Just a tease

I've got a biggums coming soon, but here is a quick TSTIHAD from TGWNA BFF Joe Morgan:

Joseph Feldstein (Stamford, CT): Behind Glavine, Maine, Perez, and Pelfrey who should be that 5th starter until Pedro returns?

SportsNation" height="11" width="24"> Joe Morgan: I really like Maine and I think he will be a very good pitcher. I think the Mets are going to win the East.

Honestly, if you're one of Joe Morgan's kids and you read this chat, you've got to be a little worried about the pops, right? Doesn't he sound like he's going to be forgetting where he put his teeth soon? (Correct answer: Wrapped around Frank Robinson's dick)

Anyway, I've been reading The God Delusion, and despite the fact that I'm only about 100 pages through after a couple of days, it's already beginning to adjust the way I see things (obviously not in terms of religion; more in terms of how I view people who continue to believe in things despite mountains of evidence that proves the opposite is correct). Here's another Q&A from the Morgan chat:

Muggsi (Newport, Rhode Island): Hi Joe, please answer a Tigers question for me. I'm curious about the work that Lloyd McClendon is doing with Curtis Granderson. He's not striking out as much (for now), and he seems to be a little more patient. But he always seems to be in 0-2 counts. Should this be addressed, and if so, will he become a better hitter because of it? Thanks for your response.

SportsNation" height="11" width="24"> Joe Morgan: He will be a better hitter with patience and and once he learns how to handle pitch counts. You do not want to be 0-2. I talked to him last season and he is a very smart player, and I think he will be a very good player. I think McClendon can really help him if they work together.

While this really is the perfect example of a Joe Morgan response to a question -- he doesn't actually ever answer the question, he mentions that he talked with the player at some point and has something obliquely nice to say about said player, thinks the player will be "good," and gives some unnecessary dap to a manager/coach that only Joe Morgan thinks is actually competent -- that's neither here nor there. What is important is that Joe's not alone in thinking that 0-2 counts are a product of poor pitch counts/discipline. While this certainly can be the case, I wonder if it really is?

That's a rhetorical question; I already know the answer. I'll write more about this, and other TGD-inspired perspectives, after I manage to get the other half of TGWNA the F off my couch.

On to things we can speak about with some measure of authority

While I understand Justin's absolute horror at the Kolb pick -- it was, simply, stunning (or: simply stunning; or: stunning, simply ... too many choices) -- I also think it's always a little crazy when fans start flying off the handle about draft picks before camp has even broken. Does this have the potential to be bad? Sure. But outsiders like us really know so little about draft prospects outside of what the talking heads tell us that it's virtually impossible to make informed criticism. Who knows? This Kolb kid could be perfectly suited for Reid's offense, and maybe they know something about Donovan that the rest of us don't. I'm not saying any of this is particularly likely, I'm just saying there isn't much beyond conjecture to go with here. So I'm going to take a pass on NFL Draft commentary.

What I do want to talk about is my new favorite sports franchise, The Golden State Warriors. Yes, my Warriors. I have inevitably become a fan of the Suns since I moved back to Phoenix, because there's no real reason not to; my love for the Pacers had more to do with Reggie Miller than it did the city or franchise as a whole, and living in the same city as a franchise this good and spectator-friendly is a little too much to resist. But the rub is that the Suns might be a little too good to captivate me, because I don't particularly gain any joy out of rooting for the bully. The Warriors, on the other hand, are like the Suns in every way except for two important exceptions:

1) They should not be beating anyone, particularly the Mavs; this is a team that barely made it into the Western Conference Playoffs, beating out luminaries like the T-Wolves and Clips for that honor;

2) This is by far the sloppiest, most street-cred-obsessed, blatantly anti-David Stern team ever assembled.

Honestly, tell me if there's one person on the Warriors you wouldn't take in a street fight? Have you seen Matt Barnes? My reflex has always been to back the "threatening" guys, if only because I get tired of the NBA's constant quest to pretend it's not a game that owes it's popularity en consummo to the street ball ethic and aesthetic. The quest began with the constant harping on AI's tats, and quickly extended to anyone who's not immediately appealing to corporate America's ideal of the grateful negro athlete. Sure, Carmelo might be an idiot, but at least he's somewhat genuine; in the span of two years and roughly 1,345 commercials, LeBron's gone from a marvel to just another sycophantic endorsement machine. Like it would be a crime if everyone didn't love him.

