed 10 hours ago doing in the game with 24 seconds left? I would have killed VDN for that, and I've been giving TT a little slack since I like a lot of what he's brought to the table (this whole "running plays" thing intrigues me, and I wish to learn more.) I haven't been entirely impressed by his rotations, however, and tonight he paid for it. I don't care if John Lucas is 100% for his career (he's not, he's 79%, albeit in a very small sample size of 15-19), I would much rather see players that are in the flow of the game, and more importantly, players that have been in the NBA for the last 3 years in a position to take clutch free throws. Ronnie Brewer is a 70% career FT shooter, Bogans is 72%. Either one I would feel much more comfortable with taking those throws. Lucas wasn't even close on either of those shots, it was clear he was nervous.

The sad part is that this completely overshadows what this post was supposed to be about, which is the emergence of CJ Watson. CJ played, basically, like a poor man's Derrick Rose, someone that the other team needs to respect to go to the hole at any time, but can also hit a pull up mid-range jump shot if you give him too much space. Obviously it helps playing 44 minutes instead of the usual 12-15, but if he can find a rhythm like that, then the Bulls just get deeper and deeper.

Anyways, that one hurts, but let's remember it was without Rose, Boozer, and mostly without Taj, and we were 2 free throws away from winning. This is a good thing, despite the outcome.

Credit Where Credit is Due- Bulls/Suns

I introduced "The Blame Game" in the beginning of this blog's life, where we assign percentage values to everyone responsible party in a game. Credit Where Credit is Due is the flipside to that, where we assign percentage values to the heroes in important games (or in this case, "character-building, season defining wins"). The envelope please:

Derrick Rose- 25%
I love that Derrick took 33 shots, and I don't even mind that some of them were forced. I know I would be killing Ben Gordon if he had the same stat line at the end of the night (14-33 from the field, 1-5 from downtown) but the difference is many of the shots Derrick missed were good shots, where he got some separation or at least was in position to draw a foul. Ben would have drawn the same line by taking bad fall away threes over two defenders. It also doesn't feel like everyone else is taken out of the game when Derrick goes into takeover mode, but that might be a testament to the next name on the list.

Tom Thibodeau- 25%
I texted a few buddies when TT was drawing up the last play in the 2nd OT with "Derrick to the rack. Book it." Everyone in the building thought that play was a high pick and roll with Rose and Noah, which is why it worked so well. That was the kind of play VDN never had the creativity to come up with nor the guts to call. I've heard in the past that the only time an NBA head coach really has a direct effect on the game is coming out of a timeout. With VDN, 9 times out of 10 the play was " dribbles around for a little bit and jacks up a shot." Now we have a coach who calls real plays! It's very refreshing.

Joakim Noah- 20%
Maybe it's unfair, but from Joakim I've come to expect at least two great hustle plays in a close game, plus for him to get every rebound in sight. Noah gets extra credit for treating Nash like his personal ATM every time he switched on to him, and for both great passes in OT (the back-cut to Rose and the feed for Korver cutting to the basket). I love that Noah can do all these unique things most big men can't, I love that I'm never more confident in our defense and rebounding than when Noah is in the game, and I love that I'm going to Joakim Noah bobblehead night next Wednesday.

Ronnie Brewer- 10%
If you just look at the stats, you'll wonder why Brewer is getting so much credit. His final line is 1-2 for 3 points, 5 rebounds, and a -17 on the night. But the +/- is so low because he was on the court for a lot of the first quarter, but that mess wasn't really his fault, and he played amazing defense on Grant Hill and Jason Richardson in the overtimes, forcing them to take bad, contested shots. And I thought Bogans was supposed to be the defensive stopper.

James Johnson- 5%
I got a text from my buddy Smitty during the game suggesting JJ is Tyrus Thomas 2.0. I want to give him until the end a season where he has actual coaching and doesn't have him minutes jerked around (although TT has already done a little of that, and probably will see even more of it when Boozer is healthy.) But I think JJ's immaturity can be fixed. If not, the nice thing is we're deep enough for it not to be too big of a deal. Until then we'll see a lot of sequences like the end of regulation where he hits a huge 3 to cut the lead to 1, then bails Nash out with a dumb foul on the other end.

