By the time you read this, FireJay will be five years old

It's true.  We've been clogging up the internet tubes for a full five years.  That first day of the blog's existence produced several gems.  And hey, in terms of the subject matter we most frequently bitch about, look how much has changed!  Check some of those early posts if you're feeling super bored today. Those were lean times.  It's hard to believe, but I was an even worse writer then than I am now.  At least my life is way better! Back then I was a low level employee at a big company in a depressing city.  Now I'm a midlevel employee at a different big company in the same depressing city.  Let that be a lesson to you, future sports bloggers: your dreams can and will come true.  (Peter King addendum to previous sentence: Maybe.)

5. Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen

You already know my thoughts on Boston's title chances.

/grinds teeth

The Celtics are still just as likely to win the Stanley Cup as they are to win the NBA title.  But I'm still annoyed.

My friend Grande called it first back in February: Even then, before Boston's improbable resurgence, it made the most sense for Boston and Chicago to battle in the 2012 playoffs 

In February, your buttclog of a friend "called it" because "it made the most sense."  Holy shit.  We've found someone with an even looser grasp than Bill on the mechanics of the world of sports.

in one of those classic, "Once upon a time, you were the teacher and I was the pupil, only now, the pupil is all growns up!" 

Star Wars reference + Swingers reference = HOLLYWOOD GOLD

series that would feature tons of highlights from their unforgettable 2009 clash 

As Bill calls it, "[the Celtics'] finals" that year.  No really, after winning that one, they had no reason to keep trying.  At that point they had successfully defended their 2008 title.  You're welcome, Orlando. 

that spawned not one but two columns from me (and served as Derrick Rose's unofficial breakout party, 

Rose's breakout came 14 months earlier during March Madness 2008, but don't expect Bill to miss out on an opportunity to try to convince you that he's a step ahead of the game when it comes to identifying great basketball players everyone already knew were great.

as well as Joe Dumars's break-out-the-wallet-to-overpay-Ben-Gordon party).

It sounds silly, but sometimes things are just destined to happen … 

It sounds like ridiculous bullshit.

and that's why I can't take Atlanta seriously. The Celtics are meant to play Chicago in Round 2. 

I wish it had happened (with a healthy Rose).  How delightful it would have been to see the Celtics get bounced in 5 and have Bill talk about how the Atlanta series was their finals in 2012.

You have the Chicago ties with KG and Doc; you have the Boston ties with Thibodeau and Scalabrine. You have the fantastically underrated Rose-Rondo rivalry (which started in 2009 and blossomed at the USA Basketball tryouts), as well as Avery Bradley (my favorite Celtic in eons) ready to lock Rose down and put himself on the map. You have Noah and Garnett doing their whole passive-aggressive, fake tough-guy agitation routines. You have a really good Pierce-Deng chess match, as well as Chicago killer Ray Allen lurking. You have the seeds for an epic Stiemsma-Asik battle. You have Doc and Thibodeau … and let there be no mistake, Doc would love nothing more than outwitting Thibs in a playoff series and putting the whole "You've never been the same without Thibs" narrative to rest once and for all. It's going to be an absolute classic. You know, assuming both teams get there. I think they will, and I think it's meant to be.

You have a bunch of stuff that's interesting, because these are two of the 16 best teams on the planet and they have interesting players and coaches.  THE STARS AND MOONS ARE ALIGNING.

Speaking of destiny … the odds of a Lakers-Celtics Finals are 50-to-1. 

You know, gambling on that is a great hedge against the insufferable coverage that series would get.  "Wow, I can't go to any sports websites or watch Sportscenter for 2 weeks, but at least I just made $1000."

Just throwing it out there. (Waiting.) Why are you laughing?

Because an episode of The Three Stooges is on in the background as I type this?

4. Chris Paul

I already made the case for his runner-up MVP season here and here, as well as the case that Paul shifts gears like the driver of a Formula 1 car depending on the game, the quarter or even the moment … and under that analogy, you'd think he's saving a little extra something for the playoffs, a little like how Dom Toretto always saves that one last nitrous oxide blast for the biggest moment. Just one problem: I hate the Memphis matchup for him. They can contain Paul with Tony Allen and Mike Conley (a quality defender); as we learned all season, the Clippers' crunch-time offense is basically, "Go ahead, Chris, do something." Again, Memphis is constructed to shut down teams like that. So either Paul clicks that nitrous blast, goes to another level and cements his status as "the best pure point guard ever," or the Clippers are going down … hard. I'm betting on the latter.

Making today's game 7 result very unsurprising.

(Important note: None of this will matter next season, when the Clips are contending as Vinny Del Negro works the weekday midnight shift with a demoted Shaq on NBA TV.)

SOMEONE MAKE ME THE VP OF COMMENTATOR ASSIGNMENTS COMMON SENSE!  GRIZZLIES IN 5!  

3. Kobe Bryant
2. Tim Duncan and Gregg Popovich
1. LeBron James

Lumping the last three together because, from a legacy standpoint, they have the most at stake. 

Already went over this a couple posts ago.  It would be true to say that all have a lot to gain.  But Kobe and Duncan/Popovich have very little to lose, meaning they have nothing at stake.  Saying what he just said is like saying "Tom Brady has more at stake in 2012 than any other FOOTBALL player."

If the Lakers win the title, "Kobe vs. Jordan" becomes a legitimate conversation to the chagrin of everyone who believes Jordan was the greatest basketball player who ever lived who ever lived and that we're never seeing another MJ. You know I'm in that camp, but at some point, the sheer girth of Kobe's résumé is going to outlive every reverential Jordan story. 

Such a concerted attempt to minimize Kobe's accomplishments.  The best part about his resume is apparently its "girth," which is an obvious attempt to damn with faint praise.  If I weren't of the opinion that Kobe is a Grade A jizzbag, I'd put more of an effort into refuting this. 

With a sixth ring, Kobe only has to break the scoring record and become the owner of an NBA team that disgraces itself by finishing 5-77 to truly threaten Jordan's throne.

Don't forget the awkward underwear ads with Kevin Bacon!

As for Duncan and Popovich, they have a chance to win titles 13 seasons apart — something that's never even come close to happening in the NBA. Riley and Magic-Kareem won titles six seasons apart. Auerbach and Russell won titles nine seasons apart. But 13??? Will we ever see that again? 

I'm not counting them out or anything, but given the way they've bounced out of the playoffs the past three years (zero second round games won, bounced in the first round as the West's top seed last year) it stands to reason that their title gap is going to remain at eight years.  Who knows, maybe the fact that the season was shorter (although also more concentrated) than a normal season will play into their hand or something.

And also, a fifth Spurs title would propel them into the "Greatest Runs Ever" discussion along with Russell's Celtics (13 years, 11 titles), MJ's Bulls (eight years, six titles), Mikan's Minneapolis teams (six years, five titles) and Kahn's Timberwolves (just kidding). 

HIRE ME TO TELL YOU HOW DUMB YOU ARE AND HOW WE SHOULD TRADE FOR SOME FORMER CELTICS!  WHO SAYS NO?

Throw in Duncan's legacy, Parker's Hall of Fame candidacy, Ginobili's Hall of Fame candidacy and the thought of Stephen Jackson, Matt Bonner, Boris Diaw and Boris Diaw's boobs hugging at midcourt in the single strangest basketball moment of all time 

Some lofty hyperbole there.  Ricky Davis shooting at his own basket to get another rebound for his triple double is not giving up that top spot anytime soon.

and, other than that, there's nothing at stake here.
And by the way, the Spurs should win the title — 

DOUBLE UPSIDE DOWN JINX!  RUN FOR THE HILLS, POPOVICH!

they have the deepest team, multiple crunch-time scorers, killer outside shooting, some much-needed swagger (thanks to Captain Jack's emotional return), the best coach and the best identity (at this point, they know EXACTLY what they are). Maybe if Ginobili weren't playing hurt and they hadn't run into the Z-Bo Chainsaw, it would have been them instead of Dallas last year. 

That's laughable.  Ginobili was a little banged up, so they lost to an 8 seed that lost in the next round to a team that then lost to the Mavericks in 5 in the conference finals.  THEY WERE SO CLOSE!  

Regardless, they have one really good crack at history here. Will they do it? I felt so unsure of my pick that I didn't even have the heart to stick it in the column — I relegated it to the footnotes.

He picked the Spurs, meaning you should withdraw all the money from your 401(k) and put half on OKC and half on Miami.

And then, there's LeBron James … who's about two weeks away from joining the following group (presented in alphabetical order).

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Larry Bird
Wilt Chamberlain
Magic Johnson
Michael Jordan
Moses Malone
Bill Russell

That's the complete list of everyone who won three or more NBA MVP trophies. 

I watched Stern give him the trophy today, it was really funny because he tried to name everyone on that list but gave up after Magic, Bird, and Malone.  Dude needed a teleprompter.

You know what else? In my 700-page monolith of an NBA book, 

Please don't call your own book a monolith.  You're unlikeable enough as things are.

I ranked those guys, minus Moses, as the six best players of all time. (I had Moses at no. 12.) They won a combined 33 titles between them. LeBron, as you know, has none. So yeah, he can keep giving those Sports Illustrated interviews and talking about how he finally gets it and all that crap, but really, he's halfway through one of the most confusing athletic careers we've ever witnessed. How can someone leave such a memorable, indelible, remarkable regular-season basketball legacy while simultaneously leaving us so unsure of his postseason prowess? 

