Wednesday, March 16, 2005
this is my last post as an ohioan. ohio fucking rocked ass, but i'll get to that in a later post.
my last day of work was friday. the movers come tomorrow and friday. we drive out of town at dawn on tuesday, fly to italy on friday, and get back on the 31st. so while i'll be drinking wine like a stallion, don't expect much in the way of posts.
i hope everyone fares well in their ncaa brackets and fantasy drafts. by the time i'm back here the yanks will have taken the series from the sox and arod will have 2 jacks.
right now i have the ending song from breakfast club in my head, so i hope that at least makes you happy...
my last day of work was friday. the movers come tomorrow and friday. we drive out of town at dawn on tuesday, fly to italy on friday, and get back on the 31st. so while i'll be drinking wine like a stallion, don't expect much in the way of posts.
i hope everyone fares well in their ncaa brackets and fantasy drafts. by the time i'm back here the yanks will have taken the series from the sox and arod will have 2 jacks.
right now i have the ending song from breakfast club in my head, so i hope that at least makes you happy...
Friday, March 11, 2005
from jayson stark:
"One fun game we've been playing this spring is asking GMs, managers and coaches to compare the Yankees lineup to the Red Sox lineup, position by position. The Yankees have the bigger names. But after a half-dozen surveys, we've only had one panelist rate the Yankees as good as even (4-4, with one spot even). Everyone else has given the Red Sox the edge at between five and seven positions. The only Yankees to win in every poll: A-Rod (over Bill Mueller) at third and Gary Sheffield (over Trot Nixon) in right."
is this a joke? i guess by GM and manager he means theo epstein and terry francona. this just supports my premise that people are underrating the yanks this year. how could anyone possibly take renteria over jeter? it's laughable that anyone involved with professional baseball could actually make a statement like that.
holy fuck! only one panelist rated the yanks as good as even!
posada vs varitek
debatable
giambi vs millar
debatable
womack vs bellhorn
bellhorn
jeter vs renteria
jeter
arod vs mueller
arod
matsui vs manny
manny
bernie vs damon
debatable
sheff vs trot
sheff
tino vs ortiz
ortiz
the only questionable spots are c, 1b, and cf. otherwise it's 3-3. so all but one panelist gave the sox the nod on AT LEAST two of those spots. maybe there was only like 3 panelists, but if not that's a fucking joke.
c - posada and varitek. you'd think this is very debatable, with no clear cut winner. but really tell me who you think is better:
player 1
last 5 years OPS (starting with 2000 season): .944, .838, .838, .923, .881
career OBP, OPS: .379, .854
player 2
last 5 years OPS (starting with 2000 season): .730, .860 (only 50 games), .724, .863, .872
career OBP, OPS: .347, .798
posada is player 1. you'd think at least 3/4 panelists would pick him, right?
1b - i like kevin millar. he's a good hitter. but to say he's definitely better than jason giambi is a bit much, no?
cf - there's no reason to think damon will repeat his 2004 campaign, especially the 94 rbi's from the leadoff spot. both he and bernie will be .785-.800 guys (which is well above damon's career numbers, so don't think im totally dumping on him), they both have awful arms and are overrated defenders.
in a way i like this - it's good locker room bulletin board material. and now i really can't wait for the yanks to quietly win 110 games this year.
"One fun game we've been playing this spring is asking GMs, managers and coaches to compare the Yankees lineup to the Red Sox lineup, position by position. The Yankees have the bigger names. But after a half-dozen surveys, we've only had one panelist rate the Yankees as good as even (4-4, with one spot even). Everyone else has given the Red Sox the edge at between five and seven positions. The only Yankees to win in every poll: A-Rod (over Bill Mueller) at third and Gary Sheffield (over Trot Nixon) in right."
is this a joke? i guess by GM and manager he means theo epstein and terry francona. this just supports my premise that people are underrating the yanks this year. how could anyone possibly take renteria over jeter? it's laughable that anyone involved with professional baseball could actually make a statement like that.
holy fuck! only one panelist rated the yanks as good as even!
