Rest in Peace, Randy "Macho Man" Savage

Issue: You are telling me he was still alive?

Short Answer: That's exactly what I'm saying.

Randy "Macho Man" Savage (Poffo) when he played minor league baseball in the Cincinnati Reds farm system.

Reasoning: I have been planning on writing my eulogy of Randy Savage since my brother sent me this article from the New York Times a week ago.  Imagine my chagrin today, as I visited ESPN.com for the first time in weeks, only to find that Bill Simmons had done the very same thing.  In his article, Simmons talks very specifically about Savage and some of the matches, interviews, and run-ins he had during his career.  See, Simmons was in high school and college when he was watching the WWF, so he remembers things like that.  When Randy Savage broke into the WWF in 1985, I was seven years old.  I remember "Macho Man" but I couldn't recount a single match he ever had.  But, I can damn near guarantee you that I watched every single one of them.  I remember Miss Elizabeth (his female manager) as one of my very first crushes in life, next to Linda Carter, who played Wonder Woman right around the same time in my life (and, I date myself - again).

The thing I do remember about "Macho Man" was the fact that he was an entertainer first and a wrestler second.  I remember enjoying (and laughing hilariously) at his interviews, but, like I said before, I remember very little about his actual time in the ring.  I remember his "Ooooooooohhhhhhh, yyyyyyeeeeeaaaaahhhhhhh!" way more than I remember his flying elbow finishing move.  I remember his partnership with Miss Elizabeth (and who doesn't?) way more than his partnership with Hulk Hogan.  Randy Savage entertained every second he was on the television screen, and I can't help but think the height of his popularity coincided with the height of the WWF's popularity.  I feel like it was he, who ushered in the era in professional wrestling, where being a phenomenal athlete wasn't quite enough.  Those athletes also had to act and entertain, since, in the end, that is what pro wrestling is all about - entertainment.  People who watch it know it is fake (although those guys get beat up more than any other athletes out there, save football players), so those who make their living off of it, better bring some believability to the table.  Randy Savage did that.

But, the thing I remembered most about Randy "Macho Man" Savage was how he, and all those other wrestlers (Junkyard Dog, Hillbilly Jim, "Mr. Wonderful' Paul Orndorff, Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat, The British Bulldogs, "Hacksaw" Jim Duggan, Hulk Hogan, Andre the Giant, Jake "The Snake" Roberts, etc.) gave my brothers and I something to love, something to do on Saturday mornings, and, something to fight about.  Although I don't remember Savage's matches, I do remember exactly where I was almost every Saturday morning for years - right in front a the little TV we had in the kitchen, watching "Mean" Gene Okerlund host the WWF, with my brothers by my side.  I also remember how my dad used to take the mini-versions of me and my brothers, one at a time, to do our Christmas shopping for each other.  Dad tells the story that, one Christmas (I imagine 1986.  Long time ago), each one of us got out of the van, walked into Toys'R'Us, and went straight to the aisle where the 6" toy plastic molded wrestlers were.  In taking three little kids shopping, he spent less than five minutes total in the store.  We had the mini-ring at home, so what better way to say Merry Christmas to my brothers than by "buying" them their favorite wrestlers - so I, and my wrestlers, could kick the crap out of them and their wrestlers.  And vice versa.  I remember the times when my brothers and I (and my dad, coincidentally) would gather around the TV to watch Wrestlemania - it was the first television program I can remember being excited to watch (maybe "Who's The Boss" as well - Alyssa Milano = hotness).  And Randy "Macho Man" Savage was at the center of it all.  Thanks Randy.  You and Miss Elizabeth (1960-2003) can entertain together, once again.

Why Joey Votto is the MVP. Still.

Issue: Is it because he absolutely rakes?

Short Answer: Well, yeah.  But he does so much more for the Reds.

Reasoning:  Now that the high school baseball season is over I will have more opportunities to do exactly what I did last night - catch most of the Reds' game.  The Reds came into the game losers of six in a row, and most of those losses were achieved in head-shaking fashion.  However, the Reds of 2010 showed up last night, stealing a win in the 9th from the Philadelphia Phillies.  Heading into the 9th the score was knotted at three a piece, and the Phillies were bringing in closer Ryan Madson.  Coming into Tuesday night Madson was 2-0 on the year with a 0.47 ERA and 9 saves (in 9 opportunities).  Let's pick up the action in the top of the 9th:

