No More Divisional Series - No More Frank TV Ads

Really, there is only one thing that I take away from watching pretty much all of the LDS games: I have never hated any television show that I have never watched more than I hate Frank TV. And that includes that Tyler Perry show, which apparently uses the same advertising company. Who the hell is Tyler Perry to have "Tyler Perry's [fill in the movie/show name here]" as the title everything he works on? Seriously, who is he?

But I digress. Frank Caliendo is pretty funny. The Charles Barkley impersonation on TNT when he was talking about Kim Jung-il was fantastic. His John Madden on Kevin & Bean every week is better than the real John Madden. I would have voted for his President Bush. And then, there are the rest of his characters. None of them look like who they are supposed to look like at all, and a few of them kinda sound like it.

There is one ad (the one where the character asks Frank for a hug) in which I have no clue who he is supposed to be. It seem like a cross between Robert De Niro, William Shatner and Robin Williams.

The point of this rant is that I can't believe that TBS thinks this shotgun-style ad campaign can possibly work. I love ice cream. But if I had two servings of it during every commercial break for 3-10 hours a day for a week straight, I would probably never want ice cream again.

Towards the end of the week, they started to release commercials where Caliendo sorta apologized to viewers, saying basically, "I know you are sick of these commercials, but watch my show." Then apparently yesterday he released a statement saying that if the ratings were better for the show, they wouldn't have to bombard us with ads. To use a medical metaphor, the reason that people don't race out at every chance they get to have a colonoscopy is not because it isn't advertised enough. So maybe if the show didn't suck, we'd watch it. After all, there have been lots of shows that did really well in the ratings that did not have up to 10 commercials an hour.

They are turning off their audience and while I would probably watch the show every now and then when I caught it, I will now go out of my way to avoid it.

The saddest part of all of this, of course, is that the rest of the playoffs are televised on Fox and they are the grand-daddies of this type of advertising. So I hope you are excited to see the stars of Fringe, House, Prison Break, 24, Bones, Terminator and the whole slew of reality shows in which the titles are complete sentences as they sit in the stands reading magazines because they were sent there so Joe Buck could "happen to notice them in the crowd" at coincidentally the same point of every game, which is also right when a promo for that show was about to air. And with games in L.A. this time, it could be even worse than normal.

Most Overrated: Cubs, Torre Or Francona?

The baseball playoffs are not exactly going as I had hoped. For one thing, Omar Minaya is ruining my life and the Mets are not in the playoffs. For another, the only teams I don't like keep winning.

Although there are two sides to the coin that was the Dodgers-Cubs series. On the one hand, the freaking Dodgers (who let's face it, are a crappy team having a good week) won the series and are in the NLCS. This makes me sad because it has been fun getting to tease obnoxious Dodger fans by saying, "At least the Mets have won a series in the last two decades." No more fun there. On the other hand, I can now pretty much expect to stop reading and hearing about the Mets "collapse" this year because of what the Cubs have done. Sure the Mets led the East by a few games and were out of the Wild Card race entering September. Sure the Phillies went nuts and passed the Mets, while the Mets ran down the Brewers before tiring at the end and getting passed up in the last two days. But the Cubs had the best record in the league and were a sure thing to make the World Series since Spring Training. Thank you Cubbies!

Joe Torre is getting a ton of credit for the Dodgers' late success, as he always got in New York, and while I like Torre a lot, I think it is pretty unfounded that he is considered such a managerial genius. His records on teams that did not have the highest payroll that year (including this year) is pretty poor. When he won in New York, he had the perfect teams: youth/experience/defense/pitching/chemistry all rolled together. As his payrolls grew, his players got more talented, his chemistry waned and his teams couldn't win it all.

So he came to L.A. and took over an extraordinarily average team. They were inconsequential for most of the season and reports started to leak out that he and third base coach Larry Bowa were not happy with the Dodgers because the team stunk. Apparently they were unaware that it was their job to do something about it. Then they got Manny Ramirez (and Casey Blake) dumped into their laps and the team suddenly surges, with Torre suddenly a genius again. The common denominator between their pathetic first half and their torrid September was Torre and the everyone but Manny basically. So why is Torre getting credit for the change?

I think managers get far too much credit when things go well. Really what do they do besides get out of the way of guys who get hot? Pitching coaches and hitting coaches deserve credit/blame more often than managers because they tinkering with people's games. They are instructing. How many managers actually do anything during the course of a game that is not by the book? Pitching changes, pinch-hitters, when to steal, etc. It is all predetermined and everyone in the building knows when they're coming. But managers can make unusual decisions which either make them lucky geniuses or get them fired.