posada vs varitek
debatable
giambi vs millar
debatable
womack vs bellhorn
bellhorn
jeter vs renteria
jeter
arod vs mueller
arod
matsui vs manny
manny
bernie vs damon
debatable
sheff vs trot
sheff
tino vs ortiz
ortiz
the only questionable spots are c, 1b, and cf. otherwise it's 3-3. so all but one panelist gave the sox the nod on AT LEAST two of those spots. maybe there was only like 3 panelists, but if not that's a fucking joke.
c - posada and varitek. you'd think this is very debatable, with no clear cut winner. but really tell me who you think is better:
player 1
last 5 years OPS (starting with 2000 season): .944, .838, .838, .923, .881
career OBP, OPS: .379, .854
player 2
last 5 years OPS (starting with 2000 season): .730, .860 (only 50 games), .724, .863, .872
career OBP, OPS: .347, .798
posada is player 1. you'd think at least 3/4 panelists would pick him, right?
1b - i like kevin millar. he's a good hitter. but to say he's definitely better than jason giambi is a bit much, no?
cf - there's no reason to think damon will repeat his 2004 campaign, especially the 94 rbi's from the leadoff spot. both he and bernie will be .785-.800 guys (which is well above damon's career numbers, so don't think im totally dumping on him), they both have awful arms and are overrated defenders.
in a way i like this - it's good locker room bulletin board material. and now i really can't wait for the yanks to quietly win 110 games this year.
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
with the yanks season opened less than a month away, and since i have the impression that folks out there think the yankee ship is sinking, i give to you a position by position comparison of this year's squad with last year's:
c: posada 04 vs posada 05
coming off an oh-so slightly disappointing 04 campaign, hitting in an even better projected lineup (he might hit 8th) AND a contract year?
edge: 05
1b& dh: giambi 04/tony clark/olerud/travis lee vs. giambi 05/tino
heh.
edge: 05
2b: cairo vs womack
i still think the yanks should be doing something with andy phillips here (though it seems he's now a full time 1b), but womack blows.
edge: 04
3b: arod 04 vs arod 05
last year he put up his worst season since 1997, and he was below his career numbers across the board. he got out his first year in NY jitters, and now the sox are talking shit about him. i honestly think he might win MVP, even on this team. i'm figuring 45 homers, 120 rbi's, 30 steals, and a gold glove to go with an OPS over 1.000.
edge: 05
ss: jeter 04 vs jeter 05
like arod, had his worst season since 1997, mostly due to that horrific slump in april and may. given that start, he actually had a great june-september to finish with respectable numbers. his walks were way down, which i think was partly do to him wanting to swing his way out of the slump. there's no reason to think he won't return to his career numbers, if not better.
edge: 05
lf: matsui 04 vs matsui 05
godzilla was unreal last year. even though it's fair to say he'll continue getting better in his 3rd ML season, it'd be hard to guarantee a better season.
edge: even
cf: bernie 04 vs bernie 05
his decline is painful for me to watch, but i'd rather have him in the lineup everyday than some weird lofton platoon.
edge: even
rf: sheff 04 vs sheff 05
routinely makes third basemen shit themselves. can't expect more than his terrific 04, but it is (potentially) a contract year and you know he's pissed people say he can't hit in the postseason. this more than compensates for him being a year older.
edge: even
starting staff: mussina 04/brown 04/vazquez/loaiza/lieber vs. rj/mussina 05/brown 05/wright/pavano
last year's staff was as close to an abomination as the yanks have seen since trotting out andy hawkins every 5 days. moose and asshole brown simply can't be much worse, and even though i'm not expecting 15/18 wins from wright/pavano like they got last year, all they have to do is go 6 innings and give up 3 runs. that's it. also, as you might have heard, the yanks added the most dominant pitcher of our generation.
edge: 05
relief: heredia/gabe white/quantrill 04/gordon 04/rivera 04 vs. groom/stanton/quantrill 05/gordon 05/rivera 05
getting rid of heredia alone would have been good enough. plus that crazy screaming nike commerical where mo wears some needle helmet is terrifying.
