Cleaning out the junk drawer of my mind for the new year

Just some random observations about a variety of things...

First, I want to address the NFL MVP - Peyton Manning got that on reputation alone. He did not deserve it this season as he was as culpable in the Colts record through the first seven games as he was responsible for digging them out of the same hole. A lot of people with the MVP vote claim the Colts would have been horrible without Manning under center, but I don't buy that they would have been any worse than 3-4 through seven games before Manning came back if they had Jim Sorgi taking the snaps.

Consider - Sorgi, for his career, has seen action in 15 games (14 if you don't count the one time in 2006 when he came in to take a knee). In those 14 games, Sorgi is 99 for 156 for 929 yards, 6 touchdowns, 1 interception and a QB Rating of 89.9. As that was a lot of partial games, break that down to five games with an average of 20 completions on 31 attempts, 186 yards, and 1 touchdown per game. Certainly passable and capable of winning three or four games over a seven game season.

There are at least five players that have had a bigger impact on their respective teams - Michael Turner, Matt Ryan, Chad Pennington, Ed Reed, James Harrison all significantly change the equation if they're not on their teams, and it's unlikely that any of their teams make the playoffs without them.

The Falcons were exposed as young and inexperienced in what I thought was one of the more boring playoff games I have ever seen.

I like the way the Red Sox rotation is shaping up, and have a hunch that a lot of people are going to panic because the Sox aren't overspending to get the big, sexy names in free-agency. If this works out the way I think it will, the Sox off-season is going to be compared to the Patriots' 2001 free agent signings. A lot of really solid guys that help make a winner, but aren't the biggest names out there.

How many times does Scott Boras have to publicly screw the pooch before his clients begin to get worried. He was publicly neutered in the last Alex Rodriguez negotiations, blinked in his game of chicken with the Sox during the Daisuke Matsuzaka negotiations, he got lucky in the Mark Texiera sweepstakes in that the Yankees swooped in and pretty much bid against no one, overplayed his hand with both Jason Varitek and Manny Ramirez.

Let's look at Ramirez for a second.

It's well known that Ramirez, likely on the advice of Boras, engineered his exit from Boston in an effort to get out from under his option years. That's not going to sit well with other general managers who will wonder if Ramirez will pull the same stunt on their teams.

Reportedly, Boras told Ramirez that he could get a four year contract for an average of $25 million per year, more than the two option years at $20 million each that the Sox would have had. Since the end of the season Ramirez has received a two-year $45 million offer from the Dodgers (since rescinded), and a three-year incentive-laden deal with a club option for a fourth year from the Giants. I'm guessing the dollars aren't in the right neighborhood based on the following from KPIX in San Fran -

The chances of the Giants signing Ramirez, a 36-year-old left fielder, were unclear. A team spokesperson told CBS 5, "it's not happening."

There was a lot of speculation that Roger Clemens would get a pardon from family friend George W. Bush and in so doing, avoid the legal implications of the federal charges that are likely to stem from the FBI investigation. Looks like charges aren't even going to get filed until after Bush leaves office. Sucks to be Roger.

I look at the Yankees off-season and can't help think that they learned nothing from the Carl Pavano signing. Nor have they learned anything from the history of fat pitchers.

The CC Sabathia signing might work well for them in the regular season for the first year or two, but eight seasons? That's nuts.

Sid Fernandez, who had weight issues, last started more than 20 games at age 29. Former Red Sox reliever Rich "El Guapo/the human zeppelin" Garces was respectable until the age of 30. At 31 he posted a 7.59 ERA and was out of baseball after that season. Once dominant Bartolo Colon had an eight season stretch wherein he pitched fewer than 200 innings only once (188 in 2000) and averaged 32.6 starts per season. When he turned 33 he went away - compiling a total of 35 starts and fewer than 200 combined innings over the final three seasons of his career. Sabathia turns 30 in 2010.

The future is not bright for him.

Congrats to the Cardinals who have finally won a playoff game after a 60+ year absence from the post-season.