Because until last year, his best teammates (by year, starting with 2003-2004) were Zydrunas Ilguaskas,  Ilgauskas again, Ilgauskas again or maybe Larry Hughes (GAH!), Hughes again or maybe Drew Gooden, one of those three guys, Mo Williams, and Williams again or 33 year old Antwan Jamison.  Put any of those top 6 guys on those Cavs teams in the 21st century version of the NBA, and you don't need to be a fucking Nobel Laureate to figure out how LBJ couldn't win a title.  His performance in 2007, when he singlehandedly carried the Cavs to the Finals, doesn't get enough recognition.  None of those Cavs teams had any business going past the 2nd round, even with the best player on the planet.  I dislike James as much as the next guy and agree that rings are important and all, but I'm not going to crucify him for failing to bring home a title with the teammates he was giving in Cleveland.  If he doesn't win one in the next four years in Miami?  Yeah, I'll crucify him for that.  Literally.

Now that's intriguing.

Not as intriguing as the possibility that the Spurs' unremarkable role players might celebrate winning a championship together!

Scoop Jackson might be retarded

After the Ravens destruction of the of the Pats in Foxboro, most pundits generally agreed that it was stupid for Belichick to punt the ball from his own 42 on 4th & 2, when earlier in the season, he went for it in a similar situation against the Colts. Scoop Jackson decided to weigh in with an entirely different theory:

In New England's AFC Wild-Card game against Baltimore, Patriots coach Bill Belichick made a decision to begin the game that proved to be the difference. The question is: Why did he make that decision?

Broken down, we can understand that Belichick's decision after winning the coin toss to open the game to kick the ball to the Ravens can be directly linked to the the infamous fourth-and-2 call he made against the Indianapolis Colts.

I smell a gigantic leap in logic coming.

The breakdown:

• In that game against the Colts, the one thing that came from that call was the belief that Belichick didn't believe in his defense. He claimed that wasn't the case. But that perception still existed.

• For almost two months the Patriots have had to deal with that possible truth hanging over their team. There's been nothing Belichick could do leading up to the playoffs to counter the rumors. He was just waiting for the opportunity.

• Playoffs begin. Wild-Card game. An opportunity for Belichick to finally get this off his back.

On the 4th & 2 at the end of the first half, right?

• In a game at home against a team that is not known for being an offensive treat, Belichick figured it was safe. What better time to instill confidence in his defense and squash the lack of confidence rumors than to let his defense open up the game against the Ravens.

• Coin flip: Pats win. One play later: Pats lose.

Wow, you are (when it comes to writing about football) fucking retarded.

1. As a Ravens fan, I can tell you that they rarely score touchdowns on their first possessions.

2. They've never hit an 80+ yard touchdown on their first play from scrimmage.

3. Do you think that the Pats gave up that touchdown run because they got over-confident they got from Belichick electing to differ (something a lot of team do against the Ravens)? If so, you're stupid.

4. You do realize that Ravens were going to get the ball at some point in the game, right?

5. The game was far from over after Rice's touchdown, and you're really dumb.

• For the second time this season, Belichick made the wrong decision. This one cost him more than just a game.

Not really. Yes, his team was eliminated from the playoffs, but they certainly weren't going to get past San Diego, and now they're in a better position in the likely uncapped off-season than if they'd been 1 of the final 8 teams. So really, they didn't lose a whole lot, and you're just a terrible sports writer.

So you see how this all came about: How one decision eight weeks ago affected one that decided the Pats' season.

No one sees that because it's a completely idiotic line of reasoning.

Most people won't see it like that, but if you watch enough CSI, it'll make sense.

Detective Frank Tripp: Sir, this sports writer is just terrible. This whole article is a giant piece of shit.

Lieutenant Horatio Caine: (puts on sunglasses) Now there's a Scoop.

YEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH

Rays Get Edge in World Series by Losing Game 5 to Boston

Normally, when I write a stupid headline like that, I'm kidding.

This time, that case is actually being argued by...

::sigh::

HatGuy.

Rays' momentum should make Phillies nervous

Wait a minute...momentum?

Philly should be rusty entering World Series, while Tampa is coming in hot

That's true. The Rays have won one (1) game (game) in a row. Their current postseason baseball winning streak total is at....one. The Phillies have won their last two, and are 7-2 in the postseason. Ice. Fucking. Cold.

Nobody in Tampa thought this at the time, but losing Games 5 and 6 of the ALCS to the Boston Red Sox may prove to be the best thing that could have happened to a young team making its first-ever postseason foray.

Even the Rays sweeping the Phillies in 4 games would not "prove" that.

We can say that because the Rays didn’t collapse. They didn't cave to the pressure of Game 7 against the defending World Champions. And in refusing to blink in the white glare of the national spotlight, they’ve been given a huge boost in confidence going into their first World Series.

More confidence than, say, dominating (one of) the best team(s) in baseball?

They’ve also got another weapon they weren’t even aware they had

#1 overall draft pick David Price? Trust me, they were aware of him.

a big-game left-handed closer with blistering speed and composure far beyond what a kid who started the season in Class A should have.

David Price racked up his first major league save ever on Sunday. (You had to listen really closely, but under his breath, one of the commentators mentioned that he's never saved a regular season game before. I don't think he knew his microphone was on.) He's a "closer" now. Funny thing is, ol' Mikey here has no clue that he's ticketed for the rotation pretty darn soon.

The kid’s name is David Price, and if it weren’t for him, Boston would be celebrating its third improbable ALCS comeback in the past five years.

I love this blip here. I really do. It implies that no other pitcher in the world could have come in the game in the 8th inning, bases loaded, 2 outs, TB up by 2, and won the game pitching the last 4 outs. News flash, Celizic. Even though J.D. Drew is really good at baseball, he's gonna fuck this up at least 60% of the time. Price got the job done, but it isn't like it was some inexplicable feat of pitching.

These are huge advantages for a team that had never had a winning record before this season, a team that had finished last season with the major's worst record. The last two season have't been kind to those teams coming in rested.

"Have't" is the world's newest favorite contraction.

Thank you for pointing out something that has more to do with luck than an actual, sustainable trend. Use it to argue whatever idiotic point you want. I, however, will counter with this.

Teams entering World Series with five or more days off and how they fared
Year Days Team Opp. Result
2007 8 Col Bos L, 4-0
2006 6 Det StL L, 4-1
2005 5 ChW Hou W, 4-0
2002 5 Ana SF W, 4-3
2001 5 Ari NYY W, 4-3
1996 6 NYY Atl W, 4-2
1995 6 Atl Cle W, 4-2
1991 5 Min Atl W, 4-3
1990 5 Oak Cin L, 4-0
1989 5 Oak SF W, 4-0
1988 5 Oak LA L, 4-1
Source: Elias Sports Bureau

THIS IS PRINTED ON THE FUCKING SAME PAGE AS YOUR ARTICLE. The team with >5 days rest has gone 7-4 over the last 11 occurrences. You are a fucking idiot for trying to claim something based on the most recent two.

Last year’s Rays were the Colorado Rockies, another young team that hadn’t known much success.

Only the 2008 Rays are significantly better than the 2007 Rockies (sorry Larry).

The Rockies did have more veteran experience, mainly in the person of Todd Helton, but, like the Rays, the postseason was unfamiliar territory.

What the hell is your point? The Rox choked it in the World Series. Why are you mentioning this in an article devoted to explaining why the Rays will win?

The Rockies won 14 of their last 15 games to reach the playoffs, then won eight straight to get to the World Series. At the time, we all thought it was wonderful. It turned out to be the worst thing they could have done because they had eight days to rest before the Fall Classic began.

Dude, I'm going to call the Cause-and-Effect police if you don't shut the fuck up right now.

The problem was that with two weeks to go in the playoffs, the Rockies couldn’t even imagine the playoffs.

THIS is the problem? The Rockies tore apart the Phillies and Diamondbacks, followed by losing to the Red Sox because they couldn't even imagine the playoffs??? Something was wrong with the neural synapses in their brains, inhibiting this concept from entering their minds???....you know what, fuck it, I'm drunk (yeah!!!! awesome!!!!), and know nothing about neurological science, and just want to point out cleverly in some way that Celizic is a motherfucking moron for attributing (any)% of
the outcome(s) of the Rockies' 2007 playoff run to how many days of rest they've had.

When they got to the World Series, they were flatter than Kansas.

There's like 20313231231e094 celebrity women who would have made for a funnier punchline at the end of this sentence than "Kansas".

(I am aware that "e" appears as a digit in that number. I wrote it in hexadecimal. Base 16, dontcha know.)

And when the Red Sox lit into them, they had no idea how to fight back.

Huh. "Hitting", "pitching", and "fielding" never entered their minds. Go figure. Major league team. Didn't even think of those things.

The same thing was true for Detroit in 2006, when they entered the World Series on six days of rest, but lost to a Cardinals squad in five games.

Again, what happened the prior 6 times a team entered the World Series on >5 days of rest?

