Collateral Estoppel

My Vote Goes to Joe, Plus a Bonus Taxi Adventure

2005-03-08T18:09:00.000-06:00

I listened to Pat and Ron last Thursday as the Cubs beat the A's 2-1 in the Cactus League opener, and since then I haven't really followed it very closely, mostly because I'm not terribly worried about this team. I think the offense will be there, despite much media worrying about how they are going to replace 70+ homers from Sosa and Alou (neglecting to mention that Sammy hit .253 last year). Aramis is going to do what he does, D-Lee will be steady at first, Todd Walker and Nomar are going to be solid up the middle, Corey will cut down on his strikeouts, Burnitz will hit 30 homers, and whoever plays left (I prefer Jason Dubois, but I would have nothing against Todd Hollandsworth) will be fine. Plus Michael Barrett can hit.

Pitching? The rotation is fine. Closer spot? That's where the title of this post comes in. Let's review: the Cubs win 88 games in 2003 and come within a game of winning the pennant. Joe Borowski saves 30-something games. Last year, the Cubs win 89 games and miss the playoffs by three games. The numbers of games that I can count off the top of my head that the Cubs blew a lead in the ninth inning last year? At least seven (both games in that May DH in Pittsburgh, a June home game against the Bucs, an April home game against Cincy, an August game in Houston, the September game at Shea, and the final week blowup against the Reds [again!] at Wrigley, one that I personally witnessed). How many wins would that have been with a healthy Joe? Theoretically 96, as there are no guarantees that he would have done the same thing last year. But anything would have been better than Latroy Hawkins trying to get the last three outs.

I realize that three of the games I listed were blown saves by Joe himself, but it was obvious last year that he was not the Joe of 2003. That's why I think he's the closer until something goes wrong. I really like Ryan Dempster, but he's kind of the right-handed swing guy of the bullpen (with Glendon Rusch as the lefty, but I think he should be in the rotation). Chad Fox? Good setup man, not a closer. You don't need an overpowering closer to win in the playoffs. After all, how much good did Eric Gagne do the Dodgers in the NLDS last year? He never had any leads to protect. Keith Foulke and Jason Isringhausen are both good closers, but nobody will ever mistake them for Dennis Eckersley, Bruce Sutter, or Lee Smith at their primes. What the Cubs need most is consistency: one guy that everybody knows is coming into the game in the ninth inning to get the last three outs. I think Joe is that guy if he is healthy. Fortunately, nobody cares what I think, least of all Dusty Baker.

Time for a Chicago cab story: today my wife and I went to the Field Museum to see the Jackie Kennedy exhibit (my wife's namesake). We go outside of our building to get a cab. Our building is right across from Navy Pier, and the Field is about two miles straight down Lake Shore Drive. The exit even says "Museum Campus" on the sign. So we get in the cab, tell the driver where we're going, and he sort of doesn't understand. I repeat it, and he says OK and we go down Lake Shore. We're cruising down until we pass the exit we should have taken. I start to think, okay, we're going past Soldier Field for some reason, and we'll take the next exit. But we pass that one, and soon we're coming up on McCormick Place. So I tell the driver, we're going to the Field Museum. He thought we were going to the Museum of Science and Industry, which is down in Hyde Park. So we get off at 31st and turn around, and we thought he had turned off the meter because of his horrible knowledge of Chicago destinations. We finally get off at the correct exit, and we get to an intersection where a left turn takes us to the Field, and straight takes us to the Shedd Aquarium and Adler Plantarium. Even though the Field is a huge building and there are signs all over it, the driver doesn't seem to know where it is, and as my wife says to turn left, he goes straight instead. Of course, the road loops us back around, where he proceeds to stop next to a parked taxi to ask this driver where the Field is. The other driver, somewhat incredulously, says that it's right next to us. So we finally get to the South Entrance and the meter says $4.10. I didn't even want to tip the guy, but I give him a twenty and tell him to give us $13 back. He starts telling us that it's really $7.90 plus this $4.10; apparently he didn't actually turn the meter off, he just sort of cut it in half. We tell him that we weren't the ones who didn't know where the Field was, and we finally agree to give him $10, and upon exiting the cab my wife tells him that he was the worst cab driver we've ever had, which was true.

What's most inexplicable about this was that if there was a top ten list of destinations that Chicago cab drivers should be required to know how to get to, the Field is definitely on the list. We weren't asking for some small museum (and if we were, I would have given the address as well), we wanted to get to the biggest museum in the third biggest city in the US, and the cab driver didn't seem to know where it was or how to get there. Unbelievable. And don't get me wrong: 99% of the drivers either me or my wife have are no problem and know exactly where they're going. I even had one get me to Webster and Southport when all I gave him was the address of 1401 W. Webster, and I didn't even know where the hell I was going. But to not know the Field? That's like not knowing how to get to the Met or the Guggenheim in Manhattan. It's completely unacceptable for a cab driver. Is it worth calling the city's cab hotline over? No. Does it make me think that the proposed cab fare increase is not a good idea? Yes, especially if a knowledge of city streets and destinations is not going to be a requirement for being a cab driver in this city.

The new dugout and bullpen seats go on sale this weekend, and the registration starts on the Cubs website tomorrow. I'm there, especially if I could get lucky enough to snag them for a weekend series in the summer. Mucho resale value there for the ones I wouldn't use.

And as Selection Sunday for the NCAA Tournament approaches, I realize that the only way my alma mater, UC Santa Barbara, will be a participant is for them to win the Big West Tournament and defeat top-ranked Pacific along the way. If that's what's required, then I know my Gauchos can do it. If not, I'm still going to win any tournament pools I enter.

Just Like I Planned

2005-02-26T02:15:00.000-06:00

The virtual waiting room really started to clear out after 11:00 tonight, to the point where I was frequently getting back to the schedule where you could pick your game without being kicked back into the room at all. In the end, my final tally is 11 games total, one with two tickets so my wife can go, and the other ten single tickets. The singles allowed me to go to two Cardinal games and a couple others the Cubs website is indicating is either sold out or has only scattered singles available. My games are scattered throughout the year (I tried to get one game per homestand, of which the Cubs have 12 this year), and overall I'm very pleased. The only annoying aspect was having to buy one game per transaction, meaning I had to put credit card info in eleven different times, which means I'll probably also end up with 10 different envelopes containing one ticket each in the middle of March, when they mail them out (the bleacher ticket I got was will call or print at home only; they wanted another $2.50 so I could use my own ink and paper, but I said no thanks). I need to resist the urge to keep buying tickets to games I know I could go to, because I know I will go overboard (that happened last year when I went to 18 games total, but my rationale is that it was my first full summer in Chicago). So eleven is it. I really need to get season tickets as soon as I have an income.

I like the bleachers the best, but I only got one game, on April 24th against Pittsburgh, due to their almost complete unavailability. This only means one thing: save me a seat, Al, because I'm coming over to right field!

It Actually Works

2005-02-25T18:28:00.000-06:00

When Cubs playoff tickets went on sale for the Divisonal Round and then the NLCS in 2003, I endured the so-called "virtual waiting room" online in an attempt to get tickets. That endeavor was unsuccessful, which led to me spending of $250 for a bleacher seat to Game 1 of the NLCS, probably the best $250 I have ever spent in my life. The Cubs lost that one on Mike Lowell's homer in the 11th, a ball that I can still remember the distinct sound it made when it clanged into the basket in front of the shrubbery in center. However, that game provided Sammy Sosa's two-out, two-run blast to tie the game in the bottom of the ninth, my favorite Sammy moment and the absolute loudest I have ever heard Wrigley, even louder than the day the Cubs swept the Pirates in the doubleheader and clinched the division.

But I digress; the point is, I got on the computer today at 1 o'clock, entered the virtual waiting room, and, to my surprise, it let me in at about 4:30 or so to buy tickets. Of course, I was limited to one game, and by then the Red Sox and the White Sox series were both sold out, as was the home opener and a few Cardinals games, and I'm fairly certain I'll be able to get tickets for the other games that I want, so I snatched up a couple field box outfield seats for the June 7th game against Toronto, so my wife and I can go sit in a close section for her one game of the year that she can stand. I also like to see random American League teams when I get the chance, since I'm not interested in venturing down to the Cell to see the Palehose. I'm currently in the virtual waiting room again, and I will likely be doing this all weekend, but I want to go see the Cubs, dammit, and I'm not going to be denied. At least it worked once for me so far.

The Cubs Are Back, and So Am I (and Hopefully on a Regular Basis)

2005-02-23T19:40:00.000-06:00

With the news that the 2nd Annual Cubs Blog Army over at Northside Lounge predictions contest is upon us, and as a member of said army despite my complete lack of posts for about, oh, seven weeks now, as some famous actor once said in something (I think it was Jason Alexander as George in Seinfeld), "I'm back, baby!" I try not to predict anything about the Cubs because of my complete and utter lack of objectivity, but I will do anything for the purposes of competition and/or gambling.

Anyway, to recap all that's happened since January 3rd, my last post: the Patriots won the Super Bowl (I predicted their two AFC victories, as you may or may not have noticed), and Sammy Sosa got traded. Both events were expected, and both made me happy. I already like the Cubs' attitude this year. A little less pressure, combined with a lot less bad apples in the clubhouse, should mean a better team (not that 89 wins is bad).

Last year I did the whole wristband thing at Wrigley and waited almost nine hours there on that Friday before I finally got to buy, but it's not happening this year. I've figured out a process that will allow me to go to most of the games that I want without resorting to trying to get them right away. Unfortunately it won't work for you unless you want to go to games by yourself. Since that doesn't bother me, and since I'm not very good company when the Cubs are losing, it's a great system.

Why the Playoffs Are Different

2005-01-03T14:32:00.000-06:00

Now that January (and cold rain here in Chicago) is upon us, it is not too crazy to turn our eyes to the impending beginning of spring training in a mere six weeks or so. With Carlos Beltran still unsigned, and it appearing that it will stay that way for at least a week, I am still confident that Jim Hendry will step in at some point and make a competitive offer for his services. You and I both know that the Tribsters are capable of paying both Sammy and Beltran for 2005.

Now that Randy Johnson is finally out of the National League (thank God, the Cubs never hit him, though this year they do play in Yankee Stadium) and in the Bronx, all the East Coast-centric pundits are ready to proclaim the Yankees' rotation as one of the best ever. If they could somehow convince me that Carl Pavano is not a fluke and that Mike Mussina has not passed his prime, I might be inclined to believe them. But if trading what remaining talent the Yankees have left in their farm system to acquire a 41-year-old pitcher with back problems is their panacea, who am I to question it? And, for the record, I'll take the Cubs' rotation for 2005, even with Matt Clement's departure to Boston: Prior, Wood, Zambrano, Maddux, and Rusch. I don't care if the Cardinals picked up Mark Mulder (though he is quite good, the Cubs can usually hit lefties), the Cubs have the best rotation in the division, and I would argue in the entire league. Atlanta's acquistion of Tim Hudson is a good one, but Russ Ortiz and John Thomson are still prominently involved. Houston's depends on Roger Clemens' whims, and the Dodgers should be decent with Javy Vasquez, but in the end I'll take the Cubs. Of course, there is bias involved.

And now I turn to the most powerful sports team in my fan garage, if you will: the Patriots. A workmanlike 21-7 dispatching of the 49ers yesterday ended their season at 14-2. If the Colts beat the Broncos, they will travel to Foxboro, but if the Broncos win in Indy (not likely), the Pats will host the winner of the Jets-Chargers game. Since we all know that the Pats are capable of beating the Colts, and beat the Jets twice, the only unknown here is the Bolts. They are a good team, despite the liability of being coached by Marty Schottenheimer, but since the Broncos have only slightly better odds than a snowball in hell of winning in Indy, we'll let the Steelers worry about the Bolts.

I will say this much: Bill Belichick knows how to coach in the playoffs. His last postseason loss as head coach? Over ten years ago with the Browns. The Pats went 3-0 in the 2001 playoffs and 3-0 in the 2003 playoffs. They didn't have home-field for the AFC Championship in 2001 either, just like this year. It's funny how similar this year is to the playoffs of three years ago, minus the fact that nobody thought the Pats were any good entering those playoffs. The Steelers were already booking their flights to New Orleans after the Pats escaped in the Snow Bowl against the Raiders (the "tuck rule" game, whose play was ruled correctly to the consternation of many Raider fans). Enter an unproven quarterback in Kordell Stewart, the Pats pick him off three times, and, along with a blocked field goal returned for a touchdown, they go to the Super Bowl instead. Now, I am aware that the Steelers have the best defense in the NFL, and that they have won either 13 or 14 in a row (I'm not exactly sure, but I don't want to look it up). However, the Pats always stop Jerome Bettis when it counts, they didn't have Corey Dillon when they lost in Pittsburgh on Halloween, nobody knows what Ben Roethlisberger is going to do when it counts in the crunch time of the playoffs, and no coach on the league is better at putting game plans together than Belichick. All told, I like their chances in the AFC Championship. Of course, they do have to get there first, so let's not put the cart ahead of the horse. (And I did accurately predict their loss in Miami.)

They're Allowed to Lose One Game

2004-12-21T17:25:00.000-06:00

I did predict it, though it was definitely tongue-in-cheek. I thought that last night's game was a trap game for the Patriots: the Dolphins always play them tough, Tom Brady never plays that well against them, and they never seemed to put it away when they had multiple chances to do so. But, come on, they're still 12-2. Let's get some perspective here. They didn't blow home-field because they needed a Steelers loss to get it anyway. Two main reasons why this loss isn't that big of a deal:

1) They won the AFC Championship in January 2002 in Pittsburgh with Drew Bledsoe coming off the bench and a team that was not as battle-tested at this year's version, so it's not like home-field is an essential component to them returning to the Super Bowl. Plus Corey Dillon was still missing the playoffs with the Bengals then.

2) They hold the tiebreaker over the Colts for the second bye, and though I hear that the Chargers hold the tiebreaker over the Pats (I'm not sure how unless two of the Bolts' losses came against NFC teams), the Colts and the Bolts are playing each other on Sunday, and, barring a tie (highly unlikely), somebody has to lose. Because the Pats beat the Colts in Week 1, a Colts win would help sew up the second AFC bye. Not that I don't think they could win two games on the road to get to Jacksonville, but I'd prefer that they don't have to.

Onto what little Cubs news there is. Tim Kurkjian just said on Sportscenter that the Yankees are set to offer Carlos Beltran about six or seven years at about $17 million. You're telling me the Tribune Company can't find that kind of cash? They gave it to Sammy, and they can give it to Beltran. Beltran doesn't necessarily want the money, though having Scott Boras as your agent does little to suggest otherwise. My point is that Jim Hendry hasn't even stepped up to the plate yet, so let's see what kind of offer the Cubs put out there before we cede Beltran to the Yankers just yet.

On a completely unrelated note, the Cubs resigned Jose Macias to a one-year deal. I actually don't mind Macias: he plays a few positions, he hustles, and he has occasional pop. You need guys like him around. I also saw that Kent Mercker signed with the Reds. They can have him.

I'm Back

2004-12-18T14:12:00.000-06:00

That's right, finals are over, I can have my life back, and it's just in time for the Patriots' inevitable run through the AFC playoffs on the way to the Super Bowl. If anyone legitimately thinks that the Steelers are beating the Pats in the AFC Championship, they're insane. You can't beat the Pats right now. (Watch, now they'll lose to the Dolphins Monday night.)

But, considering as how this blog is supposed to be about the Cubs some of the time, and I'd like to be an esteemed member of the Cubs Blog Army, it's time to discuss everything that's gone down in the past month or so.

Sammy Sosa: Is he staying? Is he going? Do I even care any more? Don't get me wrong, I love Sammy, and he was my favorite player for a long time after Ryne Sandberg officially retired, but he's slow, he can't field anymore, he strikes out too much (of course, he's always done that), and he doesn't really hit singles anymore. That said, I'm not sure why another team would want him, but we shall see. The point is, however, that trading him is not a necessary event for the signing of...

Carlos Beltran: This is a must sign for the Cubs. They pick him up, stick him in center, move Corey Patterson to left, and with the rest of their lineup, they can throw Jason Dubois in right and it would be fine. Scott Boras is a moron, and he's not going to get 10 years and $200 million for Beltran. I think the Cubs can get him for about 8 and $140 mil or thereabouts. Beltran says he loves Chicago, we all know how well he hits at Wrigley, and does he really want to go to the Bronx? Not with their ancient pitching staff (and Carl Pavano is a one-year wonder, I can tell you that much).

Matt Clement: Hey, he had some good years, but I was never truly confident having him on the mound, and he was truly snake-bit for most of 2004. Good luck to him in Boston; the thing that I'm most happy about is that he went to the American League and he won't have the chance to torment the Cubs for the next three years. (See Greg Maddux, 1993-2003.)

Todd Walker and Nomar Garciaparra: Two underrated resignings, especially considering that Nomar is amenable to sticking around after 2005. If you give him a full season at Wrigley, I have no doubt that he's going to hit over .300. I love Walker too; he needs to be starting if for no other reason than the Cubs need another left-handed bat.

Neifi Perez: Just one of those useful guys you need around to play a lot of positions. I have a lot of faith in Dusty Baker guys.

So how would this lineup look on Opening Day in Phoenix?
Walker 2B
Garciaparra SS
Beltran CF
Ramirez 3B
Lee 1B
Patterson LF
Barrett C
Dubois (or whoever) RF
P

Rotation:
Wood
Prior
Zambrano
Maddux
Rusch

Where can I pick up my World Series tickets? Oh, the optimism of December.

I also want to congratulate the men's soccer team of my alma mater, UC Santa Barbara, who agonizingly lost the national championship in a shootout to Indiana last week. My Gauchos have still only won one national championship in the history of the university, and I thought this one was going to be the second. At least they got UCSB mentioned on Sportscenter for something.

And to part, overheard on the #66 bus as I got on this week:
Driver: "You need to stand behind the yellow line."
Crazy old man: "Only God tells me what to do."
He got off two stops later, but I was wondering how long he tormented the bus driver that night.

A Perfect Ten

2004-11-13T19:12:00.000-06:00

That's the idea this week. Here we go...

NY JETS (+1 1/2) over Baltimore; Jets
*Yes, I'm aware that Quincy Carter is QB for the Jets. But as good as Baltimore's defense is (though it's not that good), I don't think an offense led by Kyle Boller is capable of scoring more than 10 points in the Meadowlands on what will undoubtedly be a chilly and windy afternoon/evening. Though I wouldn't mind a few field goals from Matt Stover, since he's the kicker on my fantasy team.

Houston (+9 1/2) over INDIANAPOLIS; Indy
* The Colts can't play defense, but the Texans are getting too many points not to bet on them. Fortunately for me, I'm starting both Brandon Stokely and Jabar Gaffney tomorrow, so as long as it's a high-scoring affair, I can't lose.

ATLANTA (-3 1/2) over Tampa Bay; Atlanta
* I still like the looks of the Falcons in a weak NFC, even considering the shellacking they took in KC a few weeks ago. Plus I have Warrick Dunn and need him to step it up.

Detroit (+3) over JACKSONVILLE; Detroit
* The Lions play well on the road, and, without Byron Leftwich, the Jags aren't left with much besides a defense that can't create turnovers (seriously, their defense was the most frustrating to have on my fantasy team; they would give up less than 20 points every game but would get maybe one takeaway, so that's why I've switched to the Bears). I'm still not sold on Detroit, but I have a hunch.

ST. LOUIS (PK) over Seattle; St. Louis
* If I were an actual bettor this game would scare the hell out of me. I would like Marc Bulger to have a good game tomorrow for my sake, but the Pats exposed them last week with a patchwork secondary. Matt Hasselbeck isn't exactly setting the world on fire, but Seattle still has Shaun Alexander, whom I desperately wanted to draft with the eighth overall pick (he got taken seventh, and I got Randy Moss, which was fine before he got hurt). I guess I'm just picking home field here.

Kansas City (-3 1/2) over NEW ORLEANS; KC
* The Saints' defense is even more porous than the Chiefs', and that's saying something. Any team with Priest Holmes should put serious points on the board, and New Orleans won't be able to keep up.

WASHINGTON (-3) over Cincinnati; Washington
* Both of these teams suck. That's the bottom line. I'm picking the 'Skins because they have Clinton Portis and I can't even remember right now who Cincy's QB is (I'm pretty sure it's still Carson Palmer).

Minnesota (+4) over GREEN BAY; Minnesota
* The Vikes hung with Indy last week and the Pack have struggled at Lambeau. Even without Randy Moss I think Minnesota will find some way to pull this game out, though it certainly won't be through defense alone.

ARIZONA (+2 1/2) over NY Giants; Arizona
* The Cards usually get too many points, and this is another example. I'll take Dennis Green in a matchup against Tom Coughlin any day, plus the Giants seem to be fading.

SAN FRANCISCO (-1) over Carolina; SF
* I have no faith in the Niners here, but I have negative faith, if that's even possible, in a Panthers team which has maybe the worst running game in a decade flying across the country and winning this game.

NEW ENGLAND (-7) over Buffalo; NE
* I'm not fond of the line here because the Bills are playing well right now, but the Pats have always been able to beat Buffalo under Bill Belichick, Week 1 in 2003 notwithstanding.