• After Edgar Renteria flew out to center, Drew Stubbs laid down a bunt-base-hit attempt.  It was a below average attempt, as bunters know when they bunt for a hit it should be "perfect or foul."  Stubbs damn near bunted the ball right back to the pitcher.  However, Madson came off the mound, tried to rush the throw, and chucked it down the right field line.  Stubbs should have bought the score keeper a beer or two, because, somehow, he/she/it scored the play a single.  Stubbs did reach 2nd on Madson's throwing error.
• Brandon Phillips then lined sharply to shortstop.  Two outs.
• With Joey Votto striding to the dish, everyone in the world (literally, every single person) knew Madson would intentionally walk him.  And, for the first time in history, everyone in the world was correct.  But that isn't what makes Votto the MVP (I hope none of you thought it was).
• Scott Rolen then reached on an infield single when he hit a hard ground ball down the 3rd base line which Placido Polanco had to dive for (this is the Votto-for-MVP play - I'll explain in a second).  Bases loaded, still two down.
• Jay Bruce, after a pop-up and two strikeouts in the game, came to the dish and delivered a bases clearing double.  Reds win 6-3.  Jay Bruce is the hero, right?  Wrong.  Joey Votto is.

Let me take you back to Scott Rolen's infield single.  First, Polanco probably did not have to dive for the ball, but, he did.  This was the exact right play too.  With a runner on 2nd and two outs, infielders have to dive after every single ball they can get to, in an effort to keep the ball on the infield.  If the ball gets to the outfield, the run scores.  If the ball stays in the infield, the runner can only advance to 3rd, and the offensive team still needs another hit to score.  That is why you see infielders dive after balls they know they can't make a play on in that situation.  It was the right play by Polanco.  But, Polanco didn't plan for Joey Votto.  See, Votto was on 1st base the whole time, doing what Joey Votto does - make baseball plays.  He got his proper leadoff, a great secondary lead, and was off on contact.  Polanco popped up quickly and immediately turned to throw to 2nd base for the force play.  Again, the exact right play.  But Polanco could only manage a pump-fake.  Why?  Because Votto was already sliding in to 2nd base.

If you can go back and watch the play, please do.  Problem is, I don't know where you are going to find video of an unexciting infield single.  Watching the play on someone's DVR is about the only way you are going to see it again.  Take it from me, it is hard to comprehend how Votto was that quick to reach 2nd base.  Maybe he has speed to go along with his uncanny approach at the plate and Gold Glove caliber leather at 1st base (did you see the play he made on Jimmy Rollins' ground ball down the 1st base line?  You can check it out here.  Sick.).  Maybe Dusty should give him the steal sign more.  Or, maybe, just maybe, Votto is one of those players who doesn't care that not a single person outside the Reds' clubhouse is giving him any credit for the Reds winning last night (except me, that is).  It's all about Jay Bruce's 3-run double in Cincinnati today.  People, please listen up -  Jay Bruce would never had the opportunity to drive in the winning run without Joey Votto making an unheralded, heads-up, baseball play.  He busted his butt in the name of a team victory, not MVP votes.  Yet, he's got my vote for MVP already (if I, you know, had a vote for NL MVP).

Dude is a freakin' ball player.

The Odd $tat of the Week

Issue: We are obviously talking about money here, right?

Short Answer: No doubt.

Reasoning: There once was a man named Bobby Bonilla.  Baseball fans surely know who he is, as years ago, he was actually a heck of a player.  Wikipedia (yeah, yeah, yeah) tells us that he was a six time all-star selection (1988-1991, 1993, 1995), a three time Silver Slugger award winner (the best offensive player at each defensive position - 1988, 1990, 1991), and he won a World Series title with the Marlins in 1997.  Not too shabby.  However, Bonilla did play for eight different teams and has often been known as somewhat of a malcontent, having more than one run-in with teammates and media members.  He is also well known for signing a 5-year, $25 million contract in 1992 with the New York Mets, that, at the time, made him the highest paid player in MLB.  However, it was a contract he never lived up to.  Yet, it was his second free-agent contract, this time signed with the Florida Marlins in 1996 for 4-years, $23.3 million, that is still making news today, thanks to the New York Mets.