I don't want to hear any excuses today regarding the Colts. They were beaten by a depleted 8-8 team - a team without its best running back, their best linebacker, and with their best receiving threat, Antonio Gates, hobbled by a high ankle sprain. The Chargers didn't even play that great a game, twice giving the ball back to the Colts in the red zone while threatening to score. And then the Colts defense imploded during the final drive - that was some of the ugliest play-off football I have ever seen.

On a final note - Matt Cassel is about to cash in on a great season. More power to him. I figure we'll know the status of Tom Brady well before the draft. If Brady is on or ahead of schedule, I expect that Cassel will be packaged for draft picks. If he's not, the Patriots have a salary cap issue to address.

Happy New Year all!

Players, Guns, and Money

A thought on the Plaxico Burress situation before I move on to other things.

A lot of players have come out of the woodwork with reasons to have guns or not have guns. Miami's Joey Porter, in an ESPN interview uses two justifications on behalf of Burress that are just stupid.

One, and he's not the only player that has said this, he noted that people know their schedules and know when they're out of the house, so they need the firearm for home protection. If I know I'm not going to be home, how is carrying a gun going to help me protect the home that's getting broken into? It's not.

Two, he challenges people to not carry a gun if they've had to deal with someone carrying a gun - a mugger, an assault. He gives the "see what you would do in that situation" defense. Years ago I worked as a teacher in a school for the emotionally disturbed. I helped my principal take a hand gun off one of the students. To this day I don't carry a gun.

And let's face it, while Porter says that Burress didn't hurt anyone but himself, he misses the points, and there are two. Burress COULD have hurt someone else and is just lucky he didn't. The second point - it was unregistered, and as such, an illegal weapon.

Butthead.

Quick thoughts on the MVP...

More often than not, the MVP goes to a quarterback. I get it. Outside of the QB, only the center touches the ball on virtually every play. So, here are some of my thoughts on the players, including some dark horse candidates, who could be considered in a year that has no clear cut candidate...

Drew Brees - Brees leads the league with 4100 yards through 13 games and is on pace for 5046 yards passing for the season and 32 touchdowns. Number like that automatically demand consideration. Brees has kept the team's head above water.

Cons - While Brees has kept the team from slipping below .500, his gaudy numbers haven't helped the team in the standings. In fourth place in their own division, the Saints are on the outside looking in at the playoffs. To even make the post-season, the 7-6 Saints are currently behind the Buccanneers, Falcons, Cowboys, Eagles, Redskins, and Bears for the two wild card slots in the NFC.

Kurt Warner - Warner's numbers are second only to Brees and he has led the historically woeful Cardinals to their first division title since the 1970's. Because of Warner's arm, the Cardinals are one of only four three teams that have already clinched a playoff spot. Warner is also having his best season since his years with The Greatest Show on Turf - a big part of the reason that Warner is demanding consideration for the award.

Cons - Warner has put up those numbers in one of the worst divisions in football, and the team has struggled against opponents with winning records (2-5 against teams with winning records, with the last one against the Romo-less Cowboys in early October).

Michael Turner - Admittedly, a dark horse candidate, but I like him for the award more than Adrian Peterson. The old black and blue division still isn't what it once was, but Turner has logged his 1200+ yards on the ground against defensive stalwarts like Carolina and Tampa. Without Turner in the backfield, Matt Ryan likely doesn't have the Rookie of the Year sort of season that he's been logging.

Cons - As good as the Falcons have been, Turner hasn't put the team over the top in regards to positioning Atlanta for the playoffs. Also, he just hasn't been garnering the attention for this award that he deserves, making it unlikely that he will turn up with a significant portion of the vote.

There are others out there that deserve consideration in a year like this, with no clear cut candidate. Arguments could be made for the likes of Peyton Manning and Bob Sanders, both of whom have kept the Colts in contention, in spite of injuries and a bad start to the season. Todd Collins for the Titans, who surely would not be where they are with Vince Young under center. Brandon Jacobs, whose running has made a legitimate championship quarterback of Eli Manning.