(Side note: Anyone else see A-Rod parallels popping up like crazy with LeBron? He's unquestionably one of the most unique and complete athletes, respective to his sport, we've ever seen. Each came into the pros as both extremely young and prodigiously talented, and hit the ground running. Both were serious contenders for the MVP Award by their second seasons. LeBron is likely to do Cleveland like A-Rod did Seattle. And both will end up, probably, being underappreciated when it's all said and done because they both come off as canned and disingenuous during public appearances, commercials, etc.)

The point is that my love of the Warriors has less to do with what they are than what they aren't. Yeah, I love Steve Nash, and Marion, and Raja, but those are the kinds of guys who wear sweater vests to post-game interviews. Amare might be the only Sun who could blend in with the Warriors, but even he's managed to tone it down a notch. Chuck learned the same lesson most of the Suns have learned: Phoenix isn't the kind of city that relishes the opportunity to witness the counter-culture. Remember the Stephon Marbury years for this franchise? Not many people in Phoenix do, either, because they stopped going to the fucking games, even though it remained a moderately competative and fairly fun-to-watch team in the bridge years between Jason "I done told Joumanna twice already" Kidd and Steve Nash, who's the most hardcore Canadian since Terry Fox, minus the prosthesis. But it's safe to say that Nash's bicep kiss in Game 2 was probably the most showing-out we've seen from anyone on this team all year.

Conversely, all the Warriors do is conclude frenetic fast breaks with wild shots, try to break defenders' ankles, and primp for the fans and cameras when they succeed. They're all attitude, and it's fucking great. It's even better that they're doing it all to the league's most annoying player, Dirk, whose general lack of human qualities has been put in clearer relief in this series. This guy was supposedly the leading MVP candidate? Please. He's as unwilling to grind as any superstar I've ever seen. The Warriors, on the other hand, are all heart. Contrary to what most commentators will tell you, you'll get about 10 times the hustle out of a kid from the streets (McGuire 2:17). The only exception to that rule is when they become so popular at a young age that the hangers-on tell them it's not worth it to try. But that's not the case with anyone on the Warriors; all these guys have been told, often multiple times, that they can't hack it. Davis, J. Rich, Pietrus, Barnes, Harrington, Jackson, et all., would tear their mothers' throats out if it meant they would get the respect they all think they deserve. Sure, that's not noble, but it makes for some seriously fun ball.

And, yes, I know this is like the 43rd team I've "liked." But it's the NBA; who gives a shit? I'll watch (and root for) anyone who does the complete opposite of what the Pistons and Spurs do.

To wrap things up, here's what today's TSTIHAD would have been:

Joe (Granger, IN): If it was your call, what would you do about the Cubs over crowded outfield?

Steve Phillips: The Cubs outfield is a real situation in that they have a number of workable parts, none of which really work in the positions in which they are playing. If Pie can play at the major league level, then he has to play center. Then I would have Soriano in left and Jones and right. If Pie cannot hit in the majors right now, then they have to play Jones in center, Soriano in left, and Floyd and Merton in right. That configuration plays three outfielders out of position, but I still think it is better than putting Soriano in center. The bigger problem the Cubs have is that they would like to go back to a twelfth pitcher which would mean Pie or Merton goes to the minor leagues. Merton has proved he can hit and deserves to be there, but Pie is they're only true center-fielder. It is a real mess. My friend Steve Stone, with whom I worked games with at ESPN, compares the Cubs' outfield with playing a round of golf with three 7 Irons and two 3 woods. You have pieces that may work in certain situations but they do not work in every situation; it is tough to win that way.

---

Jerry (TX): Do you think the Giants should unload one or maybe two of their young pitching prospects to land some offense?

Steve Phillips: No, I think that pitching and defense wins and they need to hold on to as much pitching as possible, because some of those young arms will need to go to the bullpen at some time this year. The Giants will score enough runs to win, the question is do they have the pitching to win. I think they will stay competitive all year, especially with the front end of their rotation. There is a lot of power potential in the line-up and they have some good "baseball players." I think you may see some impact this year with some of the good young pitchers they have.