In Game 3 of the Angels-Red Sox series Terry Francona made a very strange move. Francona is considered a great manager, but he has also benefited by spectacular pitching and Manny Ramirez/David Ortiz in their primes. A horse could have managed these teams. The score was tied in the eleventh, and Ortiz was on first base. The series-winning run was 270 feet from home in the form of a nearly 300-pound man. Clearly the right move was to pinch-run, then you can either steal second and score on a single (like how the Sox beat the Yanks in THE series), or bunt him over and score on a single, which was less likely since their had the heart of their line-up up, and for some strange reason, logical decision-making is thrown out the window when the guy hitting has a 1 in 15 chance of hitting a homer (and incidentally, a 3 in 4 chance of making an out). Even if you do not steal or bunt, a pinch-runner could go first-to-third on a base hit, and Ortiz could not.

But Francona didn't pinch run for the portly Ortiz. Maybe he didn't have a deep enough bench left. Then it was first and second with two outs...certainly you pinch run for him in this scenario! Screw the bench, the game ends with a speedy runner on second and any hit...what is the bench being saved for if not a game-winning hit!? But no pinch runner came on.

Then Mike Lowell walked and the bases were loaded with Ortiz at third with two outs. Not much need for a pinch-runner for Ortiz now. Even he could score from third on a ball into the outfield. So out comes a pinch-runner...for the guy on first!

I understand that Lowell is slow and has a bad hip so he's really slow, and having a speedy runner there makes it harder for the Angels to have an easy out at second on a ball in the infield. That is not a bad play. But can a fast guy at first really be expected to beat out a ball to the short-stop? And if he does, won't they just throw to first for an easy out anyway? And why was Ortiz running for himself all that time if you had a pinch-runner to waste all along?

With speed on first, the pitcher has to respect it and worry about it and throw over and be distracted. With Ortiz there, no problem. With speed on second, the pitcher is even more stressed because he knows any base hit means the series is over.

You can't say it actually cost the Sox the game because Ortiz did not get thrown out at the plate, or make a base-running blunder to end the inning. But it definitely changed the situation for the pitcher and made it easier for him to relax and focus on the guy at the plate. Terrible move by Francona and the Sox eventually lost in the next inning.

Being A Recovering Alcoholic And A Baseball Fan Couldn't Be Easy

On Wednesday, I wrote about how the Mets game from Tuesday night felt like one of those turning point games that might be the driving force that pushes the team. I don't think this team is winning a World Series unless the bullpen starts to channel John Franco (that is to say, loading the bases is fine...giving up a bases-clearing triple is not). But it did look like they would at least overcome the September 2007 demons and get back into the playoffs.

Then on Wednesday night they came out and blew a four run lead and left the winning run on third base after he hit a leadoff triple in the ninth. In fact, they had men on third with no outs in each of the last three innings. Ouch. And of course the Brewers won on a walk-off homer to tie up the Wild Card race. Ouch! To say the least, I did not want to acknowledge that any of this happened, let alone write about sports yesterday, so I took a day to regroup.

And the funny thing is that now that the Mets and Brewers have both played one more game, and each won theirs in spectacular fashion, it is painfully clear that all this magic and heroics really do have nothing to do with what happens the next day. Sure they make folks feel more confident, and confidence is crucial, but so it hitting and pitching and fielding.

The Brewers had a come-from-behind win and won it on a walk-off grand slam in the 10th. Their second walk-off homer in two games. You don't think they feel like a team of destiny? The Mets had their amazing win on Tuesday and then last night had Ryan Church score on the strangest play at the plate in history to complete a three-run comeback. As a rainstorm that had already causes a game in DC to be cancelled water-logged Shea Stadium, they played on into the 9th when Carlos Beltran hit a game-winning shot off the glove of the first baseman that stopped dead in the soaked grass that the right fielder couldn't get to before the winning run scored. They earned a split with the best team in the League. You think they aren't feeling good about themselves? Does Destiny have a favorite?

This is all kinda like how fans pray for their teams, or athletes pray for themselves before events - like God is only listening to one side of the argument. Granted, when it is Boston College playing Miami, God clearly has a side. And He apparently does not like Arod either so whatever team he is on, God's on the other team. (greatest player ever perhaps...not a sniff of a World Series title).

There is only one way that the idea of Destiny intervening can be upheld this season. And that is that the Mets and Brewers both make the playoffs, meaning the Mets have to make up a game on Philly in the last three days. After all, the Rays are the AL East winners, the Yankees are playing golf, and the Twins are about to complete a miracle comeback to win the Central despite having traded away Johan Santana among others in the off season. So amazing things happen. Of course, God doesn't watch American League baseball, so you can't blame it on Him.