Luol Deng- 5%
I know, I know, he dropped 27, he deserves more credit, I'm a Deng hater, whatever. At the end of close game you can't miss open layups and let Hedo freaking' Turkoglu get rebounds over you.

Grant Hill- 5%
I don't fault Hill for getting beat on the back-cut by Rose. But a lot of open looks were created throughout the game by taking Hill to his left or running around screens. Hill can't keep up anymore, and the Suns are going to have a hard time being competitive this year if they need to rely on Hill as their wing defensive specialist.

Kyle Korver- 3%
I'll give Korver a little credit for hitting some shots to help bring us back in the 4th, but my god did he suck in the overtimes, and was a huge defensive liability. Any open look the Suns got was when Korver wasn't quick enough to help and recover. I know you need him on the court to spread the floor for Rose on offense, but then he needs to make his open looks.

And that shot he took on the play Derrick fouled out on was moronic. Even had it went in, it's better to run 24 seconds off the clock than take that shot. Be aware of the game situation, Korver.

Jason Richardson- 2%
Thanks for missing your second free throw and keeping the window open!

There you go, feel free to dispute my grading in the comments.

Jeff Van Gundy Has a Very Short Memory

During tonight's Heat-Magic game, commenting on comments by Phil Jackson that Heat players don't respect Erik Spoelstra, JVG said Jackson's comments were inappropriate and completely out of character.

I love the Zen-Master, but playing mind games with competitive team's coaches is completely in character for Phil. It happened repeatedly in the 90's, and a few times the target was Van Gundy. I'm pretty sure JVG is trying to sort of defend Jackson in a "oh, he never normally does things like this" way, but I find it totally believeable that Phil would try to get the Heat's Big Two-and-a-Half thinking "maybe Spoelstra isn't the right coach for us."

God I hope the Bulls play the Heat in the playoffs this year.

Bleeding stopped

Huge overtime win for the Hawks. The completely dominated the extra period, even with a minute plus of power play to kill. I figured when they lost the zone with about a minute left that we'd be heading to a shootout. Great finish in a must-win for the Hawks.

Let's-Hope-Cutler-Doesn't-Get-Killed Open Thread

A quick rant before I talk football...

If there's one thing I hate about the holiday season its those stupid Lottery commercials where they try to convince you lottery tickets make good Christmas presents for people you don't really care about. "Here, I most likely got you a piece of cardboard!"
It would be even worse if they did win, because then you'd feel stupid for giving away free money to someone marginally in your life. The commercials themselves are usually obnoxious and smarmy, too.

Jay Cutler might get broken in half today. I know the Vikings front four hasn't been having as great of a year as usual, but they still make me very nervous. I don't have faith we can run on them, either, so I think if the Bears are going to have a chance today, there need to be a lot quick slants and outs. Keep it to 3-step drops and don't try to be greedy. Also, it would be nice to see some pressure from our side, too.

Three-Sport Open Thread

The Bulls welcome home Captain Kirk, the Hawks travel to Nashville to play hockey for some reason, and Manny Pacquiao beats the living snot out of Antonio Margarito. I'll be sitting here commenting on all three, hopefully someone will join me later. If not I'll just talk to myself all night. That's cool too.

First FJM-style post

I loved Firejoemorgan.com. Sometimes when I'm bored, I go back and read old posts out of the archives. I also follow one of the founders on Twitter, who linked to this article on Derek Jeter. Since the Bulls and Hawks both don't play tonight (boo) I have nothing better to do than rip apart this stupidity. I hope I do Dak, Ken Tremendous, and Junior proud.

Derek Jeter: The Ridiculous, Stupid, Clueless Speculation Continues

Appropriate that all those adjectives are in the title of this article.

Derek Jeter’s 10-year, $189 million contract with the New York Yankees came to an end with the final out of the 2010 World Series. With that, thousands of clueless neanderthals began speculating on his possible future.

I don't know, they seem to be more concerned with insurance company advertisements, but I don't know that many neanderthals.

Free agency now beckons the 36-year-old, whose future suddenly appears to be murky after coming off the worst offensive year of his illustrious career.

I suppose I should clarify the aforementioned statement. His future is only murky to those that are totally clueless in the way of the New York Yankees and Derek Jeter.

