Congress Now Controls The Sun

This is far and away the stupidest thing I've ever read. Politics, global warming, and everything else aside, apparently this woman thinks that daylight savings time has some sort of an effect on how much sunshine there is in a given day.

Wow. That's amazing.

Although I linked to it, I'm including the entire text of her "article" here. Inevitably this article will be removed eventually. But it will be preserved here at Hooray Beer.

Also, I apologize in advance for increasing your stupidity by putting this in front of you. And I also apologize from taking us away from baseball and inane things. But at least I bumped the platypus off the top of the page.

Anyway, here's the story:

Daylight exacerbates warning
You may have noticed that March of this year was particularly hot. As a matter of fact, I understand that it was the hottest March since the beginning of the last century. All of the trees were fully leafed out and legions of bugs and snakes were crawling around during a time in Arkansas when, on a normal year, we might see a snowflake or two. This should come as no surprise to any reasonable person. As you know, Daylight Saving Time started almost a month early this year. You would think that members of Congress would have considered the warming effect that an extra hour of daylight would have on our climate. Or did they ? Perhaps this is another plot by a liberal Congress to make us believe that global warming is a real threat. Perhaps next time there should be serious studies performed before Congress passes laws with such far-reaching effects. CONNIE M. MESKIMEN / Hot Springs

I truly hope that not everyone in Arkansas is this stupid. Apparently the "letters to the editor" editor is equally stupid as he (she) left the title as "daylight exacerbates warning" instead of replacing "warning" with "warming". I suppose we should just be thankful for the well placed use of "exacerbates". That's a big word for folks from Arkansas.

Okay - it's a new regime around here.

I got the new account working and now I am ready to rock.

And not like the ESPN fantasy baseball thing.

I actually mean it.

And to prove it - here is a picture of a pissed off platypus.





















Do NOT mess with me and the platypus.

Jackie Robinson Day

I am a huge Jackie Robinson fan. And I'm a big supporter of Ken Griffey Jr's idea (ok, I don't think it was really Ken's idea, but he's getting credit for it -- for whatever reason, that I can't verify, I feel like I read an idea very similar to this a few year's back on some blog or website).

But I think what's going to happen on Sunday is a little out of control. For the most part, I agree wtih what Torii Hunter had to say (and being that he's a Twin, that's rare for me).

Yes, all of the Dodgers should be wearing 42 on Sunday. Whether it's Juan Pierre, Jeff Kent, Wilson Betemit, or anyone else, it makes absolute sense for every Dodger to wear 42 in Robinson's honor. Regardless of race (but not to diminish anything that Robinson did for African Americans), Jackie Robinson did more than most people can comprehend for the game of baseball. His impact for blacks was both obvious and tremendous. But he effectively opened the door for foreigners (regardless of skin color) as well. Jackie Robinson changed the game, and a lot more in America, as a Dodger. All Dodger players should honor that each and every April 15th.

And I think at least one player on each other team should wear 42 on April 15th too. Whether it's a black player or not is not the issue for me though. The player(s) on each team who wear 42 need to "get it".

For one, I think each player who wears 42 for the day (Mariano Rivera can get a pass if he doesn't want to do this) should have to take and pass a test about Jackie Robinson. Each player who wears the number should be able to demonstrate that they know why they are wearing it. If you can't pass the test, you should study up and maybe you will be granted the honor next year.

Second, everyone who passes the test should either be evaluated by a committee and/or nominated by their team. If you have character issues, are an off the field problem, or shouldn't be associated with Jackie Robinson for any other reason, this is how baseball can ensure they don't. Players who wear 42 should be worthy of the honor. I would put Mr. Robinson's wife on the committee and a handful of others in and associated with baseball who "get it" (maybe Tony Gwynn, Ken Griffey Jr, Frank Robinson, and Kenny Williams -- just to name four people).

Also, having entire teams wear 42 (other than the Dodgers) just seems goofy to me. I don't get it. If that's part of a larger plan and each of the players can pass the Jackie Robinson history test, fine. But I doubt that's the case.

Is He a Hall of Famer?

Last year we talked about a bunch of guys who were borderline Hall of Fame candidates. With his home run last night, giving him home runs with 10 different teams, I couldn't help but think about whether Kenny Lofton was a potential Hall of Famer.