The list goes on, and while I don't believe that all of those mentioned here will garner consideration, I do believe that one of the ones mentioned here is the player who is most likely to win.
Chad Pennington - For all that the "Wildcat" offense has done for the team, the Dolphins aren't in position to wrest the AFC title from the Patriots without Pennington under center. Possible proof that Eric Mangini didn't know how to utilize him, the former Jet has out-performed his replacement in the Meadowlands, throwing for more yardage, and a higher rating. Sure, Brett Favre has thrown for eight more touchdowns, but he has also thrown nine more interceptions and been sacked four more times.

Cons - Pennington has to fight the perception that a fair percentage of those wins were built on a gimmick offense early in the season. Also, like Turner, he just hasn't entered the conversation.

Matt Cassel - Cassel got some love for the award from the pundits after his back-to-back 400 yard games. Cassel, like Pennington, has kept his team in the playoff hunt. While Pennington is doing it with a team that only won one game last season, Cassel is doing it with a team decimated by injury on both sides of the ball. In spite of filling in for an NFL MVP, not starting a game since high school, missing his starting tight end for two games, losing his starting half back for the season, and the second and third backs for a quarter of the season (and more), and missing the right side of the offensive line until the sixth game of the season, Cassel has kept the Patriots in contention for the AFC East crown.

Cons - Like Warner, the team has struggled at times, with four of the team's five losses coming against quality opponents. Cassel also leads the league in sacks and is in the top ten in total yards lost due to being sacked.

Wes Welker - Cassel's safety blanket, without Welker, Cassel is probably nowhere. Welker, in spite of having only one touchdown on the season, is the battery that makes the Patriots offense go this season. Welker is the human third-down conversion, with 47 of his 96 receptions converting for first downs. The king of the bubble screen, Welker is also tied for tenth in the league in yards after the catch with 6.8.

Cons - The fact that he has only one touchdown will be held against him, as will the fact that he plays opposite of Randy Moss. Also, when's the last time a slot receiver was even considered for the award.

City of Dust

Dust - it's tiny, seems practically insignificant, yet it's all over and can have a severe impact on even the largest of bodies.

Pretty apt description for the Red Sox latest winner of the MVP award. One of the smallest players in the majors, Dustin Pedroia is, in his second season, the most decorated member of the Boston baseball team over the first two years of his career since Fred Lynn won the Rookie of the Year, Gold Glove, and MVP awards in 1975.

Pedroia now has a ROY, Gold Glove, Silver Slugger, and MVP award to show for his work as one of the men in the middle for the Sox. It's as much a testament to the little man's gritty determination as it is Theo Epstein's and Terry Francona's dedication to standing by the little man's side when he struggled at the beginning of the 2007 season.

Their faith in Pedroia has paid off in spades.

Pedroia's win is one of the few times that the Baseball Writer's Association has gotten this right.

The award is for the Most Valuable Player, not the guy who is statistically the best - which is what I think happened over in the National League.

I always felt that the key word in the award was "Valuable."

Sure, it could mean a number of different things to different people, however, the bottom line, I've always believed, is how valuable was the player to a team's success. It's a difficult question, and seldom is a player on a team that misses out on the playoffs deserving. There are exceptions - When Steve Carlton rocked 27 wins with a sub-2.00 ERA for a Phillies team that won only 62 games back in 1972, he certainly should have beat out Johnny Bench for the award. Any lesser pitcher would have struggled to get to double digits in wins, considering the Phillies lack of run support, making Carlton, far and away, the most valuable player to any success his team had that season. Consider the following - if you had a pitcher that couldn't even half his total of wins - at say, 13 wins, and those other 14 games are losses, the Phils finish 1972 with 48 wins.

I digress.

As to the question - what would have happened to the Sox had they lost Pedroia for an extended period of time? He picked up the slack when others went down - when the team lost David Ortiz, and JD Drew. When Mike Lowell was playing through injury, and the team suffered injuries to the starting rotation. If they lose Pedroia, do they still get to the post-season? I have my doubts.

