Perfect Timing

I’m about to head out on vacation. And really, this couldn’t come at a better time. For the first time all season, I feel the need to invoke the Cubs Panic Index. In a very bass-ackwards way, that almost encourages me. Never did I dare to dream that I could make it to the 4th of July before I would need to make use of it. Still, that fact doesn’t actually lower the CPI any.

Due to the semi-remoteness of my vacation locale, the most I’ll be able to do is pop on my cell phone to check the scores, should I be able to locate an area with strong enough reception. I think we can all agree this is for the best right now. Don’t worry, my ball-playing boys. We’re just on a break. It’s not you; it’s me.

Unfortunately for my compatriots in blogging, they’ll have to do enough worrying for all of us. Sorry, ladies! Until next week…

Welcome, Derrick Rose

At least he wasn’t wearing a seersucker suit.

By not dressing like a stooge, Derrick Rose has gotten off to a better start with the Chicago media and fans than Joakim Noah did last year. Considering that no Chicagoan wanted to acknowledge even having heard of the Bulls just a few weeks ago, I suppose the 180-degree flip-flop into excitement over Rose gives us our storyline.

Given the 2% chance that it would happen this way, no one expected the Bulls to land the first pick. I mean, what would be more likely to produce a giddy, “ooooo…shiny” reaction from you: digging in your pocket and finding a $5 you didn’t know you had, or a $100 bill you knew you had? If you’re like most people (i.e., if you’re normal), probably the first. Then measure your excitement over finding a $100 bill you didn’t know you had versus finding a $5 you knew you had. Now the story is really building up steam.

I’ve also heard several people suggest that part of the excitement is because Rose is a local kid. Because what this story needs is something to tug at the heartstrings, right?

Nah. I think the reason for the excitment over Rose can be summed up in two words: Chris Paul. Or, if you prefer: Deron Willams. Those are the two biggest names in a crop of recent draftees who have proven all over again that a skilled point guard can go a long way toward revitalizing a team in just a few short years.

The Bulls have still got problems. Big problems, in fact. But if nothing else, Rose gives the fans a reason to pay attention. And that’s notable, especially since the Bulls failed to do just that with the outcome of their recent coaching search.

Congrats, Paxson et al. You lucked into this one. Now go make something of it.

Another Day, Another Draft

The NBA draft is quickly approaching.  I really can’t get very excited about it, even with — or maybe because — the Bulls are going first.  Beyond seeing where the one-year wonders end up, I’m finding it hard to get into the manufactured drama of the draft.  Will Rose go first?  Will Beasley or Mayo go second?  Does it matter?

The majority of players projected to go at the very top of the draft haven’t graduated from college.  So what difference does the age minimum make in the NBA? 

I believe the age thing has become a useful marketing tool for both college and pro basketball.  Trojans knew they had one year with Mayo, and Hoosiers knew Gordon would be gone after a year as well.  But both fan bases savored the numbers and star power, and coaching staffs use these players to boost their stock in the eyes of other one-year-wonder wanna-bees who are still in high school.  At the same time, the players can use their markets, college fans and the craziness of March Madness to boost their stock to both pro scouts and marketers looking for endorsements.  And struggling NBA teams can draw fans and interest with well known college names.   

Is the age limit good for the game?  I don’t know, but the brilliant minds behind the players are learning to turn the rule into cash.  And that keeps the industry going.

So whoever the Bulls take in the first round, just watch for how long it takes for that guy to appear in a local — or national — commercial.

Clean Sweep

My vacation last week spared me from the pain of the Tampa Bay sweep of the Cubs on the road.  But to get to mid-June without a 3-game losing streak is quite impressive, and the Rays have a very good team.  The road record is just below .500, but the current home record compensates.

The sweep of the AL Central division-leading White Sox was sweet.  It was everything a crosstown rivalry series should be.  Lots of long balls.  A close game.  A walk-off home run.  Great fan intensity.  Standout performances.  As “they” say, it is hard to sweep a good team, but that’s what the Cubbies did this weekend.  Of course, everything could go the other way next weekend, but for the moment, I’m enjoying the best record in baseball, the 14-game home win streak, the solid pitching and the hot bats.

