Summertime

I'm going to take a break from attacking everyone's heroes (firefighters, Cal Ripken Jr.) to discuss something far less substantial: the summer TV lineup. I've been watching a few shows after May sweeps ended, and I can actually tell you that unlike every year since television began existing, this year's summer television programming is awesome. Or what I just said was a total lie. That's possible too.

Top Chef: They've aired a few episodes of Season 3, and it really looks like the caliber of chefs is significantly above least season's debacle. A basic problem of any food-oriented show is that you never get to eat any food yourself, so from a television standpoint, the emphasis has to be on appearances, and how aesthetically pleasing the plates are. Last season had a bunch of cooks who maybe made tasty food, but it looked mediocre onscreen. (It probably tasted mediocre too, but I'm trying to be nice.) As in any competitive reality show, it's a little early to tell, but things are promising.


Real World/Road Rules Challenge Inferno 3: Julius and I might be the only people who watch this preposterously named show, which is winding up next week, but know this - Derrick is on the verge of winning his first Challenge ever, as he enters the final mission with a strongly favored team of Steroid Abe, Kenny, Ev (that's a man), in-shape Tonya, and Janelle. After crushing last-minute losses in Inferno 2, Gauntlet 2, The Duel and Fresh Meat, it appears that Derrick's time may have arrived. In a year when Peyton Manning won a Super Bowl, it would be only fitting for Derrick to finally win a Real World/Road Rules Challenge. 2007 - the year of the loser. Has a nice ring to it.

Last Comic Standing: I tried watching this, and a few jokes made me laugh, but I found it very hard to care. I doubt I'll tune in again, I hate watching the personal lives of comedians anyways, they all think they're tortured souls or something.

On the Lot: Rob told me to start watching this. It wasn't a very good idea. The premise of this (film directors compete American Idol style, filming short films which America votes on) is actually not bad, but the execution is horrible. The studio host is bad, the judges make no sense, and I haven't been altogether impressed with the quality of short films many of these directors are making. It isn't a bad show to TiVo though, because you can FF through all the fluff and just watch the shorts. This would be perfect, except a lot of the shorts are very mediocre.

National Bingo Night: Just kidding....or AM I?? But seriously, no, I don't watch this/know what it is exactly.

Age of Love: Surely you've seen NBC promos for this - former tennis pro Mark Philippoussis, age 30, dates a basket of women in their 40s and a group of women in their 20s. Cougars vs. kittens. (NBC's line, not mine). The premiere was pretty funny, just seeing Philippoussis react to 40-year old women, but this show takes itself sort of seriously (people cry quite a bit), so I think I'm going to stop watching. I do like that when he eliminates a woman, his closing line is "Can I give you a hug?" I love it - I'm going to start saying that whenever I break bad news to anyone. "Oh man, sorry I crashed into your car...can I give you a hug?"

Also, Kornheiser was hating on Philippoussis on PTI, but the guy won 11 ATP tournaments and made two Grand Slam finals. I don't think people grasp just how tough that is to do - I'd say his tennis success is analogous to Stephon Marbury in basketball or Marc Bulger in football. He's no all-time great, but when he was healthy, he could be a real tough opponent. Nonetheless, his presence on this show is ridiculous and has to drop him down a few pegs.

Science of Love: I'm never going to watch this show again, but I urge you to check it out once before it gets cancelled, which could be any day now. Alyssa told me to watch - the premise is insane. A guy chooses one woman on his own (instinct) and a "panel of leading experts in the field of love" chooses a woman (science) for him, and he goes on two dates, and decides if he likes "instinct" or "science" better. I won't get into too many details because this show is so stupid, but suffice it to say, almost every moment of the show made me laugh uncontrollably. I'll spoil one highlight - the team of scientists is trying to engineer scenarios to "make" the guy fall in love, prompting the host to say awesome things like "let's see if science can make love" or "are you ready to make some love?" This shit is gonna get canned real fast, so add it to your TiVo lineup ASAP if interested.