The Tigers had won 96 games that season and trounced the Yankees and A's en route to the World Series. St. Louis barely finished over .500, escaped against the Mets in the NLCS, yet rolled in the World Series. Clearly, the Cardinals were helped by staying on a roll.

THE CARDINALS WERE MUCH BOLSTERED IN THEIR EFFORTS TO WIN BECAUSE THEY HAD THE ADVANTAGE OF PLAYING REALLY GOOD!

This is in the running for "Most Useless Paragraph of All-Time".

The Rays could have been in a similar situation had they beaten the Red Sox in five games, as they might have if manager Joe Maddon hadn’t started fiddling with his pitching rotation.

Woah woah......is this Celizic PRAISING the Rays for adjusting their pitching rotation so that they might more likely LOSE game 5???

What the FUCK???

I'll drop this little tidbit for ya. Scott Kazmir got in an argument with Derryl Cousins, the home plate umpire for Game 6, earlier in this season. You think that might have had something to do with the switch? Or also, if you have to win one game out of three, the best chance you have is to adjust your pitchers to favor your team heavily in one specific game. Getting Shields to pitch at home, not against the Boston ace, Matsuzaka, is absolutely the correct move.

They’d have come into the World Series having lost just one of eight playoff games with no clue what it feels like to face a must-win game.

A situation that absolutely crippled the 2005 White Sox, who lost the Series in 4 games to the Houston Astros.

Actually speaking of the White Sox, they won 4 straight do-or-die games this season. Why the hell are the Rays doing this much better than they are? Why didn't the confidence of winning from having their razorbacks against the Great Wall of China propeller blade them deep impact into the playoffs?

See, it's fun to insert nonsense words into arguments that make no sense to begin with.

But they lost Games 5 and 6 and then had to find out just what they had inside. As things turned out, it was more than enough.

Here's some counter-anecdotal bullshit to that anecdotal bullshit.

"The Rays, in losing a dramatic Game 5 on the road and a demoralizing Game 6 at home, squeaked by in Game 7 to barely salvage the American League title. However, they move on to the World Series, their minds scarred by the fact that they almost blew everything. What happens when a good team finds out just how vulnerable they are? Just ask the super-confident Phillies."

Yeah. That oughta show ya.

Just as important as what the Rays know is what their opponents, the Phillies now know. They’ve been sitting around with nothing to do but watch the ALCS since they eliminated the Dodgers on Oct. 15. Besides getting rusty with inactivity, they’ve watched the Rays first dig themselves a hole and then climb out of it. As surely as the Rays now know they can come back against one of the game's best teams, so do the Phils.

The Phillies now know that they're supposed to try super hard EVEN IF they are leading in the World Series, the ultimate championship of all that is baseball. Brilliant point!

Wait, what the fuck? The worst the Rays were losing this series was 1-0. They were NEVER in a significant hole.

As fans, we want a seven-game series and the maximum drama. But the reality is that this World Series could easily turn into a rout, just like the past four Series, three of which were sweeps and one of which ended in five games.

You've yet to make any cogent point about why this will happen. Like, using the past matchups (which were comprised of completely different teams) is totally stupid for doing this.

In the past 10 years, there have been just two Series that went the distance. In the 2002 Fall Classic, the Angels prevailed over the Giants in seven, and in 2001, the Diamondbacks plunging a stake through the heart of the Yankee dynasty with a walk-off Game-7 hit.

The odds of the World Series going 7 games is 31.25%. With all likelihood, 3 of those 10 Serieseses, rather than 2, would have gone 7 games. Huh. When you use facts, that hardly seems worth pointing out at all, eh?

This year’s participants are more likely to go short than long, and the team that is probably in more danger of being swept is Philadelphia. There are several reasons to say that. One is that the Phillies are facing more pressure.

With all due respect to the fans and everything, I don't think that Brad Lidge and Pat Burrell care about what happened to the Phillies in like the 90's or anything.

Blame their history for that. As bad as the Rays have been before this year, the Phillies have been bad for almost forever. They have lost more games than any team in major league history, a distinction helped by the fact they’ve been playing the game since 1876.

Again, Shane Victorino probably doesn't give a shit.

They’ve also been waiting since 1983 to get back to the World Series and since 1980 to win it again. That 1980 flag remains their lone championship banner.

See, this is absolutely terrible. The Phillies made the World Series in 1993. Before you think this is a typo, they made the World Series in 1983 as well, making it perfectly plausible that HatGuy is a fucking moron that knows nothing about anything. That's all I'm trying to prove here. It's not a lot to ask that you just....you just believe me.

In Tampa, the newspapers are congratulating the Rays. In Philly, they’re writing about the Phillies' past failures and asking the players why this year should be any different than all the others.

Again, you failed to point out the part where Carlos Ruiz and Brett Myers get negatively affected by this.....

There are no curses in sports, or in life.

Finally, reason wins.

But prolonged losing streaks are helped along by the pressure heaped upon the teams.

We would also have accepted: variance.

Players tend to try so hard to prove they’re not losers that they make the mistakes that turn them into losers.

Jamie Moyer lost all ability to throw hard way before he was a well-known, crafty pitcher. You think he needs to win this World Series to prove he's not a loser? How about Ryan Howard? That 2006 MVP screaming "loser" in the back of his mind?

The only curse Tampa has worked against during the franchise’s lifetime is lack of talent and money. They’ve got the talent now, and they know it. They also know that they can come back because they’ve already done it.

BECAUSE THEY CAME BACK FROM A STEEP 1-0 DEFICIT TO WIN THE ALCS????

Actually, this is hilarious. This is the 2nd time that Celizic has made this awful inference, but he clearly believes that the Rays "came back" by winning game 7 of the ALCS when the series was tied.

The Phillies are a powerful team, but they don’t know what they can do.

What kind of thing to say is that? "They don't know what they can do????" You disgust me.

They only know that they were swept in the NLDS last year by the Rockies and they sailed past the Brewers and Dodgers this year, never facing a game that they absolutely had to win.

Might I remind you that before Game 7 of the ALCS, the Rays were never in a situation when they absolutely had to win the game, and they still won that game anyway.

Last year, The Rockies sat for a week waiting for the Series to start. Once it did, all their momentum was gone.

They were the inferior team, and weren't very fortunate in the World Series. Nothing else to say here.

Had the Rays taken care of business in Game 5, I would've said the Phils had the edge. But they didn’t, and in losing they became stronger.

This is the most ridiculous sentence I have ever read. Not only does the fact that the Rays didn't win in only 5 games mean NOTHING, but you would have honestly taken the Phillies? You'd take the Phillies over the team with home field advantage that won 97 games in the best division in baseball? REALLY????? Fuck you and your unjustified having-a-job abilities.

They’re no longer strangers to winning, to post-season play or to must-win games. They’ve been there and done that.

If I were a Phillies’ fan, I’d be afraid. I’d be very, very afraid.

Because they're a worse team and Evan Longoria owns Brad Lidge's soul?

Yeah, that's what you're getting at.

Hey Joey Johnston, May Called, It Wants Its Article Back

'Nuff said.

You're all wrong if you think Rays aren't for real

Good lord, you serious dude? This article's been written 2340932423423 times this year. Get out from the fucking sewers already!

There's plenty of proof that worst-to-first Tampa Bay is playoff-ready

Like what? Like the fact that they won the best motherfucking division in baseball? Is that proof enough? Or do you actually have to say other things?

The answer: NO.

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. - As the American League playoffs begin, it would be easy to paint the Tampa Bay Rays as a cute, cuddly story, a worst-to-first baseball turnaround that comes around every generation or so. It would be easy to suggest the Rays’ 15 minutes of fame have expired, that it’s time to exit stage right, time to let the big boys take over.

Dude, this is just emanating originality. You know how when you burn some shit in the oven, and you can smell burnt-shit-smell all over the house for the rest of the night? Let's just say a certain author (you) left "originality" in the oven a bit too long.....

Considering the franchise’s miserable history — 10 straight losing seasons and nine last-place finishes — it would be very easy to do that.

And moronic, because the awfulness of the 2001 Devil Rays have literally zero effect on the 2008 Rays. I feel like I am talking to a janitorial sign. I FUCKING UNDERSTAND THAT THE FLOOR IS SLIPPERY WHEN WET, JOEY JOHNSTON!

But this isn’t a history lesson.

Sha-BANG!

WAIT HOLY CRAP!!!!!! I just got to the part of the article that shows a picture of the author!



ROFL ZOMG....you serious dude?

Let’s stick to current events. Considering what has been assembled this season, considering what has been proven time and time again, summarily dismissing the Rays would be a grave mistake.

I'm so glad that I have you, Joey Johnston, to tell me that the team with the best record in the best division in baseball shouldn't be dismissed! They have the 2nd best run differential in the AL. What, do people really think they're a fluke or something? Get bent.

It might even be commonplace to ignore the Rays this postseason, what with the Red Sox defending a title, the Cubs trying to reverse the curse and the Dodgers thriving with Manny Ramirez-mania.

But do so at your own risk.

DON'T WALK ON THE WET, SLIPPERY FLOOR, OR YOU MAY SLIP AND FALL AND BECOME WET!

Oh, it’s easy to understand why there’s still a lack of respect. After all, this isn’t supposed to happen.

Actually it is. A team with good players is supposed to be good.