It was nice to see the voters get it right, the voters that are enamored of stat machines.

Don't believe that about the voters? Consider the following about Alex Rodriguez (this was from one of my previous posts, but I have since updated it for current numbers)...

“Once each of his previous teams, the Mariners and the Rangers, rid themselves of A-Rod, those teams averaged somewhere around eight more wins per season for the first three seasons after Rodriguez’s departure. The Yankees averaged 95.5 wins per season with A-Rod in their line-up (with decreasing numbers the last three - 97, 95, 89). The three seasons prior to his arrival? 99.67. Sure, a drop-off of four games per year isn’t huge, but it’s still a drop off and when combined with the following fact, it’s a serious indictment of what his impact on a team really is - for the three seasons he played for the Rangers, Texas won 73, 72, and 71 games respectively (the Yankees won 101 his first season with the team, a total down to 89 this season), but for the first three seasons after A-Rod left the confines of Arlington, the Rangers 89, 79, and 80 games respectively - an average improvement of eight games per year.”

So, A-Rod won the award three times on teams that had lower win totals with him than without. How valuable is that? The Sox, on the other hand, jumped from 85 wins in 2006 to 96 wins in 2007, and 95 this past season.

I know that it's not fair to lay the improvement or decay at the feet of one player, but in the case of A-Rod, the improvement/degradation has followed him through his career. It happens to one team, it's coincidence, it happens with three teams - well, that's a career trend.

In other Sox news -

I just want to bid a quick farewell to Coco Crisp who is now officially a member of the Kansas City Royals. While the trade affects depth in the outfield, it bolsters the bullpen, an issue in the post season, with the acquisition of Ramon Ramirez. Ramirez appeared in 71 games, going 3-2 with a 2.64 ERA for the 75 win Royals last season.

Happy trails Coco.

What's in an MVP...or draft position for that matter?

Yesterday Alex Rodriguez won the American League MVP award, keeping a 20+ year streak intact of AL MVP's that failed to reach the World Series. It is the third MVP that he has won. There are a couple of questions that this presents -

What does the MVP really mean?

Is it just an award to acknowledge the player who statistically has the best year, or is it meant to recognize the player who has the greatest impact on his team?

What does that key word, "valuable," really mean?

I will admit that the Yankees don't make the post-season this year without A-Rod, but do the Red Sox without Lowell? Without Ortiz? Just one of those guys out of the lineup for significant time and the Sox don't make the post-season.

Which, in turn, begs the following question - 20 years of AL MVP's failing to make the World Series, then isn't World Series MVP the far more telling award? After all, it is given to the player who plays the best and has the most impact on the championship team during crunch time. I mean, think about it, this year's winner hit 30 of his 54 home runs before the All-Star Break - 56 percent of his dingers. Through the first 63 games he was on pace to hit 64 homers.

To put the cherry on the whipped cream, A-Rod won the award playing on a last-place club in Texas. What was his value there?

I think major league baseball has to have less vague specs for the voters in regards to this award. I do not begrudge A-Rod the award because, as I said, I don't think the Yankees make the post-season this year without him, however, I don't think he deserved to have such a landslide sort of vote leaning his way. There were several other players that were just as valuable to their teams.

However, I would still take the World Series MVP on my team over the AL MVP for one reason and one reason only - at this point it seems that the AL MVP pretty much means that my team didn't even make the Series.

Feeling drafty...

An interesting idea has creeped into the scribblings of many sports writers. Many like Peter King have started to note that drafting a franchise running back in the top ten is a waste of money. There is a history that they point at that includes Curtis Martin (3rd round), Terrell Davis (6th round), Willie Parker (undrafted), performing at as high a level, and often higher levels than a number of highly picked running backs such as Ron Dayne, Curtis Enis, Ki-Jana Carter, and Lawrence Phillips.