Philadelphia (-6 1/2) over DALLAS; Philly
* Pittsburgh exposed Philly last week, but that will probably just serve to piss Andy Reid off, plus were are dealing with Vinny Testaverde here, and we all know what to do by this point (it worked last week, though I didn't articulate it).

And the lock of the week: Pittsburgh (-3 1/2) over CLEVELAND; Pittsburgh
* The Steelers are playing well right now. Are they better than the Patriots? Hell no. Let's see how they do in Foxboro before we send them to Jacksonville as representative of the AFC. But they're certainly good enough to beat the Browns in Cleveland by a healthy margin.

For some reason the Bears-Titans line is off, so I'm not picking that one. I don't think the Bears can win two games in a row on the road, but we'll see.

Who Knew Mail Fraud Could Be So Interesting?

2004-11-10T20:35:00.000-06:00

Just a rhetorical question there. Go check out 18 U.S.C. sec. 1341 if you don't believe me. And before I proceed with my recap of my Week 9 picks, an alert to anyone stumbling across this: there is lots of talk about sports, especially the Cubs (I talk about poker when I get a chance to play, but it's been so long since I have, so there's nothing to say. At least it's about gambling, sort of). It's all I have time to talk about right now. I never said I was an interesting person. My wife will tell you that I can be quite boring sometimes. If you don't like all this talk about sports, and particularly the NFL right now, don't read it. Feel free to move on. Click on one of my links to far superior blogs; I highly recommend Guinness and Poker myself. Just don't draw conclusions about me just because of what I choose to discuss in my own little space on what our president calls the "internets."

Time for a Week 9 recap, full of picks made out of sheer stupidity in hindsight.

Bears beat Giants by 7; missed both. 0-1, 0-1
Bills beat Jets by 5; missed both. 0-2, 0-2
Steelers beat Eagles by 24; missed both. 0-3, 0-3
Redskins beat Lions by 7; missed both. 0-4, 0-4
Bengals beat Cowboys by 23; got both. 1-4, 1-4
Raiders beat Panthers by 3; got the spread but picked Carolina to win. 2-4, 1-5
Cardinals beat Dolphins by 1; got both. 3-4, 2-5
Seahawks beat Niners by 15; missed the spread but picked Seattle to win. 3-5, 3-5
Patriots beat Rams by 18; missed both. 3-6, 3-6
Broncos beat Texans by 18; missed the spread but picked Denver. 3-7, 4-6
Ravens beat Browns by 14; got both. 4-7, 5-6
Colts beat Vikings by 3; missed the spread but picked Indy. 4-8, 6-6
And the lock of the week: Chargers beat Saints by 26; got both. 5-8, 7-6

Somehow I neglected to pick the KC-TB game, so we just won't count it. I would have gotten it wrong anyway.

Records after Week 9: 62-64-3 ATS, 77-52 straight up, 3-1 lock of the week.

The Dog Days

2004-11-06T16:20:00.000-06:00

That's where I'm at in this semester. Ugh. And that's a good way to describe my Week 8 picks, so let's head to the recap.

Bears beat Niners by 10; missed both. 0-1, 0-1
Packers beat Redskins by 14; got both. 1-1, 1-1
Eagles beat Ravens by 5; missed the spread but picked the Eagles. 1-2, 2-1
Giants beat Vikings by 21; missed both. 1-3, 2-2
Titans beat Bengals by 7; got both. 2-3, 3-2
Chiefs beat Colts by 10; missed both. 2-4, 3-3
Cowboys beat Lions by 10; missed both. 2-5, 3-4
Texans beat Jaguars by 14; missed both. 2-6, 3-5
Falcons beat Broncos by 13; got the spread but picked Denver to win. 3-6, 3-6
Seahawks beat Panthers by 6; missed the spread but picked Seattle. 3-7, 4-6
Steelers beat Patriots by 14; missed both. 3-8, 4-7
Chargers beat Raiders by 28; got both. 4-8, 5-7
Jets beat Dolphins by 27; missed the spread but picked the Jets. 4-9, 6-7
And the lock of the week: Bills beat Cardinals by 24; missed both. It happens. 4-10, 6-8

What a horrible week. Plus I called Baltimore "Buffalo" and didn't catch it. Fortunately nobody reads this anyway.

So through Week 8, here are the records: 57-56-3 ATS, 70-46 straight up, 2-1 lock of the week. Let's do Week 9 quickly:

NY GIANTS (-9) over Chicago; Giants
NY Jets (-3) over BUFFALO; Jets
Philadelphia (-1) over PITTSBURGH; Philly
DETROIT (-3 1/2) over Washington; Detroit
CINCINNATI (+1) over Dallas; Cincy
Oakland (+7) over CAROLINA; Carolina
Arizona (+3) over MIAMI; Arizona
SAN FRANCISCO (+6 1/2) over Seattle; Seattle
ST. LOUIS (+2 1/2) over New England; St. Louis
Houston (+6 1/2) over DENVER; Denver
BALTIMORE (-6) over Cleveland; Baltimore
INDIANAPOLIS (-6) over Minnesota; Indy

And the lock of the week: SAN DIEGO (-6) over New Orleans; San Diego

That is all.

Now It's Our Turn

2004-10-29T14:01:00.000-05:00

Congratulations to the Red Sox. If there's any American League team I "root" for (and by root I mean don't mind seeing win), it's the Red Sox. My dad once got Marty Barrett's autograph on a Red Sox pennant for me, so I suppose that's my connection to the '86 team.

I'm genuinely happy for all the long-suffering Red Sox fans out there, especially the ones who endured '46, '48, '67, '75, and '86. Those who are my age never really suffered enough; I barely recall the '89 NLCS myself, and I was eight years old. I am happy for Bill Simmons, aka the Sports Guy, whom I have been reading since 1998, way back when he could only be found on the Digital City Boston section of AOL. His readership was measured in the hundreds and he personally returned e-mails within about two hours because he had nothing better to do. But he and his father deserve this one, no doubt about it.

And in that same link is an e-mail he was sent by a Cubs fan, which I will copy here:
"For Cubs fans, you know what this feels like? I just figured it out a moment ago. It's like having this friend who suffered with you through thick and thin, sharing in your deepest pain and your greatest hopes. Finally, one day, your friend finally gets what you've both been hoping for. And you're really, really happy for them, but you can't deny that you're also jealous. And you're a bit sad, and a bit scared, because you know that from now on, you're going at it alone. (Also, you have an annoying little brother with the same problem, but nobody gives a crap about him and neither do you.)"

Of all the e-mails he posted from Cub fans, this is the one that is closest to how I think the Cubs fit into everything. First of all, I have never equated the Red Sox and Cubs in terms of their failures. Boston had lost four straight seven-game World Series before they won, all of which have occurred since the Cubs were in their last Series. The Red Sox have usually put decent teams on the field, whereas the Cubs have, more often than not, been just downright bad for the past 59 years (dating back to '45, their last Series appearance). I mean, the Cubs just this year posted back-to-back winning seasons for the first time since '72 and '73. That's downright incredible when you think about it. They've never really had a legitimate chance to win a World Series because their good teams were always one-year flukes, for the most part; the team of the late-'60s should have made the playoffs at least once, but they were penalized by the lack of divisions until '69, and we don't really need to revisit that year. The '84 team came the closest, closer than last year's, but they weren't a truly great team (though both they and the '89 team led the league in wins, which is interesting.)

I guess my point is that we haven't really suffered with the Red Sox. They made the World Series four times. They had their own demons that go back to Bucky Dent and the Yankees. Let's face it, the Cubs have just been bad most of the time. The Cubs are really more like the Indians; lots of bad teams with a couple good ones here and there. It's just that the Indians strung their good seasons together in the late-'90s. (By the way, go to Baseball Reference, look at the '95 Indians page, and tell me how that team did not win the World Series that year. It was far and away superior to the '97 team that was two outs away.) The Tribe hasn't won a Series since '48, but at least they've been recently.

I don't really attach too much significance to the fact that the Cubs haven't been to the Series since 1945. That really doesn't bother me that much, because even if, say, the '84 team had beaten the Padres, it is doubtful that they would have beaten the Tigers, who were a force that year. Would it make things better if, right now, it would be only 20 years since the Cubs won a pennant? No, because we'd still be 96 years without a championship. It is somewhat remarkable that it's been 59 years, but the Cubs have only had four opportunities to even win it through the playoff system introduced in '69; you can count on one hand the years between '46 and '68 when they legitimately had a shot at the pennant (I'd say '46, '67 and '68 are it; '52 was the only year in the '50s where they were even as good as .500). Moreover, I would rather they not win the pennant than win it and lose in the World Series. If that happens, you start to get a complex about it, just like Red Sox fans had. That's why, when (and notice I said when, not if) the Cubs win the Series, which hopefully will be next October, they need to just march through the whole damn thing and kick some ass. The Diamondbacks did it, the Angels did it, the Marlins have done it twice, and the Cubs are certainly capable of doing it. And for the record, there is no curse, but that's a topic for another day.

The White Sox really have it worse off than the Cubs do. Their fans don't even like their team half the time, they play their home games in an antiseptic park on the South Side, nestled between train tracks and a traffic-clogged expressway, their owner is despised, and they have worn some of the worst uniforms in baseball history. They haven't been to the Series since '59 and they haven't won it since 1917. The one thing I am genuinely scared of is the White Sox winning the Series before the Cubs do (or, God forbid, if they beat the Cubs to do it). A Cubs-Red Sox used to be a dream World Series; now most people would like to see a Cubs-White Sox series, but not me. This city would burn down no matter who won; this city takes its baseball more seriously than any other city. (By the way, it always bugs me when people call St. Louis such a great baseball city. You know why they love the Cardinals? Because they have to live in St. Louis! If you've ever been there, which I have, you've seen that there is nothing else to do there, especially in the summer. Plus they let the Browns move to Baltimore in '54.)

The whole Cubs-White Sox dichotomy is another reason why it's somethimes it's tougher to be a Cubs fan in Chicago. With the Red Sox, the only people who wanted to see them lose were Yankee fans, but that was more along the lines of Yankee fans regarding the Red Sox as a nuisance, not a threat. But with the Cubs, we have to deal with genuine contempt and hate from White Sox fans. I think that's why fans are so cynical about the Cubs here; we have to deal with White Sox fans who would almost rather see the Cubs fail than their own team win. This may sound hard to believe, but it's true. And that's why that writer's little brother comparison to the White Sox was so apt. The White Sox really would have been better off had they just moved to Florida back in 1990 when they had the chance, because Chicago was, is, and always will be a Cubs town.

I know I have more to say on this topic, but I can't think of it right now, and I need to make my Week 8 NFL picks. I don't think I actually have any readers anymore, but if anyone is out there, here they are.

San Francisco (+1 1/2) over CHICAGO; San Fran
*I can't pick the Bears right now, plus I might start Tim Rattay this week on my fantasy team.

Green Bay (-2) over WASHINGTON; Green Bay
* Besides actually thinking that the Packers will win, I have another reason for this pick: as many are aware by now, since 1940 the result of the Redskins last home game before the election has been an accurate predictor of the victor; if the Redskins win, the incumbent party stays in the White House, and if they lose, so does the incumbent party. I'm voting for Kerry, and thus I'm rooting for the Packers on Sunday.

PHILADELPHIA (-7 1/2) over Buffalo; Philly
* Though the Eagles failed to cover last week, Buffalo can't hang with them.

MINNESOTA (-7) over NY Giants; Minnesota
* With or without Randy Moss, the Vikings are looking very tough to beat right now (of course, we've seen this before...).

TENNESSEE (-3) over Cincinnati; Tennessee
* I flirted with picking the Bengals, but Steve McNair will probably have to be dead to not play, plus the Titans are better on both sides of the ball. I think.

Indianapolis (-1) over KANSAS CITY; Indy
* This would be the lock of the week were it not so easy to predict.

Detroit (+3) over DALLAS; Detroit
* I can't believe the oddsmakers keep favoring the Cowboys. I refer you and them to my rule about the Cowboys: never bet on a team with a 40-year-old Vinny Testaverde prominently involved.

Jacksonville (+1) over HOUSTON; Jax
* The Jags would be the team of destiny this year were they not in the same conference as the Patriots.

Atlanta (+7) over DENVER; Denver
* After the Broncos laid an egg in Cincy on Monday, I have no idea what to make of them, but I don't think Falcons can actually win the game. I would just be happy just to see Warick Dunn score three touchdowns, personally.

SEATTLE (-8) over Carolina; Seattle
* It's put-up-or-shut-up time for the Seahawks; if they can't beat the Panthers, who come in without any semblance of a running game, at home, they deserve what they get.

New England (-3) over PITTSBURGH; NE
* I'm riding the undefeated train until it derails, whenever that may be.

SAN DIEGO (-6) over Oakland; SD
* Do you believe in the Bolts? They're looking better and better every week.

Miami (+7) over NY JETS; Jets
* The Dolphins, to their credit, don't quit, and after smoking the Rams last week, I think they'll keep it close in a loss.

And the lock of the week...
Arizona (+3) over BUFFALO; Arizona
* Dennis Green knows what he's doing, and the Cards' defense forces a ton of turnovers, which is always bad when Drew Bledsoe is your quarterback.

First the Red Sox, Then the Cubs

2004-10-27T14:56:00.000-05:00

If only us Cubs fans knew what this feeling of anticipation was like, being up 3-0 going into Game 4, knowing the Curt Schilling and Pedro Martinez are available for later starts if necessary. I suppose this would be like starting Greg Maddux in Game 4 of next year's world Series knowing that Mark Prior, Kerry Wood, and Carlos Zambrano were available for the next three games if the Cubs lost. Next year might be it; I for one fully expect a healthy and dominant Prior and Wood for 35 starts each.

In any event, I keep reading the Cardinal players bitching about not having home-field advantage for the Series. I read some particularly inane quote from Ray King (a former Cub, by the way) saying that the team with the best record shouldn't be penalized. Memo to Mr. King and all the other morons who think the winner of the All-Star game shouldn't be given home-field advantage: WORLD SERIES HOME-FIELD HAS NEVER BEEN GIVEN TO THE TEAM WITH THE BEST RECORD. I find it amazing that everyone complaining about how the All-Star Game decides home-field conveniently overlooks the fact that Major League Baseball didn't exactly have the best method before 2003: they alternated between AL and NL. That's right, the reason the Diamondbacks won Game 7 at home in 2001 was because that was the NL's year to have home-field. That's it. And had MLB kept that system, the Red Sox would still have home-field, because the Angels had it in 2002 and the Marlins should have had it last year. Whether you like the All-Star game solution or not, at least the players are deciding it on the field. The reason nobody noticed the old system was because it seemed like the best team had home-field when it was really just coincidence.

And let us not overlook the ex-Cub factor in the playoffs, which says that the team with the most ex-Cubs loses. The Yankees' collapse can be somewhat explained by the fact that Miguel Cairo (!) was their starting second baseman, Jon Lieber was one of their big starters, and Tanyon Sturtze, Felix Heredia, and Tom Gordon were in their bullpen. Five ex-Cubs is just too many. The Cardinals have Tony Womack, Julian Tavarez, and the aforementioned King. The Red Sox are stuck with only Mark Bellhorn. Coincidences? You be the judge. (For the record, I can't think of any ex-Cubs on the Astros...thinking...wait, that's right, Jose Vizcaino is one. I think that's it.)

Time to recap Week 7. I have the feeling that I went 7-7 in both picks, but let's see...

Bucs beat Bears by 12; got both. 1-0, 1-0
Ravens beat Bills by 14; missed the spread but picked Baltimore to win. 1-1, 2-0
Lions beat Giants by 15; missed both. 1-2, 2-1
Eagles beat Browns by 3; missed the spread but picked Philly to win. 1-3, 3-1
Jags beat Colts by 3; got the spread but picked Indy to win. 2-3, 3-2
Vikings beat Titans by 17; got both. 3-3, 4-2
Dolphins beat Rams by 17; got the spread but picked St. Louis to win. 4-3, 4-3
Chiefs beat Falcons by 46; got both. 5-3, 5-3
Patriots beat Jets by 6; missed the spread by one-half point but picked NE. 5-4, 6-3
Packers beat Cowboys by 21; got both. 6-4, 7-3
Cardinals beat Seahawks by 8; got the spread but picked Seattle to win. 7-4, 7-4
Saints beat Raiders by 5; missed both. 7-5, 7-5
Bengals beat Broncos by 13; missed both. 7-6, 7-6

And the lock of the week: Chargers beat Panthers by 11; you're damn right. 8-6, 8-6

I knew this week would end up being a pain in the ass, and I was right.

Records through Week 7: 53-46-3 ATS, 64-38 straight up, 2-0 lock of the week.

Predictions Galore

2004-10-22T13:54:00.000-05:00

The curse has not yet been reversed, but, for the Red Sox, beating the Yankees is a good start. So do I think they will beat the Cardinals in the World Series? Yes. I saw the Cubs tangle with the Cards 19 times, winning 8 of them, and the Cards are hardly unbeatable. If you shut down Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds are prone to falling into slumps. Edmonds can be gotten out by pitching inside, and Rolen will chase breaking balls. Walker's bat isn't as quick as it used to be, and nobody else in their lineup should scare Boston too much. I also think the Fenway advantage will come into play; I know these two played each other last year during interleague, but I don't know if it was in Boston or St. Louis. In any event, the right-handed hitters aren't used to seeing the Monster, and I don't think Sanders can handle playing balls off of it very well. Overall, I think if there's any year for the Red Sox, this is it. Boston in 6; they need to clinch at home for closure.

On the college football front, Brock Berlin has hardly been stellar for Miami, but he has won the games he has needed to, and I fully expect this week to be another victory, this time over NC State. And after Florida State exposed Virginia last week, I'm not so worried about the Cavaliers in three weeks.

And now come the Week 7 NFL picks. This week has some tough lines and some tough games. I can't really get a read on it at all; I'm either going to do really well or really bad. But, on the heels of a successful Week 6, here we go. Those who actually read this know the drill by now.

TAMPA BAY (-7) over Chicago; Tampa Bay
* I can't pick the Bears with their QB situation as it is right now.

Buffalo (+6) over BALTIMORE; Baltimore
* I don't really like either of these teams, but Buffalo isn't as bad as they look and the Ravens can't score, so it should be close, at least.

NY GIANTS (-6 1/2) over Detroit; G-men
* I was never on the Lions bandwagon, but I would definitely be off it now.

Philadelphia (-7) over CLEVELAND; Philly
* The Eagles are a lock to cover and win every week.

Jacksonville (+9 1/2) over INDIANAPOLIS; Indy
* The Colts are getting too many points, but I don't think they're going to lose the game.

MINNESOTA (-7) over Tennessee; Minnesota
* Even if Randy Moss doesn't play, the Titans aren't going to stay within a touchdown in the Metrodome.

MIAMI (+6 1/2) over St. Louis; St. Louis
* I think the Dolphins will keep it close, but they shall remain winless.

KANSAS CITY (-4) over Atlanta; KC
* I actually have no idea who's going to win this game, let alone whether KC will win by 4. This is a gut pick based on what I saw of the Chiefs against the Ravens a few Monday nights ago.

NEW ENGLAND (-6 1/2) over NY Jets; New England
* Is there bias here? Yes. Should I pick the Jets? Until the Patriots lose, or at least fail to cover, I'm not going against them. 20 in a row is worth something.

GREEN BAY (- 3 1/2) over Dallas; Green Bay
* Remember my rule from last week, which was proven quite nicely in the fourth quarter: Never bet on a team with a 40-year-old Vinny Testaverde prominently involved.

ARIZONA (+7) over Seattle; Seattle
* The Cards are a lot better than they look, but I think Seattle win pull it out for fear of falling to 3-3.

OAKLAND (-3) over New Orleans; Oakland
* With a line of three Vegas is basically throwing its hands up in the air and saying, "you decide." I don't think either of these teams is very good, but something tells me Oakland will win.

Denver (-6) over CINCINNATI; Denver
* They way the Broncos are taking it to everybody right now, the Bengals can't hang with them, especially after losing by 17 in Cleveland.

And the lock of the week...
San Diego (+3) over CAROLINA; San Diego
* I still don't think Drew Brees is all that good, but after losing by a point in Atlanta last week, and looking good the two weeks before, and with the Panthers having an extremely unstable running back situation, look for the Bolts to steal this one.

My local CBS affiliate has wisely decided to show the Jets-Pats game, so I will get to watch them for the first time since the Colts game. Can you imagine Boston on Sunday? Pats at 4 o'clock and Game 2 of the World Series at 8? Those who are going to both are incredibly lucky and very likely to miss the first pitch due to traffic.

Watching the Red Sox and the Cardinals celebrate their pennants makes me want the Cubs to win the World Series even more. 2005 isn't too far away, but it can't come soon enough.

Pressure? What Would You Know About Pressure?

2004-10-20T13:09:00.000-05:00

What an appropriate line from one of my favorite movies, "Ace Ventura: Pet Detective." Of course, Jim Carrey's next line is, "Well, I have kissed a man," so it guess it doesn't all apply to tonight's Game 7 in the Bronx, but hey, I thought it was bad enough last year before the Cubs had their Game 7 against the Marlins. The difference there was that I knew the Cubs were going to lose. I'm only pretty sure the Yankers are going to lose tonight. If the Red Sox lose tonight in excruciating fashion, there might be a rash of suicides tonight in Massachusetts. Then again, I was thinking during Game 6 that if God was really on the Yankers' side, Tony Clark would have hit a pennant-winning three-run homer in the ninth last night. So maybe tonight is the night Derek Lowe pitches a perfect game or something. It would certainly be fitting.