Here are his stats.

He has about 2,300 hits right now, over 600 stolen bases, and a lifetime OBP of .372. He's a 6 time All-Star, four time gold glover, received MVP votes in four different seasons, and was the runner-up for Rookie of the Year (to Pat Listach, of all people). Despite 10 post-season appearances, Kenny hasn't won any rings (and his teams only advanced to the World Series twice).

Kiki Cuyler is the only Hall of Famer on his most similar players list (his career ended in 1938). Ken Griffey (the dad) is Kenny's most similar comparable.

Based on the stats, Kenny isn't a Hall of Famer. I hope he gets some votes. Based on how many teams he's played for, it's tough to say what cap he'd wear in the Hall. It's probably not an issue anyway. He has been a lot of fun to watch though. And he's been a guy for a long time that was a good guy to build a team around. He might not have ever been the MVP/statistical leader of a team, but he's been a really good table setter with some pop (about an average SLG percentage for his career -- not bad for a leadoff guy).

Mike's Pre-Season Predictions

Last year I couldn't even predict how the season would turn out when we adjusted our picks as late as Labor Day. So I'm not very confident that I'll come up with anything good here today. While I think there are a lot of really good teams, nearly every team is seriously flawed or has significant questions.

Anyway, on to the predictions:

AL East - Boston Red Sox
I probably pick the BoSox every year. But this year I really believe it. I think Dice-K will contend not only for Rookie of the Year honors, but for the Cy Young too. If Schilling and Beckett stay healthy (big ifs), this team is stacked. Still, it's weird that Julian Tavarez (!) is in the starting rotation.

The Red Sox hopes are aided by the apparent weakness of the Yankees' starting rotation. The Yankees will score a lot of runs, but they'll need to. Carl Pavano is starting on opening day; coming into the camp it wasn't clear that he'd make the opening day roster. And it was just a few weeks ago that there were serious talks about Kei Igawa ending up in the minors. Now he's towards the top of the rotation to start the year.

I like the Blue Jays, but I don't think they can overcome the division's two super powers. The same is true of the O's and Rays. Both clubs are probably better, but I'm not convinced their place in the standings will change this year.

AL Central - Detroit Tigers
This was a really tough pick for me. There are at least three, and probably four, teams that are legit contenders for the division title and the AL pennant.

Some thoughts on everyone but the Royals: the Twins, despite how great their front office is, have a rotation full of question marks. It's Santana and who? Scary stuff.

The Tigers are likely to regress this year. Aren't they? I think they're subject to the same type of slump the White Sox had last year. That said, they could still win 90 games. The Tigers added Sheffield to the lineup this offseason (like the Sox adding Thome last year). He'll be a big improvement. They also get a full year from Mike Maroth. But can the starter and the bullpen be as good as they were last year? How long can Todd Jones continue to be better than he was when he was young?

I wanted to pick the White Sox, but I just can't. Too many questions and weird decisions being made. That said, I have a hard time questioning Ozzie Guillen and Kenny Williams. The team's on field performance the past few years has been pretty impressive. If the rotation stays healthy and performs closer to 2005 levels, the Sox will likely win the division. Not sure if that can really happen though. There are huge concerns about the lineup, particularly at the top. But that doesn't matter as much as the pitching. I particularly like the nicknames of Peter Pan and Tinkerbell for Podsednik and Erstad, although the nicknames make me sad at the same time.

I really like the Indians too, but their pitching isn't improved. That was there problem last year. Peralta should be better and that will help. But he can't do much about holding a late, close lead. That will be their downfall.

AL West - LA Angels
I'm running out of steam, so this will be briefer. I like the Angels. They made a strong push late last year. And I think the A's are a little worse than last year (no Zito). Can Piazza replace Thomas? We'll see.

The Rangers are my dark horse though. The last two teams to get rid of Buck Showalter won the whole thing the next season.

NL East - Atlanta Braves
For years I said I would pick the Braves until they finally lost. Now they lost and I'm still picking them. Why? Well, who's going to pitch for the Mets? The lineup is sick, but the pitching staff is anemic.