edge: 05
i realize everyone's a year older. but i really think these guys are walking around with a chip on their shoulder for the first time in years. it's been bothering me that people are talking about how the mystique is gone, how they're beatable nowadays. and i think it's bothering the players a hell of lot more. add the fact that the sox are getting their rings on opening day against the yanks, and i think this may be the most intense first 3 games of the season we've ever seen. plain and simple - this is the best team they've put on the field since the glory days in the late 90's.
c: posada 04 vs posada 05
coming off an oh-so slightly disappointing 04 campaign, hitting in an even better projected lineup (he might hit 8th) AND a contract year?
edge: 05
1b& dh: giambi 04/tony clark/olerud/travis lee vs. giambi 05/tino
heh.
edge: 05
2b: cairo vs womack
i still think the yanks should be doing something with andy phillips here (though it seems he's now a full time 1b), but womack blows.
edge: 04
3b: arod 04 vs arod 05
last year he put up his worst season since 1997, and he was below his career numbers across the board. he got out his first year in NY jitters, and now the sox are talking shit about him. i honestly think he might win MVP, even on this team. i'm figuring 45 homers, 120 rbi's, 30 steals, and a gold glove to go with an OPS over 1.000.
edge: 05
ss: jeter 04 vs jeter 05
like arod, had his worst season since 1997, mostly due to that horrific slump in april and may. given that start, he actually had a great june-september to finish with respectable numbers. his walks were way down, which i think was partly do to him wanting to swing his way out of the slump. there's no reason to think he won't return to his career numbers, if not better.
edge: 05
lf: matsui 04 vs matsui 05
godzilla was unreal last year. even though it's fair to say he'll continue getting better in his 3rd ML season, it'd be hard to guarantee a better season.
edge: even
cf: bernie 04 vs bernie 05
his decline is painful for me to watch, but i'd rather have him in the lineup everyday than some weird lofton platoon.
edge: even
rf: sheff 04 vs sheff 05
routinely makes third basemen shit themselves. can't expect more than his terrific 04, but it is (potentially) a contract year and you know he's pissed people say he can't hit in the postseason. this more than compensates for him being a year older.
edge: even
starting staff: mussina 04/brown 04/vazquez/loaiza/lieber vs. rj/mussina 05/brown 05/wright/pavano
last year's staff was as close to an abomination as the yanks have seen since trotting out andy hawkins every 5 days. moose and asshole brown simply can't be much worse, and even though i'm not expecting 15/18 wins from wright/pavano like they got last year, all they have to do is go 6 innings and give up 3 runs. that's it. also, as you might have heard, the yanks added the most dominant pitcher of our generation.
edge: 05
relief: heredia/gabe white/quantrill 04/gordon 04/rivera 04 vs. groom/stanton/quantrill 05/gordon 05/rivera 05
getting rid of heredia alone would have been good enough. plus that crazy screaming nike commerical where mo wears some needle helmet is terrifying.
edge: 05
i realize everyone's a year older. but i really think these guys are walking around with a chip on their shoulder for the first time in years. it's been bothering me that people are talking about how the mystique is gone, how they're beatable nowadays. and i think it's bothering the players a hell of lot more. add the fact that the sox are getting their rings on opening day against the yanks, and i think this may be the most intense first 3 games of the season we've ever seen. plain and simple - this is the best team they've put on the field since the glory days in the late 90's.
including today, i have 3 days of work left.
anyway, congress is going to subpoena a bunch of mlb-ers for the steroid "scandal." you can take it for granted that i think this is just a complete mis-use of tax pesos, but what i can't figure out is why they choose to speak to the players listed in the article. is it simply because they are all (really) big guys? or maybe it's because they are big name players, or so-called "ambassadors of the game" (read: cock-face schilling). but really, unless BALCO named you, shouldn't they be doing a random take of players? whether or not every single one of those guys stuck needles in their asses, they are taking a ridiculously unfair amount of heat for it. it's not like they are potentially the only 10 (or so) players who juiced, yet theirs are the only names getting slandered left and right.