See, the Mets, for reasons still unknown to all in baseball, decided to bring Bonilla back to the team before the beginning of the 1999 season.  Bonilla was paid his salary in 1999 even though he hit .160 with four home runs in only 60 games.  After the season, the Mets decided they didn't want Bonilla around, and they outright released him.  When a team releases a player, that team is still responsible for any remaining salary that player is due.  In 2000, Bonilla was owed $5.9 million.  So, when Bonilla signed with the Atlanta Braves before the 2000 season, his paychecks would still be coming from the New York Mets.  Or, perhaps they could work out a "better" deal for both parties.  I wish this was a story about the greatest agent who ever lived.  But, as you read the next paragraph, remember that Dennis Gilbert, who represented Bonilla early in his career, was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as saying, "The idea wasn't completely unilateral.  It wasn't one way. Both sides thought it was a good idea."

What did Bonilla and the Mets think was a good idea?  The Mets deferred Bonilla's payment of $5.9 million so they could free up more money to go after free agents.  Back in 2000 this wasn't unheard of.  But, when the deferment runs out, every party involved has to relive the deal they made, whether they came out on the good end or the bad end.  The party who came out on the bad end here, was the New York Mets.  In deferring $5.9 million they did have enough money to sign Mike Hampton, Derek Bell, and Todd Zeile.  With these players, the Mets went to the World Series in 2000 for the first time since 1986.  But, they lost to the Yankees.  Since then, they have only reached the playoffs once (2006).  So, how did Bonilla come out?  Well, starting on July 1, 2011, Bonilla will begin receiving payments from the Mets for $1,193,248.20 per year, for the next 25 years.  I will give you a second to read that over again.  See, when Bonilla and the Mets agreed to the deal, they agreed interest would be paid on that $5.9 million.  In fact, the interest rate was a sticking point in the negotiations between the parties.  They eventually agreed on 8%.  So, apply that interest rate to $5.9 million, over the last 10 years, and the total sum Bonilla will receive from the Mets over the next 25 years is a whopping $29,831,205.  That says THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS, just in case you missed it.  Turns out you don't need a great agent to negotiate great deals.  All you need to do is make sure you are negotiating with a complete and utter idiot, like former Mets GM Steve Phillips.  Here's to you Mr. Bonilla.

A Great NBA Debate

Issue: Are there any players still playing in the playoffs that should be considered one of the best ever?

Short Answer: Yes, there is.

Reasoning: As most of my readers know, I am not a huge fan of the NBA.  When it comes to basketball, my allegiance lies with the college game.  However, I do watch the playoffs, especially the Western Conference, because they start their games around 5 a.m. eastern time, and I am a night owl.  Last night during Game 1 of the Dallas/Oklahoma City series, Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson mentioned that the head coach of the Mavericks, Rick Carlisle, claimed that Dirk Nowitzki was one of the top-10 players of all time.  Van Gundy and Jackson laughed at Carlisle's comment, saying that it wasn't THAT outlandish, but they would put Nowitzki in the top-30, or so, of all time.  After watching last night's game, and realizing the Mavericks have made it to the Western Conference Finals with Jason Kidd as their point guard, I am leaning more toward agreeing with Rick Carlisle.

Dirk Nowitzki is absolutely, positively indefensible.  He is a 7-footer who can shoot, dribble, and pass.  And, on a night like he had last night, where he couldn't miss a shot, he can take over a game like none other.  Sure, he doesn't have the flair of a Michael Jordan, a Magic Johnson, or a Wilt Chamberlain, but he can do the same things they did.  Almost every possession went through Nowitzki, whether it was him catching the ball in the post to create for himself, or running the pick-and-roll with J.J. Berea, who consequently capitalized off the Thunder double-teamming Nowitzki, by scoring 21 points.  That's right, J.J. Berea scored 21 points, and I give each and every one of them to Dirk.  How good was Dirk last night?  Check it out:

• He had 48 points on 12-for-15 shooting from the floor and 24-for-24 from the line, which, as was widely reported, set an NBA playoff record for free throws made without a miss;
• He set an NBA playoff record for free throws made in a regulation-length game, breaking Michael Jordan's record of 23 free throws made (in 28 attempts) in a win over the Knicks on May 14, 1989;
• His 24-for-24 from the line not only established an NBA record for free-throw attempts without a miss in a playoff game. That performance also exceeded the corresponding record for any regular-season game in NBA history. (Dominique Wilkins holds the regular-season mark: he went 23-for-23 from the line for the Hawks in a game against the Bulls in 1992.);
• In addition, he made 12-of-15 field-goal attempts. His total of 48 points was the highest in any playoff game in NBA history by a player who shot at least 80 percent from the floor. No other player had ever scored that many points in a postseason game while attempting fewer than 22 shots from the field. The previous fewest field-goal attempts was 22 by Bob Cousy on March 21, 1953 (50 points on 10/22 FG, 30/32 FT) and he needed four overtimes to reach those levels.