Saving Baseball

Gene Wojciechowski casually references a notion in his recent column that bothers me to no end, namely, that Cal Ripken Jr. "saved" baseball. I don't know why this phrase became engraved into our sports lexicon, but the notion that Cal Ripken somehow saved baseball is ludicrous on like six different levels. If I were a better person this wouldn't bother me so much, but alas.

Supposedly, the 1994 baseball strike had everyone so disgusted with the greed of professional baseball players that we were all going to swear off baseball forever, until Cal Ripken got into the "saving" business. Clearly, the '94 strike wasn't fantastic, but baseball wasn't in dire straits as many suggested. Although it appeared that the NBA was the new force to be reckoned with, that league would soon learn that only Michael Jordan drew a 20 rating, even with a '94 final involving the New York Knicks. Hindsight is even clearer: the mid 90s would deliver a steady stream of body shots to the NBA - a decline in scoring led by excessive hand-checking, failure of would-be stars to reach their potentials, and, worst of all, rising perception that the league was full of thugs.

Of course, baseball's trouble wasn't only about the competition - stadium attendance was down. I'm sure there were a lot of fans who cancelled their season tickets for 1995 (and the numbers do bear this out), but they were coming back eventually, Ripken or no Ripken. The inescapable truth is that people love going to baseball games. Although a number of cities showed meaningful attendance declines, seven cities actually posted higher attendance in 1995 versus 1991. The attendance decline was further exaggerated by the 1993 introduction of the Colorado Rockies and the Florida Marlins, as expansion teams draw huge numbers initially, but quickly settle at smaller levels.
Baseball was never going to die.

I can put this even more simply: of the "Big Four" sports during the 1990s (MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL) only two continue to have a substantial percentage of white Americans in 2007. I'm confident you can do the math from there, and if not, go talk to a NASCAR fan.

I never understood what was so impressive about the streak. Baseball players have professional trainers, the best doctors, professional nutritionists, fly first class or on chartered jets, don't carry their own luggage, work only 8 months a year and get tons of days off. They make physical contact with another player once every 25 games and spend about 2 hours and 56 minutes out of a 3 hour game either standing in place or sitting down. When you think about it, the wonder isn't that Cal Ripken could play in so many games - the wonder is that all the other guys get hurt so freaking often. If you were to go play a baseball game right now with some friends, you would estimate your personal chance of injury at somewhere between 0% and 1%, with the only meaningful difference being that the tension on your body trying to hit 90 mph pitches is different from trying to hit 70 mph pitches. (As a sidebar, I just saw Derek Jeter have to leave a game after injuring himself trying to change directions quickly on the basepaths, which is pretty much what a basketball or football, or hell, soccer player does every single play every game. And Jeter is TOUGH for a baseball player!)

What separates Ripken from, say, Miguel Tejada is nothing more than pure chance. Well, except that Tejada is a lot better, at least versus Ripken at that point. Ripken had a '95 park adjusted OPS of .746, which is roughly comparable to second-half-of-their-careers Omar Vizquel and Royce Clayton. That was at least an improvement over '92 when he was REALLY mediocre, posting an OPS of .689. The logic in giving a .689 OPS guy 715 plate appearances is somewhere between dicey and really dicey.

In summary, we had in "1995 Cal Ripken" a guy who by chance did not sustain a major injury in a sport where you really shouldn't be having major injuries who continued to get every possible plate appearance at the expense of his team winning games. We were really lucky to have him around, because without this overpaid and overrated shortstop (he had at least 6 undeserved all star selections) we would never have been able to save a game that did not need saving in the first place.