A team such as the Rays, whose $43.8 million payroll can’t even match financials on the left side of the Yankees’ infield, isn’t supposed to win the American League East.

Maybe the Red Sox should've won. Because they're better. But that's not what you're
getting at. Not at all.

It’s not supposed to win 97 games (improving by 31 victories) and capture perhaps the most rigorous division in all of sports.

Dude, you keep saying the same fucking thing over and over. Now you're like a flashing "DON'T WALK" sign.

It’s not supposed to become the second team to reach the postseason one year after having baseball’s worst record (joining the 1991 Braves).

Really? Then which team in which year is "supposed" to do this? Because, um. Whichever team you pick would have to have the worst record in baseball the season before. I think what you're saying here is a little unfair and a lot meaningless, dontcha think?

It’s not supposed to take a bullpen coming off a 6.16 ERA — worst in baseball since Milton Berle had the nation’s highest-rated TV show — and transform it into a collection of rally-killing buzzsaws.

Dude, you are too priceless. I've never seen anyone, not even HatGuy, go this long in an article without making a fucking point. 289 words! Zero informative things!

It’s not supposed to thrive with a lineup that failed to produce a single .300 batter and (probably) not one player who will finish in the top 10 of AL Most Valuable Player voting.

9th in OBP....but I guess that's irrelevant.

It’s not supposed to sweep the Cubs, Angels and Red Sox (twice).

335 words.

Is everyone in agreement on that?

No. 341.

Well, guess what? The Rays didn’t listen.

THAT'S your grand point? This is what all of that needless garbage was about? You sir, are atrocious. 348.

“We have good chemistry,’’ said Rays manager Joe Maddon, who resembles Elvis Costello with his way-cool Hugo Boss specs.

Maddon savors a drink from his office wine rack following particularly meaningful victories. Rays win the AL East? Anyone making such a prediction might’ve needed to sample Maddon’s really hard stuff.

Right?

Dude, just fucking stop. You have been saying the same exact fucking thing for 399 words. 6th grade essays are more meaningful.

He thinks that’s a stretch.

“You’ve got to believe it before you see it,’’ Maddon said. “We knew it was coming. We knew if we played together, we could achieve something really special.’’

And finally, something with some, albeit little actual meaning happens here. And Joe Maddon was the one who said it, not you.

Which brings us to Maddon’s now-ubiquitous saying — 9=8 — that can be found on caps, T-shirts and banners all around the Tampa Bay area.

Nine equals eight?

Translation: Nine players playing hard for nine innings will make the Rays one of eight teams playing in October.

This is perhaps the #1 dumbest motherfucking team slogan, motto, anything, that I have ever seen in my life. Ever. It's just terrible.

It was guided by Maddon through a mixture of unconventional (intentionally walking hot-hitting Josh Hamilton with the bases loaded, then escaping a jam) and old-school methods (benching B.J. Upton for lack of hustle).

This was probably one of the dumbest managerial decisions in the history of the universe. Hey Rangers, have a free run!

True story: When the Rays muddled into a seven-game losing streak at the All-Star break, losing their grip on first place, you could almost hear the snickers from around baseball. “Aha! Told you it wasn’t going to last!’’ But in the first game back, still stuck in an offensive malaise and losing at home to the Blue Jays 1-0 in the seventh inning, Ben Zobrist blasted a two-out, two-run homer off A.J. Burnett to provide the victory and effectively stop the bleeding.

The same Ben Zobrist who this season was sent down to Triple-A Durham.

Four different times.

Dude, no one could decide whether Ben Zobrist was a major leaguer or not. THAT'S WHY THE RAYS ARE FOR REAL DUDE!

True story: Facing a 10-game trip to Seattle, Oakland and Texas in August — a trap door if ever there was one for Tampa Bay’s tenuous lead — the Rays placed outfielder Carl Crawford and Longoria on the disabled list.

A death knell?

Hardly.

When the Rays returned home, ho-hum, their lead had increased by another game.

This is because Seattle, Oakland, and Texas are not good baseball teams.

True story: At Fenway Park on Sept. 9, the Red Sox were up, 4-3, and three outs away from regaining first place. Uber-closer Jonathan Papelbon was on the mound. Up stepped Rays pinch-hitter Dan Johnson.

That morning, Johnson was asleep in Pennsylvania, where his Durham Bulls were competing in the International League playoffs. The phone rang. The Rays wanted him in Boston. But a series of flight delays and travel mishaps turned his day into a nightmare. He was reluctantly scratched from the starting lineup because, well, he was in a cab, stuck in Boston traffic, as game time approached.

So in the ninth inning, Maddon played a hunch, sending Johnson to the plate, knowing he would work the count, maybe becoming a needed base runner.

What happened?

What else?

Tying homer.

The Rays immediately rallied with another run and won it, 5-4, in suddenly whisper-quiet Fenway.

Ergo, Rays are for real because of the success in one game of Unlikely-Pinch-Hitter Dan Johnson.

True story: The Red Sox pounded the Rays 13-5 at Tropicana Field on Sept. 15, drilling four homers off Kazmir (and six overall). It was an emphatic statement. Now the charging Red Sox were within percentage points of the Rays.

More than an hour after the game, when the Tampa Bay clubhouse had emptied, a reporter sought out Maddon, seeking to gauge how he would lift up his devastated team.

Maddon, smiling, doffed his cap, revealing his work behind closed doors — a modest mohawk in his white hair, not too radical, but the sides trimmed slightly. A few days earlier in New York, on a lark between games of a doubleheader, some Rays players got mohawks.

“Just wanted to be part of the group,’’ Maddon said, winking, disappearing into the night.

And with that outlook, straight from the top, the Rays promptly beat the Red Sox two straight and again took command of the division race.

So much for devastation.

Okay, and they totally won two games after losing one game. Not many teams did that this year?

So we have these reasons for the Rays being legit.

1) Ben Zobrist went from the minor leagues to the major leagues a lot.
2) The Rays beat bad teams on the road on a 10-game trip.
3) Dan Johnson hit a home run.
4) The Rays managed to win 2 games after a pretty bad loss.

Baseball is generally played by the book. Decisions are backed up with raw numbers and trends.

Every now and again, though, you get something that defies explanation.

THE TAMPA BAY RAYS DO NOT DEFY EXPLANATION! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD THIS IS NOT HARD TO UNDERSTAND! They have outstanding pitching. They are decent at scoring runs. They have one of the best defensive teams in baseball. A TEAM THAT DOES THIS IS GOOD. VERY VERY GOOD.

Seriously, why does there have to be some mystical power as the underlying reason for anything unexpected?

Every now and again, you get the Rays — with their cowbell-clanging fans finally warming up to the phenomenon, mohawks everywhere in the community and the very real notion that Tropicana Field, in all of its quirky, erector-set glory, could actually host the World Series.

Sometimes, you have to stop looking for explanations and start enjoying the ride. Sometimes, after 162 games of evidence, you’ve just got to believe.

When, oh when will the world start believing that baseball teams filled with good players are legitimately likely to play well?

Rays, if you beat the White Sox, I hope you win the World Series. Because the day after you win the World Series, we'll be hearing from some fucking retard that you guys are for real.

Is FireJemeleHill.blogspot.com still available?

Is there a word for someone who contrives an angle on a story just for the sake of writing about said angle? No? From now on, it will be referred to as Jemele Hill'ing. Re: The WNBA Fight:

Tuesday night's bench-clearing scuffle between the Los Angeles Sparks and Detroit Shock proved women can be just as boneheaded as men in the thick of intense athletic competition.

Progress?

Absolutely.

You cannot be serious, right? This has to be the build up to some sarcastic put down of the women involved in the fight, yes?

The fight, which, by the way, isn't the WNBA's first, showed that squaring up isn't a man thing. It's a sports thing. It's an athlete thing. It's an I'm-so-ticked-off-that-Candace-Parker-just-drilled-me-in-the-chest-and-the-refs-didn't-notice thing.

Aside from the whole why should these players be lauded for behaving badly thing, when you know that Jemele Hill would've torn down NBA players for doing the exact same thing:

Who the fuck gives a shit? You even said yourself it's not the first fight in WNBA. This WNBA fight is not some sort of feminist awakening.

In its way, this is a revelation for women's sports. I've long been sick of the halos and pristine white robes put on female athletes.

Until the next WNBA fight, when you will then turn, and blame David Stern for fostering a culture of violence in the WNBA.

In real life, athletes lose their tempers and use bad language. They're flawed. Female athletes aren't an exception.

You often rip on male athletes for being poor examples for today's youth. Now you're heaping praise upon female athletes for acting the same way. You are a wizard when it comes to logic.

Of course, I'm not knocking those female athletes who take being a role model seriously, but sometimes the image of female athletes is so sanitized, polished and packaged that it's nice to get a reminder that women don't always fit inside some annoyingly perfect little box.

But at the same time you are lionizing women who acted the exact opposite of those who take being a role model seriously.

If anything, we should greet the Patrick and WNBA incidents as our opportunity to show that gender should be a nonissue when it comes to boorish behavior.

Seriously, what the fuck are you talking about?

If the Mahorn incident occurs between two men, it's a nonissue.

The Mahorn incident occured between two women, and it's still a nonissue.

No one accused Alonzo Mourning of assault when he used Jeff Van Gundy as a mop in that infamous Heat-Knicks brawl.