And since we're on the topic of pressure, I'd like to thank the Sports Guy for pointing out in note #3 what I said yesterday: not only are the Yankers facing the pressure of being the Yankers team that loses to the Red Sox, they might become the first team in Major League Baseball history to blow a 3-0 lead in a best-of-seven. They've been playing best-of-seven serieses for 100 years in baseball (excepting the years where the World Series was best-of-nine). No team has ever coughed up a 3-0 series lead. And of all teams, the New York Yankees might be the ones to do it. If there is a baseball God, surely He will come through tonight for all of us Yankee-haters. It's bad enough when your team blows a 3-1 lead as the Cubs did last year. But 3-0? If the Cubs did that, I don't even know what I would do. So let's not even think about it.

And I do actually have personal fan experience with this situation. I'm a Dallas Mavericks fan, owing to my formative years in Dallas, and in 2003 they raced to a 3-0 lead in their first-round series with the Blazers. And just like the Yankers, they destroyed Portland in Game 3, in Portland. The Mavs lost Game 4, but that was no big deal, because the NBA does 2-2-1-1-1 until the NBA Finals (instead of baseball's 2-3-2), so they went home for Game 5. But when they lost that one, then they had to go back to Portland for Game 6, which they lost by about 30 in front of a deafening Rose Garden crowd. So then it was back to Dallas for Game 7, and I couldn't even bear to watch the first half. I did not want the Mavs to be the first NBA team to blow a 3-0 lead. Fortunately, they didn't, but when Fox showed the graphic of teams forcing a Game 7 after being down 0-3, I knew who the 2003 under the NBA column was referring to. And I still contend that the Mavs would have beaten the Spurs in the Western Conference Finals had they dispatched Portland in four or five games.

In any event, this should be a Game 7 for the ages. The Astros may also punch their World Series ticket today, but I think the Cardinals will find a way to win. Besides, they need to give Roger Clemens a chance to blow a big game as he does every October. Match this against Tony LaRussa's tendency to choke, and something's got to give.

Okay. Time to recap my Week 6 picks. Let's see how successful I really was.

Redskins beat Bears by 3; missed both. 0-1, 0-1
Bills beat Dolphins by 7; Fins missed covering by a point, but I picked Buffalo. 0-2, 1-1
Jets beat Niners by 8; got both. 1-2, 2-1
Patriots beat Seahawks by 10; got both. 2-2, 3-1
Eagles beat Panthers by 22; got both. 3-2, 4-1
Browns beat Bengals by 17; got both. 4-2, 5-1
Packers beat Lions by 28; missed both. 4-3, 5-2
Texans beat Titans by 10; picked the Texans to cover but thought Titans would win. 5-3, 5-3
Falcons beat Chargers by 1; Falcons didn't cover but at least they won. 5-4, 6-3
Jags beat Chiefs by 6; got both. 6-4, 7-3
Broncos beat Raiders by 28; got both. 7-4, 8-3
Vikings beat Saints by 7; got both. 8-4, 9-3
Rams beat Bucs by 7; got both. 9-4, 10-3

And the lock of the week? Steelers beat Cowboys by 4; you better believe I got both of those. 10-4, 11-3

So the week was as successful as I thought. Now I know not to pick the Bears to win another game this season. Maybe I'm starting to figure this whole NFL thing out.

Picks through Week 6: 45-40-3 ATS, 56-32 straight up, 1-0 lock of the week.

The Walking Wounded

2004-10-19T14:14:00.000-05:00

That's certainly the appropriate term to describe my fantasy football team. First it was Charles Rogers, then Stephen Davis, Kevin Jones, Santana Moss, and now Randy Moss might not play this week. Add Warrick Dunn, who may or may not be injured, and my team is lucky to be 3-3. Davis and Jones are supposed to be back this week, and Randy Moss will likely play even in a limited role, so all is not lost. But I have enough problems scoring points as it is; I don't need any more injuries.

Fortunately I think I did quite well with my Week 6 picks, even though I don't put any actual money on them. If I keep this up I might be inclined to, however. A recap is likely coming tomorrow.

The baseball games last night were very good. I got home at about 6:30, just after Derek Jeter hit the three-run double, and the Yankers didn't score for the remaining three and a half hours of the game, so maybe I brought the Red Sox good luck. If they win tonight with Schilling, anything can happen in Game 7. And you could add to the pressure of not wanting to be the Yankers team that loses to Boston the pressure of not wanting to be the first team in baseball history to cough up a 3-0 lead in a best-of-seven. As for the NLCS, the Cardinals are in danger of blowing it, which should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with Tony LaRussa's managing history, as I pointed out last week. I realize there's not much you can do when you only get one hit, but this team still won 105 games this season. I actually have to give the Astros a lot of credit; they had a hell of a month of September to win the wild card, and the Cubs' supposed "collapse" wouldn't have been as much so had Houston not won 19 in a row or whatever at home to finish the season.

In any event, I should finish (or at least continue) my Cub grades soon, and I know I will eventually. So stay tuned if you are interested.

The 'Cane Train Keeps Rollin'

2004-10-15T14:30:00.000-05:00

This post will be short and sweet as there is much to do this afternoon. Miami's offense looked dismal last night in the first half and their defense wasn't much better, but they figured it out and came back to beat Louisville. Now their toughest remaining test is Virginia on November 13th in Charlottesville. I know I already put the Canes in the Orange Bowl, but if they beat the Cavs they should have no problems running the table.

The Patriots go for 20 in a row against Seattle on Sunday, who doesn't look as tough after their fourth quarter meltdown against the Rams (of all weeks not to start Marc Bulger!). This is, in my ten year history as a Pats fan, the first game I think they have played against the Seahawks in all those years. The NFL schedule is unbelieveable sometimes, especially since most of those years Seattle was still in the AFC.

Here we go with my Week 6 picks for those awaiting them eagerly (I highly doubt that anyone is, but you never know). I've decided to make a lock of the week because most of the previous weeks I have thought there was a game that was guaranteed both spread and straight up-wise. Of course, if it's wrong, then it just proves that I should not be a professional gambler. Anyway...

CHICAGO (pk) over Washington; Chicago
Miami (+6) over BUFFALO; Buffalo
San Francisco (+10) over NY JETS; Jets
NEW ENGLAND (-4) over Seattle; New England
PHILADELPHIA (-8 1/2) over Carolina; Philly
CLEVELAND (-3) over Cincinnati; Cleveland
DETROIT (-2) over Green Bay; Detroit
Houston (+6 1/2) over TENNESSEE; Tennessee
ATLANTA (-5) over San Diego; Atlanta
JACKSONVILLE (+2) over Kansas City; Jax
Denver (-1 1/2) over OAKLAND; Denver
Minnesota (-3 1/2) over NEW ORLEANS; Minnesota
ST. LOUIS (-6 1/2) over Tampa Bay; St. Louis

And the lock of the week is...
Pittsburgh (+3) over DALLAS; Pittsburgh.
How the Steelers are getting three points in this game is beyond amazing. Didn't the line makers see last week's Giants-Cowboys game? Never bet on a team with a 40-year-old Vinny Testaverde playing a prominent role.

Quick Recap

2004-10-13T13:50:00.000-05:00

Allow me to quickly recap my Week 5 picks before I tighten up my paper for printing in a few hours. By the way, I thank the Titans' defense for holding Ahman Green to 33 yards rushing, and Brett Favre for throwing both his touchdown passes to Bubba Franks, allowing me to escape with a victory in fantasy football this past week. I hate sweating through Monday night games fantasy-wise.

Pats beat Dolphins by 14; got both. 1-0, 1-0
Steelers beat Browns by 11; got both. 2-0, 2-0
Colts beat Raiders by 21; got both. 3-0, 3-0
Lions beat Falcons by 7; got the spread but picked Atlanta. 4-0, 3-1
Bucs beat Saints by 3; missed both. 4-1, 3-2
Giants beat Cowboys by 16; got both. 5-1, 4-2
Vikings beat Texans by 6; would have gotten the spread had Minny scored a field goal and not a touchdown in OT, but at least I picked them to win. 5-2, 5-2
Jets beat Bills by 2; missed the spread but picked the Jets. 5-3, 6-2
Bolts beat Jags by 13; got both. 6-3, 7-2
Broncos beat Panthers by 3; missed the spread but picked Denver. 6-4, 8-2
Niners beat Cards by 3; narrowly missed both. 6-5, 8-3
Rams beat Seahawks by 6; missed both. 6-6, 8-4
Ravens beat Redskins by 7; missed both. 6-7, 8-5
Titans beat Packers by 21; completely missed both. 6-8, 8-6

The ones I got, I got, but the ones I missed, wow, did I miss them. Of course, Seattle blowing a big lead at home didn't help, and I'm done picking the Packers to do anything for the time being. Oh well, Week 6 awaits this Sunday.

Records through Week 5: 35-36-3 ATS, 45-29 straight up. The moral of these records: don't look to me for bets on the spreads, but I can handle the money line. Sort of.

S-A-T-U-R-D-A-Y...Night!

2004-10-09T19:10:00.000-05:00

I don't know much about the Bay City Rollers, but they graced the music world with the classic "Saturday Night" song, which I've always thought was kind of catchy, and certainly applies right now.

Big college football day today, or, as ESPN.com termed it, "Showdown Saturday." Oklahoma still has Texas' number, USC survived against Cal, Michigan owns Minnesota, Wisconsin went to the Horseshoe and won, but the biggest of them all might have been Tennessee beating Georgia in Athens. I thought Georgia was a good candidate to run the table, but now that they, Cal, Texas, and Minnesota all have losses, the number of undefeated teams has been pared down significantly. If you ask me right now, I think USC and Miami will be meeting in the Orange Bowl for the national championship. There is obvious bias to that, but with the Hurricanes' defense, I'm not sure how they don't get there unless they forget how to score. Virginia is pretty much their only tough game left, on November 9th in Charlottesville. I'm not counting Louisville or NC State as tough games, even if they do play the Wolfpack in Raleigh.

The Red Sox look like they're in pretty good shape in the AL. As far as the NL is concerned, I am the only one who finds it interesting that, since the realignment in 1994, no NL Central team has won the pennant? The Cardinals came close in '96, blowing a 3-1 lead against the Braves, and we all know what happened last year, but the last team currently in the Central to represent the NL in the World Series is the Reds in 1990, when they were in the West. It's really quite amazing when you think about it. I guess my point is that, with one more win for each the Cards and Astros, that distinction will definitely come to an end. It will likely come to an end anyway with the way St. Louis is playing, but never underestimate the ability of a Tony LaRussa managed team to choke under pressure (see '96 NLCS and '88 and '90 World Series).

The Cub grades will have to wait a few days. I need to hack out my Week 5 NFL picks before I wrap it up. As always, first pick is against the spread, second is straight up, home team in caps.

NEW ENGLAND (-13) over Miami; New England
PITTSBURGH (-6) over Cleveland; Pittsburgh
INDIANAPOLIS (-9) over Oakland; Indy
Detroit (+7) over ATLANTA; Atlanta
NEW ORLEANS (-3) over Tampa Bay; NO
NY Giants (+3 1/2) over DALLAS; G-men
HOUSTON (+4) over Minnesota; Minnesota
NY JETS (-7) over Buffalo; Jets
SAN DIEGO (+3) over Jacksonville; San Diego
DENVER (-5 1/2) over Carolina; Denver
SEATTLE (-7) over St. Louis; Seattle
Arizona (+1) over SAN FRANCISCO; Arizona
WASHINGTON (+1) over Baltimore; Washington
GREEN BAY (-3) over Tennessee; Green Bay

Thursday Thoughts

2004-10-07T13:19:00.000-05:00

So many things to talk about...

* First, let's recap my Week 4 picks, because Week 5 is drawing near and I need to make my picks soon.

Eagles beat Bears by 10; got both. 1-0, 1-0
Giants beat Packers by 7; missed both. 1-1, 1-1
Browns beat Redskins by 4; missed both. 1-2, 1-2
Patriots beat Bills by 14; got both. 2-2, 2-2
Texans beat Raiders by 13; got both. 3-2, 3-2
Colts beat Jags by 7; missed both. 3-3, 3-3
Steelers beat Bengals by 11; got both. 4-3, 4-3
Falcons beat Panthers by 17; got both. 5-3, 5-3
Cards beat Saints by 24; got both. 6-3, 6-3
Jets beat Dolphins by 8; got both. 7-3, 7-3
Broncos beat Bucs by 3; a push but I picked Denver. 7-3-1, 8-3
Chargers beat Titans by 21; completely missed this one. 7-4-1, 8-4
Rams beat Niners by 10; got both. 8-4-1, 9-4
Chiefs beat Ravens by 3; missed both. 8-5-1, 9-5

Not too bad overall. These totals bring my records up to 29-28-3 ATS and 37-23 straight up through four weeks. I never claimed to be good at picking the lines.

* The Patriots go for 19 in a row at home against the Dolphins on Sunday. The Pats have played the dumbest schedule so far; they haven't played a home game in almost a month, had ten days off between playing the Colts and the Cardinals, then had their bye, and now have three home games in a row. The NFL schedule is so ridiculously easy to make too. In any event, though the Bears are off this week, I know that our local CBS affiliate (WBBM, for those interested) will not be showing us the Pats game. I'm not sure who has the doubleheader this week, but I just know we'll get the Raiders-Colts game instead. Why? Because Indy is only a few hours down the road, and obviously we care about our neighbors to the southeast. Of course, if the Pats play like they're capable of, the game won't be all that exciting anyway, so, as usual, I guess I have no point.

* Let me reiterate to everyone complaining about the Cubs not making the playoffs: 89 wins is not a failure. The Cubs were not a great team this year; they were good, but they relied way too much on the home run and their bullpen was pretty bad most of the year. They probably should have won the wild card, but when you consider that the Astros had to go 37-10 in their last 47 just to get in, it doesn't look so bad. I'm not blaming anything on injuries, but the Cubs certainly had their share of bad breaks both on and off the field. So, without further ado, time for the CE Cub Grades, starting with the outfielders today. (By the way, the grades will cover every player who put on a Cub uniform in 2004.)

Moises Alou
The bad: His baserunning was marginal at best and atrocious at worst. His range is that of a 38-year-old, though there were few balls I think he didn't get to that he should have. He needs to keep his mouth shut.

The good: Plays to win and obviously cares about the game and the team. Led the team in homers and RBI while hitting .293. Stayed healthy all year. Was generally good for clutch hits. Only struck out 12 more times than he walked.

The CE Assessment: I love Moises, and I hope he stays. The Cubs won't pick up his option but are supposedly going to offer a one-year deal in the neighborhood of $6 million, which seems fair to me. I think he is likely to stay for that money because he would be guaranteed to start next year here and I think he knows he won't get much more anywhere else. Though he is a bit too emotional at times, it's obvious he cares, and I'll take that any day of the week. He gets an A from me.

Corey Patterson
The bad: How about 168 strikeouts? Only walked 45 times. Hit lefties better than righties, which I guess isn't really bad more than it is odd. Was not productive with runners in scoring position (.240) or runners on in general (.261). Leadoff is probably not his best spot.

The good: 32 stolen bases led a slow team. 24 homers and 33 doubles are good. Was never hurt and led the team in ABs. Made only one error and gunned down a number of runners. Still has outstanding speed, which he needed with the Cubs' corner outfielders.

The CE Assessment: I like Corey, and I've becomed used to his strikeouts by this point, though he definitely needs to stop chasing the high fastball. He always hustles and can make things happen when he puts the ball in play. He should be in center for many years to come, even if he isn't a star like they thought he might be. Despite his deficiencies, I give him a B+.

Sammy Sosa
The bad: A .253 average is horrible. Only knocked in 80 runs on 35 homers. Was worse than Corey with runners in scoring position (.224) and runners on (.224). Seems to be slower than he used to, though I guess that's not really a shock. Injuries are becoming a concern.

The good: Always plays hard. Is still a longball threat. His power numbers remain excellent. Seemed to cut down on the strikeouts this year. Generally plays right field adequately.

The CE Assessment: It's hard for me to be objective about Sammy because he was my favorite player for a long time and I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt in most situations. As for what happened on Sunday, I don't know what to make of it. I don't think the Cubs will be able to find a taker for him, so it will be interesting to see what happens. The Cubs obviously won't pick up his option in 2006, so next year might be it for Sammy. All in all, despite a lot of things, I give Sammy a B.

Todd Hollandsworth
The bad: He got hurt in June and didn't play for the rest of the season.

The good: Excelled in everything he did. Hit .318, slugging of .547, hit .400 with RISP and two outs, hit .381 with runners on, and was a huge pinch-hitting threat before he went down.

The CE Assessment: This guy kicks ass. I think his loss was huge down the stretch, and I hope he's back with a vengeance in 2005. I think everyone remembers his game-tying homer against John Smoltz in Atlanta back in April and his circus catch in the extra-inning game in Anaheim. I'm pretty sure he's signed for next year but I'm not positive, though in any event he's almost certain to come back. He may have only played three months, but he gets a big fat A from me.

Tom Goodwin
The bad: Hit .200 in 105 ABs. Only knocked in three runs.

The good: Can still play the outfield well. Stole five bases without being caught.

The CE Assessment: Once upon a time I wondered why the Cubs didn't have a guy like Tom Goodwin, and now that they have him I wonder why I asked that question. He wasn't a huge threat off the bench and provided little in his spot starts. It doesn't look like he'll be back. He gets a C-.

Ben Grieve
The bad: Nothing really, he just wasn't that great.

The good: Nothing in particular, he just wasn't that bad.

The CE Assessment: The Cubs picked him up to be a Todd Hollandsworth replacement, and he was no Todd Hollandsworth. He did very little of note and most likely won't be back. He gets a C.

Jason Dubois
The bad: Didn't get enough time to show what he could do.

The good: Hit .217 in 23 ABs, which is respectable in your first stint in the bigs. Five RBI in those ABs. Had a slugging of .435.

The CE Assessment: I think he's the future in either left or right, and the Cubs need to give him a serious shot during spring training next year (though that largely depends on Moises and Sammy's fates). He absolutely tore up AAA and has the potential to put up some big power numbers. That said, it's tough to grade him on 23 ABs, so let's just call it incomplete.

David Kelton and Calvin Murray
Kelton has probably missed his chance with the Cubs, and Murray hardly warrants mentioning.

Onto the infielders, along with the Week 5 NFL picks either tomorrow or Saturday. Tonight brings a new episode of The Apprentice. It will be interesting to see who does the majority of the bitching among the women this week.

Spring Training 2005: T-Minus Four and a Half Months

2004-10-05T14:30:00.000-05:00

Ah, the fallout of 2004. I'm especially enjoying how the media is throwing the word "collapse" around and claiming that it wasn't Chip Caray and Steve Stone's fault that the Cubs went 2-5 during the last week. The last part is true; the Cubs, specifically Moises Alou and Kent Mercker, spent too much time bitching about what was being said about them on TV. But the Cubs did not collapse; the media were the ones who proclaimed that the Cubs were the favorites to win the pennant and the World Series, while any serious Cub fan was cautiously optimistic about our chances this year. And since when is 89-73 a failure? Yeah, they missed the playoffs, but they won more games this year than they did last, and they were over .500 in consecutive seasons for the first time in 30 years, so it's obvious the Cubs are building. 2004 was never intended to be a one-year shot at the title. That's what makes this postseason so important for the Cardinals, and the Astros to a certain extent. The Cards caught lightning in a bottle by winning 105 games, and they know they're not going to do it again, so it's imperative for them to prove that they're not a hot-hitting fluke. The Central is up for grabs next year, especially if Carlos Beltran leaves Houston (for the Cubs?...), and you have to like the Cubs' chances.

Anyway, a number of Cub related things are coming on this site, including my personal grades of each player with their outlook for 2005. First I'm going to list the three best games I went to this year. I went to 18 total, by far the most I've ever been to in one season, and the Cubs went 13-5. Not only that, but of the five losses, all five were by one single, skinny run. I know for a fact that they are unlikely to win at a .722 clip in future seasons in my presence, and the fact that I witnessed no blowout losses is quite amazing. I actually could not ask for anything else. When I was younger all I wanted was for the Cubs to win; I didn't care how they did it or how many runs they had to score, and I still feel that way. Onto the countdown:

3) August 25: Cubs 4, Brewers 2
Back when the Cubs were hot, they were trying the sweep the Brewers and win the fourth in a row. After there was about a hour and a half rain delay, Greg Maddux mowed the Brew Crew down fairly quickly, giving up only one run. After Paul Bako tied the game with a solo homer, Moises Alou hit a solo shot of his own to give the Cubs a 2-1 lead going into the ninth. Enter LaTroy Hawkins, who promptly coughed up a run to tie the game. In the bottom on the ninth, Mark Grudzielanek led off with a triple that might have been foul (it looked fair to me), was left on third by Bako and Todd Walker, and was brought home with the winning run by Corey Patterson's game-winning two run homer. This was the first (and only, for right now) time I saw the Cubs win on a walk-off homer.