Two straight Q&As, two completely and utterly horseshit answers. Beyond the fact that Phillips spells Matt Murton's name wrong three fucking times, he actually thinks that having three players playing out-of-position is better than having one. Then, to follow it up, he starts and answer with an incorrect truism ("pitching and defense wins"), and then states unequivocally that he does not actually follow baseball at all: The Giants are 27th in runs scored in the major leagues right now. Outside of Bonds, Durham and maybe Roberts, there isn't a hitter on the team who starts for any other NL West team. The "power potential" Phillips alludes to has amounted to 18 home runs (22nd in MLB) and a .390 team slugging percentage (20th). You can say a lot of things about the Giants: They are old, they are creepily former-Padre-heavy, they play in a gorgeous ballpark, they have exquisite gear. You cannot say they have power potential, because this is so clearly untrue that Michael Bloomberg has just tried to ban Steve Phillips chats for the public's protection.

However, Phillips did accurately note that the Giants have plenty of "baseball players," which is a relief for a team that usually fields a squad of "transgender marine biologists."

The Stupidest Thing I've Heard All Day, April 23

Guess what: It's from another Steve Phillips chat.

Dan (Philadelphia): Steve, is Brett Meyers ultimately going to be the closer for the Phillies? If so, what can they get for Tom Gordon?

Steve Phillips: The Brett Myers move is one of the most perplexing I've seen in the recent past. I understand Jonathan Papelbon moving to the closer's role this spring, because the Red Sox had three other potential aces. The Phillies aren't as lucky, and removing Myers from the number 1 spot in the rotation to pitch him in the eighth innning doesn't make sense to me. I know the Phillies have concerns about the physical well-being of Tom Gordon to handle the closer's role for an entire season. If Myers goes to the bullpen, he has to close. For instance, he came in and pitched the ninth inning in a 9-2 game. That's a complete waste of Brett Myers' ability. He needs to start if he's not pitching in critical situations. Gordon doesn't have much trade value right now because everybody interprets the Phillies' moves to be as much about the eighth inning today as the ninth tomorow. If the Phillies could trade Gordon for a proven, consistent, top-flight eighth inning pitcher, they should jump at it now. they could move Myers to the closer's role and have more predictability out of the bullpen. I just don't think that deal is out there.

First of all, while I may not agree with some very smart people (and dumb people) who believe the Myers' move was the right one to make, using the term "perplexing" usually indicates that there's really no viable explanation. There are arguments to be made (even some good ones) that moving Myers to the 'pen is actually a masterstroke. It depends; I'm thinking about writing a post about how it could be a great move, but likely will be mismanaged. But that's neither here nor there; what's important is that "perplexing" is overstatement.

Further, holding up an example of how the Phillies have already starting mismanaging Brett Myers out of the 'pen doesn't illustrate your point, asshole. Of course Myers shouldn't be out there in a 9-2 game, but he should have been out there sometime in the first two weeks of the season when the Phillies were choking away leads in the late innings.

Finally, there is a truly "perplexing" argument made by Phillips, here, that made me laugh out loud. Here is the argument, presented in order of chronological premises and ultimate conclusion:

1) Brett Myers is the ace of the staff: .47 VORP (Veracity Over Replacement Premise, with 1.00 representing a completely and verifiably true statement)

2) (Implied) Brett Myers, as the "ace" of the starting staff, is immediately also the team's best pitcher in the bullpen: .13 VORP

3) Brett Myers would only have value to the Phillies bullpen if he were the closer, because only closers come up in "critical" situations: -.99 VORP (a negative VORP like this one indicates that it's actually the complete opposite of the truth)

4) Tom Gordon does not have trade value: -.41 VORP

Those are the four main premises to the following argument, which have a combined VORP of -.80, which means that there is no possible way that Phillips could possibly reach a viable conclusion. Yet he soldiers on with this gem:

Conclusion: The Phillies should consider trading Tom Gordon for an eighth-inning pitcher, despite the fact that Steve just said that eighth-inning pitchers aren't all that important because they don't pitch in "critical" situations. Furthermore, Brett Myers, upon receiving the magical "C" tattoo on his left ass cheek, will immediately become a great closer because there's no possible way a talented guy could possibly not be suited to short relief roles after spending his entire career starting and he's put up numbers this season that make Russ Ortiz look like Walter Fucking Johnson but who cares about that shit because Myers has the "look" of a great closer, unlike Tom Gordon who I hate because he looks like a nice dude that wouldn't hit his wife on a crowded, public street.

