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.

Referees Decide Finish By Not Deciding Finish

Clearly the play at the end of the Lakers-Spurs game was a foul. But it is basketball tradition that that foul won't be called in that situation. The thinking here is that you don't want the refs to decide the game. This thinking is flawed because by not calling a clear violation, didn't they decide the game?

Wouldn't it have been Derek Fisher who helped decide the game by biting on a pump fake and jumping into the ball handler/shooter? Wouldn't it have been Brent Barry who decided the game by drawing the foul and then having to knock down the free throws? Wouldn't it have been a Laker who decided the game when they got the ball back after the potentially made free throws?

If a guy jumps up and lands on another it is a foul. Should an umpire not call a third strike if a batter doesn't swing in the ninth inning because he wants to make sure the players decide the finish? Should a referee not throw a flag on a clip on an overtime kick return? Should a hockey referee allow a last second, game-winning goal that is thrown in? The rules are the rules. There should be no superstar rules, no playoff rules, and no last-second rules.

I thought that almost everyone handled this no-call well however. Greg Popovich said that it was not a foul and that he is not upset with the officials. Barry said that you can't call that there and took the blame himself. Phil Jackson quoted 3rd century Taoist philosophy or something but I think his point was that it probably was a foul and that he is glad his team was the beneficiary of the no-call (but that plays like this happen throughout the game and we're only talking about it because it was the last one). The consensus was that it should have been called but was not and in that situation, one cannot fault the refs. The Spurs had 47 minutes at 57 seconds before that to make one more shot and have that play not matter.

Then there was Kobe Bryant. Craig Sager, staring off into space rather than at his interview subject, asked Kobe about the play and with his adorable little smirk he said and repeated, "that wasn't a foul," as though His Eminence knew something that all the rest of us didn't (even though we'd seen the play in slo-mo from four angles at this point). He is a bad loser (remember his "there is no way I will play for the Lakers next year - I'd rather play on Pluto" comment or his famous quitting-job in game 7 against the Suns?) And he is a bad winner as this episode shows. I usually don't wish injury on anyone but...well I don't think I have to finish this sentence.

And seriously, what the hell is with Craig Sager's suits? Is it that he has given up on being an intelligent person known for his interesting and insightful interview questions and instead just wants to be remembered for anything at all? The way the guy stares off into space when he is doing interviews and the way he dresses makes me think that he may actually be blind and whoever dresses him hates him.

Finally, can we now move on from the idea that Sasha Vujacic is a great defender and has shut down Manu Ginobili? In three games Ginobili has stunk, but he went nuts in the other one. Vujacic guarded him in all four. If you do a test four times in the same beaker and get different results each time, it wasn't the beaker causing the change! If you still believe that Vujacic is a great defender and not just another annoying, flopping, soft, European whiner, you need look no further than his "defense" of Tony Parker on a fast break with about 3:30 to go in the third quarter of game 4.

He backpedaled into the lane as Parker came at him. Then Vujacic stopped and tried to set his feet to draw a charge. He prepared for the contact and then just flew backwards onto his butt when he expected Parker to be there. It looked like Parker had pulled a Frodo and vanished right in front of Vujacic's eyes. I watched it like 10 times. Parker had faked him out so bad that Vujacic flopped despite Parker not being within 5 feet of him. Classic. I found it on another site so click here to watch (sorry if they take it down).

Today is a pretty big sports day with the Pistons going back to Boston for the all-important game 5. This one will decide the series. And the Red Wings go to Pittsburgh for the Stanley Cup game 3. If Detroit wins, that series is over of course as well. And the US is in London playing England in soccer which doesn't matter for a number of reasons (it is soccer, it is not in a tournament or qualifier), but it would still be nice to beat England's butt again. We could get Thierry Henry come and play for us and it would be just like the Revolutionary War.

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.

Stars Lay An Egg, Spurs Lay Doubts To Rest

I was very excited all day on Monday for the Spurs-Hornets game and the Stars-Wings game. Sadly, both were pretty much over in the first half hour.