2) July 4: Cubs 2, White Sox 1
My parents were in town for the holiday weekend and my dad went with me, his first trip to Wrigley in ten years. The Cubs did not disappoint. In a battle of lefties, Glendon Rusch held the upper hand over Mark Buerhle after Buerhle served up a solo homer to Derrek Lee, and the Cubs carried a 1-0 lead into the ninth. Enter LaTroy Hawkins (this sounds familiar...) who promptly gave up a solo homer to Carlos Lee to ignite the Sox faithful and tie it at 1-1. Bottom of the ninth, Shingo Takatsu and Damaso Marte combined to walk three, including Todd Walker with two outs and the bases loaded, as the Cubs won to sweep the Sox in one of the loudest crowds I have ever heard at Wrigley.

1) June 19: Cubs 4, A's 3
This was the first Mark Prior start I saw, and he opposed Mark Mulder, who was nasty as usual. On a rather cool Saturday afternoon the Cubs trailed 3-2 going into the bottom of the ninth, and things did not look good, especially after Chad Bradford, the A's closer at the time, got the first man out. But then Todd Hollandsworth got an infield hit, and Todd Walker followed with a single to right. First and second, one out, and, before fans could even talk strategy, Michael Barrett lined a fastball into the right field corner. Around came Hollandsworth to tie it, and you knew Walker was getting waved around. The throw was late and Walker belly-flopped into home with the winning run as the rest of the team swarmed home plate. One of only two times in my life I have jumped up and down out of sheer excitement at a sporting event.

I'm not going to handicap the playoff field because I don't really care. If the Red Sox make the World Series I will go against my National League preference and root for them. Actually, I can't really root for any of the NL teams this year, for obvious reasons.

Watch for my Cub grades later this week, hopefully. I will definitely recap my Week 4 NFL picks soon, which was the most dismal performance a fantasy football team of mine has ever put up. I'm glad the Vikings are out of byes, because I need Randy Moss every week from here on out.

It's Over

2004-10-02T16:23:00.000-05:00

Did I think this team was going to win the World Series before the season started? I thought they had a decent chance, but they were no lock. Did I think they were at least going to make the playoffs? Yes. Was this season a disappointment? For some strange reason, I don't think that it is, at least as of this writing. As my friend Paul reminded me, nothing with the Cubs ever comes easy. And even if they had won the wild card, they would have been forced to win three series in a row without having home field in any of them. There's a lot to talk about concerning this team, including how 2004 really went and what the outlook for 2005 looks like. It's premature to do so before the season officially ends, but this team is built for the long haul, not just one season. And, though I speak solely for myself on this one, I would much rather have 2004 end this way than to have them lose in either the Divison Series, NLCS, or World Series, because everybody's hopes would have gotten really high, especially the further they went. At this point, winning the pennant is not enough; they need to win it all. Which is why winning the Central was so important. Hey, it was the Cardinals' year in the division; I highly doubt they will be able to duplicate it next year. But look for my recap of 2004 and look ahead to 2005 in the coming days and/or weeks; it will likely be a rolling thing.

Now that I won't be watching the playoffs, time to shift attention to the NFL, where the Patriots have won two of the last three Super Bowls and 17 games in a row. I like their chances in Buffalo tomorrow; they've always thrown Drew Bledsoe for a loop, and they're coming off a bye. After that comes three home games in a row, though one is against the Seahawks, who are playing quite well so far. First things first, however, they need to beat Buffalo to go to 3-0.

Onto the picks for Week 4. First is ATS, second is straight up, home team in caps.

Philadelphia (-9) over CHICAGO; Philly
GREEN BAY (-7) over NY Giants; Green Bay
Washington (-3) over CLEVELAND; Washington
New England (-5 1/2) over BUFFALO; New England
HOUSTON (+2 1/2) over Oakland; Houston
JACKSONVILLE (+4) over Indianapolis; Jacksonville
PITTSBURGH (-4 1/2) over Cincinnati; Pittsburgh
Atlanta (+3 1/2) over CAROLINA; Atlanta
ARIZONA (+3) over New Orleans; Arizona
NY Jets (-6) over MIAMI; Jets
Denver (-3) over TAMPA BAY; Denver
Tennessee (-3) over SAN DIEGO; Tennessee
St. Louis (-3 1/2) over SAN FRANCISCO; St. Louis
BALTIMORE (-5 1/2) over Kansas City; Baltimore

The Cubs: Rare, Medium, or Well Done?

2004-10-01T14:45:00.000-05:00

I thought the Cubs were done after Wednesday's loss. Yesterday's did not help the situation any, obviously. But the Cubs were probably done after last Saturday's loss in New York, which is what I worried about at the time. As I listened to the radio while walking to the subway after the game had ended, I thought that that kind of loss was one you don't really recover from this late in the season. Now that they've only won one game since, I hope that I'm not right.

I don't like how the Cubs need both the Giants and the Astros to lose now. And that assumes that the Cubs sweep the Braves. I just don't like anything concerning this race right now. Have the Cubs collapsed? I don't know. I do know that I know of at least five games earlier this season that the Cubs should have won, and had they won them they wouldn't be in this situation. Take the April 17th game against the Reds at Wrigley, when Kerry Wood couldn't finish his start and coughed up a one-run lead in the ninth. Or the June 4th game against the Pirates at Wrigley, Mark Prior's first start, when they lost a 1-0 lead in the ninth. Or that Saturday night game in Houston in August when the Cubs rallied in the ninth to take the lead but gave it up in the bottom of the inning. Or that fateful doubleheader in May when Joe Borowski and LaTroy Hawkins each blew a save. That's five wins right there. I know that I have the tendency to do this every year; think back to the games that got away. Pitchers are going to blow saves, the idea is to minimize the number that are blown. I guess I don't really have a point here.

And now the Braves are up 2-0 in the second. Things are not looking good. If the Cubs were steak on the grill, they'd be pushing medium well.

NFL picks coming later tonight; I don't have the lines with me right now.

I Hate LaTroy Hawkins

2004-09-30T14:42:00.000-05:00

I can count on one hand the number of Cubs I have hated over the years. Actually, the number is zero. I was not a Mel Rojas fan, but I didn't hate him. But I cannot stand LaTroy Hawkins anymore, and if the Cubs make the playoffs even after their abysmal loss yesterday, watching him attempt to close out games is going to be like pulling teeth.

Yesterday's blown save marks the third one-run blown save that I have personally witnessed. Three! And I've only been to 18 games this year. They came back and won the first two, but that's not the point. Here is the point: I can forgive the triple he gave up to D'Angelo Jimenez, because Jimenez was looking first pitch fastball, and he got one. But that's the problem. All Hawkins throws is fastballs, and I think that's what I can't stand the most. So with Jimenez on third, he blows two 93 mph fastballs past Austin Kearns to make it 0-2. Real life not being the scene in Major League when Ricky Vaughn struck out Clue Haywood on three fastballs, each one faster than the last, what pitch would be logical for Hawkins to throw on 0-2? I don't know what Michael Barrett called, but it was a fastball. And here's the kicker: right before Hawkins threw it, I thought to myself (and would have said this out loud had I been with anyone), "I hope this isn't a fastball." It turned into an even faster ball after Kearns hit an absolute rocket into left center, a ball that stayed in the yard only because it had no elevation. And that was that, really. At least Kyle Farnsworth was electric; I nominate him or Mike Remlinger for the closer spot, which I feel is now open.

Will the Cubs make the playoffs now? I have no idea. If the Astros had been playing a team that was not absolutely laying down for them (the Cardinals), they likely wouldn't have the scant lead they do. At least the Rockies will try to beat them this weekend. And the Giants, who knows. The Cubs have to start scoring runs, because it's the offense that's the problem right now, other than Hawkins.

And here's what bugs me the most about Hawkins. Here's his quote: "I gave up a run, but it could have been worse. I could have given up another." Translation: "I suck, but at least I didn't lose the game, that's what Jon Leicester did. So go bug him." Way to admit your mistake, LaTroy. Did you see what Greg Maddux said on Tuesday night? That's what you say to the media after you blow a save. "I messed up, threw a bad pitch, and he hit it. I'll get him next time." Don't pass the buck. One more strike and the Cubs would have won. He could have thrown four sliders in a row and if Kearns had the eye to lay off all of them, more power to him, he earned the walk. The pitcher's spot was up next, and I wasn't scared of anybody on the Reds' bench. Why throw a fastball on 0-2? Why?

I realize Aramis Ramirez and Moises Alou both hit into rally-killing double plays. I realize that the Cubs probably could have scored more than two runs yesterday. I realize that Dusty Baker could have pinch-ran for Aramis in the 12th, though I'm not sure who it would have been (maybe Goodwin, I guess). But none of that is the point. Yesterday, for 26 outs and two strikes, two runs were enough to win. On September 29th, with four games left, that game has to be won. And it wasn't. And the only way Hawkins can redeem himself for me is by being on the mound when the Cubs win the World Series. A tough standard, sure, but fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice... And he's done it more than twice.

In today's game, Mark Prior has struck out 10 through five, though the Cubs have yet to score. If they lose this one, they're in trouble.

NFL picks coming tomorrow. After two or three games I should have a decent grasp on it by now, hopefully.

The North Side Hit Men

2004-09-28T19:14:00.000-05:00

If the Cubs can score 12 runs a game for the rest of the week, I have no doubt that they will win the wild card. Though this is highly doubtful, I do like how the bats came to life last night with four homers, and though the wind is blowing in tonight, I think they'll hit well. Greg Maddux is on the bump, and this is his kind of game with runs sure to be at a premium.

Time to quickly recap my Week 3 NFL picks:

Vikes beat Bears by 5; missed the spread but got straight up. 0-1, 1-0
Steelers beat Fins by 10; missed both in a total brain lock. 0-2, 1-1
Jags beat Titans by 3; got the spread but picked the Titans. 1-2, 1-2
Giants beat Browns by 17; got both. 2-2, 2-2
Ravens beat Bengals by 14; missed both. 2-3, 2-3
Texans beat Chiefs by 3; got the spread but picked KC. 3-3, 2-4
Saints beat Rams by 3; got the spread but picked the Rams. 4-3, 2-5
Eagles beat Lions by 17; got both. 5-3, 3-5
Falcons beat Cards by 3; missed the spread but picked Atlanta; 5-4, 4-5
Broncos beat Bolts by 10; a push and I picked the Broncos; 5-4-1, 5-5
Colts beat Pack by 14; got both. 6-4-1, 6-5
Seahawks shut out Niners; missed the spread but picked Seattle. 6-5-1, 7-5
Raiders beat Bucs by 10; got both. 7-5-1, 8-5
Cowboys beat Redskins by 3; missed both. 7-6-1, 8-6

So a lackluster week picks wise. I missed a couple easy ones and that always hurts the record. Oh well, there's 13 weeks left. Go Cubs!

Picks through Week 3: 21-23-2 ATS, 28-18 straight up.

All Cubs, All the Time

2004-09-27T13:47:00.000-05:00

Quick thoughts with seven games left:

* I am a huge Joe Borowski fan. Last year I did not worry about him saving games at all, and he rewarded my faith by only blowing one save that I can think of right now. I wish I had the same faith in LaTroy Hawkins, but I don't. I don't feel good when he comes in the game like I did with Joe. The Cubs were fortunate to win Tuesday's game after he blew the save, and lightning was not going to strike twice on Saturday. Though I blame Ryan Dempster for walking two guys with a three-run lead, I don't understand why you throw a guy with one major league homer any pitch that is not a slider with two strikes. If he can lay off them and take the walk, more power to him. But don't leave a fastball over the plate.

* Saturday's game, as soon as the lead was gone, turned into one of those games I knew the Cubs weren't going to win. Sometimes you just know that they're going to lose, and Saturday was one of those times. I try to be as optimistic as I can about the Cubs, but when you are one strike away from winning the game and give up a three-run homer to tie the game, it's hard to believe that you're going to come right back and score a run or two and then get three more outs.

* I'd like to blame Sunday's crappy offensive output on it being the 12th game of a 12 game roadtrip, and on them actually facing a decent pitcher, but they had their chances and couldn't cash them in. They haven't really been scoring much of late, except the six on Thursday, so it's going to have to be the offense that puts them in the playoffs.

* Moises Alou needs to quit bitching about the umpires, but in his defense, the pitch that he took for strike three with the bases loaded in the fifth Sunday was not even close to being a strike. I would love to know how a slider from a lefty can cross the plate at the knees when it almost hits a right-handed batter in the ankle. Plus the umpire took about two full seconds before he rung Moises up. Make up your mind.

* If the Cubs go 7-0 on this homestand, they will win the wild card, because tonight's game is the game in hand that they have over the Giants. They win, they're one game up. They lose, they're tied. I like that Carlos Zambrano is on the hill; he's been lights out at home lately.

* I had said before the Cubs went on the road that I would be happy with an 8-4 record. Why does that feel so disappointing now?

* Finally, today is September 27th, which marks the one-year annivesary of the happiest Cubs day of my life. I was in attendance at Wrigley last year when the Cubs swept the Pirates and, coupled with the Astros' loss to the Brewers, won the division. No crowd, except maybe the Game 1 of the NLCS crowd, at Wrigley has been more electric than the one that day. When, during the first game, the scoreboard put a three-spot up for the Brewers in the sixth to make it 5-0 or something like that, we went nuts. When the Astros game ended, a few people with cell phones were spreading the news around, but as soon as the scoreboard guys took the blank tile off of Milwaukee's final score panel to put the five in, everybody stood and applauded the scoreboard. It was amazing, and it was so unexpected that Mark Prior had to step off the mound. But that's when we knew all the Cubs had to do was win and they were in. The break between games was full of buzz, and when Sammy Sose homered to give the Cubs a 1-0 lead in the first, people were ready to go nuts, which we did as soon as Jose Hernandez hit into a double play to end it. Nothing will top that memory for me unless I'm at Wrigley when they win the World Series.

*I really like the Cubs' chances in the playoffs, but they have to get there first. I said about a month ago that the first team to 90 wins should win the wild card, and the Cubs could do that as soon as Wednesday. I still think that it's true.

7-0 is best. 6-1 should be good enough. 5-2 is pushing it. 4-3 and we'll need some major help. Ron Santo's back in the booth tonight, and as he tells Dusty at the end of every pregame interview, "Sounds like a winner to me. Let's go get 'em."

Magic Number Time

2004-09-24T14:12:00.000-05:00

Now that the Cubs have taken a half-game lead in the wild card, it's time to start talking magic number, even though it's not quite as easy as usual because the Dodgers' predictable rough stretch is putting the West in play as we enter the last ten games. The calculations are all way over my head, and there's an excellent discussion of all the scenarios over on and another thing, which is my favorite Cub blog and should be your first stop every day if Cubs info is what you're looking for. In any event, the Cubs are playing very well right now, they've guaranteed themselves a winning road trip, and if they win out they can't miss the playoffs. So let's hope the sweeping can continue in Shea, a stadium the Cubs haven't played in in about 17 months.

Odds and ends before I get to my Week 3 NFL picks, which I'm sure you're all eagerly awaiting.

* The Amazing Race finale was Tuesday, and my wife and I might have been the only people in the country (other than their families) disappointed that Colin and Christie came in second. I understand that the producers made them out to be villians, but they played the game better than any of the other teams, and it sucked to see them lose because United had to delay a flight, since that's what it really came down to. But congrats to Chip and Kim for winning, they did play well, they just caught some breaks here and there. (By the way, Colin's "my ox is broken!" proclamation last week is the greatest reality TV line ever.) And it's a good thing I wasn't actually taking bets on the odds I put on each of the teams a month ago, because I installed Chip and Kim at 3-1, so there might have been a lot of bets on them.

* I watched both Survivor and The Apprentice last night, and I found myself bored with Survivor (even though I said I wasn't going to watch it). I'm sick of these shows splittling up teams into guys and girls, because it always ends up with guys thinking they shouldn't lose to a team with women and women thinking that they need to show the guys who's better. Plus on Survivor the reward challenge involved a balance beam, just like last week's immunity challenge, and no matter how you slice it women have an advantage on balance beams. The guys did come back and win the immunity challenge, but I won't be watching next week to find out what happens. Or maybe I will, it's hard to say. The show sucks you in slowly. The Apprentice was good, though I don't like how the women ganged up on Stacie, especially since Maria clearly screwed things up and was unwilling to take any shred of responsibility for it. I also thought it was outrageous to pay Mike Piazza $20,000 for a half-hour appearance, but if they'll pay it, more power to him.

* Watching the Miami-Houston (not Dolphins-Texans) game last night during commercials, I saw ESPN show a graphic stating that Miami has had 20 NFL first round picks since 2000, and the next closest schools have had six. Twenty! That's beyond amazing. How they don't win the national championship every year is beyond me.

* And speaking of the NFL, here are my picks for Week 3. The Patriots, Jets, Bills, and Panthers are all off, though Week 3 is a little early for a bye if you ask me, especially for both of the Super Bowl teams from last year. First pick is against the spread, second is straight up, home team in caps.

MINNESOTA (-9) over Chicago; Minny
MIAMI (-1) over Pittsburgh; Miami
Jacksonville (+6) over TENNESSEE; Tennessee
NY GIANTS (-3) over Cleveland; G-men
CINCINNATI (+3) over Baltimore; Cincy
Houston (+7 1/2) over KANSAS CITY; KC
New Orleans (+7) over ST. LOUIS; St. Louis
Philadelphia (-4 1/2) over DETROIT; Philly
ATLANTA (-10) over Arizona; Atlanta
DENVER (-10) over San Diego; Denver
INDIANAPOLIS (-6) over Green Bay; Indy
San Francisco (+10) over SEATTLE; Seattle
OAKLAND (-3) over Tampa Bay; Oakland
WASHINGTON (-2) over Dallas; Washington

Glendon Rusch takes the hill tonight in New York, and as Homer Simpson once said, "I like those odds!"

Welcome Dusty

2004-09-22T18:32:00.000-05:00

Though I don't think that this humble blog had anything to do with it, Dusty Baker is taking Matt Clement out of the starting rotation for the remaining 12 games and will start Glendon Rusch in his place. I've been on the record for over a month saying that I was sick of Clement starting, and I really like how Rusch just goes out there and throws strikes, and does it quickly as well. Plus having a lefty start never hurts, especially against the Reds. In any event, the Cubs are now 5-2 with five games left on the trip, so they just need to keep winning and things will take care of themselves, if only because they've still played one less game than the Giants.

Time to recap my Week 2 NFL picks, because if I don't do it soon Week 3 will have already kicked off.

Bears beat Packers by 11; I nailed the spread but picked the Pack to win. 1-0-0, 0-1
Jags beat Broncos by 1; missed the spread but picked the Jags. 1-1-0, 1-1
Ravens beat Steelers by 17; boy, did I miss this one. 1-2-0, 1-2
Lions beat Texans by 12; got both of those. 2-2-0, 2-2
Colts beat Titans by 14; nailed both. 3-2-0, 3-2
Giants beat 'Skins by 6; missed both. 3-3-0, 3-3
Saints beat Niners by 3; I picked the Niners to beat the 7 point spread but NO to win - jackpot! 4-3-0, 4-3
Falcons beat Rams by 17; got both. 5-3-0, 5-3
Panthers beat Chiefs by 11; missed both. 5-4-0, 5-4
Seahawks beat Bucs by 4; missed both. 5-5-0, 5-5
Cowboys beat Browns by 7; missed the spread but picked Dallas. 5-6-0, 6-5
Patriots beat Cards by 11; got both. 6-6-0, 7-5
Raiders beat Bills by 3; Raiders failed to cover by half a point, but at least they won. 6-7-0, 8-5
Jets beat Bolts by 6; got both. 7-7-0, 9-5
Bengals beat Fins by 3; missed the spread but picked Cincy. 7-8-0, 10-5
Eagles beat Vikings by 11; missed both. 7-9-0, 10-6

So in Week 2 I went 7-9-0 ATS and 10-6 straight up, bringing my totals after two weeks to 14-17-1 against the spread and 20-12 straight up. If these two weeks are any indication, this is why I don't bet the line.

The Z-man is on the hill tonight, so as Ron Santo would say, let's go get 'em.

Six Down, Six to Go

2004-09-20T20:44:00.000-05:00

The Cubs are now halfway through their Eastern Time Zone journey and are a respectable 4-2 after they split their DH in a Miami suburb today. I have no idea how they beat Carl Pavano and lost to David Weathers, but they have beaten a number of good pitchers this year, and they even beat Pavano with a lineup that included Jose Macias (who had three hits) and Paul Bako. It's easy to forget that Nomar Garciaparra hasn't even played in week either. In any event, I was hoping for an 8-4 trip when it started, and they're halfway there. Anything less than 4-2 in Pittsburgh and New York is simply unacceptable at this juncture. Fortunately Matt Clement won't start until Saturday at Shea at the earliest; I'm quite sick of him, to be perfectly honest. Today's game was a prime example of him self-destructing: he failed to throw strikes to Juan Pierre and walked him, he hit Mike Lowell (or Conine, I forget), and then he gave up a three-run homer to Damion Easley on an 0-2 pitch. I had to go to class after that and I knew I wasn't going to miss anything. Anyone who argues now that Mark Prior would be in the bullpen in the playoffs, after his outstanding performance today and Clement's stinker, is insane. Put Clement in the pen and bring him in for one inning. And tell him to throw strikes.

I won't tally my NFL picks until later this week. Randy Moss is going to singlehandedly win for my fantasy team this week. It's about damn time.

Time to go write about summary judgment...