It's A Magical World

Have you ever seen anyone taking roadkill off the street? I never have. Broad estimate here - I've probably seen anywhere from five thousand to ten thousand animals run over on the street in my lifetime, and never once have I ever seen anyone remove any of them. Yet they always vanish. Also, given my schedule and age, I'm often on the road late at night, so the "it happens when you're sleeping" answer doesn't satisfy me. I know that there are roadkill removal companies and services, but I think they are merely sham companies set up for money laundering purposes. (Anytime something stays in business longer than it should, I declare that it must be around for money laundering. I think there is a lot of that going on.)

After much deliberation, I have determined that the answer to this quandary is that there is a roadkill fairy, which is invisible, and removes roadkill whenever people are not looking. I have also decided that the roadkill fairy's name is Terry, which is good in this situation because it's a gender-neutral name.

Along similar lines, one of the things I've learned to block out living in New York are fire truck sirens. As a kid, if I heard a fire siren, I'd feel a palpable tinge of concern, and hope that everything was okay. But in New York, fire sirens are so common that any sense of worry has been completely numbed. I must see 3-4 fire trucks with their sirens on each week, if not more, yet I pretty much never see or even hear of any fires. I understand that small apartment fires might still necessitate the fire department despite no visible flames or smoke to outsiders, but I don't even hear people say "oh, there was a fire in my building this weekend". And I personally speak with at least 1-4 people in New York a day. That's a lot of people. (Granted they're often the same people. And I have an imaginary friend.) By my rough estimation, in New York, I've seen around 300 fire trucks with their sirens on, have heard of two fires, and seen zero. The disparity is ridiculous.

There may be a fire siren fairy, who turns on sirens for no reason, overriding the controls of the New York Fire Department. I'm sure that is the explanation and there are no other possible explanations, so don’t even bother to suggest your own ideas.

Where Are The F*$%ing Updates?

Sorry everyone, I don't know what happened there. The weather got warm, I started running in my spare time, I slept more, I had bouts of writers' block - it all added up to no posts, and that's just plain unacceptable. Well that stops now, and that's a promise you can hold me to. If I break it, there's really nothing you can do about it, but that's what I do best: make empty promises. That and the worm. I do the worm really well. Although I think I do it sort of incorrectly because my chest always hurts a lot afterwards.

So what else have I been doing during the blog layoff? There's been a bit of domestic travel - Vegas, DC, Northern California. I flew to San Francisco a couple weeks ago and had to drive to this tiny town called San Martin for a client event at a golf resort & spa. Even people who live in San Jose, Palo Alto and Cupertino had never heard of San Martin. I went on Wikipedia and learned it's fighting to gain official consideration as a town, which is just about the saddest thing I've ever heard.

I rented a car, and just went with the generic midsize sedan, but when I got to Avis, the guy said he only had two cars available: a Ford Mustang and a Ford F-150. Thinking it might be a bit awkward to drive a pickup truck to this client event at a resort, I went with the Mustang. How the hell do people drive that car? It's ridiculously jerky - I guess that's meant to give you a "sports car" feel or something. Just going from 0 to 10 mph practically made Sara vomit all over the dashboard. Sara kept making fun of me for how douchey I looked driving a Mustang - it really is a car for overcompensating. If you're not rich. Because middle class guys need to overcompensate too. And as we drove around, I realized there were tons of Ford Mustangs on the road. I'm not sure if that says something about society as a whole, or if I was just seeing a lot of rental cars since I wasn't too far from the airport.

Sara and I decided to kill some time and see "Ocean's 13", and Sara did the navigation to her home movie theater in Mountain View, which is on the short list for most boring cities in the universe. We exited the freeway, but there was no movie theater - instead there were a bunch of Google buildings. Thankfully we drove a little more, and saw a sign that said "Movies" with an arrow to the right. I turned right...and more Google buildings. So we circled around the block and eventually found another sign for the movies, telling me to turn left. Went left - still all Google. Google everywhere. I started to get scared, everyone was wearing Google clothes too. We eventually asked someone and found the theater - apparently Google employees are keeping a movie theater all to themselves, because the theater could not have possibly been a real business. The movie cost $7.50 - $7.50!! - what is this, 1991? The ticket they gave me wasn't even perforated, the lady at the door just rips it down the middle. Damn you Google and your underpriced retro movie theater. One day lightning will strike a computer that's showing a Google search and the computer will turn evil even though Google means no harm and we will all die after we are attacked by our computers. It's just like in the movies "I, Robot" and "Stealth". Technology is dangerous, and Google must be stopped. Otherwise we'll all die. Don't say I didn't warn you - it's pretty much a known fact that lightning causes technology to turn evil.