That's because Jeff Van Gundy grabbed onto Mourning's leg on his own volition. This would be like saying "No one accused that Boise State player of rape when he proposed to his girlfriend after the 2007 Fiesta Bowl."

It's interesting how differently we look at boorish behavior when gender is involved. The reaction to women fighting is usually a mixture of astonishment and fascination.

Whereas when Baseball fights break out, fans yawn and try to sleep because they're so utterly bored by the proceedings.

We treat girl fights like a novelty, when they shouldn't be seen as such. News flash to those still using sticks to create fire: Female athletes are just as competitive as men and when some are pushed to the edge, they'll exhibit the same lack of control.

What is your fucking point? We get it; women athletes sometimes act like assholes. This is news to exactly 0 people.

Leslie said this to ESPN about Tuesday's melee: "This is not the way we want to represent ourselves and the WNBA." For most athletes, that's true. But it's not always a picture-perfect representation. It isn't for men. It shouldn't be for women, either.

Ms. Hill, what you just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent article were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in the webosphere is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Hahaha check out this hilarious THE ONION article!!

Oh man, this is really funny

"Whether you're a football fan or not, I'm sure you found yourself caught up in the hype this past winter with the success of the New Jersey Giants," said Sen. Paul Sarlo, D-Bergen. "I emphasize the New Jersey Giants."

Made-up sounding senator name: check
Hilarious premise that only slightly diverges from reality: check

And though the Giants tell the world they're from New York, Garden State senators said their come-from-behind attitude represented more of a Jersey mentality.

Sarlo said they resembled "gutsy New Jerseyans" and "what we are all about here in New Jersey."

Perfect execution of a stereotype (people from New Jersey are delusional and obnoxious): check

The ceremony enlivened the usually reserved Senate, especially when Codey grabbed a football and unleashed a perfect pass across the Senate chamber to Sen. Nicholas Scutari, D-Union.

One more made up name that sounds like some Italian guy who would live in New Jersey: check
Ridiculous, un-newsworthy ending to a totally un-newsworthy story that no self respecting journalist would ever consider even writing: check

Hehehe, I fucking love the Onion.

Wait, that wasn't in The Onion?

Fuck me.

Maybe You Expected Me To Pick On Chas MacGonaghcle Of The Des Moines Globe

The number of posts I'm able to make is a bit limited these days. As for which writers I should cover in the process of formulating these posts, there's a part of me that says I should use this opportunity to diversify and find real pieces of garbage from lesser-known sources. With two or three days to find something before taking the time to write about it, after all, I should have some sort of "pick" of some sort of "litter" compared to back when I was putting up something new every night. On the other hand, though, there's a part of me that just wants to continue my mindless bitching about Bill Simmons. Let's just say that internal debate was settled easily.

This is the conclusion to a two part column in which Bill ranked a large handful of NBA players in terms of value this season, all the way from Stephon Marbury at No. 450 to, holy fucking shitballs this is a surprise, Kevin Garnett at No. 1. I don't really have huge problems with 90% of the column(s). I know there are plenty of NBA fans out there that are tortured by his often-shitty analysis, but I can't help but consider most of what he says about "The League" to be not that bad when you compare it to his NFL and (particularly) MLB work. So in general, the whole rankings thing comes off OK. Until, of course, we arrive at KG and Bill's reasoning for choosing him as MVP.

This is not journalism. This is horrid, pathetic, and embarrassing. This is an insult to Mike Celzic and anything he could ever write about Derek Jeter. It's an insult to Bill Plaschke and anything he could ever write about Juan Pierre. It's an insult to anything that has ever been written about David Eckstein or Darin Erstad. This is so bad, I honestly don't know how to begin picking it apart. Fortunately, Simmons breaks the ice for me with a hilarious opening clause.

1. Kevin Garnett

Let's get the bad stuff out of the way so you don't think this is a homer vote:

Oh. Ahhhhh. OK, so it's not a homer vote. Say no more. I was thinking to myself, "During a year in which pretty much everyone and his parole officer has agreed that Kobe is the MVP pick, if a huge Celtics fan makes a case for Garnett it's probably because he's being a homer." But then you come along and tell me that that's not the case at all! I really appreciate the clarification.

This is like your friend trying to convince you that his bitch of a girlfriend is actually a nice person. "Dude, I know you're going to think I'm only saying this because I'm dating her, but hear me out." Of course, when you're in a situation like that, your friend eventually breaks up with the girl and admits she was a cunt. Bill will take his blind and clueless homerism to his grave.

I don't think Garnett is the most talented player in the league;

No one has thought this since 2005.

I don't trust him at the end of games because he gets too wound up; it drives me crazy that he relies on his fall-away so much (especially in fourth quarters);

Fair enough.

and I'd rather have Tim Duncan for a playoff series if my life depended on it.

I like how this is phrased as a reluctant concession to Duncan fans. One of those players has four motherfucking rings (all but one obtained as the best player on his team). The other has one has two motherfucking playoff series wins. If your life really depended on it, and you racked your brain for hours over the decision, you might decide that Duncan is the better bet? Good.

Of course, none of that stuff matters in an MVP discussion.

The first and last items on that list do not. The second and third though, about late game performance? Well, two of Bill's own criteria for picking an MVP (which I don't necessarily agree with, but I'm willing to consider as starting points) are:

Question No. 2: In a giant pickup game with every NBA player waiting to play, and two fans forced to pick sides with their lives depending on the outcome of the game (I think this is how the annual Rucker League tournament works, by the way), who would be the first player picked based on the way everyone played that season? Question No. 3: If you replaced every MVP candidate with a decent player at their position for the entire season, what would be the effect on their teams' records?

If only Bill weren't so popular, and such a catastrophic pile of asshole, I bet he would take the time to answer an email inquiring as to how this list and the above claim about late game performance are compatible. Alas, since he'd obviously never reply to that email, you'll have to try to quilt an answer together on your own. Good luck. I got nothin'.

He's the one guy everyone will remember from this regular season (sorry, Kobe);

"Everyone" in this case meaning, of course, Celtics fans. Don't get me wrong; plenty of people will remember Garnett changing teams, because that's a cool and relevant story. But the actual performance on the court is a different story, in this non-Celtic non-Laker fan's opinion. There's a chance it's only because my favorite team is in the West, but I would definitely say that Kobe's overall performance was more "rememberable" this year.

and he was worth a 30-win swing to the Celtics this season.

Interesting. My paperwork here says he was only worth 26 wins, but I guess you could be right. That would mean the combined sum of adding Ray Allen and James Posey and having several young contributors (Rondo, Perkins, Powe) get another season under their belts was worth 11 wins. As in, this Celtics team minus Garnett and plus Al Jefferson wins 35 games and misses the playoffs. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmbullshit.

In other words, he's the first choice for two of my three MVP questions.

In other words, he's the choice for your first MVP question (not listed by me, but it's about that remembrance bullshit) and you offer absolutely no evidence as to how he fulfills the other two.

But that's not why I'm picking him. On May 22, professional basketball was effectively murdered in Boston.

Christ on a crutch. Holy fish sticks. You. Fucking. Crybaby. Someone call the whaaaaaaaaaaaambulance for Bill, because he's got his ovaries all twisted up. The history of the NBA draft is fucking littered with teams that expected to get a top 3 pick and were denied by some cruel bounce of a ping pong ball. It happens all the stinking time. Guess what? It happened to Boston last year. Guess what else? That doesn't mean you can write a sentence like that. Ray Lewis didn't drive up to Boston, find a physical manifestation of the nebulous concept of basketball, and murder it like a Super Bowl partier. A professional sport is "effectively murdered" in a town when a team moves away, a one-of-a-kind-once-in-a-generation superstar leaves as a free agent, or someone prominently involved with a team actually dies. Losing the lottery and picking 5th when your record indicated you should be picking 2nd IS NOT ON THAT LIST OR ANYWHERE NEAR IT.

Sorry about that. Here comes the Ecksteiny part.

Garnett transformed every single facet of the franchise upon his arrival, from playing for the Celtics to coaching them to following them to owning them to working for them. What he did can't be measured by statistics; it can't even be measured in a few paragraphs like the section you're reading right now. It would belittle what he did.

Offensive.

He transformed the culture of the team. He taught everyone to care about defense, to care about practice, to care about being a professional, to care about leaving everything they had on the court, to stop caring about stats and start caring about wins.

More offensive.

He single-handedly transformed the careers of three young players (Rajon Rondo, Leon Powe, and Kendrick Perkins), one veteran (Pierce) and one coach (Doc Rivers), all five of whom could have gone the other way. He played every exhibition game like it was the seventh game of the Finals. During blowouts, he stood on the sidelines and cheered on his teammates like it was a tight game; because of that, the bench guys did the same thing for the starters and basically turned into a bunch of giddy scrubs on a 14-seed in a March Madness upset during every game.

Most offensive. I would also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone: this was not a homer pick. OK? Got it? None of this is being written because Bill loves the Celtics. The analysis is all 100% objective. Just thought I'd keep that in your brain as you wade through this.

The best word for him would either be "contagious" or "selfless." By Thanksgiving, the entire team was emulating him. Every time a young player got carried away with himself during a game -- like the time Perkins started going for his own stats, or the time Rondo snapped at his coach --

Who could forget!