That is seriously ridiculous, but, it is only one game.  Is there anything else out there that says this guy is a top-10 player of all time?  Would I be writing this if there weren't?  Okay, maybe I would, but not this time.  The NBA implemented the 3-point line in the 1979-1980 season (that means I am older than the 3-point line - FML).  Since then there has been a "club" which few players have been a member of.  This "club" requires you to shoot 90% from the free-throw line, 50% from the field, and 40% from the 3-point line.  I'm pretty sure I couldn't do that in an empty gym.  Anyway, some of the members won't shock you (and, yes, I realize that by this time you know Nowitzki is a member, but bear with me):

1. Larry Bird ('86-'87, '87-'88) - even at 6'9", simply one of the best shooters ever;
2. Mark Price ('88-'89) - a 6-foot guard, but, a Georgia Tech grad, so you know he is a stud;
3. Reggie Miller ('93-'94) - at 6'7", maybe the second best shooter ever, behind Larry Legend;
4. Steve Nash ('05-06, '07-'08, '08-'09, '09-'10) - a 6'3" point guard - ever wonder why this guy has won two MVP's?  Check out how many times he's been a member of the "club."

And that is the whole list.  Almost.  Three of these guys - Bird, Miller, Nash - are tall enough to be good post players as well, which helps the field-goal percentage.  But none of them would be considered post players.  All of them, however, would be considered shooters.  Dirk Nowitzki brings to the table every single aspect of the game.  He is a 7-footer, so his post game is impeccable and indefensible.  Yet he shoots like a guard.  Last night, Van Gundy and Jackson were talking about how great of a job Serge Ibaka was doing on Dirk defensively.  Seriously.  The guy scored 48 with a hand permanently in his face.  For the record, Dirk did not join the 50-40-90 club this year, but in 2006-07, and it is the only time he has done it.  But, after watching Dirk last night (and throughout the playoffs) I can't believe there have been many players in the history of the NBA who brought more to his team than he does.

Tiger Woods Strikes Again

Issue: What do you mean?  He was hurt, right?

Short Answer: Bull.

Reasoning: I don't like to speculate, ever.  Speculation can only cause trouble and embarrassment for everyone involved.  Plus, how could I ever prove I was right?  Well, one thing I learned in law school is to just talk really fast and use a lot of big, ambiguous words, so by the time you are finished, no one really knows what you were talking about in the first place.  Then, charge $250 per hour for those services.  Sounds like a plan.  Since I am not a licensed attorney, I can hypothesize, without any real proof other than my gut feeling, and not get myself in trouble.  I think.  And my hypothesis is this - Tiger Woods withdrew from The Players Championship yesterday, not because his knee, achilles, and calf hurt, but because his pride was hurt, maybe beyond repair this time.

I will not pretend like Tiger is not hurt.  His knee has been an issue for quite some time now, and I'm sure it still bothers him.  Last time someone questioned Tiger's injuries was Retief Goosen after the U.S. Open in 2008: "It just seemed that when he hit a bad shot his knee was in pain and on his good shots he wasn't in pain. You see when he made the putts and he went down on his knees and was shouting, 'Yeah,' his knee wasn't sore. Nobody really knows if he was just showing off or if he was really injured. I believe if he was really injured, he would not have played."  Whoops.  Turns out his leg was broken and his ACL was torn.  Let me ask you this - had Tiger gone out and shot 42 on his opening nine at the U.S. Open in 2008 (like he did yesterday at The Players), don't you think he would have withdrawn then too?  The only reason to play golf on a completely shattered leg is because you think you have a chance to win.  No chance, no play.  End of story.

Tiger has often said the same thing: "Why play if you don't think you're going to win? If I don't think I can win, I won't enter the event."  By that logic we can assume Tiger entered The Players Championship thinking he was going to win the tournament.  This means he was mentally and physically prepared to play 72 holes of golf, walking the whole time, and beat all of his competitors.  He last played competitive golf at The Masters, well over a month ago.  Could his sore knee, achilles, and calf not heal up in the amount of time?  If it didn't heal, what was he doing at the tournament in the first place?  His answer to that was this: "[his doctors] said I could play. The more rest I get, the better it would be, obviously. Obviously, it's a big event. I want to come back for it and play, and unfortunately I wasn't able to finish." (emphasis added).  So he wanted to come back and play because it was a big event, not because he thought he could win?  I'm confused.

