In the second installment of FF Running Backs, I'll delve into the players I feel will break through in 2008. The following RBs will be enter the "Top 12" status:
Ryan Grant. Assuming he signs a contract, Ryan Grant will prove the 2nd half of 2007 was no fluke, as he ran for nearly 1000 yards in less than 10 games, plus a 200 yard game in the playoffs against Seattle. Grant will easily top the 1000 yard barrier this year as the full time starter.
Marshawn Lynch. This is not a surprse for most folks. What IS news over the last week is the news that the NFL will not punish Lynch for his hit-and-run accident a few months ago. With no suspension to worry about, expect Lynch to post a 1400 yard season.
Reggie Bush. I know the arguments - too small, quick but not nec fast, more a slot reciever, etc. To me, he looks a lot like Brian Westbrook. And this year, he may play special teams as well. If your league rewards for receiving, definitely consider him a first rounder.
While I didn't list him among the top 12, I would consider Laurence Maroney as a first round back as well. Maroney proved his worth to Belicheck as the season went on, and I think he'll continue where he left off from the second half of 2007. Most magazines have him pegged as a #2 RB. Draft him as one and reap the rewards of getting a 1st round steal. Again, you heard it here first.
My second 12 is as follows:
13.Maroney
14.Jonathan Stewart
15.Matt Forte
16.Willie Parker
17.Michael Turner
18.Darren McFadden
19.Kevin Smith
20.Rudi Johnson
21.Julius Jones
22.Earnest Graham
23.Thomas Jones
24.LenDale White
In addition to Maroney, I'm bullish on 4 rookies: Stewart, Forte, McFadden, and Smith. (If Willie Parker is injured, add Rashad Mendenhall as rookie #5). In addition, keep an eye on Denver's Ryan Torain and Arizona's Tim Hightower. Both rookies need only a bit of luck (or in Torain's case, the usual Denver shananigans) and they could be deep sleepers that give a "Top 24" value. As stated before, this is a good year to grab a rookie RB!
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
We're moving!
We're moving!
Esther has accepted an offer to teach 6th Grade Science in Culpeper, VA. So we are leaving Da Burgh as of August 1st.
I'll update the blog as more details emerge....
Esther has accepted an offer to teach 6th Grade Science in Culpeper, VA. So we are leaving Da Burgh as of August 1st.
I'll update the blog as more details emerge....
Friday, July 18, 2008
Fantasy Football - Running Backs, Pt 1
This week's FF column I will cover running backs - a position so important I've devoted two parts to it.
First off, use your 1st round pick on a RB. This is not negotiable. You'll probably read in various magazines about picking a QB or WR first given the increase in the passing game.
Based on 2007, the QB most mags will point to is Tom Brady, and the season he had. Well, if you've read my first FF column, you know what I think of Brady. And at this time last year you could have had him in the 3rd or 4th round! The QB I think will be the best this year in Carson Palmer is also going around rounds 3 or 4.
What about WR? You could arguably make a case for Randy Moss going in the first round. BAck when he played for Minnesota, he was regularly a 1st round WR. Frankly he's the only one I'd make that exception for, and depending on how your league scores points, he may not be as much of a difference maker as you would think. In fact, if your league scores points for receptions, he might not even beat out his own teammate in Wes Welker!
More than any other position, RBs provide the best security. It's much easier to predict how a RB will fare than a QB or WR. Remember at this time last year no one had guessed how successful Brady was going to be. Had you picked Brady in the 3rd or 4th round after picking a top 10 RB you probably won your league.
In general, here is how I would slot the top 12 picks, regardless of position:
1. LaDainlian Tomlinson 2. Adrian Peterson 3. Steven Jackson 4. Brian Westbrook 5. Joseph Addai 6. Frank Gore 7. Larry Johnson 8. Marshawn Lynch (assuming no suspension) 9. Clinton Portis 10.Willis McGahee 11.Ryan Grant 12.Reggie Bush
After McGahee, I'd consider a WR or even a QB (if you think Peyton Manning is your guy.). Note though, after McGahee you are dealing with RBs that have more potential than production, so if you had picked a non RB in the first 8-9 picks, you'd be dealing with more "question marks" than anything else.
The next column will be featuring which RBs will rise to "top 12" and "top 24" status this year.
First off, use your 1st round pick on a RB. This is not negotiable. You'll probably read in various magazines about picking a QB or WR first given the increase in the passing game.
Based on 2007, the QB most mags will point to is Tom Brady, and the season he had. Well, if you've read my first FF column, you know what I think of Brady. And at this time last year you could have had him in the 3rd or 4th round! The QB I think will be the best this year in Carson Palmer is also going around rounds 3 or 4.
What about WR? You could arguably make a case for Randy Moss going in the first round. BAck when he played for Minnesota, he was regularly a 1st round WR. Frankly he's the only one I'd make that exception for, and depending on how your league scores points, he may not be as much of a difference maker as you would think. In fact, if your league scores points for receptions, he might not even beat out his own teammate in Wes Welker!