and in case you (somehow) thought it was just a conspiracy theory, click here, sign up for a 7 day trial, and get aerial photos of any address in america (maybe the world, but i didn't check). from a purely technological standpoint, i think this is pretty cool. from a privacy standpoint, not so much. either way, i really don't know how this is legal but blackjack isn't (in many locales)...
anyway, congress is going to subpoena a bunch of mlb-ers for the steroid "scandal." you can take it for granted that i think this is just a complete mis-use of tax pesos, but what i can't figure out is why they choose to speak to the players listed in the article. is it simply because they are all (really) big guys? or maybe it's because they are big name players, or so-called "ambassadors of the game" (read: cock-face schilling). but really, unless BALCO named you, shouldn't they be doing a random take of players? whether or not every single one of those guys stuck needles in their asses, they are taking a ridiculously unfair amount of heat for it. it's not like they are potentially the only 10 (or so) players who juiced, yet theirs are the only names getting slandered left and right.
and in case you (somehow) thought it was just a conspiracy theory, click here, sign up for a 7 day trial, and get aerial photos of any address in america (maybe the world, but i didn't check). from a purely technological standpoint, i think this is pretty cool. from a privacy standpoint, not so much. either way, i really don't know how this is legal but blackjack isn't (in many locales)...
Monday, March 07, 2005
raise minimum wage? this issue has probably been hashed out here before, but do yourself a favor. click the link, then look at the 2nd picture in the article - the one of ted kennedy. now let's start a thread of potential captions for this pic. i'll first:
"lady, here comes a tit punch."
"lady, here comes a tit punch."
Thursday, March 03, 2005
it's been a big couple of days for rich people (though i suppose this is always true):
yesterday mel gibson bought his own island. isn't this everyone's dream? i've been saying this since i was 8, when i was planning to run away because i had to stop playing wiffle ball for dinner. anyway, i don't think an island is all that uncommon among billionaires. but this time the natives who were kicked off the island back in the 1700's are saying it's theirs, and are filing a claim or lawsuit or something. if they win, since i'm 99% sure i'm decended from both the germanic tribes AND the vikings, i'm going to call cnn and claim that europe was once held by my peeps and they should give it to me. seems fair, no?
also yesterday, bill gates was knighted by the queen of england. i'm sure richard the lionheart would be glad to hear of this development. gates weighs roughly 11 stones soaking wet, and probably would need an entire HR department to pick up a two handed axe. i mean, i know gates has had a monumental impact on society on everything, but can't we at least reserve titles like "knight" for people who can really kick some ass (ex. george the animal steele, ted williams, etc)?
then today, some old leaky faucet became the first person to every fly around the world without refueling. while i'm sure this is mildly impressive, does his flying even have jack shit to do with it? shouldn't they be spraying champagne on the engineer who designed the plane? but scratch that. i don't want any champagne being sprayed for this. first person to fly around the world, i like it. around the world in 80 days, check. but really - without refueling?? if there are going to be any more around the world records they should they be reserved for "without gas" or "without breathing"?
lastly, there's been a $3.5 billion bid to buy the nhl. now this is just cool - right up there with buying your own island. you could decide where the franchises go, what their names would be, get to design uniforms, make rule changes, add cheerleaders (like they have in russian hockey leagues), etc. the first thing they should do is hire a veeck. we'd have mini me on skates, a cd smashing melee, and an exploding scoreboard all within a week. i hope this purchase happens.
yesterday mel gibson bought his own island. isn't this everyone's dream? i've been saying this since i was 8, when i was planning to run away because i had to stop playing wiffle ball for dinner. anyway, i don't think an island is all that uncommon among billionaires. but this time the natives who were kicked off the island back in the 1700's are saying it's theirs, and are filing a claim or lawsuit or something. if they win, since i'm 99% sure i'm decended from both the germanic tribes AND the vikings, i'm going to call cnn and claim that europe was once held by my peeps and they should give it to me. seems fair, no?