Short and Sweet

2004-09-17T13:58:00.000-05:00

That's what I have to make this post because I have a 25-30 page brief due next Wednesday and I haven't even read all the necessary cases, let alone actually started writing it. The Cubs are playing well right now, I saw my first ever Cub grand slam in over 50 lifetime games courtesy of Sammy Sosa on Wednesday, and hopefully they can keep it cooking in Cincy. Onto my Week 2 NFL picks. First is against the spread, second is straight up, home team is in caps.

Chicago (+8 1/2) over GREEN BAY; Green Bay
JACKSONVILLE (-3) over Denver; Jacksonville
Pittsburgh (+4) over BALTIMORE; Pittsburgh
DETROIT (-3) over Houston; Detroit
Indianapolis (+1) over TENNESSEE; Indy
Washington (-3) over NY GIANTS; Washington
San Francisco (+7) over NEW ORLEANS; New Orleans
ATLANTA (-2 1/2) over St. Louis; Atlanta
KANSAS CITY (-6) over Carolina; KC
TAMPA BAY (+3) over Seattle; Tampa Bay
Cleveland (+4 1/2) over DALLAS; Dallas
New England (-8) over ARIZONA; New England
OAKLAND (-3 1/2) over Buffalo; Oakland
NY Jets (-3) over SAN DIEGO; Jets
CINCINNATI (-5) over Miami; Cincy
Minnesota (+3) over PHILADELPHIA; Minnesota

Go Cubs!

What a Weekend

2004-09-14T14:33:00.000-05:00

The Cubs alternated between playing like crap, playing great, playing like crap, and then playing great again. The Patriots took it to the Colts and reasserted themselves as the team to beat in the AFC, and in the whole league. Miami rallied to beat their arch-rivals in OT and solidified their front runner position in the ACC. And Charles Rogers, who I had high hopes for on my fantasy team, broke his collarbone and is out for the season, and he didn't even catch a ball before he got injured, so he left me with a goose egg for the day. My team lost, needless to say. At least I managed to fight my way to a third-place money finish in a $5 SNG late Saturday night on UB; I forgot how almost competent the players are there compared to Party.

Let's see how my picks panned out from last week; records are cumulative after each game, ATS first and straight up second:

I picked Tennessee to cover and win, and they did both. 1-0, 1-0.
I picked Detroit to beat the spread and win, and they did both. 2-0, 2-0.
I picked Oakland to beat the four-point spread and Pittsburgh to win. Pittsburgh won by three. Jackpot! 3-0, 3-0.
I picked Washington to cover and win, and they did both. 4-0, 4-0.
I picked Cleveland to beat the spread and win, and they did both. 5-0, 5-0.
I picked Buffalo to cover the three-point spread and win; they failed to do either. 5-1, 5-1.
I picked Cincy to beat the spread and the Jets to win; the Jets covered but won. 5-2, 6-1.
I picked St. Louis to cover and win; they won but didn't cover. 5-3, 7-1.
I picked New Orleans to beat the spread and win; this was a dumb pick as Seattle won by 14. 5-4, 7-2.
I picked Houston to cover and win, and the Bolts won by 7. 5-5, 7-3.
I picked the Giants to beat the 9 1/2 point spread and Philly to win; the Eagles won by 14. 5-6, 8-3.
I picked Minnesota to cover and win, and they did both. 6-6, 9-3.
I picked San Fran to beat the 3 1/2 point spread and win; they lost by two. 7-6, 9-4.
I picked KC to beat the 3 point spread and win; they lost by 7. 7-7, 9-5.
I picked Carolina to cover and win; they did neither. 7-8, 9-6.

Add this final record to my 0-0-1 and 1-0 after the Pats game and I end up with a 7-8-1 record ATS and 10-6 straight up. My straight up is respectable because the first week is tough to figure out, and my ATS goes to show why I don't bet on NFL games. But I will forge on next week...

As for the Cubs, Matt Clement needs a good outing tonight. The Cubs have to beat the Pirates and Reds consistently if they're going to the playoffs. They got off to a good start last night in that regard. Tomorrow I will be in attendance, and Mark Prior is pitching, who I've only seen once this year, back in June against the A's (the Cubs won the game with two in the bottom of the ninth, the second time ever I've seen them pull that trick). I've brought the Cubs good luck all year, so let's hope they're going for the sweep tomorrow and can finish it off before they head off on their four-city, 12-game road trip, their longest of the year.

NFL Picks through Week 1: 7-8-1 ATS, 10-6 straight up.

The 'Cane Mutiny

2004-09-11T12:05:00.000-05:00

I didn't get home until halftime of last night's Miami-Florida State game, and it didn't appear that I had missed anything either with the score 10-0 FSU. But then in the second half, for the first 28 minutes of it, Miami had the worst offense I have ever seen them put on a football field. Missed field goals, bad throws, a blown fourth-and-four, and a questionable kicking of a field goal on fourth down on FSU's three-yard line (I probably would have gone for it, but that's me) made things look bleak for the 'Canes until they pulled off a great touchdown to tie it and a better one to win it in OT. The OT winner was absolutely perfect because it's something I would have done in NCAA Football on the PS2: 2nd and three from the 18, put two tight ends on the left side, and then run a counter play to the right and let your stud running back take it to the house. Perfect. So Miami has now beaten Florida State six consecutive times, and they are in the driver's seat for a BCS bowl already. Their offense was far from perfect, but their defense was smothering, so as long as they can put points on the board, they should run the table.

As for the Cubs, Dusty Baker obviously decided to start the JV in the first game and the varsity in the second, which is about the only way to trade blowouts the way they did. Through some stroke of luck the Cubs find themselves in a three-way tie for first in the wild card, and things aren't as bleak as those in the Chicago media would like to make it out to be. Next week brings three with the Pirates and four in Cincinnati, all winnable games. Plus Carlos Zambrano goes today, and except for the one start against the Astros two weeks ago (the last loss I went to), he has been lights out at home. The Cubs just need to pull it all together; yesterday's start by Mark Prior was very promising for the rest of the season and (hopefully) the playoffs.

That'll wrap it up for now, but I have one more thing to address. To the thief who stole the back tire off my bike while it was parked in my building's locked bike room: you'll get yours someday. Maybe not from me, but from somebody. After all, what goes around comes around.

Those Vegas Oddsmakers

2004-09-10T11:21:00.000-05:00

Here's the extent of my Cubs talk today: doubleheader starting at 1:20, and the weather should be quite nice with the wind blowing out, which bodes well for their homer-happy offense. Hopefully they'll come out swinging and sweep it.

Now time for football. The Patriots emerged victorious last night, which should come as no surprise seeing as how they own the Colts. The Pats made some costly turnovers but created some of their own at key times and looked pretty balanced on offense, though not quite to the Colts' extent, who were really running the ball well at times. 1-0 is certainly a better record to start with than last year's 0-1, especially since 2003 opened with the 31-0 drubbing at Buffalo.

And last night's game was evidence at how accurate the oddsmakers in Vegas can be with the NFL. Notice I didn't say how "good" they can be, because it's not really a measure of skill, and as the Sports Guy pointed out yesterday, an NFL team gets three points just for playing at home, so the oddsmakers pretty much thought that the two teams were even. And most importantly, they're not actually trying to predict the outcome, they're just trying to balance the bets on both teams, which is why the line sometimes gets adjusted as the game draws nearer. So it came out as a push for Vegas, with everyone getting their money back. I know the actual outcome rarely matches the line exactly, but you would think that they would want to set the line with half-points so as to avoid situations like this one. Maybe they thought that if they set the line at 3 1/2 there would have been too much action on the Colts.

That puts my record at 0-0-1 ATS and 1-0 straight up. With the Titans-Dolphins game getting moved to tomorrow due to another potential hurricane (U of Miami's nickname is probably starting to hit a little too close to home), I'm going to knock all my predictions off right now. The first prediction is against the spread, second is the winner of the game, home team is in caps. Here we go:

Tennessee (-3) over MIAMI; Tennessee
Detroit (+3) over CHICAGO; Detroit
Oakland (+4) over PITTSBURGH; Pittsburgh
WASHINGTON (-2) over Tampa Bay; Washington
CLEVELAND (+3) over Baltimore; Cleveland
BUFFALO (-3) over Jacksonville; Buffalo
Cincinnati (+4 1/2) over NY JETS; NY Jets
ST. LOUIS (-11) over Arizona; St. Louis
NEW ORLEANS (+2 1/2) over Seattle; New Orleans
HOUSTON (-4 1/2) over San Diego; Houston
NY Giants (+9) over Philadelphia; Philly
MINNESOTA (-4 1/2) over Dallas; Minnesota
SAN FRANCISCO (+3 1/2) over Atlanta; San Fran
Kansas City (+3) over DENVER; KC
CAROLINA (-3) over Green Bay; Carolina

Though I've never tried to do this before, I think I'm helped by the fact that I don't really have any inherent biases against any team, so I can be mostly fair about it. We'll see how it goes.

That's it for now. Big baseball and football weekend coming up; September's always a great month in that regard.

BONUS PREDICTION: Miami will beat Florida State tonight by at least 10 points. Bias alert: my stance on Miami has been made clear, plus I hate FSU. So take it with a grain of salt.

Quick Stuff

2004-09-09T13:31:00.000-05:00

I don't even want to discuss the Cubs right now. They need to figure it out today on their last off day of the regular season because going at least 5-2 on the rest of the homestand is now mandatory. Tomorrow's doubleheader with Kerry Wood and Mark Prior will be the beginning of the end, either good or bad, depending on how they fare.

Two other points of discussion this afternoon:

1) Dave asked me in the comments how I became a Miami Hurricanes fan, and I was planning to tell the story before Monday, but when the Florida State game was postponed until tomorrow, I put it off and explained the Patriots first. But this story is actually a lot shorter. In Dallas, the Cowboys are king, and college sports are secondary, mostly because SMU hasn't been good since I before I could walk, TCU has never been good at football, and North Texas barely registers on the radar even though it's thirty miles north in Denton. Texas and Texas A&M are reported on only because of the number of alumni in the Dallas area. My dad graduated from Texas Tech, but he isn't a sports nut like me (unless you count golf) and so he never instilled any Red Raider pride in me. So my formative fan years in the mid to late '80s happened to coincide with Jimmy Johnson's taking Miami to or winning the national championship game almost every year. I started watching them and really liked their whole thug image, and that was all I needed. I remember the wins over Alabama and Nebraska to win national championships, and I remember how 'Bama destroyed the Canes in the Sugar Bowl after the '92 season. Plus I contend that Miami has produced more quality NFL players than any other school, and I don't really think anyone can argue with that.

The fact that I attended a college without a football team (UC Santa Barbara) allows me to keep Miami as my college team even though I am now older than all of their players. Though I suppose it would be nice to have my own team to root for, I could have gone to a school with one, but I chose not to, and that's another decision I don't regret.

2) I'm going to attempt to pick all NFL games this season against the spread and straight up, mostly to see how well I would do if I were actually betting on the games in Vegas. Since there's a Thursday game this week, and I don't have time to do the other 15 games right now, I'm picking tonight's game right now.

ATS: NEW ENGLAND (-3) over Indianapolis
Straight: New England

The fact that I'm a Patriots fan has nothing to do with either pick; I honestly think the Patriots will beat the spread and win the game.

Live From My Law School Library...

2004-09-08T13:42:00.000-05:00

it's CE! [Cue music and introductions. Introduce host. Insert inane and unfunny monologue.] I've got a great post for you, so stick around, I'll be right back.

Wouldn't it be nice if life were actually like a TV show? Actually, I don't think that would be very nice at all, especially if it was some drama where bad things kept happening the way they always do in dramas. At least in sitcoms characters usually don't die (with the notable exception of Susan on Seinfeld).

First, let me talk about the Cubs. There's not much to say, really, other than that last night's game was more or less a waste of four hours. Aside from Corey Patterson's two solo homers, both to right field, the four other Cubs' runs did not even score in exciting fashion. Two came on an error, the third scored on a wild pitch, and the fourth came in on a groundout. I think the Cubs left 16 on base, and they certainly had their chances to put the game away or outright win it. LaTroy Hawkins did pitch himself out of a jam well in the ninth, and Todd Wellemeyer really pitched out of a jam in the 11th, but when you keep playing with fire, you're going to get burned. And now that the Cubs have 27 games remaining, it's not too early to call tonight's game a must-win. Greg Maddux dominated the Expos last Monday, and though the wind will likely play a factor tonight as well, one or two runs might do the trick for the Cubs.

Matt Clement left the game early last night due to some sort of upper back injury. Normally this would be bad, but I don't really think it's that big of a deal. I'm getting sick of the way he's pitched this year. It's true that he hasn't gotten any run support, but most of the runs that he gives up are his fault. One of the runs last night is a great example. Two outs and nobody on in the third and Matt proceeds to walk both the 7th and 8th place hitters before giving up a bloop single to the pitcher to knock in a run. It seems to me like he loses concentration way too easily, and that's not going to cut it in the playoffs. Glendon Rusch is more than capable of filling in, and at least he throws strikes and doesn't hurt himself. And if you recall from an earlier post, I nominated Clement as the odd-man out come October anyway. He's much more suited for bullpen work if you ask me. I'm also aware that he's a free agent, and I say let him go if he doesn't want to sign for less than $10 million or so. Rusch can start next year, and it's possible Angel Guzman will be ready to go, plus Ryan Dempster is always an option. For me, it's basically come down to me not trusting Clement when he starts, like you're just waiting for the wheels to come off. So maybe this is a blessing in disguise, I don't know. Call me a blasphemer if you want.

Let's shift gears now. Last night was Tuesday night, which meant another new episode of the Amazing Race. This one found the teams jaunting from India to New Zealand by way of Thailand, and to no one's surprise (least of all myself, because I picked them to win the whole thing three weeks ago) Colin and Christie came in first again. Honestly, I don't see how they're going to lose. Chip and Kim kept saying how they were attempting to assist the C's in self-destructing, but C and K barely avoided getting eliminated themselves, very unwisely choosing not to yield the twins, who were eliminated, when they had the chance. I've never watched a whole season of this show before, so I'm not sure exactly how close we are to the end, but they've hit every continent except Antartica (I'm considering New Zealand as part of Australia, though I know it's not), and it looks like they're going to the Philippines next week. I'd like for it to end before the playoffs start, and I think it will seeing as how there are only four teams left with one non-elimination leg to go.

Speaking of reality shows in faraway places, CBS is ever more frequently reminding us that the new Survivor starts next Thursday. Let me state for the record that I am particularly fond of Survivor because I started watching it in May of 2000 before it got huge later that summer. Nobody knew what it was and what it was all about, myself included, but I was watching it opposite rooting for the Lakers to lose in the NBA Playoffs (0h, cruel fate...). So I've always considered myself to be in on the ground level when it comes to this show. And this fact is why it pains me to say I'm probably not going to watch it this time around. I liked All-Stars because I knew all the people and it was interesting to see how they would all interact with each other. And I thought that the second Survivor was the best one because the contestants had just enough to go off of based on the first one but were still pretty clueless as to how to play the game. But just based on the commercials for this new one it looks like all the people have already decided how they're going to play the game, and that's dumb. It's obviously a fluid concept. You can't treat every situation the same. And now you've got these new people saying how they're not going to be a leader because that's who the other people always go after (obviously he wasn't taking notes on Boston Rob's second-place finish in All-Stars) or how they're going to play dumb and see how far it gets them. Here's an idea: how about being yourself? I realize casting probably doesn't want these people to be themselves, and that's the problem. It's exactly the reason I won't be watching the second Apprentice. Everybody thinks they know how to play based on the first one, and they don't. Besides, with the OC being moved to Thursday nights at 7 this year, I'd rather watch that than Survivor anyway. Will Ryan come back? Did Seth drown? Will Marisa stay away from the bottle? Will Sandy's eyebrows get bushier? These are all intriguing questions as we enter the next season. Plus I think that everyone needs a trashy soap opera to watch, if only to make their lives look positively normal and boring by comparison.

Last topic: the Patriots. They open tomorrow night at home on ABC against the Colts, who are still bitter over losing last year's AFC title game. The problem for the Colts is that they're not better than the Pats; they weren't last year, and they're not now. The Pats may not blow teams out, but they also haven't lost a real game since last September. And until somebody else in the AFC steps up, it's their conference to lose.

So how did I come to be a Patriots fan? Here's the story. I was born in Dallas and lived in a Dallas suburb (I could tell you which one, but I won't) until I was 11, when my family moved to Amarillo, the cultural center of the Texas panhandle (which tells you a lot). I was an NFL nomad in my single-digit years; I liked the 49ers because they were good (I wasn't even 10 years old yet, cut me some slack) and because the Cowboys were horrible in the late '80s (the final Tom Landry years). A 1-15 season in 1989 brought the arrival of Jimmy Johnson, who, along with Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, and Michael Irvin, turned the franchise around. Their first Super Bowl season was in '92, the the last fall I spent in Dallas, and I was along for the ride, and stayed through their next Super Bowl win the next season, '93.

The end of that year brought my family's move to a western suburb of Chicago. Finally I was near the Cubs, but my dad's company ended up moving its headquarters to Denver in the summer of '94, and after a mere eight months in Illinois, it was off to Colorado. So, for the '94 season, I declared myself an NFL nomad. I was 13 years old, I was casting off the Cowboys, the team of my birth city, and I was ready to latch on to the next team that needed me. The obvious choice was the Broncos, since I was living in Denver. But for some reason I turned on them. I don't really know why. Maybe it was Wade Phillips, the coach at the time before Mike Shanahan came to town. Maybe it was John Elway, who I've never liked and have always thought was overrated. Maybe it was the fact that everyone in Denver seemed to like the Broncos just a little too much, though at that time I couldn't blame them; the Nuggets' best years were (and still are) in the '80s, the Rockies were only in their second year of existence (and baseball was in its strike in '94 anyway), and the Avalanche were still the Quebec Nordiques. But most of my friends were Broncos fans, so it should have been an easy choice. It wasn't, however, and I began to hate the Broncos. It was completely unfounded, and though I don't hate them anymore, I'm still not that fond of them. One of my fondest sports memories was that Saturday afternoon in January of '96 when the Jaguars went into Mile High and beat them after they had gone either 13-3 or 14-2 and were undefeated at home. The fact that this put the AFC Championship game at Foxboro for the Pats also helped.

But I digress. The Pats were just coming into their own in '94, with Bill Parcells at the helm and a young Drew Bledsoe throwing the ball 60 or 70 times a game because they couldn't run the ball for squat. Maybe it was the freewheeling type offense (I've always liked to watch teams pass, even though when I play football video games I never throw the ball), maybe it was their new uniforms (that actually played somewhat of a role), maybe it was just the fact that they weren't the Broncos or Cowboys, but when they went into Cleveland for that wild-card game at the end of that year, I had declared myself a Patriots fan, even though I have yet to step foot in the state of Massachusetts in my life. As soon as I got a Drew Bledsoe jersey it was confirmed. And it was tough being a Pats fan in Denver. They never could beat the Broncos when Elway was around (I still hate Shannon Sharpe after that whole phone on the sideline thing he did in Foxboro), and my junior year of high school was when the Broncos finally broke through and beat the Packers in the Super Bowl. After watching the Pats lose to the Pack in the previous Super Bowl, I wasn't too pleased. My dad and I went skiing the day of the Broncos-GB Super Bowl, that's how much I wanted to see it.

And now I'm in Chicago. I won't say that I like the Bears, because you can only like one team and I want to be ambivalent towards the rest (I can honestly say that I don't hate any of the other 31 NFL teams), plus the Pats do play the Bears every four years. I will say that I don't mind seeing the Bears win, and they're good for some NFC entertainment. The Pats' first Super Bowl win will mean ten times more than any future Bears Super Bowl win, but if the Bears do win the Super Bowl again I will be happy for my friends who are Bears fans and for the city as a whole. They're a little crazier about the Cowboys in Dallas than they are about the Broncos in Denver or the Bears here in Chicago. Part of that comes from Texas being such a football state, more so than any other, and I think Chicago is a baseball town first and foremost.

So by all rights I should be a Cowboys fan, and in some sports fans opinions I'm one of few people actually allowed to be a Cowboys fan because I was born in Dallas. I would hate for people in Boston to not consider me a true Patriots fan because I'm not from the Northeast, however, so I won't go there. I could also be a Broncos fan, but that didn't work out. But I've been a Pats fan for ten years now, so I'm stuck with them, even in Chicago. Besides, going to NFL games is overrated, plus I can always get NFL Sunday Ticket. The NFL is the best league to be an out-of-town fan in, so it all works out.

So that's the story. I've made my choice, and even if the Pats hadn't won two of the last three Super Bowls, I wouldn't regret it at all.

Five Times the Fun

2004-09-06T21:12:00.000-05:00

We all know that the Cubs lead the NL in home runs, and we all know that the long ball is pretty much the only way that they consistently score runs. That they took two out of three in Montreal without hitting a homer in any of the three games was remarkable. But today they went back to their home run ways, whacking five in today's romp of Les Expos. The weather was nice and warm, with the wind blowing out, and you knew that they would be in good shape with Carlos Zambrano on the hill. Today's game actually reminded me of the May 7th game I went to when Carlos tossed a complete-game shutout against the Rockies and the Cubs romped 11-0. In both games they scored early and often, and it was smooth sailing after the third inning both games.