KG was there to set him straight and scare the living hell out him. Every time one of his teammates was intimidated, KG had his back. Every time one of his teammates got knocked down, KG rushed over to pick him up; eventually, four teammates were rushing over to help that fifth guy up, and that's just the way it goes with the team now. Every time an opponent kept going for a shot after a whistle, KG defiantly blocked the shot just out of principle, and eventually, everyone started doing it. No shots after the whistle against the Celtics. That was the rule.

Boy, sounds frightening. They're so badass that they don't let you take shots that don't count. I bet that saves them zero points a game! If I captained a baseball team and wanted to develop a similar rule about how my guys would intimidate opponents, it would be: no running through first base on a groundout. You will be hit by the right fielder, and hit hard.

A couple of umbrella statements, really quickly: first, remember again that this opinion has nothing to do with Bill's Celtic fandom. And also keep in mind that we are being asked to believe that an aircraft carrier full of anecdotal bullshit is why Garnett a) would be picked first if two fans had every player available and wanted to draft teams to get a game going and b) is more irreplaceable than Kobe or LeBron.

It was a series of little things, baby steps if you will, but they added up to something much bigger.

Stolen from a St. Louis Post-Dispatch piece about Eckstein, 10/30/2006. Also, time for another reminder- Bill is not saying any of this because he's a Celtics fan.

You can't measure Garnett's impact with individual statistics, but these numbers seem pretty relevant: 24 (number of '07 Celtics wins); 16 (number of '08 Celtics losses); four (number of useful free agents who signed with Boston after the KG trade);

Apparently P.J. Brown and Scot Pollard are now considered "useful." Also, clearly, those guys (plus Posey and Sam Cassell) came to the Celtics strictly because of KG's "contagious" and "selfless" personality and specifically not because they wanted to be a part of one of the best overall teams in the league. If KG had the same talent but the disposition of Shaq? Forget about it. No Scot Pollard and his 1.8 points per game for you, Boston.

0 (number of useful free agents who signed with Boston in the 15 years before that);

I don't know or care enough about the Celtics to research that, but I'm going to guess that it's patently false. Particularly if Pollard and Brown are "useful." (He is talking about those two, right? If he's not, feel free to punch me in the face for being an ass next time we see each other in person.)

10.2 (Boston's point differential this season, and by the way, that's a historic number);

Historic how? I guess we'll just have to leave that unqualified. It's just... historic. Hey, Atlanta's differential was a historic -1.8. They've never recorded it before. Therefore, historic.

three (number of Texas teams they beat on the road in a four-day span, as well as their total number of double-digit defeats this season);

Whoop-de-fuck on both counts, especially when trying to determine an MVP.

4,753 (estimated number of Teammate Hugs during games this season, shattering the record of the '84 Lakers); 42 (field-goal percentage for Boston opponents this season); 41 (number of home sellouts this season); and 3-to-2 (their odds to win the 2008 title).

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Also consider: sine July 2, 2007, more than 150,000 Garnett jerseys have been sold in Boston.

OK, I made that up.

Look at the Celtics last year and look at them this year. Does any of the good stuff happen without Garnett? Any of it?

Is.... is that rhetorical? You mean, like, if they still traded for Ray Allen, still kept the same core of young players, and added Al Jefferson back into the mix in place of Garnett? Unless "the good stuff" is defined as having a guy that looks like a space alien sign late in the season as a backup point guard and winning 65 games instead of 61, the answer is: yes. All of it.

Maybe his MVP campaign lost some stream when he missed 10 games earlier in the season, and I have to admit, even I shifted my attention toward Kobe, Paul and LeBron these past two months.

Thanks for bringing that up- not only did he miss those games, but he wasn't at 100% for at least 5 games after he made his comeback. So he missed 20% of the season, basically. But hey- he made people care, man. He made them care. He hustled and gristled and scooted and gritted. You can't put a value on that, unless it's a made-up value related to winning an MVP bestowed on a player by a huge fan of his team.

During a conversation with my father last weekend, I mentioned the MVP "argument" and he quickly responded with a fired-up rant that was very unlike my Pops. I'll do my best to paraphrase it:

Here we go. This will finally settle the MVP debate, once and for all. I won't lie- even though Bill promised at the beginning of this segment that he wasn't picking Garnett for homerish reasons, I've been a little unsure as to whether or not that was really the case. But I'm confident that as soon as we add his father's objective opinion to the mix, the doubt will finally leave my mind and I will be sure that these gentlemen are expressing their opinions on this matter without any regard to personal bias. I can't wait.

"Argument? There's no argument, it's Garnett.

Sold. You had me from "no." As in, "no way do this man and his son hold this opinion because they're Celtics fans! That's being a homer, and this choice (it said so at the beginning!) is not a homer choice."

I went to almost every home game. He's standing on the bench screaming for his teammates when we're up 30 points. He's a maniac! A few weeks ago, I couldn't go to a Wednesday night game so I put my tickets online and they sold in four minutes. Four minutes!

Who says the buyer wasn't actually going to see someone else, like Brian Scalabrine? These are Boston fans we're talking about here. What are the odds a black player was directly responsible for their desire to shell out big bucks to attend a sporting event? In other words, how about that Wes Welkah? Fachkin' amazin' what that guy dahs on the fayuld.

Last year, I would have been walking around my office asking if anyone wanted to go, and I would have probably ended up eating the tickets.

Because the Celtics blew last year, stupid. Obviously Garnett is partially responsible for their turnaround and deserves credit for that, but really? All 41 games worth? Or even 30? Dubious.

This year? Four minutes. Who did more for a team in one year? We lost 18 straight games last season. We were nothing. Didn't you watch the games? How could anyone be more valuable than KG was this season?"

Well, if you ask Bill, by 1) being more rememberable, 2) being the first overall pick in an imaginary pick-up game draft, and 3) being less replaceable. For item 1, I'll call it a toss up between Kobe and Garnett. For item 2, I'm going Kobe, then LeBron, then Garnett. For item 3, I'll go LeBron, then Kobe, then Garnett. So although that's a bunch of bullshit, it's based on your son's bullshit and answers your question.

It's a great question, and since I couldn't answer it without sounding like a fool, Kevin Garnett gets my MVP vote for 2008. Just remember, the "V" stands for "valuable."

Yes. It does. Good. There's nothing clever about that, and everyone already knows it. Being reminded of it does nothing for anyone because it's an incredibly nebulous concept. Thanks for ending your column with something that resembles a poorly conceptualized corporate slogan. ESPN: Just remember, the "P" stands for "programming."

I would like to add that Matt Holliday was fucking robbed of the NL MVP last year, and I'm not at all saying that because I'm a Rockies fan.

We Have Open Declarations of Ignorance

Mike Celizic literally just admitted that he knows just as little about baseball as everyone suspects he does.

Tigers winless? Red Sox in last? Time to panic!
It's only been a week, but it's never too early to ratchet up the anxiety


It's exactly too early to ratchet up the anxiety. Yesterday it was too too early, and tomorrow, it will be not quite too early.

We are all doomed. Doomed, I say. Doomed.

The world is turned upside down. The Red Sox and Phillies are in last place.

I've already read the article. It's about Celizic complaining that teams with winning traditions are doing poorly and teams with losing traditions are doing well. And the Phillies are certainly not the former.

The Brewers and Royals are in first place.

The Brewers are good.....

Yeah, sure, there are still more than 150 games to play, but since when has that ever stopped a sportswriter from pushing the panic button? That’s our job

Damn. Well, I've got nothing more to say on Celizic. I've been making fun of him for a long time for being no good at analyzing anything or knowing anything about anything but the Yankees. But it's my fault, everyone. That's not his job.

Oh come on, of course I'm going to keep bashing him.

I’m for Detroit. Remember, these are the Tigers that went into the season surfing on a wave of expectation kicked up by experts from sea to shining sea who said the AL Central was Detroit’s before a single ball was thrown in anger. Best lineup in baseball. That’s what they said.

Pure exaggeration. The majority of "experts" that I personally saw and heard chose the Indians.

Dontrelle Willis leading the pitching staff.

No expert thought he was any better than the third best pitcher on the staff. I guarantee you of that. Just because you've heard of him doesn't make him the best pitcher (remember his Josh Fogg obsession last October?).

Tied for first place with the White Sox are the Royals. If the Royals aren’t going to settle down in last place where they belong, what’s the world coming to?

Celizic literally wants the standings to be the same every year. And the same players continue to play the same positions until they're 70 and Celizic is retired or whatever.

What follows is the most blatant display of ignorance I've ever seen. The following is the equivalent of "I don't deserve my job, and I don't care to get better at it either." In fact, I might only be writing this because of what's next.

Do they have any idea how much extra work they’re creating for all of us who go into a baseball season confident that we can get along just fine without knowing anything about the Royals? Who in the name of pine tar is Ross Gload? Billy Butler? Esteban German? Alberto Callaspo? Jimmy Gobble? Guess I’m going to have to find out.

This is flat out inexcusable. And you'd better get to know who Billy Butler is. Fast.

Jemele Hill Continues Her Quest To Become The Worst Journalist Of All Time

I have no idea who currently holds that title, but I can't see them doing so much longer as long as Jemele keeps up her recent pace of drivelish shit.