Consider this column an open letter to the buffoons, be they professional writers or Red Sox fans, that actually wasted their time and mine by even speculating on Jeter’s future as anything but a Yankee or on his ability to still play the game after an off-year.

How'd they waste your time? No one's making you speculate on anything. Also, that buffoon comment hurts. I hate being called a buffoon almost as much as I hate being called a nincompoop.

Let the education begin…

At the ripe old age of 36 and coming off the worst offensive year of his illustrious career, Jeter is apparently done, according to the self-proclaimed Einsteins of the Web.

This, of course, is what Jeter’s detractors (mainly comprised of Red Sox fans, some Mets fans and the entire staff of ESPN—you know, "The Red Sox Network") want us to believe.

As an unbiased Cubs fan, I feel like ESPN shoves at least as much Yankees coverage down my throat as Red Sox, if not more so.

It’s interesting that when posing such a claim they forget to include the following about Jeter’s 2010 season:

A) Every player in every sport experiences a down year. Jeter apparently just experienced his.

So every time us buffoons talk about Jeter we're supposed to say "he had a down year, just like every other player in sports." Good to know.

B) Unlike players like David Ortiz, Manny Ramirez, Sammy Sosa and others, Jeter’s offensive decline did not come in the wake of his being named as a steroid abuser. Yes, I omitted A-Rod because unlike the others, so far, his power outage seems to be due to injury.

Yep, A-Rod is just a coincidence. The rest are dirty cheaters.

C) While it is true that some of Jeter’s offensive numbers were not “Jeter-esque,” such as the .270 BA and leading the league in outs made, placing fifth in the league in grounding into double plays, they conveniently forget what he actually did do from a leadoff spot minus the bat of A-Rod and the slow bat of Mark Teixeira behind him for much of the season…

His 663 at-bats were the most he has had since 2002 and second-most in the league in 201o.

That'll happen when you lead off.

He led the league in plate appearances.

You say Jeter's fallen off! He led the league in plate appearances! Let's see Juan Pierre do that! Wait, Juan Pierre did that?

His 30 doubles were three more than the previous season, when he finished third in MVP voting, and were his most since 2007.

I'm sure he was 3rd in MVP voting entirely based on those 30 doubles, too. (I wanted to find where those monster 27 doubles put Jeter on the leaderboard, but the only list I could find on Yahoo Sports only lists the top 50, which ended at 35. Oh well.)

He drove in 67 runs from the leadoff spot, one more RBI than last season, when (ahem) he finished third in MVP voting.

Yeah, that didn't put him the top 50, either. Also, the Yankees lineup is stacked and in the American League, so it's really not that much of a handicap RBI wise for him to hit leadoff.

He was 10th in the league in times on base.

Hey that's almost a relevant stat! It's just like OBP...except it included times you reached due to error, or by fielder's choice. And, of course, it's not a percentage, so Jeter is helped out greatly by that plate appearance stat you cited earlier.

He led the league in fielding percentage at short.

Oh, I'll get to his defense later.

Any other team, in contention or not, with a shortstop leading the league in fielding, scoring over 100 runs and driving in nearly 70 from the leadoff spot would be considered successful.

However, because the numbers were posted by Jeter, the world—and seemingly his career—is coming to an end.

Excuse me if I don’t rush to get my affairs in order.

What the hell are you talking about?

Now being realistic and objective,

because those are two things you've been the epitome of thus far

something Jeter detractors never experience, Jeter could very well be on a decline. His age suggests his best years are behind him. He has played a lot of games over his career, and after 15 years the opposition is going to find out how to pitch Jeter and defend against his hitting spray.

1. "hitting spray" sounds gross.

2. Admittedly I didn't watch a whole lot of Yankee games this year, so I missed the part where opposing defenses spread the 8 position players (7 if someone was on base) in the shallow outfield. Kudos to Billy Beane for coming up with that.

However, the decline of most athletes who have enjoyed a relatively injury-free career like Jeter is a natural and gradual one that takes a period of years. Jeter does not show that pattern just yet. If Jeter experiences a similar season in 2011, then the detractors might have something. Until then, it’s merely wishful thinking on the part of the currently clueless, jealous and jaded.

The only problem is Jeter doesn't need a new contract after 2011, he needs a new contract now. Otherwise I'm sure we wouldn't be debating this.