Cubs Mania is Out of Control

Normally, I’m a local media girl. I like to stay up-to-date on the developments from around the leagues, but given the choice I’d rather listen to a local reporter who eats, breathes and sleeps my team and can therefore discuss them in excruciating detail.

However, with work having banished me to the road for the last few days, I’ve had little choice but to rely upon the national media for most of my sports information, outside of the few times I’ve been able to hop online and get a look at the Trib. I am left both amused and somewhat alarmed by how taken the national media is with the Cubs these days. Every episode of SportsCenter I’ve seen, every column I’ve read, every talking head I’ve heard—nearly all have led off with the Cubs.

I’ll grant that the 100-year angle gives new life to the always popular stories about curses and futility. I’ll grant that the crosstown series against the White Sox, also a first place team, adds a little luster. I’ll grant that homers, both of the walk-off and of the four-in-one-inning variety, make for especially flashy headlines. But at the same time, I still find myself somewhat dumbfounded by how far-reaching the insanity has become, given that we’re not even out of June yet. I am amazed by the way that every sports wonk in the country appears to be positively drooling over the prospect of the Cubs in the playoffs.

Come on, people. I’m as wheeeeee!! about this season so far as anyone else is, perhaps more. But perspective is a virtue. Let’s not forget that just a few days ago we got swept by the Rays (though, in all fairness, anyone could tell that series was coming at us like a Mack Truck with “disaster” written on the grill—for quite a few reasons). Let’s not forget that we’re still four games sub-.500 on the road. Let’s not forget that Carlos Zambrano and Alfonso Soriano are both on the DL with injuries that could quite easily linger even after they return to the lineup. Let’s not forget we’re still weeks shy of the all-star break.

Patience, people. Let’s pace ourselves with the hysteria, shall we?

Is Another Tiger Woods Victory Good for Golf?

I’ve heard it said that there are two kinds of people in the world: Phil Mickelson fans and Tiger Woods fans. I am an ubercasual golf fan, but I firmly believe this to be true. For the record, I am the latter. But today’s exciting playoff conclusion is just the latest in a string of tournaments in which Tiger finds himself against the ropes against an improbable opponent. And in these situations, even a Tiger fan must decide: is it better to root for the prohibitive favorite, or for the upset?

Point: Follow the general Life Rule: All things being equal root for the underdog.

Counterpoint: Are all things equal in this case? When dealing with the giant presence that is Tiger Wood, I submit that it may be practically impossible for anything to be equal.

Point: For many of these gentlemen, this is their one chance at taking the big prize. Tiger will have many, many chances.

Counterpoint: Golf is one of those sports where, at any given tournament, a superior player can have a travesty of a round or of a tournament, and an unknown can have a miraculous round or tournament. Chances are good that in most of his tournaments, Tiger will have a relative unknown nipping at his heels. If we keep saying that he’ll have his chances in the future, those chances may never arrive.

Point: Tiger is a gloryhog.

Counterpoint: For these gentlemen, simply playing Tiger competitively is a victory in and of itself. Whether they lose or win, they win. For Tiger, anything less than a first-place finish is roundly considered a let-down. Tiger, in a certain sense, needs the win more than they do.

Point: Tiger is a moneyhog.

Counterpoint: I was shocked to read that even perennial also-ran Mediate has made $13 million over the course of his career, just in tour winnings alone. Even those relegated to tour leftovers are doing just fine for themselves.

Point: It’s a better drama factor if the unknown wins. It makes for a more memorable weekend.

Counterpoint: In the end, Tiger’s historic run at golf immortality will be what we remember. It will be what we write books about, make movies about, and tell our grandkids about. The glow of an unknown’s victory fades in the time it takes to say “Zach who?”

Point: Competitiveness is what keeps the sports juice flowing, regardless of the activity. More competitive contests are to everyone’s benefit. That’s why all professional sports leagues and organizations regularly meet to create ways to improve the competitive balance.