(A quick Google search reveals that she's far from the only writer out there to hold this opinion, but for our purposes let's pretend this whole perspective was her idea. It'll be more fun that way. And thanks to everyone who tipped me off about this.

LeBron's image clearly means a lot to him, maybe even as much as pursuing a championship.

Apples and oranges, you stupid bint.

And that's why I can't understand why he would allow Vogue to feature him with supermodel Gisele Bundchen in such a distasteful manner.

Here's a link if you haven't seen the shot in question yet. Jemele has the same image up in her article of course, but I don't want you going over there to see it and adding to her article's traffic unless absolutely necessary.

In case you haven't seen the cover, LeBron has Gisele in one hand and a basketball in the other. LeBron is dressed in basketball gear, with his muscles flexing, tattoos showing and bared teeth. Gisele, on the other hand, is wearing a gorgeous slim-fitting dress, and smiling.

Yes. And?

She looks like she's on her way to something fashionable and exciting.

Well, she's a supermodel. I'm not a supermodel, nor do I know any, but I'm pretty sure that all they do with their lives is put on nice clothes and attend events that are fashionable and exciting.

He looks like he's on his way to a pickup game for serial killers.

Why does it look that way, Jemele? Because he's black? It's because he's black, isn't it. (Actually, most serial killers in US history have been white, but you know what she's getting at. Black people = criminals!) You racist. Racist racist racist. A self-loathing racist, no less! You'd think in this day and age, we'd be able to get past this kind of thing, at least in the mainstream media. What kind of editor lets this kind of assertion go? "Hmmmmm... Jemele is saying that because James has a mean expression on his face and is dressed to play basketball, he looks like someone who likes to murder people... yeah, that works." Anyone with a brain should be insulted by this. Have you ever seen him play basketball? He makes that face like five times a game.

Now, maybe the point was to show the contrast between brawn and beauty, masculinity versus femininity, strength versus grace.

OK, sure, that works. I personally think it was really just more about showing a top model and a star athlete striking a fun and energetic pose. But whatever.

But Vogue's quest to highlight the differences between superstar athletes and supermodels only successfully reinforces the animalistic stereotypes frequently associated with black athletes.

Actually, it doesn't. What it does instead is reinforce those stereotypes in the minds of people that can't see past color and who bend over backwards to find racism in places it doesn't exist. In some cases, it may be because they are obnoxiously sensitive and find complaining about artificially offensive things like this soothing. Well, that makes them idiots. But at least they're not hateful. What we have here, based on that serial killer comment, is entirely different. This is ten thousand times worse than being an hypersensitive complainer with a stick up your butt. Break it down with me to its simplest terms- this is someone who's part of a group... who then sees a member of her group looking exactly as he often does while performing in his line of work... and then decrying it, because when she looks at the pose all she can see is the worst possible stereotype associated with said group. That's mind-bogglingly dumb. He's a goddamn basketball player who's well known for making intense facial expressions. When he appears on a magazine cover dressed as a basketball player and making an intense facial expression, the last thing you should be is offended.

A black athlete being reduced to a savage is, sadly, nothing new.

Reduced to a savage by who? The eye of the beholder.

But this cover gave you the double-bonus of having LeBron and Gisele strike poses that others in the blogosphere have noted draw a striking resemblance to the racially charged image of King Kong enveloping his very fair-skinned lady love interest.

This is also stupid, given how un-distressed Tom Brady's fucktoy looks and, again, the fact that LeBron looks like that all the time when he plays basketball. But at least the people who are taking that angle on the photo ostensibly managed to get past the idea that if a black guy looks angry, he's probably a felon. They got the "don't be an idiot" car down the driveway and out into the street. Jemele is stil in the garage.

LeBron is just the third male ever to appear on Vogue's cover, but it's hard to believe Vogue would have made Brett Favre, Steve Nash or even David Beckham strike his best beast pose.

Good point. You know who else probably wouldn't have been asked to pose like that? Tiger Woods. Or Tim Duncan. Or LaDanian Tomlinson. (Shawne Merriman? Maybe. But that's different.) You know who else they might've actually asked to try that pose though? Roger Clemens (pre-Mitchell report, of course). Or Brian Urlacher. Or, I know this is going out on a limb in terms of the definition of "athlete", but John Cena. So, nice try. This still has everything to do with LeBron the person and nothing to do with LeBron the African American.

...[W]e don't even have to dip back to the 19th century to see how images of black athletes have affected how we think and thus how we view sports. In 1994, Jack Nicklaus said there weren't more African-Americans in golf because "blacks have different muscles that react in different ways."

As stupid as that is, where's the Fuzzy Zoeller remark? I guess it doesn't work as well in this context.

And that backward thinking isn't limited to whites, either. Former ESPN NFL analyst Michael Irvin channeled his inner Jimmy the Greek when attempting to explain Tony Romo's abilities. Irvin surmised that Romo was good because his "great, great, great, great grandma pulled one of them studs up outta the barn [and said], 'Come here for a second.'"

All of that makes for interesting discussion. But you know what? It has abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with this magazine cover. Go look at it again. If you think the magazine editor or photographer set up that picture intending to reinforce any particular stereotypes about black men or white women or what happens when a black man holds a white woman, you're out of your fucking mind. The picture is about LeBron and Gisele looking like they're having fun while doing what they do for a living.

Or, shit, maybe I'm naive and stupid and everything Hill speculates about the photo's intent is actually true. But if you know for a fact that that's the case, please don't tell me. I kind of like living here in Noteverythinghastobeaboutracegoddammitville. (It's located in HeyIunderstandracismstillexistsbutfortheloveofgodletsnotmakeeverythingintoaracialissue County.)

He's Back, He's Bad, He's......VENTIN' VENTRE

Everyone, we are about to get hit with some of the worst metaphors known to man.

Red Sox have become baseball tornado

This is what happens when a team wins 3 baseball games in a row, people! It transforms into a natural disaster that annihilates everything in its path!

ANAHEIM, Calif. - The earth opened up Sunday and swallowed the Angels.

Now when did tornadoes get the ability to "open the earth" and make the earth swallow things? This double-metaphor really isn't doing it for me.

Actually, it just seemed that way.

Whew.

It was the Boston Red Sox who devoured them, and really Saturday was more like the final bite before the last burp. Rarely do you see an entire baseball team push itself back from the table, take a deep breath, loosen its belt, and reach for a mint.

....I'm speechless.

What's going on here?

The Red Sox advanced Sunday to the American League Championship Series by completing a sweep of the surprisingly submissive Angels with a 9-1 victory in the best-of-five division series.

Aahhhhh ok. There we go.

Although Stanford upset USC on Saturday, proving that just about anything can happen in sports, this result seemed as if it had been etched in stone, or more specifically, in Bill Stoneman, the Angels’ GM whose mantra is that the Angels don’t need another big bat.

Purpose of big bat: Score more runs
Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim: Already pretty good at that

Somehow I don't blame him.

The Red Sox are moving on because, at least in this series against Los Angeles, it seemed like the only kind of bats they have are big ones.

Also: not hard to win a series when your pitching holds the other team to 4 total runs.

The contrast was startling, as it figures to be in the ALCS. The Red Sox had been sliding somewhat down the stretch in the regular season, allowing their formidable lead in the American League East over the Yankees to dwindle to a squirmy margin. But now that that nonsense has been dispensed with, it’s almost like they’re interested again.

So that's it. They were bored. The Boston Red Sox have been looking up at the Yankees for over a decade, and now that they were the ones sitting in first with a nice lead, it was just too uninteresting for them to care. Cool.

Skipping to later......

Just about every baseball club these days pops champagne after every significant postseason development — gaining the playoffs, winning the division series, winning the championship series, winning the World Series. Investing in champagne stock at this time of year is probably the wisest move on Wall Street.

I'm actually going to stick with my initial conviction that Ventre thinks you can just "invest in champagne stock". Also good: investing in pumpkins near Halloween (like Homer Simpson), investing in pine trees around Christmas, in eggs around Easter, and in fireworks around the 4th of July. These are proven excellent financial strategies.

(we'll leave out the discussion of Ventre's lack of understanding of weak-form efficient markets and the pure idiocy of thinking that the sale of like 1500 bottles of champagne would affect its stock price, if it had a stock)

So it was no surprise to see the Red Sox erupt late Sunday in a bacchanal of bubbly.

After careful analysis of past trends, Michael Ventre has determined that no, it was completely un-shocking, and actually quite predictable that the Red Sox celebrated with champagne.

There was first baseman Kevin Youkilis madly shaking a bottle and spraying it in a 360-degree guyser. There was prankster Manny, filling a tub with ice water, then sneaking up on several unsuspecting teammates. When the champagne ran out, they used cans of beer.

These guys are a fucking baseball TORNADO. What were we writing about again?

Red Sox Nation may turn out to be the greatest country in the world, at least as far as this 2007 baseball season is concern.

This is just a mind-bogglingly stupid sentence.

Oh yeah, and "is concern"? Nice. We don't need no stinkin' editors. Fight, the power, Mike.

Go Indians!

MSNBC.com Needs New Analysts....

.....like Michael Ventre needs a new job.