Yes, Steve, it all makes sense to me now. Thank ye.

The Stupidest Thing I've Heard All Day, April 16

From John Clayton's piece on rookie quarterbacks:

Spread options aren't going away, and while this evolution is creating quarterback prospects able to do more things in passing offenses, it is hampering their preparation for the NFL. More and more, scouts look at tape and see quarterbacks taking their first running steps after they accept a shotgun snap.

That style fits the CFL more than the NFL, and as creative as offensive coaches might be in the NFL, defenses have too many fast athletes to be beaten with a steady diet of quarterback options. Ultimately, teams have to line up in conventional sets, run the ball and work the play-action game with quarterbacks. That's NFL football and it will always be NFL football.

Has Clayton (who I usually like, if only because he makes me feel 10x handsomer every time I see him on SportsCenter) been watching the same football league that I have? Because I could have sworn that the single biggest story in the NFL last year ran the fucking shotgun option on about 15 percent of his downs. Sure, the Titans didn't exactly become the Utah Utes, but I sure saw a lot of NFL teams get "beaten up" by Vince Young running right fucking by them.

More examples:

- The St. Louis Rams lined up 4- or 5-wide on most of their plays the two consecutive years they went to the Super Bowl.
- The Atlanta Falcons have been anything but traditional in terms of offensive gameplanning since Mike Vick was named the starting quarterback. The Falcons have also integrated some options into the ostensibly "West Coast" playbook, and Mike Vick doesn't play-action so much as run bootlegs and decide on the fly whether to pass or throw.
- My good friend would actually appreciate it if you told Andy Reid that he "has to run the ball," because good ol' Sacred Underpants hasn't gotten the memo yet.

There are probably a few more examples of "outside Clayton's box" thinking going on in the NFL, but those are the ones that come to mind first. So, we've now established that Clayton's wrong, or at least overstates his case.

But there's another thing that bothers me about what Clayton's writing here: I promise you, it's exactly the kind of shit that people wrote during the West Coast's infancy (Not to mention the infancy of any "revolutionary" tactical shift in sports [Moneyball, zone defenses, neutral-zone trap]). "That's always going to be NFL football?" Says who, you ugly son of a bitch? Say that to Bill Belicheck, and see how quickly Sweats laughs in your fucking face and completely dismisses you.

Believe it or not, everyone, the only teams who place themselves at a disadvantage these days are those who truly believe the "recipe" for winning NFL franchises is 50/50 pass/run splits, two-tight sets (how many teams even run a two-tight base anymore ... five?) and play-action passing. It's not that those things are wrong, or bad, it's that they're all ultimately personnel-dependent. I am relatively sure that if Bill Walsh had been handed Eric Dickerson, he wouldn't have come up with the West Coast offense. But he didn't have Dickerson, and rightly concluded that if he wanted to win, he needed to shake some shit up. It's fitting that in the subsequent years, the West Coast has gone from being an "alternative" offense to being the norm, so much so that you see teams forcing non-WC players into a system that clearly doesn't play to their strengths, which is precisely the kind of problem the WC was created to solve. But I digress; the bottom line is that you have to be an incredibly lazy thinker to believe that the NFL is going to remain static, not to mention believe that it's ever actually been that way.

Lastly: The whining we've heard from NFL front offices surrounding some of the modern college offenses is called "improving job security," Johnny. If they can convince the fans that it's "impossible" to scout a QB these days, then they presumably don't look so bad when the pick flops. I'm shocked they don't complain about how "short" the college schedule is, too.

The Stupidest Thing I've Heard All Day, April 12

Just in case anyone wondered what went through Steve Phillips' head when he made some of the worst personnel moves in the history of professional sports, here's an example of this man's line of thought:

(Re: B.J. Upton)
Upton is still raw and at times overly agressive while hitting. He's hitting .385 but has struck out 11 times in 25 ABs. That's a formula for failure--it's just a matter of time. I think the Devil Rays should trade Upton at peak value and try to bring some pitching back for their organization.