The fact is this - Tiger has some lingering leg problems, this I do not doubt at all.  And, those leg problems may have been part of the reason Tiger withdrew.  They were not the sole reason though.  The triple-bogey he took on hole four yesterday was the result of an approach shot in the water and then his subsequent pitch-shot in the water.  Pretty sure a pitch-shot into the water wasn't because his knee hurt.  The Shot Tracker on PGATour.com recounts Tiger's last hole yesterday: shot 1 - 327 yard drive (what knee??); shot 2 - 279 yard 5-wood (hurts that bad, does it?) to 17 yards from the hole; shot 3 - chip shot fails to make the green, ends up in green side bunker (the knee must have got him there); shot 4 - sand shot to 22 ft. 3 in. from the hole (that one was the achillies); shot 5 - putt left 1 ft. 3 in. short (damn calf); shot 6 - hole out for bogey.  My guess is if you can reach a 583-yard par-5 in two shots, your knee, achillies, and calf aren't causing the trouble.  Hanging a +6 on the front side may have had more to do with it than Tiger will ever let on.

For the record, I am still rooting for him to come back because golf is more fun to watch when he is in the hunt.  But, after this charade, that may be the only reason I want him to come back.

Why Baseball is the Greatest Game Ever

Issue: Why?

Short Answer: I'm about to tell you.

Reasoning: Baseball is the greatest game ever because if you watch a game you are almost guaranteed to see something you have never seen before, literally.  I have been involved with the game for 27 years (damn, I'm getting old) and I swear I still see things, not only that I have never seen, but that I thought I would never see.  Case in point: I was coaching my beloved St. Xavier Bombers against Toledo St. John on Saturday afternoon in Toledo (we were participating in the all-Ohio Jesuit Baseball Tournament - which we went 3-0 in).  St. John had started a left-handed pitcher who had allowed so many batters to reach base that he had ample opportunities to balk.  He did, and I kindly pointed out some of these balks to the umpires, but, my observations where ignored (as they usually are).  In the 2nd inning (I think) the St. John pitcher balked again (he did not pause before delivering his pitch to home plate), and again, the balk wasn't called.  This time however, the St. John's bench noticed the balk and verbally told the pitcher to make sure he paused before he delivered home.  It wasn't two pitches later that the Walsh pitcher was coming set, didn't pause, and attempted a pickoff at first base.  Immediately the field umpire yells "BALK!"  Casual baseball fans may not realize that when a pitcher attempts a pickoff, he does not have to pause.  Crappy umpires may not realize that either.  But, after missing 4 or 5 balks, I figured the umpire owed us one.  Anyway, the St. John's coach came out to argue (as well he should have), and after failing (miserably) to convey to the coach why he called a balk, the field umpire decided to talk with the home plate umpire.  It took only a few seconds for the umpires to overturn the call and send our runner back to first base.  In 27 years that was the first time I had ever seen an umpire go "oops, I made the wrong call, I think I will change it."  Of course it had to go against the team I was coaching, but, we won anyway, so who cares.

But, that is why baseball is awesome.  The game has been around for 150 years (give or take) and each and every game is different in some way.  Situations often present themselves that players, coaches, and umpires have never seen before (in the law these are called "cases of first impression") and may never see again.  Hence, the point to this post.  Pat Venditte is a switch-pitcher.  No, that is not a typo.  He can, and does throw both right and left-handed.  How well?  The video below is of the Staten Island Yankees and the Brooklyn Cyclones facing off in a New York Penn League game - that's right, professional baseball.  Obviously Venditte is pretty darn good, either way he throws.  The Yankees are ahead in the game 7-2 in the 9th inning when a Brooklyn player gets a meaningless 2-out hit.  Or so every thought at the time.  What made this hit so special was that it brought up Ralph Henriquez who is, you guessed it, a switch-hitter.  How is this going to work?  What is the rule?  Funny thing is, in 150 years (give or take), I'm betting this is the first time it has EVER happened.  Take a look at the video:

Turns out the rule now states that the hitter must step into the box first and then the pitcher on the mound.  During an at-bat, the batter can change sides of the plate one time, but, the pitcher may also change one time.  Hence, the pitcher has the decided advantage.  Too bad this is probably the only time it would ever really matter.  Man, I love baseball.