The trendy pick is probably the Phillies, but how are they going to do it? Can Howard be as good again this year as he was last year? Teams will pitch around him until Burrell or someone else produces. Freddy Garcia is a nice pickup, but there's a reason the Sox were willing to give him up. Freddy could allow as many homers at CBP as Howard hits. And the Phillies bullpen does not inspire awe.

The Braves lost a lot of late leads last year. They spent the offseason trying to improve their pen. I'm not convinced, but Schuerholz and Cox have a decent track record, to say the least. If the Braves' pen improves and the Mets regress even just a little bit, the division is the Braves for the taking.

The Marlins are kidding themselves. It will be a nice story if they can contend again. Willis will rebound. But can the sophomores in the rotation duplicate their rookie success? And why would anyone pitch to Miguel Cabrera?

If the Nationals can avoid losing the most games in ML history, it will be a significant accomplishment.

NL Central - Milwaukee Brewers
This division is brutal. If anyone wins 85 games, I think they'll take it. Really just about anyone other than the Pirates could win the division. And by saying that, I probably added 5 games to the Pirates win total.

Last year the Cardinals won the division with 83 wins. It's not that they're a bad team. There are a lot of good (but not great) teams in this division and they beat the crap out of each other.

The Cardinals rotation is a mess. The Cubs spent a fortune on upgrades this offseason, but have no pitching after Zambrano to speak of. The Brewers could be interesting if they stay healthy. The Astros could be interesting if they get Clemens, but I doubt that will happen. And the Reds could surprise if their pitching lives up to insider expectations. If the outfielders stay healthy (big if), the Reds have a big bat to trade for a pitcher in July.

All I can say about the Pirates is that they have Jason Bay. Don't tell me about Freddy Sanchez. He'll be exposed. And the LaRoche kid is nice too.

NL West - San Diego Padres
Here's another free for all. Coming into the spring, I liked the Dodgers best. But throughout the spring I've been impressed by the raw talent the Diamondbacks have. And the Padres are the two-time defending division champs and they're better this year than last year. Even the Rockies are better.

I'll stick with the Padres. They addressed some of their offensive issues by acquiring Kouzmanoff and Giles offsets Barfield. Plus they added Maddux and Wells. While neither is anywhere near their prime, they'll excel at Petco. And Peavy has to be better.

Wild Cards
In the NL, the West and Central teams will beat each other up so much that no one will seriously be in the wild card race. The wild card winner will likely be whoever beats up on the Nationals the most. It comes down to the Phillies and Mets. While the Phillies are cursed, I hate the Mets (but like many of their players), so I'll take the Phillies.

The AL is also pretty crazy. All three divisions should be uber-competitive. The Yankees will likely be in it and make a trade or two in July. Someone will rise up in the Central though and a team or two will falter. I'll take the White Sox to put it together and take the wild card.

World Series - Red Sox over Brewers
I really don't know. I like the pick of the Red Sox. I have no clue in the NL. Having the Brewers in the World Series would be fun in one regard: the TV ratings would suck, but what could Bud say? It's his small market team. And I'd like a big market, big dollar vs. small market, small dollar matchup to throw another wrench into the mix for people who say small market teams can't compete.

Ok, now go and bet against everyone I picked.

More Questions

There was a story in yesterday's NY Post by Mike Vaccaro that was pretty interesting. It started off talking about classic baseball questions (i.e. Willie, Mickey, or the Duke?) and went on to talk about the potentially classic questions in today's game.

Since it was in a New York paper, they started with the most obvious: Who would you rather have - David Wright and Jose Reyes of the Mets or Alex Rodriguez and Derek Jeter of the Yankees?

From there they focused on the NL East with Wright and Reyes or Ryan Howard and Chase Utley of the Phillies. In the article they said that foursome could represent the NL in the All-Star game for many years to come. That may well be the case, but it could be due to the fact that those guys are from the larger media markets.

One could just as easily throw the Marlins duo of Miguel Cabrera and Hanley Ramirez into the left-side-of-the-infield debate mix. Given the choice between Wright and Reyes, or Rodriguez and Jeter, or Cabrera and Ramirez, you really couldn't go wrong.