Jeter needs to move to the outfield. His defense is too poor and he is too old to continue to play that position.

I really love this argument. Nothing makes a Jeter detractor sound more ignorant than this old chestnut.

Speaking of "old chestnuts": your writing.

Let’s just be quick about this one, shall we?

Jeter led the league at short in fielding percentage.

Which is very easy to do when you're too damn slow to ever get to a ball not hit directly at you. Let's try to find a better a stat, shall we?
Fielding Runs Above Average -10
Defensive Runs Saved Above Average -13
Range Factor per 9 inn. 3.78

For reference Alexei Ramirez was +9, +16, and 4.89. Want someone a little more average? Cesar Izturis was +6, +3, and 4.24 for the Orioles.

Jeter’s FA combined with his offensive contributions, even in a "off-year,” made him more valuable than most at his position.

Jeter's WARP: 3.1
Ramirez: 6.2
Troy Tulowitzki: 6.7
Hanley Ramirez: 4.4
Jason Bartlett: 3.2

I know he said "most", but still.

Jeter’s strong and accurate arm shows no sign of the advanced “age” that he is constantly tagged with.

Age ain't nuthin but a number, baby!

Jeter is a student of the game and leader on the field. He knows how and where to position himself per batter and communicates this knowledge to those in the field with him. It’s called intangibles—this does not show up in the box score or on a stat line, but it is infinitely more valuable.

Infinitely more valuable! See, Pujols, instead of hitting all those stupid home runs all over the place, you should have just been positioning the other fielders better. Than the Cardinals might have made the playoffs. After all, that's infinitely more valuable.

Jeter has a head for the game—when is the last time you saw Jeter make a “bonehead” play?

When he settled down with Minka Kelly instead of staying a swinging bachelor. Amirite, fellas? (*Wife slams door, walks out*)

—he is a thinking man’s player that typically makes the "right" out.

To be fair, the range of Alex Rodriguez and Robinson Cano on either side, along with the glove of Teixeira, make things easier on Jeter, but that is what an infield is supposed to do.

The suggestion that Jeter needs to move to the outfield is a laughable one that clueless people who know nothing about baseball continue to make.

Really? I haven't heard people saying that. Probably because he'd be just as much of a liability.

If Jeter is to be moved, and that is questionable, it would make more sense to move Alex Rodriguez to DH, which would possibly help reduce what appear to be chronic leg and hip issues and move Jeter to third, where his strong arm would feel at home and his range issue won’t be so much of a factor.

The problem with moving Jeter anywhere is the Yankees do not have his replacement lined up (if you believe the Nunez stuff, I am laughing at you right now),

"Ha Ha, I say, you old chestnut of a buffoon. Let me go get my affairs in order."

so get used to seeing him at short for the next year or two.

Posada, Chamberlain, Burnett, one more starter and the pen are all more pressing problems than anything real or perceived about Jeter.

First sentence I've agreed with so far.

Still concerned with Jeter at short?

Ask yourself one question: How many games, regular season or playoff, has Jeter’s glove, arm or range cost the Yankees during his career?

Probably a few, considering his WARP would probably higher if it wasn't for defense.

What was that?

I said probably a few, turn your hearing aid up, old guy.

That’s what I thought. You can collectively shut up now.

Jeter is not worth $20 million per year and is not worth what he expects or will ask for.

I love this one. I really do. I’m laughing at you.

LOLzers!

1) It’s not your money, so why worry? Save me the “the more money he makes the higher the ticket prices…” etc. Is Jeter’s salary responsible for the rising cost of gas, milk, etc.? It’s called inflation. Look it up.

2) Baseball is a game that we played in Little League. It’s a game that our kids play at the park. Jeter is a professional Major League Baseball player and Major League Baseball is not a game, it’s a business. The Yankees are the most valued franchise by far in MLB. In the first year of their new stadium, the Yankees netted $441 million. That’s after all the bills were paid, including the luxury tax, player and staff salaries, etc. Pretty successful enterprise, I must say—and Derek Jeter plays a large role in that profit.