Counterpoint: What makes Tiger great is the one thing that all those rule changes can never adequately account for: individual talent. Even if Tiger wins in the end (as he does more often than not), the changing cast of characters around him makes for enough drama. And the fact is that a Tiger win generates more buzz and more ratings for the sport, thereby drawing more young players into the sport, thereby increasing the likelihood that the game will remain competitive in the long run.

Counclusion: It is best if Tiger finds himself in a tight race, rather than stringing together victories in which he laps the field. But in the final analysis: Go Tiger.

Dear Cardinals,

And Iiiiiiieeeeeiiiii will always hate youuuuuu!

But you already knew that. So let’s instead start with something you don’t know: I kind of like you right now. I mean, like you in the like-you-while-still-hating-you sort of way.

Why do I like you now? Well, because you’re kind of spunky. You won’t give up. Even though anyone with two brain cells to rub together neither gave nor gives you any chance in the NL Central, you keep at it. In the face of a thin roster, injuries, and suspect talent, you remain undaunted. You pull yourselves up by your diminutive bootstraps and forge ahead. Ain’t you cute!

On a night when we beat the Braves 7-2 behind a complete game effort by our starter, you bested us with a complete-game-driven 10-0 triumph. Good show!

However, you also bested us in one other important category: injuries. My best guess is that losing Soriano will be less detrimental to us than losing Pujols will be to you. To cope with the loss of Soriano, we will have to leadoff with a guy who is hitting .322 with a .400 OBP, who has stolen 12 bases and strikes out just once every 11 at-bats. And we will have to fill his roster spot with a guy who was hitting .421 in limited duty, after crushing the ball all over the minors. And you will fill Pujols’ spot with a guy hitting .160 in AAA after being sent down due to lack of productivity.

Best of luck with that,
TheWittyOne

Hello and Goodbye

The Hello in question is the hiring of Vinny Del Negro as the new coach of the Chicago Bulls. I could be somewhat inclined to play the cheap card here, since his salary is a paltry sum. But the Bulls were allegedly prepared to make a play for Mike D’Antoni, so apparently the money was there for the right person.

So that begs the obvious question: was this the right person?

Eh. Who knows. But maybe that’s the exact problem. Plenty of first-time coaches have done well within a short amount of time. And plenty more have needed several years and/or several stints to get it right. And still more have flopped entirely. Where Del Negro fits—your guess is as good as mine, which is as good as anyone else’s. And it seems to me that, with the team young and in general disarray, uncertainty is exactly what we don’t need right now.

I was never high on the D’Antoni hire, nor was I thrilled about the Collins hire. So I can’t sit here and lament the one that got away, though why Flip Saunders didn’t merit even an interview is beyond me. And I’m excited that Del Negro’s style of play seems to point to the drafting of Rose, who I’d rather see in a Bulls uniform than Beasley. But are the Heat still interested in swapping picks for Wade? Or were they ever in the first place? If they are, please tell me where the line for that deal forms.

The Goodbye in question is Cedric Benson. I’m not going to congratulate the Bears for doing the right thing, even though getting rid of Benson is the right thing for many reasons. We can make an excellent case for dropping him even without appealing to his love for mixing alcohol with various forms of transport. But the high-and-mighty Bears have shown time and time again that repeated bad judgment is something they simply cannot suffer, unless you happen to deliver on the football field. In that case, come home—all is forgiven.

So I award the Bears no points for this one, even though ditching Ced Bens was the right thing to do. He obviously had no interest in becoming an NFL-quality running back, a loyal teammate, or an noble human being. He was bad, and he didn’t care. He was petulant, and he liked it that way. He was lazy and surly, and he saw nothing wrong with that.