Yes, the basketball game wound up going down to the wire after New Orleans scraped their way back into it, but tell me: did you ever really think San Antonio was going to lose that game once they got a lead? The Spurs were never going to lose a 9 point halftime lead. Even on the road against a "better" opponent.

The Lakers cannot be happy with this match up. Derek Fisher can't handle Tony Parker at either end. Lamar Odom and Pau Gasol can be cancelled out by Fabricio Oberto, Kurt Thomas and Tim Duncan. Vlad Radmanovich sucks. And Kobe Bryant is always an impossible cover, but Bruce Bowen is as good as anyone at doing it. And I didn't mention Manu Ginobili. The Lakers won't be able to run away and hide from the Spurs, and remember what happens to Kobe when games are close or they are down? The "new" Kobe vanishes.

In the Jazz series, in games that the Lakers won (none were particularly close) here are Kobe's average stats: 33 points per game, 8.5 for 15.8 shooting (54%), 1 for 2 on three-point attempts (50%). Here are Kobe's stats in Laker losses: 33.5 points per game, 11.5 for 29.5 shooting (39%), .5 for 8 on three point attempts (6%).

The Jazz did not do anything differently defensively in the two losses. Kobe just starts trying to take over and single-handedly erase leads...he stopped playing the offense and his teammates started watching. In losses he doubles his shot attempts, but his shooting percentage drops 15%! Forced offense leads to bad shots, which only lets the other team get layups at the other end.

Sure, the Spurs do not have great depth, and that is supposedly a great strength of the Lakers, but seriously, which bench would you rather reply on: Kurt Thomas, Ime Udoka, Michael Finley, Brent Barry and Robert Horry or Jordan Farmar, DJ Mbenga, Ronnie Turiaf, Luke Walton and Sasha Vujacic?

Spurs in 6. I don't think San Antonio can win three straight at home, or I would say Spurs in 5. The Spurs will win one in L.A., the Lakers will win one in San Antonio and the the Spurs will close it out in game six in L.A. (remember the Conference Finals mysteriously switch to a 2-3-2 format).

As for the other big game last night, Dallas pulled one out of Philadelphia's playbook and didn't show up for their big elimination game. I stopped watching after the first period. But how good is the Stanley Cup Final going to be?

Stay tuned for a recap of the Major League Baseball First Quarter-Season coming tomorrow.

NBA Action: It's The Same As Always!

The NBA should consider a new motto: The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same.

The league saw quite a shake-up among the Who's-Who this season. The Lakers floated to the top on the backs of nobodys like Jordan Farmar and Sasha Vujacic, and near stars like Pau Gasol, Lamar Odom and Derek Fisher (let's face it, Kobe was the same amazing Kobe as always). Chris Paul and Tyson Chandler became superstars in New Orleans. The Suns and Mavs sputtered for most of the season before both bowing out early. The Spurs and Pistons aged before our very eyes. The Celtics looked like the best (and most fun) team in a long, long time. Denver and Golden State and Cleveland were cute, but were never a threat to anybody. And Utah just kept its head above water with Deron Williams looking more and more like the real deal.

The further these NBA playoffs go along, the more things seem the same as they have always been. Despite all the regular season shake-ups, with only eight teams left it now appears that it will be the same final four and same Champion as last year.

The Cavaliers have a chance to tie their series up with the Celtics tonight and although the Celtics have been the team to beat since before day one of the season when Kevin Garnett arrived, he quickly turned into Kevin Garnett when the postseason arrived. The dominating Celtics are 0-4 on the road in the playoffs and escaped one of the NBA's all-time worst playoff teams by the skin of their teeth. The LeBrons are not a championship team, but they are still better than the the Celtics have turned out to be. I think the Cavs will win tonight, and win in Boston, and then come home and close it out in Cleveland with LeBron getting at least two triple-doubles.