So the Cubs are now 12-4 in my attendance. That's a .750 winning percentage, and recall that all four losses came by one run. I've got two more games left to go to this year, though when they make the playoffs I will definitely go to a game. I'd like to wait until the World Series, but they have to get there first...

I'm watching Sports Page on CLTV as I type this out and one of the guys said that the Cubs need to sweep this series, and I wholeheartedly agree. The Expos have no punch in their lineup whatsoever, and the Cubs don't have to face Livan Hernandez, who pitched yesterday. After that, they need to show the Marlins who's boss. They can't worry about what the other teams are doing. The Astros may have won ten in a row, but they're still 1 1/2 out and they aren't going to win their remaining 25 games or so. Of course, I also thought the Cubs were going to go 7-0 on their last homestand, and they only managed to go 4-3. But they are certainly capable of going at least 7-3 on this 10-gamer.

I played a frustrating $5 SNG on Party late Saturday night, frustrating in that I more or less folded my way into being one of four left, but was unable to pick up the big hand that I needed in order to make the money. My new strategy is to only play the monster hands outside the blinds (AA, KK, AK, and QQ), and to raise only the AA and KK. My competition has tended to play poorly enough that they will weed each other out so that I don't have to, and then all I have to do is pick up a big pot or two to make the money and be in position to win it. Theory and practice are two completely different things, however.

And now, to finish things up, it's time for the latest installment of three things about me:

1) I didn't use to like mustard on anything, and now I love it, especially on hot dogs. I guess it was an acquired taste.

2) My personal athletic peak came when I was ten years old and I was chosen to be on a little league all-star team. It's been all downhill ever since. In baseball I can't hit and in basketball I can't shoot, which is a shame because I'm 6'4", though in the NBA that's the size of a point guard.

3) I prefer cats over dogs, though I wouldn't go so far as to call myself a cat person, despite the fact that my wife and I own two. I just think they're easier to deal with than dogs.

Randomness

2004-09-05T02:29:00.000-05:00

I now know that the Cubs' lead is down to a half-game over the Giants, but the Cubs have played five less games than SF, so advantage Cubs. The Astros are hot but can't possibly keep it up the rest of the way, plus they have six left with the Cardinals, who are setting the world on fire. We'll see them in the NLCS. I firmly believe this at 2 o'clock in the morning.

I've decided to share three random bits about myself for as long as I feel like keeping this up. Here we go:

1) I'm a Leo. My wife certainly agrees that I'm as full of myself as all Leos are purported to be. By the way, summer birthdays are the worst because you're not in school at the time, and thus having a decent birthday party is almost impossible. I'm still bitter over never having a good one in my youth.

2) I don't shop at the Gap, Old Navy, or Banana Republic because I hate the Gap's commercials. I don't like Old Navy's either, but my boycott started before they started advertising. I'm also aware that BR does not advertise, but they're owned by the Gap, so they qualify. Plus I bought a pair of pants at the Gap outlet (breaking my boycott) and they turned out to be quite possibly the worst pair of pants I've ever owned.

3) I've lived in four different states in my life (Texas, Illinois, Colorado, and California) and have moved a grand total of six times in my 23 years, though three of the moves took place between January 1993 and August 1994. Needless to say, if you do the math, sixth and seventh grades were not fun for me. That's what attending four different middle schools will do to you.

I need the NFL to start soon, and thankfully it does on Thursday. Sunday afternoons are much nicer with it going. Of course, I still watch the Cubs until their season is over. I also need to go to bed because I'm not making much sense right now.

Like November in September

2004-09-04T22:03:00.000-05:00

Summer has finally arrived in Chicago: temperatures in the 80s consistently, high humidity, warm nights. It's about damn time. It's also the only way to be sure that it's not actually November right now with football in full swing (except for the NFL) and the Cubs not in action. It's quite odd to have the Cubs just not playing at all, with 28 other teams playing their normal schedules, and I feel detached from baseball as a result. I'm a baseball fan, but I'm not a fan of other teams. That would seem to be obvious, but what I mean is that I will watch other games if they're on, but I won't go out of my way to find out scores and such. Which is why I didn't find out until this afternoon that the Giants and the Padres both won last night. So at this very moment I cannot honestly tell you what the Cubs wild-card lead is, though I know they still have the lead because it's going to take a lot of half-games to make up a deficit when the team in the lead does not play at all.

What tomorrow's postponement means is that the entire weekend was wiped out and that I will be in attendance for their first game since Wednesday (September 1st, if we're keeping track), coming Monday at Wrigley against Les Expos. Dusty is apparently going to keep the rotation in order, which means Carlos Zambrano gets the ball. In the short term there is nothing bad about the Cubs getting four days off; Aramis Ramirez and Nomar Garciaparra can certainly use the time off, and the bullpen could use the break too. Giving each starter what amounts to eight days between starts won't hurt either (Carlos hasn't pitched since the last game I was at, last Saturday, the 28th of August). In the long term, the effects will remain to be seen. It appears that a doubleheader on the 20th is the only option in terms of making two of the games up. Though this means no off days after this Thursday the 9th, the Marlins sure as hell aren't going to give up any home games, and I can't blame them. What I do like is how the third game likely won't be made up unless it matters, and one can only hope that it won't. It would be nice for the Cubs to only have to play 161 games to make the playoffs. Plus they're now going to have at least three games in hand (a hockey term I love to use, it means they've played three less games than their opponents), so with each loss by other teams in the hunt, the Cubs can capitalize that much more. Of course, at the rate the Astros are playing, they may not lose again. This is my attempt to jinx them like I did the Cubs.

On to football. If my wife and I have a son (we're a ways away from children, of course), I am thinking that starting him as a kicker early is the way to go. Let's do some math. There are 117 Division 1-A football programs in the nation. This means that there are 117 teams that need kickers who can at least make extra points. That's 117 scholarships up for grabs, which means a free ride through college. And after seeing the Northwestern kicker miss five field goals on Thursday and the Oregon State kicker miss three extra points tonight as the Beavers fell short in their attempt to upset LSU on the road, it only confirms that college teams have a desparate need for merely competent kickers who can at least make extra points and 30-35 yard field goals. Watching college football this season also reminds me that, except for a few fifth-year seniors, I am older than every player on the field. I'm only 23. I still don't think I'm getting old, but I do remember the '90s well, and it's almost 2005.

And so I wrap up another post that doesn't really have a point. I think I'm off to battle a $5 SNG on Party; I've had a good run lately in those.

Marginal SNG Success

2004-09-01T12:16:00.000-05:00

After my poor showing in the Monty Memorial, I finally got the chance to wade back into the more friendly waters of Party last night and played two $5 SNGs. The first one was a disaster. I got no cards, barely saw any flops that I was not in the blinds for, and finally went out with Big Slick suited to a QJo. QJ offsuit! I don't know how big of a underdog that guy was, but after watching the WSOP and seeing Doyle Brunson beat KQ with Big Slick, and ESPN showing the Doyle was a 3-1 favorite, that loss makes me even more frustrated. The guy caught a queen on the flop, which I know is poker, but I was one card away from making my flush. Argh. Anyway, I somewhat impetuously dived right into a second SNG, and this one was more successful: a second place finish for $15. So I made a whole three dollars, but it was nice to win something. The second one was a typical Party SNG. Lots of people throwing their chips around with abandon, and before I knew it I was one of five left before I had even won a pot. I got lucky and nailed a straight after I had gone all-in after the flop with QJo (a 10 and a 9 hit the flop, so I had eight outs, and I felt like I was due anyway), and when two players went all-in with four left, I backed my way into the money. A flush knocked one more guy out, and then the leader had about T6000 to my T2000, so it was a matter of time before I went down.

Everyone was pleasant and friendly in the chat at the second table, which was in stark contrast to the first. About halfway through the first SNG, with about six people left, some jackass (an observer, though I wish Party would note observers as such like UB does) started typing stuff in the chat like, "ooh, $5, you guys must be taking this seriously" and a whole bunch of crap about how much we all sucked because we were playing in a $5 SNG. After the typical return comments from the players about how he was a fag and to suck their cocks (I'm not making this up), I finally turned the chat off because I didn't want to see it anymore. I just can't believe that this guy would do this. There were about 50,000 people on Party at that time, and even if you played the $100 SNGs all the time, why would you waste your time making fun of people for playing a $5 SNG? I'm not made of money. I don't even have a job right now. I'm a student and I really shouldn't even be playing with real money at all, but I like to play and I can win a little bit here and there, which adds up. The more I think about it the more it pisses me off. I really wanted to tell that guy to go fuck himself but I knew it wasn't going to do any good. I think his name was "cop4359" (it was definitely a four-digit number after cop), so if you run into this guy tell him that he's a fucking idiot. And then take all his money if you can.

If anything like this has ever happened to anyone reading this, tell your story in a comment, because I want to know if this is common or if it's just this one asshole. It's never happened to me before.

Oh well, time to read about our nation's income tax.

The Stretch Run

2004-08-31T21:06:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow marks the first day of September. The Cubs will play 27 games in September and three more in October for a total of 30 more games. So let's forget about tonight's complete and utter waste of three hours and concentrate on the Cubs winning as many games as possible out of the next 30. In the same number of games in September last year, the Cubs went 19-8 to erase a 2.5 game deficit in the Central. And though they lost tonight, the worst they can be headed into Wednesday is one-half game behind the Padres, who are losing in St. Louis as I write this. You heard it here first: the first team to 90 wins is going to take the wild card. I think the Cubs enjoy the schedule advantage, but as Chris Berman says on NFL Primetime, "That's why they play the games."

Speaking of NFL Primetime, we lost our cable sometime last October and thusly lost ESPN, which really sucks during the NFL season because I love turning on the aforementioned NFL Primetime at 6 o'clock and seeing all the highlights. I usually don't watch the Sunday night game, and SportsCenter is really starting to annoy me in how it handles highlights, so Primetime is nirvana for someone like me who just wants highlights and analysis. Baseball Tonight is the same way during the baseball season; give me Peter Gammons, Harold Reynolds, and Tom Jackson any day of the week. But now we have the cable back, and this means all of ESPN's offerings, though I don't watch NFL Countdown because I have never liked preview shows, plus when I was in college in California that would have entailed getting up at 9 o'clock on a Sunday morning. No thank you.

You're quickly discovering that I really don't have much of a point tonight. I just overheard that the Indians are beating the Yankees 22-0 in the Bronx. The Cubs were in a nail-biter compared to that one. If the Red Sox won (which they were on their way to doing earlier), they would be 3.5 games behind the Yankers. My friend, and best man in my wedding, Mike is from New York and is a Yankers fan, and I've been getting on him about their pitching this year. I said it would be a liability in October, but at this rate they may not even get there. I know Boston and NY square off at least once more. Could this be a reverse '78? And if it is, the Yankers need to watch out because the Angels, A's, or Rangers (whoever doesn't win the West) could pass them in the wild card if the Bosox pass them in the East. This might be a very interesting September in New York. Lord knows that the Giants and Jets both suck.

Another quality episode of The Amazing Race tonight, which ended with the second non-elimination leg in a row. Colin was less of an ass this time around, and this week it was Linda and Karen who had taxi-driver-paying-issues. Brandon and Nicole were saved from having to shave their heads and were saved by the producers from elimination, though they thanked God for it afterwards, and I hate to break it to them, but God doesn't care who wins this race. Surely they would realize that after seeing the squalor and poverty in Calcutta. In any event, Colin and Christie finished first again, and it's a good thing I wasn't actually taking bets when I laid their odds, because I would put them at even money to win it right now. Chip and Kim are close behind, and Chip seems to think that he's going to make Colin self-destruct, but the C's have yet to perform poorly despite all their blow-ups. I still think it's their race to lose.

Let's look at some lines for college football this weekend. My Hurricanes are favored by two over Florida State; I don't like that they're playing in the first week, but it is in the Orange Bowl and they haven't lost to the Seminoles since 1999 (I think). Sometime before Monday I will explain exactly how I came to be a Miami fan; it's a long story.

Colorado's favored by six over Colorado State; my brother went to CSU, a lot of my friends from high school went to CU, and I can't stand the Buffs, so this game has always been of some interest to me. I don't know if it's to be played in Boulder or Denver, but either way I would take the Rams and the points. CU always finds a way to blow this game even when they have the better team, and after this off-season's scandals I can't imagine that Gary Barnett would be all that effective as a head coach.

And in a game that only those in Lubbock or parts of Dallas care about, Texas Tech is favored by 24 on the road over SMU. Oh, how the mighty have fallen when it comes to SMU. People forget that the Mustangs were a Southwestern Conference power in the early '80s before they were put on the death penalty by the NCAA, the only program ever to be punished in such a fashion. Certainly there are some teams recently who have deserved it as much or more than SMU did back then, but the NCAA wanted to make an example of them, and they certainly did. The dissolution of the SWC helped to drive the final nail in SMU's coffin, as it did for Rice and Houston. Baylor can't compete in the Big XII, and Texas A&M has fallen on hard times lately, so really the only former SWC teams thriving are Texas and Arkansas.

You the reader may be asking: how do you know all this, and why do you care? The answer comes in that I was born in Dallas and I spent most of my formative years there (about 13 out of 18, give or take). Dallas sports were all I knew early on. How did I end up liking the Cubs then? The wonders of WGN are responsible for that, and for most other Cub fans not born in or near Chicago. Plus the Rangers were really bad in the mid to late '80s. But I'm stuck with the Cubs now, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

For those of you who have stuck with me this far, thank you, and I will spare you anything more right now. I will say that I generally don't like the fall because it means football season, which means that baseball season is ending and the weather is getting colder. Don't get me wrong: I like football, but football has always had this strange negative effect on me that I can't really explain. Maybe it's because I never got to play it as a kid, I don't know. I do know that January is my least favorite month, but November is a close second. And if the Cubs don't win the wild card this year, this October is going to be miserable. At least the Patriots will win the AFC East...

The Gameplan

2004-08-30T20:43:00.000-05:00

Cubs Talk

It's fairly obvious and can be summed up in one tidy, three-letter word: win. If the Cubs do that more than the remaining teams in the National League (other than the Braves, Cardinals, or Dodgers), they will make the playoffs. And the Cubs took their first step towards that with a fairly easy 5-2 victory over Les Expos, whose lineup looks worse than Arizona's, even without Luis Gonzalez. In any event, Greg Maddux breezed through 7 innings for win #13 on the season and #302 for his career. With Prior and Wood going tomorrow and Wednesday, a sweep is probable, though the Cubs at worst should take two out of three.

I just heard Buck Martinez say during the Marlins-Mets game on ESPN2 that the Astros were back in the wild card race after winning 3 of 4 at Wrigley. If they didn't have three teams to pass and zero games left against the Cubs this might be true, but Houston is a team that has shown no signs of life for the past five months, so I'm not sure why winning a series against the Cubs has suddenly propelled them into the race. Their beating the Reds tonight is an indication of nothing, and the Cubs have eight more games left against Cincinnati, plus six against the tail-spinning Pirates. The Astros have been DOA since June, and they don't have enough. Besides, they're still only four games over .500.

But do the Marlins have enough? As Steve Stone wisely pointed out, the Cubs do tangle with the Fish six more times (that's what happens when you let the morons at MLB make the schedules, though I don't know who else would: the Cubs were done with Arizona on May 6th, finished with the Cardinals, a team they played 19 times, on July 20th, played the Brewers 17 times between July 5th and August 25th, and don't even play the Marlins until September 3rd).

Allow me to go off on a tangent: I know I could do a better job of making the master schedule for baseball. Just give me a list of how many times each team is supposed to play every other team, and it's done. I'll even follow the unwritten rules: have both Chicago, New York, LA, and Bay Area teams at home at the same time as little as possible, have the first week's games be played in warm-weather locales, and emphasize rivalries within divisions in September. And don't even get me started on the unbalanced schedule: I hate it. The balanced schedule was much easier to figure out, and it's completely stupid that the Cubs pay only one visit to each city that's not in the Central. As a reward we play the Brewers, Pirates, and Reds too damn much, with occasional decent games against the Astros and Cardinals.

And now Buck came back to say that Lance Berkman got hit in the head yesterday against the Cubs. It didn't look like he was hit in the head the first time, and on each subsequent replay it looked even less so. I never liked Berkman before (he looks like a jock meathead) but now I really despise him after his horrible acting job yesterday. I've always hated Craig Biggio, so it won't take long before I hate most of the Astros. (I hated Roger Clemens before he was an Astro: talk about one of the most overrated pitchers in baseball. He's the last guy you want pitching a big game for your team.)

Where was I? Oh yes, the Marlins. They benefit only in that they play the Cubs a lot, but once the Cubs are finished with them the Cubs have a steady dose of the Pirates, Reds, and Mets. I don't care who the Fish play after that unless it's the Expos only for the rest of the season. Advantage: Cubs. I haven't looked at the Giants' schedule (their playing the Rockies and D'Backs helps, the Dodgers and Padres not so much), and I know that the Padres have yet to play the Cardinals (advantage: Cubs). But here's what might be the best part about the Padres and Giants still being in it: they have to play each other. As long as the Cubs win, they'll gain ground on the loser. What's best is if they split each series (or at least have no sweeps for either team), because then neither team gains anything.

Of course, this is all contingent on the Cubs adhering to the gameplan. If they lose, all bets are off. I still vividly remember 1998, where scoreboard watching became an art and the Cubs and Mets were never separated by more than one game for the entire month of September. Hopefully this September will allow the Cubs to establish a magic number at some point.

Poker Talk

Last night's Monty Memorial was not so successful for me: 46th out of 77. I think the fact that all the players knew what they were doing made things a lot tougher. There were four key hands that I will attempt to recap as best I can (I don't take notes when I play):

1) Early on I was dealt pocket rockets in the big blind. I hate getting them in the big blind because I never know how much to raise. Two players had limped in and I raised the standard amount, and the first guy called while the second folded. The flop came J high, I bet out, and was promptly raised about the size of the pot. Now convinced the other guy made his set, I bailed. I don't think I played this hand very well at all, but it was early and I didn't want to take any chances.

2) My best (and luckiest hand) came when I was dealt A5 in spades in the big blind. I checked to see the flop for free with about three others and saw the best flop I could think of: the 964, all spades. With the nut flush in hand, I checked and called, setting up my slowplay. A blank came on the turn (as I prayed for the board not to pair), and I checked, hoping the other guy (there was only one left at this point) would bet, but he checked. The river did not pair the board and I knew that this pot was mine, so I tried to maximize my value by betting an amount slightly bigger than the pot. I was hoping that he would move all-in, though I don't know why he would have, but he did call and I easily took down the pot. That gave me a short-lived chip lead at the table.

3) I had a pair of 5s (presto, I believe) in MP. I raised the pot and got the pot heads up, but the flop came 976. I was first to act, I bet, and he raised significantly. I think I might have gotten pushed off this hand, but I should have checked. Instead I lost a sizeable bet. I know I misplayed this hand.

4) The hand that brought my demise. With blinds up near 150/300 I was sitting on around T1300, so I knew I needed to make a stand, which I did with a pair of 6s. I went all-in preflop, mostly hoping for a call but ready to accept the blinds if everyone folded, and the guy that I almost knocked out with my flush called me with Q5. Only one card can beat me, and of course you know that it came on the flop. No 6 was forthcoming, and that was it. I'm still pissed off about this hand; not with my play, but with the fact that I was called with Q5 and that he caught a Q. I don't know the percentages on this hand but it's not like I was against two overcards, so I should have been at least a 60% favorite. Oh well, it's not like I was going to win the whole thing anyway.

So I think I will welcome going back to Party and UB, where the rest of the competition is most definitely not as competent as the other 76 players in this tournament. It was fun, though, it was good practice, and I will definitely play in the next one.

Whew. This was lengthy, but there was stuff worth talking about. Tomorrow brings the last day of August, Mark Prior on the hill, and a new episode of The Amazing Race at 8 instead of 9 thanks to the Republican Party. Don't get me started on politics, that's one topic I'm staying away from (at least until October, anyway).

Coming Up on CE

2004-08-30T13:58:00.000-05:00

I should have something more on the Cubs and the Monty Memorial later. Neither were particularly successful yesterday; they've lost three in a row, I went out 46th out of 77. Congrats to Iggy for winning the whole thing, he certainly put in enough effort setting it all up.

Time for the wonderful world of Constitutional Law.

The Jinx

2004-08-29T13:24:00.000-05:00

No sooner than I said that it didn't look like the Cubs planned on losing any time soon, they gave up 22 runs in two games in the process of losing both. They certainly had their chances yesterday in a game that I could find little to be positive about. I knew the wind was blowing out of the north so I wisely decided to take the Red Line, and I wore my standard breezy-weather-in-August attire: shorts with my Cubs turtleneck and Mark Prior jersey. I was in the first row of upper deck reserved, right at the angle the first base camera is at when there are ground balls on TV. The wind was blowing in relentlessly, and it was obvious that homers were going to scarce, if not impossible. Jeff Bagwell's double to right easily would have left the yard any other day, but Sammy Sosa flew out to the warning track in the third, a ball that likely would have been on Waveland on Friday.