P.S. - the Staten Island manager is Pat McMahon.  He was the recruiting coordinator at Mississippi State when I was being recruited there to play baseball, and he became the head coach there in 1998 (one of the reasons I decided not to go there was the fact that I would have played for two different head coaches).  This video is the first I have seen of him since about 1997.  Small world.

Stats Are Fun

Issue: Didn't you already do an "Odd Stat of the Week?"

Short Answer: I did, but...

Reasoning: Sometimes I see stats that completely boggle my mind.  Stats that seemingly cannot be explained.  That is the main reason I started the "Odd Stat of the Week."  Oh, that, and my brother told me it might be a cool idea.  So, I ran with it.  I try to pick out one stat that makes me go "huh?" and pass it along to you, my readers (I am almost sure there is more than one of you out there by now).  But, this week, I have seen quite a few stats that have baffled me, including Raul Ibanez's slump, which I wrote about here.  Let's take a look at a few:

1. Joey Votto, on May 3, popped up to deep 2nd base - his first pop-out since 2009 - I haven't seen an actual stat that proves this to me.  However, I heard Jim Day, on the Reds' post game show, say this exact stat.  I also saw it in the Reds recap on Reds.com here.  Funny thing is, the stat is so awesome that I don't care.  I want to believe it.  But, I went to law school, so I know I have to do at least a little research (whether actual lawyers do or not).  I found a link from Rob Neyer at ESPN.com (it was written September 7, 2010) detailing how unbelievable this stat actually is.  From 2008-2010 Votto's IFFB % (infield fly ball, which is defined by FanGraphs.com as a fly ball caught within 140 feet of home plate) was 0.6%.  Yes, that is less than 1%.  Votto had 5 pop-ups in 2008, 2 in 2009, and 0 in 2010.  Well, how does that compare with some other hitters you may have heard of?  From 2008-2010 Albert Pujols hit an IFFB every 19 at-bats, Prince Fielder every 21 at-bats, Miguel Cabrera every 25 at-bats, and Adrian Gonzalez every 38 at-bats.  Joey Votto hits an IFFB every 167 at-bats.  The craziest thing about this stat: Votto is not the best.  Over the same time span, Ryan Howard hit an IFFB every 202 at-bats.  Howard has hit an IFFB only 15 times in his entire career.  And yes, major league hitters just don't pop-up that much.  In 2010, Skip Schumaker hit only one, Ryan Howard two, and Derek Lee two.  Votto, however, had zero all of 2010, which is just ridiculous.
2. Atlanta Hawks, on May 2, win their first conference semifinal game since 1997 - This stat, at first glance, seems a bit innocuous.  I mean, how often do the Hawks actually reach the conference semis?  Turns out, more than you may think.  In fact, the Hawks reached the ECS in 2010, where they were swept by the Orlando Magic.  They also made the ECS in 2009 (tells you how much I watch the NBA) where they were again swept, this time by the Cleveland Cavaliers.  Before that, the last time the Hawks made the ECS was 1999 (I knew they used to stink) where they squared off against the New York Knicks (this was a long time ago).  The Hawks were swept then too.  To 1997 we go!  The Hawks met up with the Chicago Bulls (the team they are playing this year too) in the ECS in 1997.  The Hawks were beaten 4-1 in the series.  However, that one game they won (game 2 of the series) would be their last win in the ECS until Monday night.  Their 15-game losing streak in the ECS was the longest losing streak in the conference semis in NBA history.  And now they are down 2-1 to Derrick Rose and the Bulls.  Better luck next year.
3. Reds pitcher Travis Wood has allowed exactly one stolen base in 24 career starts - I am a baseball guy (and a Reds guy, if you haven't figured that out yet).  I understand that left-handed pitchers have a distinct advantage in shutting down opponents' running games.  Yet, I have also seen left-handed pitchers who have terrible moves, basically wasting one of the best tools in baseball.  It's kind of like a speedster who can't/won't steal bases.  You can't teach speed and you can't teach being left-handed.  Travis Wood has taken full-advantage of being left-handed and it not only helps him, it helps the Reds (when he doesn't get rocked).  The reason this stat came up was because in Woods' last start against the Astros, he picked Jason Bourgeois off first base (the Astros Michael Bourne (13) and Bourgeois (12) are actually 1-2 in MLB in stolen bases).  The craziest part of the stat isn't that Wood has only allowed one stolen base, it's that there have only been 3 attempts off him.  In 17 starts in 2010, not one single runner attempted a stolen base.  In 7 starts in 2011, there have been three attempts, and only one (the Cardinals' Colby Rasmus on April 23) has been successful.  Now if Wood would just stop giving up runs and losing games.