This guy is a total joke. Everything he writes is laughable. Admittedly, there are a few Celizic articles that are hard to tear apart, but this guy just never says anything of value. We're going to have an "INSIGHT" comment after each section, telling you what you can learn from Ventre each time.

Dodger fans will abuse Bonds more than ever
Environment will be truly hostile as Giant seeks record-tying 755th HR

Ooh GREAT! An article about how fans of a divison rival.....don't like Barry very much! What foresight, what ANALYSIS, what STUFF PEOPLE COULDN'T HAVE TOLD THEMSELVES. No really man, really, I expect that you'll write multiple, excellent paragraphs that will make me understand this in a new, more profound way. And if I haven't conveyed this yet, simply an AWESOME topic to write about.

In professional wrestling, it is common to see a villainous figure climb into the ring and spew nasty comments at the crowd. The fans, many of whom work themselves into the equivalent of a ‘roids rage without even taking steroids, scream back at the instigating hulk, questioning his manhood, his ancestry, the whereabouts of his spouse (often suggesting she’s someplace she isn’t supposed to be) and bathing him in every combination of expletives imaginable.

Oh man, gotta love this setup, the wrestling analogy...the angry fans, the "instigating hulk"....how could you NOT draw this comparison?

INSIGHT: None. Just things about wrestling. We'll forgive him later though if this is somehow useful.

Take that scenario, multiply it by 10, and it will approximate the scene at Dodger Stadium this week when Barry Bonds attempts to tie, and then break, Hank Aaron’s career home-run record.

So....the fans won't just be hostile, they're going to be VERY hostile. Continue with this awesome, awesome analogy (and continue saying such awesomely insightful stuff!)

INSIGHT: Dodger fans don't like Barry Bonds, and will jeer, heckle, and boo him intensely. Anyone else not know this already? Because I sure didn't.

The pro wrestling analogy is fitting not simply because Bonds, like many pro wrestlers, resembles one of those huge Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade balloons that appears inflated to the brink of bursting. It’s also appropriate because when Bonds and Dodger fans get together, there is a visceral reaction, a primal, savage, beastly burst of ferocity that rivals scenes on “Animal Planet” when a lion hunts down and then devours a zebra.

Can you imagine a giant Barry Bonds balloon floating down the street during the Macy's parade? Thanks to Michael Ventre, I sure can now. And this "Animal Planet" thing sounds pretty cool. Maybe I should watch that. What's this article about again? Oh yeah. Baseball.

INSIGHT: Barry Bonds got big on steroids. Dodger fans don't like Barry Bonds, and will jeer, heckle, and boo him intensely.

And that’s just during batting practice.

So I was looking up the definition of "hyperbole" in the dictionary the other day, and....hey!

Starting Tuesday, the gloves come off.

Woah....careful man. "Gloves" are boxing equipment, not wrestling equipment. Your extended metaphor is dying.....

Bonds has been showered in boos, catcalls and suggestive remarks every time he has appeared in Chavez Ravine in the past. After all, he’s a Giant. He wears the uniform of a pagan horde, at least in the minds of the locals. When they look at Bonds, they don’t think “home run,” they think “pillage.” They want to roast mutton by an open fire, drink grog, and then battle him to the death.

INSIGHT: Tuesday, Barry Bonds plays in Dodger Stadium. Dodger fans don't like Barry Bonds, and will jeer, heckle, and boo him intensely.

This time, emotions will run even higher. Bonds is attempting to stain the record book by trying to hit Nos. 755 and 756. But he also wants to do it against the Dodgers. Bonds gets off on that.

"Bonds gets off on that"? "stain the record books?" There's something sexual here! Suppose Bonds hits 2 homers Tuesday night, here comes Ventre's article title the next day:

"Record Books Stained as Bonds Excitedly Shoots Off Two Orgasmic Homers Against Rival Dodgers"

INSIGHT: Bonds doesn't like the Dodgers, and (probably?) wants to break the record against them.

Like the aforementioned meat-headed juicers who oil their bodies and then slam each others’ heads into the mat, Bonds has a lot of anger. He is perturbed that a ticker-tape parade isn’t being held every time he enters a new city. He scoffs at detractors who suggest that somehow his accomplishments aren’t worthy of admiration. He mocks those who have followed the legal process and believe that eventually he might be forced to trade in McCovey Cove for Pelican Bay.

Ah, back to wrestling, good. Somehow I doubt that Bonds cares that a "ticker-tape parade" doesn't happen wherever he goes.

INSIGHT: Bonds is an angry man who believes he is doing something great and hates people who say otherwise. (we need people to tell us this???)

Bonds enjoys being despised — usually. He revels in it — for the most part.

INSIGHT: Bonds likes being hated.

But this historic pairing of controversial slugger and proud rival fan base is actually ideal, because whether he wants to admit it or not, this is one situation in which he’d rather not have to deal with resistance. In a perfect world, he’d rather break the record, be greeted with an outpouring of love and appreciation, and then get carried around the stadium on an opulent litter like the kind Cleopatra used to ride in.

More dumb, hyperbolic crap. What a waste of (cyber)space.

INSIGHT: Bonds won't be loved in Dodger Stadium, but ideally, he wants to be loved and appreciated. (This seems VERY contradictory to your last insight!)

Bonds would like the Dodgers to stop the game so that the fans can give him as long a standing ovation as possible without having to be burdened with mundane details like finishing the game. Bonds would love Bud Selig to get on one knee, say, “I’m not worthy,” and then hand him keys to a yacht. Bonds would like a hug from Henry Aaron. Bonds wants a video tribute on the big scoreboard showing his career highlights, but one that is digitally enhanced so it doesn’t appear as if he went from looking like a cyclist to an offensive lineman practically overnight.

Ideally, Bonds would love to orchestrate every detail of his record-breaking performance in Dodger Stadium the way Eva Longoria planned her wedding in France.

Ain’t gonna happen.

Stop, just STOP already. This is nonsense. It's like you realized 4 paragraphs ago you had no point, so you're just spewing hyperbole and analogy left and right.

INSIGHT: Ideally, Bonds wants to be loved and appreciated.

On April 8, 1974 in Atlanta, Aaron broke Babe Ruth’s record for career home runs. He whacked No. 715 off a Dodger, Al Downing. Since then, Downing has been an answer to a trivia question, even though he’s more than that. He had a fine career over 17 major league seasons, most with the Yankees and Dodgers, and has also worked in the Dodgers’ organization.

Downing’s name doesn’t live in infamy. He just happened to give up the record-breaking blast to a great player and a great person. If it wasn’t him, it would have been somebody else.

What does this have to do with anything? I mean it's hard to say you're off topic in an article with no point, but somehow, I REALLY think Downing is irrelevant to talking about Dodger fans hating Bonds. And by the way, great last sentence of this section.

INSIGHT: Al Downing gave up Aaron's record breaking home run, but don't sell him short! He had a nice career, and if he didn't give up that home run, someone else would have!

But pity the Dodger pitcher who gives up Bonds’ record-tying and/or record-breaking dingers this week. Brad Penny will be the L.A. starter on Tuesday night, followed by Mark Hendrickson on Wednesday and Brett Tomko on Thursday. And there are relievers who could be victimized also.

INSIGHT: It would suck to give one of the next two Bonds home runs (duh), and there are several different people who might do that.

There may be a segment of Dodger fans who want to see Bonds break the record this week against the Dodgers for two very different reasons: 1) they want to tell their grandchildren someday that they were present when history was made, or 2) of all the fans in the majors, they feel they are best equipped to unleash a torrent of horrors not seen since medieval times.

INSIGHT: Dodger fans don't like Barry Bonds, and will jeer, heckle, and boo him intensely. (I've pressed CTRL-V 3 times for this already)

Yet most Dodger fans probably want Bonds to be foiled in his quest. They don’t want to see him break the record at all, but they know that’s unrealistic because even if he were on life support he’d somehow blink his eyes and convince the Giants to wheel him out to home plate so he could stick his bat out.

INSIGHT: Dodger fans don't want Barry to break the record, but he will anyway. I am a terrible sportswriter who just uses weird hyperboles to fill up space.

Most Dodger fans want Bonds to strike out every time up, so they can jeer and taunt him. They’ve been doing it to him his entire career, but especially since 1993, when he joined the heathens to the north. They’ve been especially vociferous in their heckling since 2001, when it became clear that Bonds had put on a few extra pounds of muscle.

INSIGHT: CTRL-V! Dodger fans don't like Barry Bonds, and will jeer, heckle, and boo him intensely.

Barry Bonds is coming to Dodger Stadium. It may not be an event as scripted as a pro wrestling match, but Dodger fans definitely know their lines.

INSIGHT: Barry Bonds is coming to Dodger Stadium. What will happen is unknown, but the one thing for certain is.....(CTRL-V!) Dodger fans don't like Barry Bonds, and will jeer, heckle, and boo him intensely.

To those of you reading this. Scroll up to the top. Read it again, but only read the sections marked "INSIGHT" Ask yourself if you learned anything in these sections that you didn't already know (except for that stuff about Al Downing). If the answer is "yes", there's a 97% chance you've never heard of "baseball" before.

Again, really, Ventre, thank you oh so very much for being a baseball analyst who says smart, informed, wise things about baseball that are so obscured to the casual fan.

I'm off to play poker!