After the Cubs' defense completely imploded in the second, I was beginning to think that my streak of one-run losses was going to come to a schreeching halt, but they fought back with two in the third only to give it right back in the sixth. The top of the sixth was a rather interesting half-inning; Zambrano got the first two hitters easily, and as the rain fell at its steadiest clip, I thought a rain delay might be imminent and that they were waiting for the third out. Unfortunately, three walks, a single, and an error that was really a hit were parlayed into two runs, all with two outs, to make it 7-2. The Cubs refused to go quietly, cracking four consecutive singles to start the sixth, and scored three to make it 7-5. It was at this point that I noticed the Cubs were still without an extra-base hit, and while it was nice to see them score five runs on eight singles, I knew that they needed something more at some point. Michael Barrett complied with a one-out double in the eighth and scored on Nomar Garciaparra's pinch-hit single, but Corey Patterson left Ramon Martinez on second with the tying run, and, after Derrek Lee walked, Todd Walker struck out to leave the tying and go-ahead runs on base. By this point Brad Lidge had been brought in, and Todd admitted himself in the paper today that he was trying too hard, which never works with the bases loaded. Mark Grudzielanek walked with two outs in the ninth to keep things alive, and I was hoping for Barrett to take a low fastball and drive a low liner through the wind into the bleachers for a game-winning homer, which certainly would have been incredible had he done so. Alas, it was not to be, but he did end the game noisily, with a line drive that was caught at third, though it was foul.

So my personal record is down to 11-4, but all four losses have only been by one run. Yesterday's was the first game that I had seen Carlos Zambrano lose this year. I'm going next Monday, Labor Day, against the Expos, and if the rotation holds that start belongs to Mark Prior, so my jersey will actually be accurate for only the second time this season.

And just for the record, this summer has sucked weather-wise, and I'm sure anyone who has been in Chicago all summer will agree. If only I had known that April was going to have the most consistent weather this year. Now it's almost Labor Day, and with football starting soon (college this Saturday, NFL two weeks from today, though I am aware that USC and Virginia Tech played last night and that my Patriots play on Thursday the 9th), it's all downhill from here.

The second attempt at the Monty Memorial is tonight, and Iggy assures us that Pacific is not going to screw it up this time. In any event my money's coming out of it after this tourney no matter the outcome. Hopefully I can catch some cards, and, if nothing else, at least collect a bounty on someone.

You Can Call Them Butter, 'Cause They're on a Roll

2004-08-26T21:34:00.000-05:00

Five wins in a row? Check. Winners of eight of nine (which really should be nine in a row)? Double-check. Playing the best baseball they have all season, hands down? Triple-check. The team we're talking about, as you've undoubtedly guessed, is the white-hot Cubs, who don't look like they plan on losing anytime soon, and with their rotation finally clicking into place, why should they? Even when they make mistakes, like in Wednesday's game, those mistakes have not come back to bite them in the ass like they did earlier this year. Moises Alou gets doubled off of second in a tie game in the sixth inning on Wednesday? No problem, he hits a go-ahead solo homer in the eighth. Paul Bako and Todd Walker leave Mark Grudzielanek on third with none and one out in the ninth, also on Wednesday? Corey Patterson wins the game with a two-run bomb to right. Mark Prior gives up a two-run homer to Jeff Bagwell in the first inning on Thursday? He doesn't give up any more runs and the Cubs take the lead for good in the third on Sammy Sosa's three-run shot to right.

On Monday of this week I said to my friend Paul, also a huge Cubs fan, that the Cubs really should sweep this entire homestand. While I didn't really think that they would (6-1 seemed more likely), they're more than halfway there, and with Kerry Wood, Carlos Zambrano, and Matt Clement pitching this weekend, I don't care if Roy Oswalt and Roger Clemens are pitching two of those games for Houston, the Cubs should win the remaining three. Unfortunately the Giants are not cooperating because they continue to win (as do the Padres, who swept four from the Mets at Shea), so the Cubs' lead is still a scant game, but that should increase fairly soon. And if the Cubs don't lose, it can never go down.

I'll be in attendance on Saturday, putting my 11-3 record to the test. I saw the Cubs beat the A's when Mark Mulder pitched, so good pitchers have no effect on the Cubs when I go (except for Jason Schmidt's one-hitter back in May). I also haven't seen the Cubs lose a game that Carlos started. Let's keep this going.

No new poker talk, but I'm looking forward to the second attempt of the Monty Memorial on Sunday.

Back to the Grind

2004-08-24T19:11:00.000-05:00

In the past three and a half months, I conveniently forgot exactly how much time law school takes in terms of class and reading, so I apologize for my lack of recent content. I'm taking five classes this semester and the reading itself is taking most of my hours between classes. Fortunately I just bought an extra internet cord so that I can access the internet in the library, which will allow me to update during the day if I'm so inclined (or play poker, whichever is more pressing).

First things first, the cancellation of the Monty Memorial on Sunday really sucked, but that wasn't the only lowlight of the day. My wife and I headed out to Old Orchard Mall in Skokie that afternoon, mostly to avoid the crowds of people along the lake for the Air and Water Show, and also because she had never been out there. We took the extremely crowded tourist trolley to the Red Line, which we were going to take all the way to Howard to make a bus connection out to the mall. There was a PACE bus scheduled to leave at 1:40 and we got on the train at 1:05, so we were pushing it in terms of making it up there in time. Any plans of actually making that connection were dashed when we sat at Belmont for at least ten minutes as we waited for "signals ahead." The train was sluggish once we finally pulled out and actually went express from Wilson to Loyola, only the second time a Red Line train I have been on went express. We finally made it to Howard in time to catch the 2:00 #97 bus. Every time I think taking the train is going to be a piece of cake, the CTA does something to prove me wrong. We got there at 2:30 and left at 5:40 in order to make it home by 8:00, which we did. After the cancellation of the tournament I was ready to cash out, but I'll keep my account until next week, after this week's tourney, so I can cash out then. I don't like Pacific's interface and set-up, but they didn't have to give all of us participants $25 and add $1500 to the kitty, so I guess they redeemed themselves somewhat. I'm still taking my money out afterward, though; UB and Party are enough for me.

The Cubs are rolling right along, winners of five of six and, truth be told, they should be on at least a six-game winning streak (had they won Saturday) and possibly an eight-game streak (had they also won last Tuesday). But they are finally 12 over .500 again, their high water mark this season, and tonight's game will be the first attempt to go 13 over at home, with six more games on the homestand. I'm going tomorrow, and the last time I saw Greg Maddux against the Brewers, he tossed a complete game shutout. My personal 10-3 record this season is on the line, and I'm going on Saturday as well.

Moises Alou just gave Matt Clement a 3-0 lead; if Matt ever wanted run support, he's got it now, though I don't think the Cubs are done scoring tonight. The way this offense is going, I half-expect them to reach double digits every game.

My fantasy football draft is about three and a half hours away. I'll have a report on my team later, though I'm not optimistic since there are a few guys in my league who have definitely out-researched me.

7:50 UPDATE: Derrek Lee just cleared the bases with a grand slam to give the Cubs a 7-0 lead, which should be more than enough tonight. For some reason the Cubs just don't hit grand slams when I watch, so it was nice to actually see this one live. I have still never seen them do it in person in the over 40 Cubs games I have been to in my lifetime.

SNG Success

2004-08-21T23:00:00.000-05:00

I just finished a $5 SNG on Party, rising from the dead to finish third in a tournament I had no business making the money in. In the roughly 50 hands I was dealt (I didn't request the hand history so I don't know for sure), I did not get one single pocket pair. Statistically I should get one once every 13 hands (correct me if I'm wrong), but never even saw big slick either. My best hand early was KJ suited, and I made questionable all-in plays with KQ and A10. With five people left, the hand that saved me and put me in the money was when I was in MP with about T450, and the blinds were at 50/100 (I think). I saw K10 and decided that this was as good as it was going to get, so after one player with T250 went all in and the next guy called, I raised to 400 (I should've just went all in there, but it didn't make a difference). After a rag flop, I went all-in and was called. Both of the others had Ax, which put my tournament life in jeopardy after a blank on the turn before a miraculous K came and saved me on the river, putting me at about T1350. This left four, and the guy that had called my all-in went all-in himself on the next hand, which I wisely stepped out of the way on, and got knocked out when the other guy caught a straight. So in a span of two hands I went from second-to-last in chips to placing in the money, though I was severely out-chipped at this point. I think I went out with KQ, but I don't really remember. I usually play conservatively in SNGs, especially early on, but I seriously had about 5 hands I played outside the blinds, and still got lucky enough to make the money. I'd like to claim that it was skill, but it wasn't. I any event, that makes me 2 for 2 in making the money in my last two SNGs, a streak I would like to continue. And if the pocket pairs are waiting for me tomorrow night in the Monty Memorial, I'm all for that.

I'm not even going to discuss the Cubs debacle from tonight. They went from not hitting, to storming back to potentially win a game they really did not deserve to win, to coughing it up in the bottom of the ninth. At least the Giants lost, though I would rather the Cubs had just lost this game 2-0.

Keep it Comin'

2004-08-21T17:53:00.000-05:00

If the Cubs' offense can keep this up for the remaining 39 games, the Cubs are going to cruise into the postseason on the heels of a 9-2 pounding of the Astros at Minute Maid Park, a stadium the Cubs have always hit well in. They've now won five in a row in Houston and have a very good chance of sweeping their second straight series in Houston with Mark Prior and Kerry Wood going tonight and tomorrow. And now that all suspensions have been served, we can get used to a Prior-Wood-Zambrano-Clement-Maddux rotation from here on out. There's not an easy series for any opposing team with this lineup. The Brewers next week get to face Zambrano, Clement, and Maddux, and then the Astros get Prior, Wood, Zambrano, and Clement. Things are looking up, and even though we can't reasonably expect the Cubs to hit six homers every game, one or two a game is not out of the question, and the offense seems to be clicking at the right time.

On to poker talk. I asked for and received Doyle Brunson's timeless Super System for my birthday, and, boy, has it made me rethink the way I've been playing. Though it was written 25 years ago, the chapter Brunson wrote about no-limit has not lost any importance or relevance. Everybody knows he preaches aggression, but it's not maniacal aggression. I have a few things I plan to try tomorrow night in the Monty Memorial, but I obviously can't divulge them here, not that too many of my competitors are or will be reading this.

The Air and Water Show is going on here in Chicago, and it means more tourists than normal down in my neighborhood, and it also means more people stopping on the sidewalk to try to see the airplanes that are screaming overhead. The fact that we're surrounded by thirty-story buildings all around would seem to impede the view of the planes, but don't tell that to most of the people on the sidewalk. Weekends like this make me look forward to January when visitors to our fair city are few and far between.

No Nomar tonight, he's just getting a day off, and I imagine he would be available for pinch-hitting if necessary. That puts Derrek Lee in the three-hole, and he is certainly capable of hitting there. Let's go take care of business.

Earl Weaver Would Be Proud

2004-08-20T16:46:00.000-05:00

I've always thought the Earl Weaver style of managing was too simplistic, and frankly, too American League. I mean, sitting around waiting for the three-run homer is no way to win ballgames, especially if the homers are not forthcoming. But this Cubs team may be tailored for the "two bloops and a blast" way of scoring runs. We know that they lead the NL in homers but are only 7th in average runs per game (4.7), but they do have good enough pitching to win games in this fashion.

And yesterday was a prime example of this. After the Cubs uncharacteristically scored a run in the first inning that did not come via the long ball, Greg Maddux immediately ran into trouble in the first, culminated by a Geoff Jenkins three-run homer to make it 4-1 Brewers. This was no problem for the Cubs, who used two walks and a Derrek Lee three-run bomb to tie it at 4. A Sammy Sosa solo shot briefly gave the Cubs a 5-4 lead, Aramis Ramirez untied a 5-5 game with a three-run homer following a single and a walk. And that was all the offense the Cubs needed. It's nice to see them hit homers with guys actually on base; that five solo homer debacle against the Padres last week is not the way to go.

In any event, there is reason for optimism as September draws near. Joe Borowski and Todd Hollandsworth are both set to return fairly soon, though Hollandsworth is still in his cast but has personally guaranteed that he will be back. It will be nice to see Borowski come back, especially if it's in his 2003 form. That will allow LaTroy Hawkins to return to his set-up role, one he is better suited for, and will allow Dusty to rotate Farnsworth, Leicester, Dempster, and likely Wellemeyer as the righties in the pen. It will be interesting to see who ends up on the 25-man roster on September 1st, because if I understand correctly a player must be on that roster in order to be eligible for post-season play, though the rosters do expand to 40 in September. My guess for the 25 Dusty would take to October are:

OF: Sosa, Patterson, Alou, Hollandsworth (assuming healthy), Goodwin, Macias
IF: Lee, Grudzielanek, Walker, Garciaparra, Ramirez, Martinez
C: Barrett, Bako
P: Prior, Wood, Clement, Maddux, Zambrano, Borowski, Hawkins, Remlinger, Mercker, Rusch, Farnsworth

This depends on a few things: if Farnsworth is healthy and not a head case like he is currently, and how Dusty would want to use his extra starter. That's really the question here. Most teams have an obvious fifth starter who does not get to start in the playoffs because he is not needed, but because of the Cubs' starting pitching depth, the Cubs aren't one of those teams. Clement seems to be the odd-man out because of how snake-bit he has been; the last thing the Cubs want is for him to start a Game 3 or 4 and wonder what's going to go wrong to derail him. Though Maddux does not have the greatest postseason record, you know he wants the ball, and Zambrano should be strong this October as opposed to last year. (Prior and Wood should be hitting their strides based on the time they've missed due to their injuries.) This arrangemet would allow Dusty to use Clement as a long man if necessary (let's hope not) or as some sort of specialty reliever. Though having three lefties might be unnecessary, Remlinger is more effective as getting righties out, and Rusch needs to be on the roster in some form or another. Plus the other three likely NL playoff teams go right-left-right much more than the Cubs do, so more lefties are necessary.

All of this is somewhat presumptuous, seeing as how the Cubs are still a half a game back in the wild card, but with a schedule that has the Cubs see the Expos six times, the Marlins six times, the Mets three, the Pirates six more, and the Reds eight more, things are looking up. The Cubs also went 19-8 last September to storm past the Astros and Cardinals. And though the Astros are currently at .500, the Cubs have beaten them 6 out of the last 7 and have generally handled them well this year. And I don't care if Houston has won four in a row; beating the Phillies right now is not an indication of much.

So it's Glendon Rusch tonight in a spot start necessitated by Kerry Wood's suspension. Rusch's numbers aren't sparking, but I think he'll have a good start tonight. He'll at least turn Beltran and Berkman around to their weaker sides. The Cubs go with Prior and Wood tomorrow and Sunday and avoid Roger Clemens, so they should be able to at least take 2 out of 3.

Let me state for the record that I don't hate the White Sox (the only major league team I do hate is the Mets, and I'm getting there with the Cardinals), but I'm sure not rooting for them either. You can stick a fork in them, though, as they just dropped two out of three to the Tigers at home. They are somehow only five behind the Twins, but they would have to pass the Indians first, and there's no way in hell they're going to win the wild card. For all the hoopla surrounding Ozzie Guillen, he hasn't done anything more with this team than Jerry Manuel had done last year. The injuries to Magglio Ordonez and Frank Thomas will be offered as excuses, but this team wasn't good enough with them. I didn't really have a point here, but I enjoy seeing them lose because of their fans' genuine hate for the Cubs and Cubs fans, most of which is rooted in jealousy and inferiority complexes. The Cubs weren't the Chicago team that almost moved to Florida in 1990.

This post has gone on for a while...so what else is there to say? I just spent a few hundred dollars buying my books for this semester. If there is a racket any more lucrative than the college/grad school textbook industry, I don't know about it. Students pay through the teeth for everything because there is no other option. All those websites that were huge about four years ago are long gone, and we're stuck paying what's on the price tag. I always buy new because I want to keep them, so it's partly my own fault, but I hate used books, especially if there's highlighting in it.

I'm almost finished reading James McManus' Positively Fifth Street, which has been good when discussing poker and not so good when discussing everything else. I didn't realize going into the book that he did so well in the tournament, and it's funny that the date of the final day of the main event, May 19, 2000, is a date I know exactly what I was doing: it was a Friday, and the Price is Right episode that my residence hall floor had gone to the taping of on May 3rd aired that morning.

I need to play some poker to get ready for the Monty Memorial on Sunday night, plus I need to prepare for my fantasy football draft on Tuesday night. I'm picking eighth, which is about one spot lower than I would like because of Ricky Williams' retirement. I wouldn't have drafted him anyway, but that just left one less premier running back on the board. If Shaun Alexander falls down to me, I would be ecstatic.

That's enough for now. ESPN Classic is showing Game 6 of the 1993 World Series, an excellent game in all regards and obviously remembered for Joe Carter's home run. I was twelve years old and I remember watching the whole damn thing. Maybe this is the year the Cubs make their own World Series history. If a Cub hit a game- and World Series-winning homer at Wrigley in Game 4 or 5 (remember the AL has home field thanks to Roger Clemens' crappy start in the All Star Game), I can't even imagine the delirium that would result. They would probably have to build a new Wrigley this winter because the current one would burn down. We can dream, can't we?

Aramis!

2004-08-19T14:45:00.000-05:00

Aramis Ramirez just knocked Chris Capuano out of the game with a three-run bomb to give the Cubs a 8-5 lead. This should be enough offense, but more runs never hurts. Let's go take care of it.

It's Corey Time

2004-08-19T14:08:00.002-05:00

Flashback to May of last year. It's the fourth game of a four game series in Milwaukee, and the Cubs are going for the sweep. The game is tied at two and it goes into extras. The 10th turns into the 11th, which turns into the 12th, and before we know it, it's the top of the 17th and I'm wondering if this game is ever going to end. I was in California at the time, and at work, but it felt like I was there through the wonders of MLB.com's Gameday. I'll never forget what happened when Corey Patterson stepped up with a man on and two out. If you've never used Gameday, it's somewhat nervewracking, especially last year's version, because all that showed then was "Pitch x: Ball put into play." What was it? A single? An groundout? Did the outfielders collide with each other and one of them is unconscious? But then the words "Corey Patterson hits a two-run home run to right field" appeared. 4-2 Cubs. Todd Wellemeyer struck out the side in the bottom of the inning in his major-league debut, and the Cubs swept the series.

(By the way, Gameday is much better this year. When the ball is put into play, it indicates what happened: out, no out, or run-scoring play. The only quirk is that sacrifice flies are shown merely as outs, which is true, even though I think they could note it as an out and a run-scoring play. Anyway...)

Fast forward to last night. My wife and I get home from dinner in time to witness Mike Remlinger uncharacteristically give up two runs to cough up the lead on Russell Branyan's second homer of the night. At that point I honestly did not think the Cubs were going to win. With the Cubs, I try to stay as positive as I can, but I was not optimistic. But Ryan Dempster took care of the ninth, Kent Mercker took care of two outs in the tenth, and Travis Phelps, making his first major-league appearance in two years, made the mistake of walking Ramon Martinez with two outs. On the radio Ron Santo made a fleeting reference to Corey hitting a long one, coupled with his mentioning that Corey had had a long swing that night. Cue the 2-2 pitch, which Corey promptly deposited into the bullpens in right-center, and the Cubs had themselves a 7-5 lead. LaTroy Hawkins attempted to make things interesting but managed to record save #18, and the Cubs picked up a much needed win.

I've always been a Corey Patterson supporter, even earlier this year when he was struggling mightily. He has the knack for hitting clutch home runs, and though he might not ever hit as well as .300, if he can manage to walk 50 times (he's at 34) and steal 20-30 bases (21 right now), he would be a viable leadoff man, because he would occasionally lead off the game with a homer, which is always nice, and he would be good for a number of doubles and triples.

I also really like Derrek Lee in the two hole, especially considering that he has already driven in four runs today, three of them coming on a three-run bomb to tie the game in the second. As I write this, it's a 5-5 game in the top of the fourth. Greg Maddux has left a few pitches over the plate, but the Cubs should be able to score enough to win this one. Hopefully.

Enough Cubs talk. I haven't played poker in a few days, though I did watch the first half of the WSOP main event on ESPN2 at midnight. I really like the way Daniel Negreanu plays; he had a tough time reading the newbies at his table and made some bad plays, but he didn't blame the cards, he blamed himself for getting knocked out. He seems like a likable guy who is friendly and doesn't feel the need to be an ass to everyone. Plus the fact that he had made a ton of money in this WSOP alone doesn't hurt.

I'm personally getting ready for the Monty Memorial on Sunday, and The Blogfather indicates that there are 75 people registered, which sounds like a good amount, and I know it's going to be a tough group to beat. I'd like to finish in the money, or at least collect a bounty for knocking somebody out. I hope the cards are friendly.

Anybody in Chicago today near the lake can't miss the sounds of all the jets getting ready for this weekend's Air and Water Show. It's pretty cool hearing them fly by (there goes one now), and nothing beats being at Wrigley that weekend if they Cubs are in town, like I was last year, because the pilots make it a point to fly right over the park and scare the crap out of the players.

Maddux just shut down the Brew Crew in the fourth. Top of the order coming up. Let's do something...Leadoff single for Nomar. Good start.

I Hate Comcast

2004-08-18T15:33:00.000-05:00

Why? Because my cable is out. Of course, my wife and I didn't have cable at all for about nine months between last October and July, but now that I have it I want it to be on all the time. Plus the Expos-Giants game is on ESPN and I'd like to watch it. At least my internet has yet to go out in the over a year that we have had it, knock on wood.