Some crazy stuff there.  And just remember, these crazy stats all happened this week.  I'm sure there are more out there, but I have limited time and limited brain capacity, so, deal with it.

The Odd Stat of the Week

Issue: What is the biggest difference between major leaguers and minor leaguers?

Short Answer: I love being able to formulate my own issues.

Reasoning: This is a question I have been asked a few thousand times in my life.  And, my answer is always the same: consistency.  Players in the minor leagues are just as talented as those in the major leagues, for the most part.  In fact, I played with guys in the minors that didn't make the big leagues that were more talented than guys I played with that did make the big leagues.  However, if a player isn't consistent, that big league club has no use for them.  An 0-for-20 at the big league level can cost the team real dollars, and we all know how much teams like losing money (or not).  The big club needs guys that, day-in and day-out, give you a real chance at driving in runs, throwing strikes, and winning games.  Because winning games means more fans come out to watch, which means the team makes more money.  See what I am getting at?

With all that said, players in the big leagues do go through slumps.  It is a game where pitchers throw 95+ mph fastballs, ungodly sliders, wicked change ups, and splitters that fall off a table.  And the hitters are using a wooden, round bat to hit a round ball.  Good luck with that.  Yet, slumps in the big leagues are either figured out, or, that player is shipped out or benched.  Sometimes, though, a player who has had a great career and is in no danger of being benched or released, finds himself in an epic slump.  Allow me to introduce you to Raul Ibanez.  Ibanez has had a good career.  He is not a great player, but he can certainly hold his own.  He is a career .282 hitter (he has been a full-time player since 2001) with 233 HR, 350 2B, and 981 RBI.  Most teams would love to have him playing left field for them.  So far, 2011 has been a season to forget for Mr. Ibanez.

The game the Phillies (Ibanez's team) played against the Brewers on April 18 seemed like any other game.  To all others but Ibanez, it probably was.  Ibanez singled in his second at-bat of the game, then things started to go rapidly downhill.  He went 0-for-3 in his last three at-bats (with 2 K's), and one of the biggest skids I have ever seen had officially begun:

• April 19 - 0-for-3, K
• April 20 - 0-for-1, K
• April 21 - 0-for-3, K
• April 22 - 0-for-4, 2 K's
• April 23 - 0-for-4, K
• April 25 - 0-for-3, K
• April 26 - 0-for-4
• April 27 - 0-for-1, K
• April 29 - 0-for-4, 2 K's
• May 1 - 0-for-4, K
• May 3 - hitless in his first at-bat before hitting a ground-rule double

In all, Ibanez was 0-for-35 with 13 K's.  Ouch.  For some perspective, Robin Ventura (who once had a 58 game hit streak in college at Oklahoma State) has the longest hitless streak of any third baseman, ever.  From April 21, 1990 until May 9, 1990, Ventura pretty much played every day, and, for that stretch, didn't get a hit, every day.  He went 0-for-39 over that stretch.  At least one source says the longest hitless streak by a position player in MLB history was by Bill Bergen, who had an 0-for-46 back in the early 1900's.  Turns out, Ibanez was closing in on history before his double on May 3.  Just the wrong kind of history.

Sports Movies

Issue: What do you think of the list compiled here?

Short Answer: I agree and disagree.

Reasoning: For any athlete (or former athlete) sports movies are usually a point of contention.  Some like certain movies for certain reasons, while others dislike the same movies for different reasons.  I have often considered myself a leading connoisseur of sports movies.  I have often thought about becoming a consultant for actors/directors/producers to help ensure the sports, in sports movies, are played, and portrayed the proper way.  Problem is, I don't live in Hollywood, would never want to, and, I have no idea how to get my foot in the door, or if anyone would listen to me anyway.  Maybe I will just keep writing.  Let me give you a prime example of what I am talking about, dealing with the movie Field of Dreams.