Orlando had a chance to even the series at home with the Pistons' best player not suited up. They lost - series over. I am tired of hearing how amazing Dwight Howard is going to be. Yes, his points and rebounds totals have improved in each of his four years. But it has been four years and his claims to fame are: he wore a Superman cape and won the dunk contest despite not actually dunking the ball, he lead the league in dunks in 07-08 and he didn't get swept out of the playoffs by the Pistons in 07-08. He's not Superman, he's the Invisible Man. 8 points in the biggest game of the season? The Pistons will win it Tuesday night and rest up before stomping on the Cavs in 5 games.

The Lakers have finally shown their true colors as well. Before the season, they were the best soap opera in town: everyone hated one another, no one trusted one another, and they all talked behind each other's backs. They came out and won a few games early and suddenly they fell in love with one another. Late in the season, Lamar Odom was asked before a game why the team chemistry had improved so drastically. The answer wasn't, "Kobe grew up," or "we just gelled as a team," or "Phil finally got through to us." It was, "well, we're winning." In Game 4 vs. the Jazz, it was the post-Shaq Lakers again. Kobe shot 33 shots and only made about a third of them. He was hurt, but on plays when he missed shots, made turnovers, got burned or wanted a foul, he was hurt much, much worse than on plays when he succeeded. Phil Jackson listlessly cried "run the offense" over and over from the sideline as Luke Walton, Jordan Farmar and Vlad Radmanovich (combined 7 points, 3-14 shooting) stood around watching the MVP sink the ship, and Ronny Turiaf was not even on the bench (though it was due to stupidity, not injury this time). Yes, the teams are even and the Lakers still have home court. But if Kobe really has a lower back injury, as tough as he is, he can't win two more games by himself. The problem is, we have now seen that when the chips are down - the New MVP Kobe becomes the old Kobe...the one that didn't win a single playoff series since Shaq left.

The Hornets - Spurs series is supposed to be the ultimate Showdown of the New NBA vs. the NBA of the last decade. The Hornets came out in the first two games and shut down the Spurs. San Antonio looked old, bored and just done. Apparently the Fountain of Youth was not in Florida, as the Spanish explorers believed; it is in San Antonio. After returning home, the Spurs dominated Games 3 and 4, so it's all tied up. So what is more likely in the final three games: The Best Team of the last decade will show their age and get run out of the building at least two out of three times, or the upstart Hornets will show their inexperience and get lulled into a close game and get outfoxed two out of three times?

After all the upheaval in the league this season, the Finals will be awfully familiar: the Spurs over the Pistons.

Lastly, has anyone else noticed the NBA Cares commercials where players talk about how they work with kids to teach them the importance of reading and education? The great irony being that the player reading the script has a reading level only slightly higher than that of the 10-year-olds he is seen talking to, and the NBA is among the lowest education levels of any profession. What percentage of players have college degrees? How many have even a second semester of completed college coursework? But I suppose who teaches a good lesson is not as important as the lesson itself.

Momentum Screeches To A Halt

It is kinda hard to find anything to write about besides the Sharks/Stars game last night. And that is really saying something because this was an amazing all-around sports weekend.

Stars 2-Sharks 1: Game 6 Quadruple overtime. This was easily the best goaltending performance I have ever seen. Evgeni Nabakov and Marty Turco combined for over 100 saves, but it wasn't just how many saves they got, it was how many spectacular saves they got when any one mistake would cost the game and possibly season. Not a hockey fan? Think of it this way: a catcher has to add about 20 pounds of weight to his pads and then stay in his crouch for 20 minutes at a time for a total of a little over 2 hours. The pitcher will then throw at him, but will try to get it by him, instead of hitting the mitt. If he drops any ball, he loses and his team is eliminated. It was the 8th longest playoff game in history and was the best I have ever watched.

The four best quotes from the 5-and-a-half hour game:
4. Vs. studio host during the 6th intermission: "If you're just tuning in, where the hell have you been?"
3. My mom as the second overtime began: "If I have to watch this crap, we're opening another bottle of wine."
2. My dad as the goalies were peppered with shots, but only 2 scored for the first 125 minutes: "It's like basketball with no rims."
1. My wife, a die-hard sharks fan, after the game: "I hate the Cowboys so much more than I ever did. I'm never going to Dallas. Stupid city."