I doubt highly that many professional baseball G.M.s take time out of their busy days to read online chats by the guy who used to be their insurance policy against being the worst within the peer group. Well, maybe Bavasi does, but he won't count in about two weeks anyway. Anyway, here's what Steve Phillips has to offer on one of the most scrutinized young players in the major leagues:

1) He's still raw: This would make sense, as Upton is 22. Thanks Steve.

2) At times he's overly aggressive when hitting: This could probably be said about every major league hitter, with the possible exception of the laconic Bobby Abreu and the incomparable Albert Pujols. Everyone else gets out of line sometimes. This is not helpful analysis.

3) He's hitting .385: This is awesome because Steve, in the same sentence, admits that Upton's only had 25 at-bats. Twenty-five at-bats! Mind you, it is 175 doggy at-bats, so maybe it does mean something.

4) He's struck out 11 times in those 25 ABs: Again, it's 25 AB! STOP ACTING LIKE THIS SAMPLE SIZE IS INDICATIVE OF WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT FROM 22-YEAR-OLD B.J. UPTON WHO IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE AWESOME AT BASEBALL.

SORRY AB Sorry about the screaming.

5) The "that's a formula for failure" line: No, it's not. Again, let me pull out a list that's come in handy before:

NL

Dunn-CIN	194
Howard-PHI	181
Hall-MIL	162
Soriano-WSN	160
Bay-PIT	156

That's a list of the gentlemen who struck out more than anyone else in the National League last season. Also doubles as: A list of five of the most valuable players in the NL last season.

For the last time, everyone: Strikeouts are really not that bad at all. Provided you are good at hitting, a concept that is not mutually exclusive with striking out.

6) I think the Devil Rays should trade Upton at peak value and try to bring some pitching back for their organization.

I just want everyone to read that sentence again. I'll wait.

...

For the last year, just about everyone has taken turns stomping on B.J. Upton's nuts, because he hasn't hit quite like he was expected to and it's turned out that he couldn't catch a grounder off the bat of a little leaguer. He's gone from SS to 2B to 3B to possible outfielder and back to 2B this season. That many position changes would make Jenna Jameson's head spin. All the while, the Devil Rays have publicly wrung the franchise's metaphorical hands over what to do with this guy, like he was some kind of ticking, iron-gloved time bomb. Two days before Spring Training came to a close, they announced they weren't going to dick around with him as some kind of super-utility player, instead opting to stick him at second base, where at least they're used to having shitty defenders. The general vibe coming from Tampa is that the club is treating the keystone like it's a fucking quarantine island for the worlds biggest-swinging leper.

Then, to top it all off, idiot pundits like Steve Phillips won't get off the kid's ass for two seconds, constantly nattering about his strikeouts (no mention of that ugly .308 OBP he put up last year, though) and his defense, and referring to him as a giant disappointment.

Yet, his value is at its peak because he's hitting .385 in 25 fucking ABs.

When I started writing this, I was in a good mood and I wanted it to be funny. Now, I'm just really angry and I want to make a time machine and fly back in time and abort Steve Phillips.

(Too soon?)

The Stupidest Thing I've Heard All Day, April 11, Part II

From the Eureka! department of sports discoveries, ESPN's Fantasy Geek Rex Eric Karabell has figured out something that's been totally missed by, roughly, 15 percent of the baseball-watching population:

It dawned on me while I was watching Juan Pierre and Willy Taveras Tuesday night that these are not what leadoff hitters are supposed to be. Of course, they are fast, capable of stealing 100 bases between them, and they can cover ground in center field like few others, but do they get on base enough to satisfy their teams? Are they only leading off because they run fast?

It's entirely posssible that Karabell isn't writing in earnest, and is instead using the "dawned on me Tuesday night" bit as an easy way to bring readers into the fold. There might even be some saracsm here -- the ultra-rhetorical question to close the graf is hard to say without a straight face -- that I'm too dense to pick up on. I hope so, because if he's really spent this much time studying baseball statistics (even if only for fantasy baseball, a universe in which Pierre is something of a stud) and it's just dawned on him that the guy who's led the major leagues in outs three of the last four years might not be the dude you want to be giving the most at-bats on your team to (or the second-most, or sixth-most, or any) then he's quite possibly the most retarded gentleman in the greater Bristol area, and that's saying something.

