Who's More Stoned Right Now: Big Brown Or Joakim Noah?

Now that the Spurs are finally, mercifully eliminated, has anyone noticed how much Kurt Thomas looks like that dude from the Snickers commercial where the guy is playing guitar and singing the "prancing nuget in the meadows" song? (click here to watch) Here they are:


Maybe it's just me but I honestly could not watch a Spurs game without humming that song to myself. And I don't know why but I think it is wierd that the guitar player is lefthanded.

The Mets crushed the Dodgers yesterday, which was nice. You always hear that certain players struggle or really play well against certain teams, but it never made sense to me. Why does Brad Penny suck so amazingly badly against the Mets and then is a Cy Young-type against everyone else? In his career against them, he has probably pitched to 100 different Mets players, and no matter who is wearing the uniform, they hit off of him. Doesn't make sense. (Note how badly I am working to avoid making a crappy pun on Brad Penny's worth when he plays the Mets)

In reverse, why does David Wright kill the Dodgers (highest batting average against the Dodgers of any player in 50 years!), or Larry Jones kill the Mets? Again it is not as though it has all been against the same 3-4 pitchers. Confidence is the answer I guess, but it still is beyond reason.

The college baseball playoffs start today (Div. I) and I am happy to say that my alma mater is ranked 7th in the country! This would really be great if they didn't get absolutely hosed on their tourney draw. The way the first round of the baseball playoffs work is that teams are groups geographically and play four-team double elimination tournaments. Example: Day one: A beats B, C beats D. Day 2: A beats C and B beats D. That makes two losses for D and they are out. A has two wins, B and C have one each. Day 3: B and C play with the losing being eliminated and the winner faces A for the Regional Championship. The next round is the Super Regional where teams play a best 2 out 3 series against another Regional Champ. That leaves eight Super Regional Champs and they play two 4-team double elimination tourneys (just like first round). Winners in each side of the bracket play a best of three series for the title.

Confused?

Would it make it clearer if I said that there is no clear ranking in baseball - there are three widely viewed polls (Baseball America, Writers, and USA Today/ESPN). Also the whole tournament is not seeded - only the top 8. And although USD is the highest ranked team in their Regional, they drew the #2 seed and have to play on the road. Depending on the poll, USD is 11/7/10th. Host and #1 seed Long Beach State is 25/18/unranked. #3 seed Berkeley (who USD plays today) is 15/22/19th. How does the #7 team in the country not get to host? How does the third best team get the top seed and get to play at home? How do three top 25 schools have to play one another in the first round? There will be 16 teams left after the first round, so statistically, if only 1 out of 3 top 25 schools can advance, we will have 8 ranked schools left and 8 unranked. There is no way that more than two ranked schools should be in any one Regional bracket, regardless of how far they have to travel to make it work.

Of course, the Toreros should be able to beat up Fresno State and can certainly win 2 out of three against Long Beach State and Cal. so all of this whining may not matter.

The Greatest Hall of Fame Class That Might Never Be

During last night's Dodgers-Reds game, the text-in question of the game was "When do you think Ken Griffey Jr. will make the Hall of Fame: 1st Ballot, Later than that, or Never." 7% of Dodger fans apparently think he will never be elected. I don't think you can chalk this up to stupidity because even Dodger fans are not that dumb. Maybe it is that the only people who respond to these text-in questions are that dumb.

This, and Mike Piazza's retirement got me thinking about the Hall of Fame. This year's "graduating" class includes such once-sure things as Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds (if he is officially retired) and Piazza. The fact that Mark McGuire didn't get voted in, and may never be makes raises interesting questions:

Does Sosa get in? If Mac didn't there is no way Sosa does. Sosa was caught cheating (cork) and has been tied to steroids/HGH. McGuire just used a supplement that wasn't illegal yet (andro) and possibly more but nothing was ever proven. Plus, Mac was better. Sosa is out.

What about Bonds? His numbers make him perhaps the greatest of all time, but there is no one left on the planet outside of the San Francisco peninsula that doesn't think he was juiced the whole time. So how much weight do voters place on steroid allegations? If this Federal case against him proves he lied about juicing, does that knock him out of the Hall? What does it do to his records? I can't stand him but I don't know if I could not vote for him unless the Hall makes an official stance against documented cheaters and Bonds is officially proven. For now, Bonds is in.

Clemens' situation is very similar to Bonds. I don't think anyone thinks he was clean. However, unlike Bonds, he has no fans and no city loyal to him because he was never loyal to them (not that fan support affects Hall of Fame voting). It has not been proven, but allegedly he was doped up as much as Big Brown is right now. If it is somehow proven, does the best pitcher of his generation and one of the best 3-4 of all time get denied? He should, but will he? If it goes unproven, I think like Bonds, you have to let him in. And no, the fact that he allegedly had a whole bullpen of mistresses including one who wasn't old enough to spell mistress does not play a role in HOF voting.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if Piazza was voted in (and he will, of course) and these stiffs were not? Particularly Clemens. If you remember, Piazza and the Mets used to hit the hell out of Clemens. In 2000, Clemens beaned Piazza in the head (second time) and then did the same to Jay Payton. Then in the World Series Game 2, there was the famous 'roid rage...oops, I mean the famous bat-throwing incident. Well the Mets never got a modicum of payback after those incidents. Wouldn't it be great if the payback they (and we fans) finally got was this?

On to other things - what a second half by Kobe Bryant! Not only did he score 25 points and lead the comeback, but it was mostly on good shots and wise decisions (10 for 16). I didn't know he had it in him!

So what happens now? The Lakers must be feeling a little bit bulletproof. Will their inexperience make them lax in Game 2 or will they come out and make the Spurs pay for not closing it out? Will the Spurs be despondent and feel they blew it or will they be really, really pissed off and come out and hold the Lakers to 11 points in Game 2? I expect the Lakers to come out with all guns blazing, but the Spurs will hang around. In the second, the Spurs will get a lead. In the third Kobe will try to Kobe-fy them and the Spurs will wind up winning by double digits. Spurs in 6.