The idea is that a team looking for a running back, but doesn't want to spend big bucks on an unproven rookie, would be better served finding a gem in the late rounds rather than spending on an established back closing in on his 30th birthday (Texans and Ahman Green, we're looking at you).

It's not a bad idea, however, why wouldn't this be just as prudent to apply this same reasoning to quarterbacks? Some of the best in the business, per generation, have been missed by a number of teams - Johnny Unitas was cut by Pittsburgh, Joe Montana was a second rounder out of Notre Dame as was Brett Favre, Tom Brady came out of the sixth round, and Steve Young was a pick in the supplemental draft. A number of other solid starters have come from the late rounds - Bernie Kosar was a pick in the supplemental draft, currently Derek Anderson is looking solid, as is John Kitna. Jake Delhomme was undrafted as was Kurt Warner. Steve Grogan was drafted in the fifth round.

Isn't the evidence of first round quarterback busts just as damning as it is for running backs? Rick Mirer, Michael Vick, Ryan Leaf, Jeff George, Akili Smith...the list goes on.

I Guess Because Ho-Hum Bowl Doesn't Sound as Good...

I have seen better.

Granted, I have also seen worse championship bouts, but this year's Super Bowl certainly wasn't in the top 50 percent of the games played. This was a game in which both teams did their damnedest to give the game away - Chicago just worked a little harder at it.

The Colts turned the ball over three times on offense (twice from the game's MVP), missed an extra point and a field goal. The Colts high-powered offense accounted for 22 total points on a rainy night.

Unfortunately for the Bears, their offense could manage only 10 points and Rex Grossman was responsible for three of the team's five turnovers (two interceptions on poorly thrown balls and one fumble on the center exchange) - two coming at a time late in the game when the Bears still had an opportunity to pull ahead on touchdowns. Grossman had a later fumble on the exchange that he recovered himself.

It was a sloppy game with few exciting moments (I am not saying this because I am a Patriots fan - I still feel that the Giants-Bills game in January of 1991 is amongst the best ever, the conflicts between the Steelers and Cowboys are epic - except for a mediocre game in the mid 1990's, and the 49ers-Bengals game was special - and I don't like either of those teams).

As for the game MVP - I think the selection of Manning was weak, and probably based more on sentiment than what he actually did to win the game. Let me qualify this by adding that I don't necessarily feel as though there was a clear cut candidate.

His game wasn't horrible, but it wasn't "Most Valuable Player" quality either (Hell, Rex Grossman completed as many touchdown passes to Colts as Manning did). I think that Dominick Rhodes was just as deserving for his ability to keep the Bears offense on the sidelines and to wear out the Bears D while racking up 113 yards and a touchdown on 21 rushing attempts.

Another option would be safety Bob Sanders. Granted he had only two tackles, but also forced one of the Bear fumbles and had an interception (returned 38 yards) and a pass defensed. And a final, although unlikely candidate - Adam Vinatieri. He accounted for 11 points, and after the initial kickoff, kept the ball away from the dangerous Devin Hester.

The Prince of South Beach -

Ah, Prince and the half-time show...It was one of the better halftime shows that I have ever seen, but I have to admit to some surprise at the lack of outrage from middle America about the sexual suggestiveness of the shadow-theater at the tail end of the mini-concert (see the Reuters picture above).

Racial Barriers -

This morning on ESPN's Mike & Mike radio show Mike Greenberg made a big deal about "racial barriers" being broken. It is, at its core, a ridiculous sentiment that implies that there was someone, or some group of someones in control of the NFL that have consciously been trying to hold back black head coaches.

If Tony Dungy were the ONLY black head coach in the NFL right now (he wasn't even the only one in the Super Bowl), I would concede that this Super Bowl win was about a racial barrier that has been broken, that his win would probably mean that other black coaches would get shots at more of the top spots, but this is a guy that's been a head coach for a decade and he's not alone as a black head coach in the NFL.

Here's the real trick - name a Latino head coach. Asian? Hell, try for assistants - outside of Ron Rivera of the Bears, it's pretty hard, isn't it?