Also:

I know it's early, but it's not like Pierre and Taveras have a track record of getting on base. I'd argue they are far more valuable in fantasy than real life because of the stolen bases. You know, steals aren't exactly a critical strategy in real baseball. Teams win without running all the time.

What's that you say? Karabell's in?!? That's it, folks: Nothing can stop us now.

The Stupidest Thing I've Heard All Day, April 11

Two things, actually. I promise, I'm going to stop pretending that Joe Morgan is a legitimate topic, but there are two of the single funniest, most obtuse things I've ever seen in my life. I am now convinced that Joe Morgan is functionally illiterate, and has his 7-year-old godson answer all the questions "because he knows about those newfangled eletrical keyboards."

Mike (St. Louis): Joe, can you share your favorite Jackie Robinson encounter with us?

Joe Morgan: I guess the one time I met him and had a chance to talk to him. I told him thank you and he smiled and said you're welcome. That's probably my favorite when we had a chance to converse.

I don't know why, but I can't get the image of Joe Morgan being soothed by his wife out of my head. It is a disturbing image.

And then, the most awesome chat response of all time:

Rick H. (Selah, Wa.): Do you think King Felix has a shot at the AL Cy Young this season? Or, will it be another year or two?

Joe Morgan: Dwight Gooden is the best young pitcher I've ever seen. He was better than all of them at a young age.

In the words of Alex Trebeck, "Simply stunning."

The Stupidest Thing I've Heard All Day, April 9

From this morning's Mets-Phillies game (a tilt on which I'm sure Justin has no small amount of things to say):

(Note: This is in regard to a Paul LoDuca groundout the inning before that moved a runner to third who eventually scored. This conversation takes place the next time Paul LoDuca is up to bat. This conversation is not verbatim, but it's pretty damn close. I don't know who these assholes are.)

Asshole in the Booth No. 1: "Stat-heads will say that's a bad play, but it's not a bad play! It ended up scoring a run! That's good!"
Asshole in the Booth No. 2: "They ("stat-heads") can go into their laboratory with all their stats, for all I care."
No. 1: "Well ... stats are useful for some things (emphasis his)."
No. 2: "Yeah ... they are. But you should also actually watch the game (emphasis mine). You need a feel for the game."

There are so many parts of this exchange that are so insulting to our evolutionary ancestors that it's actually quite remarkable. Tragically, the "actually watching games" thing seems to be a common conceit among those who feel threatened by the encroachment of numbers, computers and critical thought into the once-virginal halls of The Way Things Are Done In Baseball. I just love thinking about a bunch of geeks who spend their entire lives breaking down statistics to prove that conventional baseball wisdom is silly, but adamantly refuse to watch an actual game because it's too boring, or they think it will somehow ruin their ability to view the game objectively.

The Stupidest Thing I've Heard All Day, April 6

I've been knocking around different things to do with the blog that don't involve vitriolic opposing record reviews ("You don't know a pan flute from your ass, cuntbag!") or sabermetric rants that serve to do nothing but anger the traditional sportswriters in our growing audience who still stand by Bartolo Colon as the AL's Cy Young Award winner in '05 and think that A-Rod isn't "clutch" enough (I think it's because of all the standard definition TV they watch).

Not that any of that stuff is going away, mind you ... I just wanted to add something to the mix.

So, I'm breaking out the first regular TGWNA staple: "The Stupidest Thing I've Heard All Day," which will be essentially a short-form (who am I kidding? "Run-on" form is more like it) criticism of something dumb that I've either heard or read that day. If it's a slow news day, I may dig in the archives, but with baseball back in full swing, there should be no shortage of moronic, uninformed quotes floating around the interweb for me to take my rudderless frustration on.

If you have read or heard something dumb that you would like the Diesel to comment on, feel free to drop me an e-mail at createyourownfuckingblog@gmail.com. Name and town, please, if you wish to make it on the air.

Without further adoo ado adieu needless pause, here's the inaugural entry, from today's season-opening Joe Morgan chat.

Brent S. (fjm): what are your thoughts on josh hamiltons comeback story?