I feel like this game was a disappointment however, because the Sharks should have won and it should have gone to game 7. How amazing would one last showdown for all the marbles, two days after this marathon be? Could Turco and Nabakov even have started? Of course they would have, but could they possibly have been effective? Would the Sharks momentum continue after having won 3-straight to tie it up? Would there be payback for the clean but hard hit by Scott Morrow on Milan Michalek? Too bad we will never know. One thing we do know: Detroit is going to destroy Dallas in game 1 of the West Finals.

I did get to thinking about momentum in sports this weekend. I have heard the expression that momentum is only as good as tomorrow's starter. I came to the conclusion that momentum is a misnomer and what we actually are talking about when we bring it up is confidence. For instance:

The Dodgers had won 8-in-a-row on Sunday. The Rockies had lost 11 of 13. Both teams' momentum was allegedly taking them in opposite directions. But the Rockies got 3 hits to start the game, they found themselves ahead, and bang: two streaks ended.

No one regular season game ever means anything more than any other. And even if the pressure feels greater in a game 7, it is no more important than game 1 was. Momentum does not build...only confidence is tested.

A 30-point win or a 10-run loss is just a win or a loss unless the players think it will or will not happen again. Either way, you have to go out and make something happen...momentum won't just do it for you.

If there was such a thing as momentum, why did the Rockets ever lose a game once they got on that amazing roll? Why did the Sharks not blow through Calgary and Dallas after entering the playoffs on a similar roll? How does a guy ever break out of a hitting slump?

They talk about momentum much more in the playoffs than any other time. Will the Celtics finally playing like a decent basketball team give them some kind of advantage over the Cavs in round 2? Not really, but if everyone on the team thinks so, and the Cavs get intimidated by what the Three-Party did to Atlanta, then yes, it could have an effect. But it is the players' heads only (which is, of course a very important factor).

The talking heads are all questioning whether the Hornets' game 1 blowout will give them a momentum advantage? The playoffs don't start until someone loses at home. The Hornets merely held serve. Does anything think the Spurs think they are out of it? It's all about confidence, not momentum.

If momentum existed, how could you account for Mission Impossible being great, the second one being an absolute travesty, and the third one being great? The answer here is simple: John Woo is the worst director in the history of film, and screwed up a perfectly good script with incessant slo-mo-diving-shooting scenes. I mean two guys with guns played chicken and dove at one another instead of just shooting each other. Didn't they watch Indiana Jones shoot the dude with the two huge swords? As Shakespeare said, "more matter, less art." But I digress...

If momentum existed, how do you explain the Celtics this year? Last year they were dead in the water. Then they got a crappy spot in the draft lottery. Then they tried to trade for Kevin Garnett and he said no and everyone said Boston was a racist city and no black players want to play there and no great black players have ever played there (never mind that that isn't true and their coach and 4/5 of the team was black). The franchise was toast. Then Garnett changed his mind. Then Ray Allen signed. Suddenly they all thought they were NBA champs, and Bostonians loved black people. Not a single ball was dribbled. Not a single shot was taken. It wasn't momentum...it was confidence!

In some instances, I suppose momentum does exist and confidence can mislead you. Like when Carlos Beltran hit a pop foul Sunday and the third baseman sprinted over, slid on the track under the ball and it landed about 10 feet behind him. I hope that wasn't on national TV...whoops.

NBA Playoff Weekend Roundup And Salma Hayek

Perhaps the biggest tragedy in sports this year will be that either the Spurs or Suns will not make the second round of the playoffs, but either the Magic or Raptors will. I suppose the NBA and the involved TV networks like the idea of having such intriguing first round match ups as the Spurs vs. Suns and having the Pistons lose game 1 at home, but at the same time they must be scared out of their minds.