Why would you want that on your team anyway? I’m wondering if maybe Jerry Angelo paid Benson to drink and boat and then drink and drive. Angelo couldn’t just release Benson outright, thereby admitting that this was his most spectacular whiff in a career full of them. So Jerry pays him to do something dumb and voila! Jerry gets an excuse to get rid of Benson without entirely admitting a massive failure at talent evaluation. And Benson gets to do the only thing he seems to have any interest in: go home and sit around with his piles of signing bonus money and think about how he made out like a bandit. A few million to destroy the Bears’ running game? Sheesh. I could strap on some pads and go out there and fail to gain any substantial yardage, and I’d only ask for half of what Benson got. In fact, I’ll bet there are some drunken idiots at Soldier who’d do it for another beer.

Am I kidding about Jerry aiding and abetting Benson’s nearly disastrous encounter with a pedestrian? Yeah. Am I entirely willing to put such a scenario past him? Well, I’d answer that, but Cedric Benson’s attorney advised me to keep my mouth shut.

Lovin’ Lou

I don’t even mind Wednesday’s loss. That’s how good things are going right now. During the win streak, we still had issues with an overtaxed bullpen and inconsistent starting pitching. So I’ll take a 2-1 loss that saved the ‘pen and showed that the inconsistent Ted Lilly still has some of his 2007 form in him, if only he’d find a way to call upon it on a more regular basis. Scoring one run is never a good thing, but we’re far enough into the season that I feel confident in saying that scoring runs will not be an ongoing issue for this team. And last night we avoided the momentum-squasher of a late-inning blown lead, thereby dispatching a nascent losing streak.

I also must point out that I love Lou Piniella right now. I love how grouchy he gets even after wins. I love how he still finds time to pick on all the things the Cubs are doing wrong. I love it because, (a) that’s so Lou, and (b) being ornery about wins is a luxury that only winning teams have. It’s just like how I love it when Lou says we shouldn’t “get too giggly.” It reminds us that there is actually something that might be worth getting giggly over. We Cubs fans have not had many a cause for giggles, unless it’s the laugh-so-you-won’t-cry sort of giggle. But maybe this year is different.

Lou can smell the history. He wants this as bad as any Cubs fan or player, maybe more. You don’t come back, at the age of 60-something, to manage under one of baseball’s most unforgiving microscopes because you’re bored or because you want to make a quick buck. This job is Lou’s bid for baseball immortality. In any case, he’ll be remembered as one of the best managers of his time. But if he is the manager who finally takes the Cubs all the way there, then his name goes right under God’s in the list of all-time historic greats.

David Brown has one of my favorite recent observations about Lou: “Lou Piniella becomes easily irritated by anything Jason Marquis does, and it makes for great TV. If it were socially acceptable for Piniella to knee Marquis in the groin during a mound visit, he would do it.” First of all, it’s true. Lou hates Marquis in the same way he hates Rich Hill, except that he was able to get rid of Hill but we’re apparently stuck with Marquis until a trade or a tragic slip-and-fall intervenes. But second of all, it reminds us of how heart-on-sleeve Lou is about things, often to infamous results. On the one hand, I can’t imagine Lou giggling over anything. He seems far too curmudgeonly for that. He’s seen too much baseball weirdness to give into the mistaken notion that the Cubs have anything in the bag at this point.

But on the other hand, recalling the man who threw a base and kicked a hat, I have to wonder if “don’t get giggly” is also Lou’s admonition to himself. He’s right in the same boat with Cubs fans in that he needs to keep his emotions from running away with the whole thing. Maybe he won’t get giggly, but I can see him talking to himself. “Breathe deep. Two deep breaths. Keep knee from involuntarily violating the space near Jason Marquis’ crotch…”

Home Sweet Home

That’s what Wrigley Field is for the Cubbies — home, sweet home.  Fresh off a 7-0 homestand, the Northsiders seem invicible within the Friendly Confines.  Not even a 7-run deficit could phase them.  That dramatic late-inning comeback with the Rockies in town was just one example of the magic at Wrigley.

But now, with more games on the road than at home, let’s hope the Cubs take some of that magic on the road.  They have been fun to watch.

Oh, and earlier I mentioned that the Cubs pitching staff knows how to hit.  Zambrano pitched very poorly in San Diego, but his 3-for-3 hitting tied the game…gotta love that!