Okay, that's the update on me - more standard blog fodder to come soon. Really.

Stone Cold

I had to travel again for work yesterday, and arrived at the meeting site about 90 minutes early, so I decided to kill some time and go to the Coldstone Creamery across the street. As a sidebar, you know how if you tip them a dollar at Coldstone, they have to sing some kind of super-enthusiastic T.G.I. Fridays sort of song? Apparently in high school, James used to go to his suburban Coldstone Creamery, where he was the only customer and there were only like one or two people working there, and bring maybe 6 dollars, and just periodically tip a dollar for no reason other than forcing them to sing those stupid songs, which they did with furious rage on their faces.

Anyways, I walk in, and it's chock full of high school or maybe middle school kids and a few poorly dressed parents. In I come, on a lovely 75 degree day, in a full suit and tie. Pretty awkward - everyone had this look on their face like "Who does this douche think he is?" But what the hell, I already walked here - no 13-year olds are scaring me away. So then, picking up my briefcase, I walk up to the 16-year old cashier, resplendent in his acne and braces, and muster the straightest face I possibly could.

"Can I help you, sir?"
"Yes, I'll have a Cookie Doughn't You Want Some, please".
"Sure, a Cookie Doughn't You Want Some. You want a 'Like it' or 'Love it'?"
"'Like it' is good."

As I tossed my tie over my shoulder to avoid any ice cream stains, it occurred me that I'm rarely overdressed for any situation. The whole experience threw me for a little bit of a loop. I'm wondering, is it better to be overdressed or underdressed for a given, typical situation? Like, would you rather be in a Hawaiian shirt and shorts at a wedding, or wearing a tuxedo at someone's beach house? Annie said she'd opt for being underdressed, because it's embarrassing either way, but at least when you're underdressed, you're physically comfortable, which I think is a good way of looking at it. Eager to hear other thoughts on overdressed versus underdressed.

And in case you were wondering, my Cookie Doughn't You Want Some was tasty, but melted extremely quickly. It would have been a lot of wasted ice cream had I gone with the "Love It" instead of the "Like It".

NBA Playoff Thoughts - The West

People need to lay off this Tracy McGrady-never-got-past-the-first-round stuff. I know he's never advanced out of the first round, but I don't think that's really that big a deal. I don't buy the notion that some players are really good statistically, but the great ones "just make their teammates better". The guys who go deep in the playoffs? It's not because they make their teammates better - it's because they have better teammates.

There are really four ways a great player can "make his teammates better":

1) He scores a lot, commanding attention from the defense and away from teammates

2) He passes with imagination and precision, allowing his teammates to get better shots

3) He dominates the offense, allowing teammates to rest on certain possessions, improving both their offense and defense

4) He plays excellent defense, allowing his teammates to not worry about needing to double-team

How does McGrady fare? 1) obvious; 2) he's always been a very good passer, as evidenced by his 7.0 assists per game - if you play fantasy basketball, you know how impressive that is; 3) obvious; 4) probably the weakest part of his game, but in the playoffs, when not trying to rest his aching back, I'd say he's been a "good" defender, memorably shutting down Dirk Nowitski in Dallas for two games in the 2005 playoffs.