also yesterday, bill gates was knighted by the queen of england. i'm sure richard the lionheart would be glad to hear of this development. gates weighs roughly 11 stones soaking wet, and probably would need an entire HR department to pick up a two handed axe. i mean, i know gates has had a monumental impact on society on everything, but can't we at least reserve titles like "knight" for people who can really kick some ass (ex. george the animal steele, ted williams, etc)?
then today, some old leaky faucet became the first person to every fly around the world without refueling. while i'm sure this is mildly impressive, does his flying even have jack shit to do with it? shouldn't they be spraying champagne on the engineer who designed the plane? but scratch that. i don't want any champagne being sprayed for this. first person to fly around the world, i like it. around the world in 80 days, check. but really - without refueling?? if there are going to be any more around the world records they should they be reserved for "without gas" or "without breathing"?
lastly, there's been a $3.5 billion bid to buy the nhl. now this is just cool - right up there with buying your own island. you could decide where the franchises go, what their names would be, get to design uniforms, make rule changes, add cheerleaders (like they have in russian hockey leagues), etc. the first thing they should do is hire a veeck. we'd have mini me on skates, a cd smashing melee, and an exploding scoreboard all within a week. i hope this purchase happens.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
yesterday i came to work and it was like csi, dayton in here. apparently over the weekend there was an attempted robbery but the robber(son)s got scared off or something, because all our shit was back by the afternoon (even my bon jovi cd, which was in my computer).
anyway, what i found to be funny during the whole ordeal was that the atmosphere around here wasn't one of anger or frustration. instead, people were sort of giddy, almost excited. everyone was milling around, popping their heads in all the offices, happily spreading the news. it was almost like a competition: "oh you only lost that? well i lost two CPUs AND a flat screen monitor!" one guy i spoke to was even sort of pissed that none of his shit was taken because he felt like he was missing out (also, he didn't have the excuse to do nothing like all those with missing stuff).
when i sat down at my desk to eat lunch you know what the whole scenario made me realize? how the fuck did people do "work" before their were computers (read: the internet)? did they just stare blankly at the wall? take naps or 3 hour lunches? i've had this discussion at work before and some of the older guys say that the internet actually increased productivity because instead of 5 guys talking around the water cooler, wasting 5 man-hours, people are burning them individually here and there instead of in groups. i have a hard time believing this, but i don't care. all i wanted yesterday was to find the criminals and make them run through an office supply gauntlet: we could line the walls of the hallway, smashing them with keyboards, whipping them with mouse cords, offering paper reams to the jugular and scalding coffee to the crotch. because, for pete's sake, i couldn't check my email or read about how arod tripped on the mound during a pop up drill until like 3pm. and for that, my friends, someone has to pay.
anyway, what i found to be funny during the whole ordeal was that the atmosphere around here wasn't one of anger or frustration. instead, people were sort of giddy, almost excited. everyone was milling around, popping their heads in all the offices, happily spreading the news. it was almost like a competition: "oh you only lost that? well i lost two CPUs AND a flat screen monitor!" one guy i spoke to was even sort of pissed that none of his shit was taken because he felt like he was missing out (also, he didn't have the excuse to do nothing like all those with missing stuff).
when i sat down at my desk to eat lunch you know what the whole scenario made me realize? how the fuck did people do "work" before their were computers (read: the internet)? did they just stare blankly at the wall? take naps or 3 hour lunches? i've had this discussion at work before and some of the older guys say that the internet actually increased productivity because instead of 5 guys talking around the water cooler, wasting 5 man-hours, people are burning them individually here and there instead of in groups. i have a hard time believing this, but i don't care. all i wanted yesterday was to find the criminals and make them run through an office supply gauntlet: we could line the walls of the hallway, smashing them with keyboards, whipping them with mouse cords, offering paper reams to the jugular and scalding coffee to the crotch. because, for pete's sake, i couldn't check my email or read about how arod tripped on the mound during a pop up drill until like 3pm. and for that, my friends, someone has to pay.