The funny thing in all of this is that as a fan, I have no idea what to do with myself from day to day. Wednesday night I felt like I had been kicked in the stomach and yesterday I couldn't even watch ESPN because I hated seeing the ticker show that the Wild Card was tied. Now the Mets pick up one more win, and even though they are still in the exact same position - tied - I feel like they are sure to get it done. I guess the easiest way to calm myself on this rollercoaster is to take solace in the fact that I am not a USC fan.

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.

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.

National League Predictions

While I do not recognize the Red Sox and A's two game miniseries as part of the regular season because it took place in the wrong hemisphere, Baseball is basically here. ESPN has the Season Opener on Saturday night, many teams play Sunday and everyone is in by Monday. My fantasy league has drafted, Sports Illustrated has released their Major League Baseball preview (though I haven't received it because my mailman steals things), and Mark Prior is injured. So it's time to look at the season ahead.

It would have been fun to make 86 predictions for the upcoming season, in honor of the 1986 Mets, but who has time for that? Plus, I'd end up having to start predicting some really obscure, pointless facts (like by how many games the Dodgers miss the playoffs - 6+). So I will stick to the stuff that matters, first the National League:

NL East: Mets - The offense will be decent, not a juggernaut like the last few years were expected to be. But the pitching will be stellar. Pedro is the new 14-15 win, 4.00-4.50 Pedro, but that is fine for a #4 starter. John Maine is a front line starter now despite that he was undrafted in my fantasy league (I promptly dumped Todd Helton for him). Perez was a consistent and consistently good throughout 2007. No reason to think he won't be again. El Duque will be El Middle Reliever. Pelfrey is the #5 and will be good for 10-15 wins depending on run support. Santana is the best pitcher in baseball and he is going to a pitcher's park in a pitcher's league. ERA will be sub 3.00 and he'll win 20 and the Cy Young. The starters are conservatively good for 70 wins. An average relief staff can scrape together 25 more, and this isn't an average staff. 95-67

NL Central: Cubs - Carlos Zambrano, Ted Lilly, Rich Hill are a solid starting three, plus Leiber, Marquis and Demptster will fill out the rotation. Their offense is very good with Ryan Theriot and Alfonso Soriano leading off, and Fukodome may be fantastic (or he may be Kaz Matsui). The Central generally stinks and this team will feast on the biggest, weakest division. 97-65

NL West: Giants - Just kidding. Diamondbacks - No team in the league has the front-line starting pitching of the DBacks. The Dodgers are the sexy pick, with all these young guys and especially with Torre, but I don't buy it. They were a fourth place team last year. They have no track record of success, and are known more for choking late that anything else. Is Torre enough of a motivator to fix it? Perhaps. But what have the Yankees been known for of late? Choking. The Rockies were magical but there is simply no way that every single player has a career year again. It took a 20+ game win streak to get them to the postseason (and through most of the postseason)...you can't rely on that. The Padres have Mark Prior. The Dbacks are like a secret out there in Phoenix. But Brandon Webb and Dan Haren are a lights out 1-2 combo with Micah Owings and The Old Unit bringing up the rear. Upton, Young and Byrnes may be the best defensive outfield in baseball. The West is very even and the win totals will be low (thus hurting their Wild Card chances). 92-70

NL Wild Card: Braves - It was fun while it lasted, the Braves are good again. Chipper doesn't need to be the man with Tiexiera there and Andruw Jones is gone which is the best thing they could hope for in the off season. Glavine will probably turn into Nolan Ryan since he was a saboteur on the Mets the whole damned-time anyway. Smoltz is Smoltz. Hudson is awesome. Chuck James is decent. Hampton sucks but he'll get hurt so he won't hurt the team. Kelly Johnson, Mark Kotsay, Larry Jones, Mark Tiexiera, Matt Diaz, Brian McCann Jeff Franceour is a tough top 7. Their pitching is either too old or too young to match up with the Mets, but they will hover around the 90-win mark. 90-72

NLDS: Cubs over Braves in 6 - Zambrano beats Hudson twice. Chipper flops. Soriano strikes out at curve balls a lot. Tiexiera is a one man show, but the Cubs balanced offense eats up the tired, old Braves pitching.

NLDS: Mets over DBacks in 4 - Santana throws four perfect games in the series, David Wright pulls a Carlos Beltran and hits 7 home runs.

NLCS: Mets over Cubs in 7 - Cubs go up 3 games to none. Steve Bartman, wearing a Jim Kelly helmet, black socks, a Babe Ruth jersey, Brian Leetch's skates, Arizona Cardinals shoulder pads, Jim Brown's costume gun from The Dirty Dozen, and Turk Wendell's necklace, brings a copy of Madden, a Sports Illustrated with Kerry Wood on the cover, and a billy goat to game 4 so all curses can be broken simultaneously and the universe gets angry. Mets win four straight.

I will have the AL winners and World Series champ (take a guess) soon.