In the 2001 playoffs, McGrady averaged 34 points, 8.3 assists, 6.5 rebounds, 1.8 steals, 1.2 blocks with only 2 turnovers. There is no question at that point of "but did he make his teammates better?" He most certainly did. He did it by scoring 34 points and collecting 8.3 assists and 6.5 rebounds and 1.8 steals and 1.2 blocks. When you play well statistically, you make your teammates a hell of a lot better. It's just that when those teammates are Pat Garrity, Bo Outlaw, Andrew DeClercq, Darrell Armstrong, Michael Doleac, Jacque Vaughn and John Amaechi, you might still lose in the first round.

If the Rockets manage to beat Utah and advance, people will talk about McGrady breaking through, really stepping into his own as a leader. I prefer to say he was always a leader, now he just happens to lead Yao Ming and Shane Battier.

---

The Warriors-Mavs series has been the best first round series I've seen in some time, highlighted by the absolutely electric Games 3 and 4 in Oakland. Game 4, of course, was attended by Jessica Alba, whose boyfriend was a high school teammate of Baron Davis. You know, I think I sort of like Jessica Alba. Anyways, I haven't had so much fun watching a non-Laker team in a long time, and I really hope the Warriors close out in Game 6.

The upcoming Phoenix-San Antonio series looks like it's effectively the Western Conference finals - they both looked very impressive in their opening round. Amare has improved immensely defensively, and Phoenix has improved to a slightly above average defensive team, as opposed to the bad defensive teams of years past. They continue to yield a lot of points, but that's only due to their fast pace - per possession, they are playing decent defense, as a team with Raja Bell and Shawn Marion should. I think Phoenix's ability to improve their defense without slowing their offensive flow (versus when they play Kurt Thomas, and the offense looks a lot worse) will carry the day. San Antonio looks sharp, but my gut says this is the year Phoenix breaks through and wins the West.

NBA Playoff Thoughts - The East

Thought I'd jot down my thoughts on the NBA playoffs - we'll start with the East...

If you're not a fan of a specific Eastern Conference team, the conference is almost unwatchable, and frankly has been for like 7 or 8 years. An Eastern team may very well win a championship, but they play an unpleasant brand of basketball for a neutral fan. It's like a conference full of Baltimore Ravens.

You have the Pistons, whose devotion to fighting through picks and seamless switching on defense is impressive, but ugly. There's the Heat, who are fun to watch if you enjoy Shaq and Wade shooting forty free throws a game. Toronto is fun, but never on television. Cleveland is a disgrace to offensive play-calling - watching LeBron shoot 35-foot three pointers is pretty low on my priority list. New Jersey, once the most exciting Eastern team to watch, doesn't fastbreak too much anymore, and focuses more on Vince Carter in the halfcourt, which is exciting the one out of every five games Vince gives a shit. Then you have the Bulls, who despite being young and athletic, play Scott Skiles' ultra-disciplined system. At least this year we don't have to watch Rick Carlisle's Pacers - you know, I bet Skiles and Carlisle have both had the same thing for breakfast every day for the last 25 years. You could probably make a good buddy movie with them, call it "Carly and Sky". Two antagonistic buttoned-up, by-the-book accountants/free-throw contest champions have a bizarre day of wild accidental criminal hijinks. I'd watch it. If Jessica Alba is in it.

When Gilbert Arenas and Caron Butler went down, the East lost its most genuinely fun team, leaving only Toronto to carry that mantle. So I've been pretty disappointed that Toronto has delivered a general stinkbomb in these playoffs. Even the games they won didn't have the same energy and spirit that's marked the second half of their season.

Cleveland basically got a bye, Detroit-Orlando had zero interesting moments, and Chicago swept an injured Miami team easily. Sometimes I don't know why I bother to watch Eastern Conference games - as a neutral fan, I never come away satisfied.

Anyway, nothing's happened yet to displace Detroit as the odds-on favorite to win the conference. The Bulls might be able to, if Luol Deng has his coming-out party, but realistically I think Tayshaun Prince reduces Deng to merely a good player and Billups and Hamilton should frustrate Gordon and Hinrich. I could be wrong though. That's happened in the past.