When you look at it, there is not much to get excited about in in the first round. The Lakers-Nuggets series is a train wreck and will probably be a sweep or 5-gamer. Celtics might win in 3, with Atlanta just conceding. New Orleans vs. Dallas...yawn. There are some interesting subplots, but ultimately does anyone outside of New Orleans or Dallas care? Detroit - Philly is only interesting if Philly wins game 2. Otherwise, Detroit will probably just win it in 5. Utah vs. Houston could be the most boring and anonymous match up of 54-win teams in league history. FYI: Orlando and Toronto both have NBA franchises and are actually meeting in the playoffs. Cleveland vs. Washington is only interesting to see if LeBron will topple under the pressure of playing 12 against 1 every night. Even Ben Wallace's possible hairdo spectacles aren't interesting anymore. And of course, San Antonio vs. Phoenix is one of the best first round playoff match ups in any sport of my lifetime.

So one series is watchable, and it lived up to that title in Game 1 - not that I watched. I did not see any of the games this weekend because I still don't really care yet - or I don't care enough to waste two hours of my life watching the first three quarters of a game yet.

I did watch the Mets vs. Phillies Sunday night and that 6th inning rally made me really, really happy. I also think that Chase Utley would look very good hitting second between Jose Reyes and David Wright. When is his contract up in Philly? The Mets are on TV again tonight, but I get to work at the Dodgers game censoring profanity for the live telecast. This will be like knowing that Salma Hayek is standing next to me naked, but I have to watch Diane Keaton undress instead. I hate Diane Keaton.

In 2006, I was in Boston for Patriots Day. I was at a bar watching the Red Sox, and Mark Loretta hit a game-winning homer and then we ran outside to watch the winners of the Boston Marathon finish - the closest finish in history at the time. It was a pretty spectacular 5 minutes in sports-fandom. Is there a more painful/glorious ending to a sporting even that what happened this morning though? A woman out-leaned an opponent to win the marathon by 2-seconds, gaining the advantage win 100-yards left. Can you imagine dedicating your whole life to training, getting perfectly primed for the biggest event in the sport, going out and being the leader through 99.8% of a 26.2-mile race and then losing it in the last .05 miles? Spectacular.

NBA First Round Preview

The NBA Playoff match ups are finally ready for consumption. If I, or anyone else, cared about the Eastern Conference until the Pistons-Celtics series, I would discuss those series as well. But I don't, and neither does anyone but the family members of the players. So here is my flawless prognostication of the first round of the Western Conference playoffs:

1 Lakers vs. 8 Nuggets: I mentioned yesterday that this is the only match up in the West that stinks. The Lakers won't roll over the Nuggets, but the Nuggets will just find ways to lose. Traveling to Denver is tough because of the altitude and that will give them an advantage at home, but considering that the only Los Angeles basketball team to win a playoff series since Shaq emigrated was the Clippers, Kobe Bryant will make sure the Lakers win this one. And Denver can't play defense, so they can't stop the one-man Bryant show. Lakers in 6 (and that is being charitable to the Nuggets).

2 Hornets vs. 7 Mavericks: This is a tricky series because the Hornets have been front-runners for a long time this year and deserve the easy first round series, but there is no easy first round series, and they have absolutely zero playoff experience anyway. On the other side, you have Jason Kidd who may or may not be really good and Dirk Nowitski who is the same, but being a European, he will fold under pressure (born too close to France). If the Mavs can get the ball out of Chris Paul's hands like they did Wednesday night, the Hornets are screwed. And that is all the series comes down to. Defend Paul, Mavs win. If not, Hornets win. No way they can keep him down for four straight. Hornets in 7. Wouldn't it be great if Byron Scott then went and reminded Jason Kidd that it was Kidd who got Scott fired from New Jersey?