Merchandise with Jeter’s name on it sells more than any other Yankee and quite possibly more than most players in the game. His continued presence in the lineup sells tickets. His pursuit of career and MLB milestones opens all kinds of opportunities for revenue. Jeter is a money-making machine, and for the Yankees the near-$20 million annual investment has been well worth it.

Sure, what the hell, give him $40 million. Just don't expect him to give you more than average numbers for a shortstop back.

3) Jeter is a private person and has never come out and revealed what he wants, expects or is willing to play for. What he has done is accepted what was offered. No one, not professional writers or armchair hacks, knows what Jeter wants or is willing to play for. As for what he deserves, until you are running the Yankees and paying their bills, opinions on his worth and value mean nothing more than what can be scraped off the bottom of his cleats.

In terms of advertising, merchandising, stature, reputation and image to the league, franchise and the game, Jeter, more so than many in baseball, is worth every penny he has earned.

No one's saying he's not, but the question is more is he worth continuing to pay him like the best shortstop in the league when he's 37-40?

The Yankees need to think younger, and in order to land Cliff Lee the Yankees might need to dump Jeter and Mo.

I actually read that in a column right here on Bleacher Report. Are you done laughing yet? Yes, it took me a while to stop too.

Yeah, that's pretty dumb, unless Cliff Lee hates old people or something. Pretty sure the Yankees can afford to overpay all 3 of them.

I won’t spend too much time on this because it’s so...Red Sox "stupid-esque."

Buffoonery, I say!

Jeter is a career Yankee. He is this generation's Joe DiMaggio. He is 73 hits shy of 3,000 for his career, a feat few players have reached and one that no other Yankee in history has reached. It’s another revenue opportunity for the Yankees, and Jeter is responsible for it.

Anyone actually speculating that Jeter will reach that milestone in another uniform is in need of immediate therapy and possible medication.

Debate 101: It strengths your argument when you insult everyone who disagrees with you.

While no one knows for certain that he'll never be in another uniform, it’s very hard for a logical, forward-thinking, upright-standing, non-low-browed human to picture Jeter in another uniform. Unless Minka Kelly likes to play dress-up in the bedroom.

Mariano Rivera is still dominant in his role—regardless of age.

The idea that the Yankees would even consider dropping these two iconic franchise players for any reason, let alone acquiring someone like Cliff Lee is amateurish speculation at best. It’s simply laughable.

Is Terry Bradshaw writing this article?

Lee will be a free agent, and, if he wants to play for the Yankees as much as the Yankees want him, no other team will be able to outbid the Bombers for his services. The Yankees want to stay within a budget, but make no mistake about it—they have the revenue to get the job done without dropping their cornerstones to do it.

2nd sentence I've agreed with you.

Bottom line, people…

Derek Jeter is a Yankee for life. Anyone thinking otherwise is clueless, a disgruntled Mets fan or a wishful-thinking and bitter Red Sox fan. It’s laughable to think anything else.

You haven't laughed yourself out yet?

If I had to guess (and why not, everyone else is doing so)…

Jeter is not a “hang-around” type of player—if he is not performing to a level that he feels he should play, he will retire mid-contract.

I see Jeter getting $16-18 million per year for three to four years (taking him to age 40). Depending on how he performs will determine one-year contracts after that. He might even ask for percentages of profit or may accept less with a more incentive-laden contract.

As for next year, when Jeter once again hits over .300, the roaches—I mean his detractors—will return back under the woodwork.

"Hey, man, can I borrow your debate 101 notes? I was sick that day."

Derek Jeter is a first-ballot Hall of Famer that has played the game the way it should be played. Sabermetricians that churn out stats as to his fielding ability, or lack thereof, and anyone else that detracts from Jeter are merely jealous that he does not play for their team of choice.

The man's record speaks for itself.

On a serious note, I get not wanting to see your franchise superstar who's won you multiple championships play the twilight of his career somewhere else (see Jordan, Michael.) That doesn't mean it's "laughable" that it will happen, though. Especially since the Yankees are a fairly smart organization that might not want to pay an at-best average shortstop $16-18 mil until he's 40.

Anyways, that was a fun way to spend a couple hours while watching the stupid Jazz-(basketball)Hawks game. On a programming note, I might miss both Hawks and Bulls games tomorrow night due to a birthday party, but I'll be home in time to comment on Pacquiao taking Margarito down.