SportsNation" height="11" width="24"> Joe Morgan: I think it's great that a guy can straighten his life out and try to move forward. I'm not sure baseball is the right place for that. My first thought is that he's been out of the game for three years, due to substance abuse and I worry because there were so many other players in the minor leagues at the time trying to make the big leagues and doing all the right things and he has jumped over them. No matter what we say, he's taken someone's place who was trying to get to the big leagues. I always pull for guys trying to get their lives straight, but playing in the big leagues is a privilege, not a right. As happy as I am for him, I feel bad for some player that is in the minors and doing all the right things and not get a chance in the big leagues.

SportsNation" height="11" width="24"> Joe Morgan: All that said, let's hope that he can keep his life together this time.

SportsNation" height="11" width="24"> Joe Morgan: Baseball has had some disappointments from players in the past that its given several chances to and it hasn't panned. Maybe he should have started in AAA to prove he deserved to be in the big leagues.

It's worth noting that this is a question from an FJM fan, so it's clearly meant to induce Joe into saying something dumb, like we can't talk about Josh Hamilton because he hasn't won a World Series yet. But that's irrelevant, because Joe says dumb things all the time without provocation.

What is relevant is that this response brought into relief what it was about all the Josh Hamilton hand-wringing that bothered me this spring, beyond simple overexposure. Everyone who wrote about this guy seemed to do so while wincing (get it?!?); it's like they understood the attractive (if not cliché) angle here was redemption, but what they really wanted to say was, "I hope he fails because he did drugs and wasted his talent and I wish I would have had the talent because I really love baseball and would never have wasted it like him." I think this concept of, "What I wouldn't do for ..." is a big part of the motivation for those around baseball, whether it be people in the administration, sportswriters, bloggers or casual fans. Baseball is the one game we could all see ourselves, in some way, playing, and that's why we love it so much. When someone like Hamilton comes around, the rest of us are perplexed. Why would he ruin his shot to be the best baseball player alive? It's like kicking Charlize Theron out of bed after stalking her for six months and finally getting her to agree to a date. But what those people never seem to understand is that no one can stalk Theron and actually convince her to go out on a date, not to mention bed her afterward. You're either born with the goods to get in them drahs, or you ain't. That the rest of us aren't is, I suppose, the inherent unfairness of nature, and means we're probably going to have to bust our ass for every piece of trim we get.

Josh Hamilton, in truth, never had to work for his talent. There's never been more definitive proof of this than Spring Training 2007, when he came back after three years of playing essentially no baseball and started beating the living shit out of AAAA pitching. When the laptops opened up everyday, I think most sportswriters felt like they had an angel/devil dichotomy; the story they wanted to write was that Hamilton's success made it all the more galling that he ever started with the drugs in the first place, but the story they eventually wrote was how nice it was to see this heavily tattooed man play the game he loves again under bright blue skies and the sounds of spring. Mercifully, most of the hacks who took aim at this story weren't good enough craftsmen to compel us to go more than three paragraphs with this tripe. But the undercurrent was enough to unsettle even the most obtuse of readers; you could tell that deep-down, they wanted this guy to continue being punished for turning his back on what every single on of them would kill to have.

So, I at least respect Joe for coming out and saying it. But that doesn't mean it isn't, still, total horseshit.

Bottom line, folks (and I'm looking at you, Emmy-award winning fuckstick): Sports are not fair. Stop pretending they are. Stop acting like there's a single manager in the country who would rather have Eckstein than Jeter, Tejada, Ramirez or Rollins. Scrap makes for great, clichéd stories, but talent is what wins ballgames. Josh Hamilton, astonishingly, has enough talent that he's still good enough to make a major league roster after spending three years out of baseball and even longer than that hooked on dope. Whatever Reds farmhand got denied a spot on the 25-man roster because of Hamilton -- maybe even a stud like Joey Votto -- got denied it because the prospect of losing Hamilton to the Devil Rays had more downside than leaving a prospect in the minors until the inevitable Scott Hatteberg injury prompts a call-up. If any of those prospects, Joe, were a better option for the team, Hamilton would be back in Durham right now. So stop it with the "doing the right things" crap; they obviously weren't doing enough of the most important thing, which is being better at baseball than Josh Hamilton is.

Also, do some fucking research: The Reds would have lost Hamilton if they didn't keep him on the major league roster. Aren't you supposed to be a baseball expert?