I have also employed the services of Haloscan for comments. I didn't realize that switching would cause me to lose all my past comments, but those are the breaks, I guess, and I didn't have too many. I like the box that pops up better than the way blogger does it. Feel free to recomment if you'd like since it appears my traffic has gone up considerably in the five-day old life of this humble blog. And if you've never commented before, I'd love to hear what you have to say. As you've probably discovered, I like to talk about the Cubs, poker, and TV, and in the future I'll be sure to talk about my fantasy football team (our draft is next week), the NFL (I'm a Patriots fan, it's a long story that I'll explain before the season starts), college football (go 'Canes, another long story), why tourists annoy me, examples of the CTA's incompetence, and anything else under the sun. You just never know what you're going to get here. But I thank you for stopping by.

Unfortunately, They Weren't Playing Hockey, and Why You Do Not Smite the Travel Gods

2004-08-18T13:50:00.000-05:00

Much like the poker gods do not like to be smited, neither do the travel gods. It's true in real life, and also on TV shows. More on that later.

First, however, it is unfortunate that the Cubs weren't playing hockey last night, because hockey is the only sport where a team can possibly be rewarded for not scoring (gaining a point for a 0-0 tie). While I am fully aware that the Cubs did score a run in last night's fairly boring 3-1 loss, this team does not play good enough defense to win 1-0 games. In fact, they haven't won one all year, to the best of my recollection. They've won a 2-0 game, and they were two outs away from beating the White Sox 1-0 on the 4th of July, but this team does not seem capable of winning a game 1-0. That's actually not that big of a deal unless the hitting goes completely down the toilet, which it did last night. I have no idea why Victor Santos has beaten this team three times this year. On top of that, Pat and Ron on the radio informed us that the Brewers were 9-21 in their previous 30 games before last night. Why do the Cubs always bring out the best of the Brewers? I'm looking forward to next Wednesday, a game I will be attending, when these two play their last game this year and are done with each other until 2005.

So tonight it's hard luck loser Matt Clement, who I think is going to flee the Cubs this offseason in search of more offense. He'd find it in Texas, that's for sure. Anyway, he's 8-11 with a 3.18 ERA (which would be second in the AL but does not even register among the top 8 in the NL), 0-2 with a 4.17 in his last three starts, and the Cubs are 10-14 in his starts. He does have a 2.33 ERA against the Brewers this year. Milwaukee is starting Ben Sheets, which would normally trouble me, but the Cubs have beaten him twice this year and generally hit better against better pitchers. Go figure. I won't get to see much of tonight's game, but that was the case last Wednesday when they won tidily, so let's hope history will repeat itself.

Onto why you don't smite the travel gods. On The Amazing Race last night, the ultra-annoying Mirna and Charla were particularly contemptuous after finding an airline that would get them from Cairo to Nairobi almost twelve hours faster than the other teams. Not content with this development, however, Mirna, first informed the ticket agent not to help the other teams because they were "violent," and then she and Charla made faces and choking symbols at the other teams as they attempted to get tickets. Long story short, all six teams got on that flight, M and C tried to find a faster connecting flight but had it blow up in their faces when it was delayed and they thus fell behind, and they ultimately found themselves eliminated when they came in last, probably thinking that it was a non-elimination leg. Thank God. I think all the other teams are happy about it too, but we'll just have to wait and see.

Onto poker stuff. I e-mailed Iggy last night to reserve my spot in the Monty Memorial Poker Tournament, which I encourage anyone who has not done so to do. You have until noon Thursday to e-mail him with your screenname. Usually $20 is too rich for my poor student's tastes, but it sounds like fun, and there are a ton of bounties to be collected for knocking certain players out. I also like Pacific Poker's timer on each player, which starts at 18 seconds and goes down on each action. Not much dead time in these games.

That'll do it for now. The Cubs need to win tonight, because dropping to seven games over .500 is not going to cut, easy schedule or not.

Family Guy Returns to Fox

2004-08-17T18:12:00.000-05:00

In another example of me liking a TV show that is no longer on the air, while I was watching The Simpsons (a show that is still on, though I don't watch the new ones for reasons I may explain at a later time) I saw that Fox is putting on a Family Guy marathon tomorrow night, with four episodes supposedly hand-picked by creator Seth McFarlane. I think Fox has realized that cancelling FG was a bad decision three years ago; it's a huge success on Cartoon Network at 10 o'clock, one of those cult TV shows that is actually good (unlike Twin Peaks or My So-Called Life, which were both vastly overrated). I think I read somewhere that it's the highest rated cable show in its time slot for males between 18-35, a group of which I am a member. Whatever Fox's motives, it's great to see it back on network TV, even if it's only for one night, and even if it does go up against the Cubs.

"Hi, My Name is Matt, and I Like to Watch Reality TV"

2004-08-17T17:13:00.000-05:00

That's mostly what this post is going to be about, but let me remind you that the Cubs and the Brewers go at it in less than two hours up in Miller Park. Carlos Zambrano looked great in his last start against the Padres on Wednesday and shut out the Brew Crew on July 29th, so a win should be imminent. I like general stats and that's about it, so you won't see any WHIPs or Adjusted ERAs or anything like that on this site; if you want that kind of analysis on the Cubs, I can point you in the right direction. Here's the only stats I like: Carlos has a 2.82 ERA (good for fifth in the NL and the majors, for that matter), is 2-0 in 22 innings with a 2.05 ERA in his last three starts, and the Cubs are 15-7 when he starts. That's all you really need to know. Let's hope Aramis Ramirez is back in the lineup tonight.

Alright. Back to the topic at hand. I like reality TV. I know some people think it is the scourge of humanity, how TV is dumber than it ever has been, and all that sort of crap, but with the end of my second favorite comedy of all time, Frasier, I have no comedies to watch. I like The O.C., but I just realized that I have class on Thursday nights this semester, so that's a problem. But good reality shows are worth watching. Survivor is one (another show I won't be able to watch on Thursday nights now), and this summer has brought another: The Amazing Race. This show is currently in its fifth installment, and I didn't watch the previous four, mainly because it was always on at weird times and I thought the concept was strange. But I started watching it this summer and have become hooked. Imagine what happened when I opened today's Chicago Tribune and found this article about the show (registration required; I know, I hate them too). Go ahead and read it, especially if you don't watch the show, I'll wait.

Done?

Good. Now I don't know who this Maureen Ryan is, but it's obvious she has never watched this show before now, or at least doesn't comprehend what has transpired up to this point.

She refers to Charla, who is quite likable, as a "Richard Hatch-style" character (a reference to the winner of the first Survivor). I have no idea where this comes from: Charla is not conniving, not manipulative, and is generally nice to everyone, other teams included. The fact that she is short provides some amusement in a light-hearted way, but other than that it is a non-issue.
She then, in her guide to the show, refers to Mirna and Charla as "the team to beat." I bolded this because of its patent absurdity. This team has yet to finish first in any of the legs and actually is at a disadvantage in any stunts that require running quickly. Mirna is bitchy, overly dramatic, conniving, and overall reprehensible; the fact that she is a lawyer shames me to no end. She accused Colin and Christie of being maniacs last week for wanting to hold on to a cab that they hadn't even paid for yet! Mirna thinks all the other teams are jealous of them (despite their lack of success, unless merely not getting eliminated is a success), and yet wants their help whenever they can get it. I can't stand her at all, and every week I root for their elimination.
She finally, in describing Colin and Christie, says that they are "most likely to have a blowup at a critical moment." Journalists are not supposed to just make things up, but that's just what Ryan has done here: I have yet to see any sort of blow-up between them. Colin is a bit intense, but he's also the best player so far.

So with six teams left, and this being a site about sports and gambling, I would like to place some odds on each remaining team winning the $1 million:

Colin and Christie (2-1): this is the team I would personally wager on. Colin plays like I would: he is great at logistics and is always looking for the earlier flight or the quickest route somewhere. They absolutely lapped everyone in getting to Egypt and finished the leg about eight hours ahead of everyone else. Of course the show brought them back to the pack, but they still finished first last week. They're really going to have to screw up to finish last in any leg.
Chip and Kim (3-1): in the beginning I wasn't impressed by them, but Chip can handle any of the tasks and is willing to help other teams out, which bodes well for them in the future. They've got a legitimate shot at it.
Brandon and Nicole (8-1): the dropoff is large from the top two. B and N are smart but spend too much time praying for assistance. God doesn't care who wins this race. They also have the tendency to get into little spats which can derail them. I personally don't think they're tough enough to win.
Charla and Mirna (15-1): Mirna thinks she's going to die by performing physical tasks (see last week's episode with her putting the goats in the boat), and there are a number of roadblocks that Charla simply can't do because of her size. Mirna also might get killed by another team if she keeps her bitchiness up. If this team wins I might throw my TV out the window, but they are better than the remaining two.
Kami and Karli (25-1): the identical twins bring nothing to the table, are quite adept at getting lost, and fight with each other all the time, but somehow they finish in the middle of the pack each leg. I don't see any way that they can win this though.
Linda and Karen (30-1): they're older and they're slow. They're also prone to injury. Unfair? Possibly. But these two won't do it. They had their money taken away after finishing last in a non-elimination leg and needed a flight delay to not lose last week. They'll probably be next to go tonight, but we shall see.

So that's my rant on The Amazing Race. It's on at 9 tonight on CBS, which goes up against the Cubs who are on WGN. Normally I watch the replay on Saturday at 7, but the Cubs are in Houston that night (they've played day games on the past five Saturdays), and I'd rather watch it tonight, hoping that the Cubs have things well in hand and I can watch them during commercials. Carlos is usually a quick worker, so they should be in the seventh by 9 o'clock.

I'm also aware (as ESPN keeps reminding us) that the main event of the WSOP starts tonight, but I already know who wins and I'm not really that interested in watching until it gets to the final table. I also remember watching the 2002 final when Robert Varkonyi won and hearing everyone say that this was the end of poker as everyone knew it. So I think people are getting a little too worked up about it; it's just a poker tournament, plus it doesn't necessarily crown the best hold 'em player in the world. Of course, it's one that I'd like to play in at some point, so I guess I'm not making any sense.

That'll do it for now, but I may write something after the Cubs and/or The Amazing Race.

I Now Know Why

2004-08-16T19:05:00.000-05:00

I was wondering the other day why I was watching the Olympics, and now I figured it out. I like to have the TV on as background, and usually sports are the best background. When the Cubs aren't playing and you don't want to watch the Cardinals-Reds game, there's no better background sport than swimming/diving/whatever sport NBC wants to show us. I think I need more of a life when my wife is at work.

By the way, the episode that reminds me why I love Seinfeld was just on: the one where Jerry's mechanic (Ray's brother on the overrated Everybody Loves Raymond) steals his car with JFK's gold clubs in the trunk that Elaine had overbid on for Peterman in an attempt to get back at Sue Ellen Mischke, the bra-less heiress to the O Henry candy bar fortune, while Kramer and Newman plan to take bottles and cans to Michigan in a mail truck to collect the deposits, and George has no idea what Wilhelm wants him to do for the Yankees. Just an outstanding two-parter. My wife already knows that the first two DVD volumes of this show are on my Christmas list.

Time for dinner, it's too bad I can't cook.

Ugh

2004-08-16T17:18:00.000-05:00

That's still how I feel about how the Cubs' bullpen stunk up Wrigley yesterday as they were unable to protect Mark Prior's three run lead after he left in the seventh. The thing that frustrates me the most is that the Dodgers never hit the ball that hard in the eighth, except for Bradley's double. Shawn Green's little flare to lead off the inning was hardly well-hit but I knew that it was a bad beginning. The Cubs have to do something to keep leadoff men from reaching in the late innings of close games; on Thursday the Padres had their leadoff man reach in each of the 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th innings, and he scored in the 8th to tie and the 11th to score the eventual winning run. You can't win games late by continuing to do that.

So the Cubs head to Milwaukee for the third and final time, even though it seems like they were just there (and they were three weeks ago, and three weeks before that). Then it's their final trip to Houston, followed by seven against those same two teams next week at Wrigley. In fact, they don't play another team with a winning record right now until Atlanta comes calling the last weekend. So all these games are winnable, if their sweep of the Rockies (a clearly inferior team) was any indication. I'm also thinking that I need to personally go to as many games as possible in the last month and a half; I mentioned that they're 10-3 in games I went to, but I failed to mention that the three losses were all by one run (you can look it up: 12-11 in 10 to the Reds in April, 1-0 to the Giants in May, a Jason Schmidt one-hitter, and 4-3 to the Phillies in July). I am going next Wednesday and Saturday, so expect the Cubs to win both of those.

Things are more successful on the poker front. I won my very first SNG on Saturday night on Party, one of the $5 variety. For some reason I knew that I was going to win, and the poker gods must have preordained it for me because everything hit for me. When I had four to the nut flush, the turn gave me the needed heart. And I went runner-runner to make a Broadway straight to take down three 10s. I personally knocked out three of the other players too. Now let's see if I can repeat it, though I can usually at least place in most of the ones I play in.

Today's $5 tourney on UB was a waste of time. I never got into any sort of groove, got moved twice in the first forty minutes, and was dealt pocket rockets twice in four hands. I won both, but I would have liked to save one for later on. My demise came when I got too involved against one player and wanted to take him down. It started with my getting a pair of 7s UTG. I limped in and everybody called. When I caught a 7 on the flop I hit my set, but there were two hearts as well. I bet and was called, but when the third heart came on the turn, I checked, planning to see what the other guy bet. He bet the pot (around T200) and I was pretty sure he hit his flush, so I folded. I'm pretty sure I made the right call, but I couldn't be sure; I was sure I didn't want to take a chance on pairing the flop for a full house in case he did have the flush. Two hands later I was dealth big slick in the small blind. I called after no raises and an ace hit the flop. I bet and the same guy called, and when a rag came on the turn I checked, intending to check-raise. He bet the flop again, and, thinking he was trying to steal the pot, I raised, he re-raised, and I too quickly called to go all-in. He had A9, and I thought I had it until I saw the chips pushed his way; that's when I saw the 9 on the flop. That was a stupid call on my part, because I usually wait for AK to hit me hard before I commit with it. Of course, I thought top pair-top kicker was good, but that's the way it goes sometimes.

Class starts for me next Monday, meaning less time to play poker, though I'll still fit in SNGs when I can. My summer has been too long as it is.

Finally, I want to thank Scott from Northside Lounge for commenting on my last post (I'm going to put your link up on the side, Scott). I've actually been reading Scott and Dennis for over a year now and have really liked their stuff, but I never commented on their site (I usually don't comment on blogs, and I'm not sure why). But thanks for the comment, Scott, it's great to have readers already!

And Show Them What They've Won...

2004-08-14T21:39:00.000-05:00

...a major league baseball game (I credit Kenny Mayne for this line, a man who should still be on SportsCenter because his catch phrases were actually funny). Let me digress on this tangent for a minute: the funniest "This is SportsCenter commercial was the one were Kenny Mayne was testing out new catchphrases for home runs. The payoff comes at the very end, when Mayne yells out "Yahtzee!" For some reason I think this is hilarious and should be used by somebody, somewhere. And now, back to what I was supposed to be talking about.

I decided to ride my bike to Wrigley today. I live right across from Navy Pier, so I'm just across Lake Shore from the path and it's a fairly easy 4.5 mile jaunt north to get to the park. Even though I can see the flag on top of the Tribune Tower from my window, and this could physically see that the wind was blowing out of the north, I chose to ride my bike anyway. But wind or no wind, I'm sick of riding the Red Line, especially on Saturday mornings for 12:20 starts. Two reasons for this: 1) the CTA obviously runs fewer trains on Saturdays, especially in the morning, and 2) all the tourists in town for the game seem to get on at my stop (Grand), and the train is usually full or close to it by the time it reaches the station. So it was a nice morning, I hopped on my bike, and proceeded to fight a 15 mph wind for about a half and hour before I finally made it and was able to use the Cubs' bike check service, which is a great idea and one they execute flawlessly. I don't normally worry about my bike being stolen when I lock it elsewhere in the city, mostly because I actually know how to lock it, but since I have a quick-release seat (and I really wish I didn't), normally I have to take my seat with me if I want to be sure to have it for my ride home. So the bike check allows me to not have to take my seat with me and not worry about the bike, plus I can avoid the crowds. It's great.

And so was Kerry Wood today. He personally shut down the Dodgers through 8 innings and even hit a homer in the third through the teeth of the wind. There's one play that won't show up in the box score or on the highlights but helped keep the Dodgers off the board. With no score and two outs in the second, LA had Alex Cora on first when David Ross ripped a liner off the wall in left-center. Fortunately for the Cubs, instead of hitting the ivy the ball hit the doors, and Moises Alou quickly played the hop and fired it to Nomar Garciaparra, the cut-off man. I was sitting just past third and turned to see if Cora was being waved in, and he got the stop sign just after the ball was thrown by Alou. I actually think Cora would have scored, because the throw took a nasty short hop that Nomar picked clean, but it would have been a tough throw to get him. He stayed on third, however, and Kaz Ishii, the Dodgers' pitcher, left him there after grounding out.

Kerry also brought the house down by striking out Adrian Beltre with the bases loaded in the eighth, finishing his day with 122 pitches (I think). Kerry is either dominant or shaky when I see him pitch, and he was certainly the former today. If he can pitch like this the rest of the season, the Cubs will be in pretty good shape. Of course, my man Mark Prior needs to be his 2003 self tomorrow so they can take two out of three before the schedule gets a lot easier the rest of the way. Plus the Cubs have now won 10 of the 13 games that I have attended this year, and I'm going to six more games. That's at least four more wins, one would think. My presence also means a short game; today's was 2:20, and the last two I went to were less than 2:30 also.

I never did play Omaha H-L on Party last night. I may go do that right now as I watch NBC milk the Olympics for all they're worth. I think men's gymnastics sucks, but I don't want to watch SportsCenter and the other NBC channels aren't showing anything, so I'm stuck. For some reason I feel compelled to watch the Olympics because they're only on once every four years, not that I remember the 2000 Olympics that well. I like the Winter Games better anyway.

My Title

2004-08-13T22:12:00.000-05:00

Some of you (assuming I have readers) who are not lawyers may be wondering exactly what "collateral estoppel" means. It has nothing to do with the recently released Tom Cruise movie (which was very good, by the way, but my taste in movies is somewhat odd), but instead is my favorite legal term for reasons I can't really explain. The irony is that it comes from civil procedure, easily my least favorite class last year. It basically means that litigants can't re-litigate issues that have been previously decided, even if the second cause of action is completely different from the first. It's incredibly complicated and I am not the right person to explain it fully, but it sounds cool and nobody knows what it means, so it's esoteric and an in-joke all at the same time. My wife can confirm that I have a strange sense of humor.

The First Pitch

2004-08-13T21:45:00.000-05:00

It's Friday the 13th, one week past my 23rd birthday, and I finally feel like I have enough to talk about to start my own blog. I would be surprised if anyone actually reads this because I don't plan on telling anyone about it, but it beats writing a diary, which reminds me too much of "Doogie Howser."

This blog is mainly about the Cubs, living in Chicago, poker, and law school, and not necessarily in that order. There will be plenty of other topics, so go with me here.

I haven't played poker since Tuesday night and was excited about playing in the Ultimate Bet $5 tourney with $1500 added. The full 1000 people entered, which meant a $1755 payday for the winner. I would have taken making the money, which would have required making the top 80. Long story short, I finished 310 spots away. I had around T1800 with 50-100 blinds and was UTG when I saw a pair of cowboys. I raised to 200 and was called by the guy to my immediate left. The flop had a queen as the highcard and had no flush possibility, so I quickly bet the pot. Much to my surprise I was raised, and thinking he had a queen I went all in, only to to see my imminent demise come with his pocket rockets. No king was forthcoming and that was it for me. The hand violated my rule of not going out of a tourney with a playable stack (I still had at least 15 BB's left), but I honestly didn't think the guy had rockets, as he merely called my raise pre-flop. Oh well, there's really not much you can do when you have kings up against aces. Mostly I was proud of myself for making enough money for the buy-in without having to make another deposit. I took $2.85 to a $.25/$.50 table with $.10/$.25 blinds, quickly saw K2 in the BB, and was more than happy to see a flop of K22. Checks all around after the flop but a check-raise on the turn made me six dollars, which I quickly pocketed and left to register with. These are the kind of accomplishments I am proud of in this stage of my poker playing career, which tells you a lot.

I'm going to see the Cubs tomorrow, and if they play the way they played today I might as well skip it. But they have won 9 of the 12 games I have been to this year, so they usually play well in my attendance. This will be my first Kerry Wood start of the year, the sixth Cub starter I will have seen. Here's a breakdown of the Cubs' record with each pitcher starting when I go:
Greg Maddux: 3-1
Carlos Zambrano: 2-0
Matt Clement: 2-2
Mark Prior: 1-0
Glendon Rusch: 1-0
Last year I went to see the Dodgers play the Cubs on a Saturday in August and Kerry left in the second inning (or maybe the third) with back spasms. I haven't seen him win in three years, coincidentally against the Dodgers in Dodger Stadium in August 2001. So I really don't have any point right now. I only hope Aramis Ramirez is back in the lineup tomorrow, because he always hits when I go.

I might go play some Omaha H-L on Party Poker now. I usually don't play that game very well but if I only play hands with A2 in them I should be okay.