3 Spurs vs. 6 Suns: Is this the best first round match up in history? No question this series goes 7 games. Shaq and the Suns have been playing better and better as their season progressed, and the Spurs have been slowed a bit in the last weeks with Manu Ginobili hurt. However, I think if you give Tim Duncan seven times to find a way to beat someone, he will do it at least four of those seven times, every time, every opponent. I do not understand why Tony Parker is not subject to the European=soft equation, but somehow he escaped. Maybe Eva's Latin fire rubbed off on him. Spurs in 7 in a spectacular series. How sad that Shaq won't go further than Kobe again.

4 Jazz vs. 5 Rockets: The Rockets avoid a nightmarish road series in Utah because of an unusual rule change from a few years ago. Despite the Jazz being the higher seed, Houston has a better record by 1 game, and thus is awarded home court for the series. Utah was 37-4 at home this year, one of the losses was to Houston (opening night - doesn't really count). However, the only reason the paper-thin Rockets are in this situation is a freakish 22-game win streak. Without the streak, they are barely over .500. Put plainly, they won't win a game on Utah, so the question is: Can the Rockets go 4-0 at home? The answer is no. Utah in 5.

For posterity's sake, I will call the Spurs over the Jazz in the West Finals and the Celts over the Spurs in the Finals.

Yesterday I experienced the worst fantasy baseball day of all time. I had five starting pitchers, but only four spots for them so I had to bench on of them or a closer (Wagner, Papelbon and Rivera). I figured the Mets would blow out the Nats, so I benched Wagner, thus assuring a save between the other two who played each other. My starters' lines: Chien-Ming Wang 4 IP-8 earned runs, Tim Hudson 3 IP-4 earned runs, C.C. Sabathia 4 IP-9 earned runs, James Shields 5 IP-6 earned runs, and John Maine 6.2 IP-2 earned runs and a win. My closers: 0 IP. And Wagner, who I benched, got a perfect inning save with 1 K. This is why I do not pay for these leagues.

15 Reasons Not To Go Outside This Weekend

Before we all allow ESPN to distract us from what is important this weekend, I want to remind the American people that the Red Sox and Yankees series is not the only great one worth watching this weekend. The Reds are heading to the Steel City to take on the Pirates as well!

I suppose if you have nothing better to watch during the weekend (besides hunting for Saved by the Bell episodes), you could always squeeze in the Frozen Four (BC over North Dakota, Michigan over ND; Michigan wins it all Saturday at 4 p.m.). Or the Padres vs. Dodgers might be interesting. Or watch the Ducks further implode. ESPN Classic always has the original American Gladiators or World's Strongest Man on, and that is always a half-hour well spent, not to mention that the Kansas-Memphis game is no doubt on a loop there these days. ESPNU has the NCAA women's bowling championship (Saturday 5 p.m.).

It is always fun to watch the Spurs come to LA and embarrass the Lakers, so Sunday should be a good day also. And with Tiger only 4 shots back on Thursday, it will be interesting if he can stretch his winning margin to double digits or not on Sunday. I say no, but stranger things have happened.

Like Phillies starting pitcher Cole Hamels getting a pinch-hit bunt single in the 11th inning Thursday. Or the Mets' Jorge Sosa being the 7th Met pitcher in the game, and getting the win after throwing 1 pitch in the 12th inning. That's how you earn a day's pay.

Luckily for me, we have some college friends in town for the weekend. You would think this means I will miss a lot of the sports-bounty for the weekend. But no, I get to stay at home while the wife shows off L.A. to the gals. Rest assured, I won't miss the Duke-Virgina lacrosse game tomorrow.

Doesn't it seem like every weekend is full of can't miss events that are usually rendered insignificant by the next weekend? If it wasn't for that fact that no one will hire me because I have no discernible skills, life would be great.

West Hollywood is still hanging onto a huge lead in the visits to this site and in time spent here. In second place is South Pasadena and third is Huntington Park, but apparently folks in Tennessee are starting to like me. Frankly, I question their judgement, but the stats don't lie. This is weird to me because I don't know anyone who lives in any of those places. I am hoping this trend continues because someone needs to rescue Sports Illustrated from having to use Selena Roberts on the back page. I keep reading her articles and at the end, I always feel like I know so much less than I had when I'd started.