Another NL East pairing to throw into the mix would be the Nats Ryan Zimmerman and... oh... well... nevermind. Do the Nats even have a SS prospect?

Tough Questions

Ok, let's be honest here for a moment. Take salary/budget out of the picture. Forget about fantasy baseball. If you were starting a team and could have any third baseman you wanted (maybe it's for an Olympics/World Baseball Classic type of event), which player would you pick. Say you're looking to have this guy for this year and for the next five years.

The candidates, at least in my mind, probably are: Eric Chavez, Scott Rolen, Miguel Cabrera, David Wright, Alex Rodriguez, Alex Gordon, Ryan Zimmerman, Joe Crede, and Brandon Inge. There are definitely some other prospects and major leaguers out there to consider. But I think that's the A-list.

So who do you pick?

Chavez and Rolen have had off years and/or injuries. They've both probably peaked and their better days are behind them.

Crede and Inge are fun to watch, but don't have the upside of others on this list. They're definitely not the types you would build around.

Cabrera, Wright, Gordon, and Zimmerman are all either stars or will be stars very shortly. I think they each have holes in their game though. They're all pretty small and are really defense and/or speed. You can work around all of those things when you get the bats you get with these guys.

But I think the guy I would have to take -- and it really pains me to say this -- is ARod. He had a down year last year with 30+ homers and well over 100 RBI. Everyone talks about what a great year Jeter had (and don't get me started there), but ARod, in a "down" year scored about as many runs as Jeter and drove in more. Bad Arod is better than good/great just about anyone else.

The knock on ARod is what he does in the "clutch" and what he's done in the post-season. I think ARod is close to "getting" it though. Barry Bonds used to struggle in the playoffs. But he owned the 2002 post-season (I think the homer he hit off Percival is still in orbit). ARod seems like the type who will come around later in his career.

Maybe I'm just going soft on ARod. The talk of him being traded to the White Sox (or just about anywhere else in the league) doesn't seem to go away. Maybe I'm just preparing myself for the inevitable.

Regardless, I hope Wiggins ends up with ARod on his fantasy team.

News of the Day

I'm not sure which of these stories I like better:

1 - Man tries to cash check from God

2 - A police dog was called into court because a judge wanted to know about the college degree he allegedly earned. The real kicker (this shocked me) is that the degree is not from Florida State.

Three Things Wiggins Thinks

Here are things that I know, with absolute certainty, that Wiggins thinks:

1. That ARod will be the MVP of 2007. Not just the AL MVP. And not just the All Star game MVP. He'll be the MVP of everything that is 2007 in baseball. He will win the ALCS MVP. He will win the World Series MVP. He'll win the MVP Award for his play when the team of American all-stars visits Japan in the offseason. Wiggins even thinks there's a chance that ARod will win the NLCS MVP because of the influence he will have on the psyche of the NL players who will fear facing him in the World Series.

2. Hanley Ramirez will hit .237 and manage a statistically inefficient stolen base to caught stealing ratio.

3. Wiggins thinks "comedian" Andy Dick will find his inner heterosexual and spawn a child. She will be named Anita. Wiggins will try not to laugh about this for 18 years. He will fail.

We Almost Missed a Month

January has nearly come and gone and we have posted nothing. I suppose part of that is due to a post-holiday lag, but most of it is because 1) there's no baseball at the moment (although, we have to figure out how to get radio/television of the Caribbean Series. Seriously) and 2) Wiggins and I are both whipped. Initially I thought that was kind of sad, but I'm warming up to it and now I recognize that it's kind of cool.

Sadly, the cool little links I put up the last time I posted here seem to have gone offline and they're no longer available. That, much like me, sucks.

That's all I have for now. Hopefully I'll be inspired sometime soon.

Sides

The links and such on the side of the page have gotten a little stale. I am going to take the opportunity today to spruce them up a little bit.

Maybe It's Not So Crazy

Ok, so the 5-year/$70 million contract for JD Drew still seems insane to me. Props to him for opting out of the 3-year/$33 million the Dodgers owed him. He's a lot richer for that decision.

But the deal seems a lot more sane when you consider the 6-year/$100 million contract that Carlos Lee received from the Astros.