Field of Dreams is a good movie to watch.  It has a good story (although hardly believable), good actors, and good baseball scenes.  But, I would never consider the movie one of the best sports movies of all time.  Why?  Because, ladies and gents, Shoeless Joe Jackson, whom the story in the movie is built around (besides John Kinsella, Kevin Costner's movie father) was a left-handed hitter and right-handed thrower in real-life.  In the movie, somehow, someway, Joe Jackson is a right-handed hitter and left-handed thrower.  No movie with that egregious an error can ever make a list of best sports movies.  So, in the end, in order to be considered a great sports movie, it must have a great story, must be historically accurate, and it must have actors who can portray athletes.  The sports movies that suck are sports movies where the actors don't look like athletes (Major League 2 or Major League 3 anyone?).  The absolute most important thing to have in a sports movie is actors who look like they have actually played the sport.  Some good sports movies (that meet the criteria I mentioned, not an exhaustive list):

1. Hoosiers
2. The Natural
3. Friday Night Lights
4. Rocky I, II, III, IV
5. The Karate Kid (no joke)
6. White Men Can't Jump
7. Tin Cup (with the exception of David Sims, played by Don Johnson - bad, bad swing)
8. The Color of Money

Each movie has actors who actually looked like they have played the sport, plus a compelling storyline to go along with it, which makes them fantastic movies.

The link I provided at the beginning is a top-10 list of worst actors in sports movies, not the worst sports movies.  However, two of their top-3 are way off base.  Tim Robbins as Nuke LaLoosh in Bull Durham, in my opinion, is one of the greatest acting performances of all-time.  The herky-jerky pitching motion used by LaLoosh in the movie is all part of his character and charm.  It completely fits, and, I'm not sure the movie would be the same without it.  Also, Madonna as Mae Mordabito in A League of Their Own was, I thought, fantastic.  The article seems to have something personal against her, because it mentions how distraught she was on set.  Yet, in the movie, she plays a quite credible ball player, you know, for a girl.  The rest of the list I agree with, I think.  Most of those movies I haven't seen, or never would have considered them "sports" movies in the first place.

And now for my list.  Being a former baseball player, and with the plethora of baseball movies out there, I am often asked what my favorite baseball movie is.  Instead, I will give you a top-5, in order, with some memorable quotes (taken from the top of my head, so there may be small discrepancies):

1. Bull Durham
1. Nuke: "I held it like an egg."  Crash: "And he scrambled that son-of-a-bitch."
2. Crash: "Strike outs are boring, plus they're fascist.  Throw some more ground balls, it's more democratic."
3. Skip: "You lollygag around the infield, you lollygag your way down to first, you lollygag in and out of the dugout.  You know what that makes you?  Larry?"  Larry: "Lollygaggers."  Skip: "Lollygaggers."
2. Major League
1. Lou: "They say you're a pitcher.  You sure ain't much of a dresser.  We wear caps and sleeves at this level son."
2. Willie: "What league you been playing in?"  Ricky: "California penal."  Willie: "Never heard of it.  Well, how'd you end up there?"  Ricky: "Stole a car."
3. Lou: "Nice velocity."  Pepper: "Sounded like it."
4. Jake: "Hell of a situation we got here Rexy.  Two on two out you guys down by one.  You have a chance to be a hero on national TV, that is, if you don't blow it.  By the way, saw your wife at the [I have no idea what the name is] Lounge last night, helluva dancer.  And that guy she was with, I'm sure he's a close personal friend and all, but let me ask you this: what was he doing wearing her panties on his head? [Rexman swings and pops the ball up] Uh-oh Rexy, I don't think this one's got the distance!"
3. The Natural
1. Roy: "When I walk down the street, I want people to say: 'There goes Roy Hobbs, the greatest hitter that ever lived.'"
4. The Sandlot
1. Smalls: "Oh, I thought you said, the Great Bambi."  Ham: "That wimpy deer?!?!"
2. Ham: "You mix your weenies with your mama's toe jam!"  Little league kid: "You bob for apples for the toilet, and you like it!"  Ham: "Yeah, you play ball like a girl!"
3. Ham: "You know, if my dog were as ugly as you, I'd shave its butt and teach it to walk backwards."
5. A League of Their Own
1. Ira: "Do you think if I paid you more you could be a bit more disgusting?"  Jimmy: "I could certainly use the money."
2. Ira: "I especially liked the move in the 5th inning when you scratched your balls for an hour."  Jimmy: "Anything worth doing is worth doing right."
3. Walter: "Let me be blunt, are you still a fall-down drunk?"  Jimmy: "That is blunt.  No sir, I've quit drinking."  Walter: "You've seen the error of your ways?"  Jimmy: "No, I just can't afford it."

For the record, movie #6 would be Eight Men Out, which is a great recount of the 1919 Chicago Blacksox Scandal.  Oh, and they have Shoeless Joe hitting left-handed.  Tip of the cap to the producers of that movie for getting something so easy, correct.