I know this isn't how the contract will be paid, but pretend that Lee gets paid like JD Drew for the first 5 years. That means the 6th year -- when Lee will be more qualified to play d-line for the Texans than outfield for the Astros -- is effectively worth $30 million. That's insane.

And don't even get me started on the Gil Meche contract. Wow.

Science Fair

1 - What did we do before YouTube? Seriously, I don't know how we existed.
2 - I want to help a kid with a science fair experiment this year.

Long Lost Brothers

I always knew that Wiggins and I had long lost brothers (from other mothers):

Is This Kid Possessed?

I Have To See This Movie

Yeah, it's been like a month since I've posted. I know, I know: It's pathetic. I mean, I'm approaching Wiggins territory here. But I have a clip that will redeem me. Just watch it all the way through to the end. Note the bottle of vodka that Matt Lauer takes and the high five he gives to the last question he receives:

Oh man, I can't embed it for some reason: Borat on Today

Apparently my mad blogging skills are diminishing. Sad.

Picking for Perfection

Since I did so well with the (so-called, but I'm not sure why -- since you can't play anyone from your division) Division Series, I am going to forecast the outcome of the League Championship Series in both the NL and the AL:

National League: Cardinals over Mets
American League: Tigers over A's

Congratulations to the Mets and Athletics!

Joe Girardi Day

So it seems that Joe Girardi will likely be fired within the next hour or so. Fine. Whatever. He did well enough. But he wasn't the best in game manager of all time (although, who is in their first year?). He seemed to do well managing a clubhouse full of personalities (ranging from minor leaguers to established stars -- even if they were all practically under 25).

But at this time last year, Girardi didn't seem to make the most sense to outsiders. Other candidates made more sense. Now it seems they're hiring one of those types -- as the rumors have Fredi Gonzalez getting the job. Fredi has a great resume and, since he is bilingual, will likely relate well to players who speak English and Spanish.

The question of the day though, for both Samson and Loria (Beinfest too if he's part of the hiring) is: what will you do differently in hiring a manager this year that you did not do next year? Clearly there was a flaw in the hiring process used last year. They hired a manager who came in and delivered results that were above expectations. Something was missed in the interview and background checking process that allowed the Marlins to hire a manager that they clearly do not want. Can they admit that mistake?

Also, if Gonzalez is hired as early as this afternoon, as has been reported, will MLB investigate the Marlins hiring practices (again)? Or do the Fish get a pass since they're reportedly hiring a Hispanic manager? Maybe it's ok to only talk to one candidate and to handle the whole process while the job is technically already filled if you hire a minority. I applaud the point of the process that MLB has put together, but the point should be to consider the best candidates. Not to just pick a name out of a hat and go after the one person that you target, as the Marlins are seemingly wont to do.

Playoff Predictions

I haven't yet mustered the courage to go back and look at our playoff team predictions, even the most recent ones. I will soon. But for now I'm just going to make some picks. Here are the LDS matchups:

AL
Tigers vs. Yankees
Twins vs. Athletics

NL
Cardinals vs. Padres
Dodgers vs. Mets

Predictions
The Yankees will dispatch of the Tigers fairly easily. The Tigers have been a great story of late, but they've faded.

In the other AL series, the Twins will top the A's. Despite not having Liriano, the Twins finished strong.

The Padres will get even for last year and knock out the Cardinals. And I'm going to hope the Mets fall to the Dodgers.

Early LCS Predictions
Yankees over Twins -- I hope I'm wrong
Dodgers over Padres -- I'll admit it, I just want to hear Vin Scully call a World Series. I know I can get it on tape, but hearing it "live" would be cool.

World Series
Dodgers over Yankees -- How cool would it be to have a Mets-Dodgers and Yankees - Dodgers series in the same post-season?

Scoring the Picks

I am embarrassed to report the following:

In our last set of college picks (straight up, mind you), Wiggins went a pathetic 4-6. Shockingly, Mike did worse -- going 3-7.

We did slightly better in the NFL last week. Both of us went 9-7.

This week, Wiggins came strong with his NFL pciks. He has gone 10-3, with the Reggie Bush show still pending. Mike has only managed an 8-5 record. Sad.