More than any other position, RBs provide the best security. It's much easier to predict how a RB will fare than a QB or WR. Remember at this time last year no one had guessed how successful Brady was going to be. Had you picked Brady in the 3rd or 4th round after picking a top 10 RB you probably won your league.
In general, here is how I would slot the top 12 picks, regardless of position:
1. LaDainlian Tomlinson 2. Adrian Peterson 3. Steven Jackson 4. Brian Westbrook 5. Joseph Addai 6. Frank Gore 7. Larry Johnson 8. Marshawn Lynch (assuming no suspension) 9. Clinton Portis 10.Willis McGahee 11.Ryan Grant 12.Reggie Bush
After McGahee, I'd consider a WR or even a QB (if you think Peyton Manning is your guy.). Note though, after McGahee you are dealing with RBs that have more potential than production, so if you had picked a non RB in the first 8-9 picks, you'd be dealing with more "question marks" than anything else.
The next column will be featuring which RBs will rise to "top 12" and "top 24" status this year.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Passionate Spirituality - Introduction
One of the foundations of the church we go to is the concept of Passionate Spirituality.
In a nutshell, this is not so much a pursuit of divine experiences as it is an outward expression of people who have been pursued and found by God. Ideally, one lives in such a way that our lives cannot be explained apart from God. Committed to being full of Jesus and full of life, the desire is to no longer be seen as ordinary, but as extraordinary—no longer seen as passive or indifferent but fervent about the cause of Christ.
Rob Bell also uses this in Velvet Elvis:
"My understanding is that as to be a Christian is to do whatever it is that you do with great passion and devotion. We throw ourselves into our work because everything is sacred."
Rob references Colossians in this passage: "Whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus."
When a person pursues this passion for all it's worth, one can't help but be attracted to it. You see this all the time in sports (Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky, etc.). You also see it in music (Miles Davis, Beethoven, the Beatles, Mozart, Stevie Wonder, U2 - just to name a few). This excellence has a draw all it's own, but there's also a magnetism attached to those who are constantly pursuing excellence simply due to their passion for their chosen field.
When one channels this passion with the love of Jesus Christ, the end result is nothing short of miraculous in how it draws others to conclude it can't be anything other than Jesus. When one is commited to living a life extroardinary - no longer seen as passive or indifferent but fervent about the cause of Christ - this can lead to God being able to do amazing things.
As a musician, I've been fortunate to be able to live this life. I've pursued my passion for music and have been blessed with both opportunities and relationships. In finding and developing my passion, I live my life as an extension of a church where the believers are on fire, living prayerfully committed lives with joyful and enthusiastic faith.
Doesn't that sound like a church you'd want to be part of?
I'll be posting more thoughts about this next week.
In a nutshell, this is not so much a pursuit of divine experiences as it is an outward expression of people who have been pursued and found by God. Ideally, one lives in such a way that our lives cannot be explained apart from God. Committed to being full of Jesus and full of life, the desire is to no longer be seen as ordinary, but as extraordinary—no longer seen as passive or indifferent but fervent about the cause of Christ.
Rob Bell also uses this in Velvet Elvis:
"My understanding is that as to be a Christian is to do whatever it is that you do with great passion and devotion. We throw ourselves into our work because everything is sacred."
Rob references Colossians in this passage: "Whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus."
When a person pursues this passion for all it's worth, one can't help but be attracted to it. You see this all the time in sports (Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky, etc.). You also see it in music (Miles Davis, Beethoven, the Beatles, Mozart, Stevie Wonder, U2 - just to name a few). This excellence has a draw all it's own, but there's also a magnetism attached to those who are constantly pursuing excellence simply due to their passion for their chosen field.
When one channels this passion with the love of Jesus Christ, the end result is nothing short of miraculous in how it draws others to conclude it can't be anything other than Jesus. When one is commited to living a life extroardinary - no longer seen as passive or indifferent but fervent about the cause of Christ - this can lead to God being able to do amazing things.
As a musician, I've been fortunate to be able to live this life. I've pursued my passion for music and have been blessed with both opportunities and relationships. In finding and developing my passion, I live my life as an extension of a church where the believers are on fire, living prayerfully committed lives with joyful and enthusiastic faith.
Doesn't that sound like a church you'd want to be part of?
I'll be posting more thoughts about this next week.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Chinese Ghetto
This seriously has to be the funniest thing I've ever heard...
Many of you may have heard about the "Chinatown Buses". These buses are chinese-owned operations that take people from Chinatown to Chinatown, all across the Eastern Seaboard. It's a cheap option if you want to go from, say New York City to Philadelphia (a trip Esther and I have done).
Anyway, like any chinese line of businesses (such as Chinese Restaurants) the competition between the bus companies are ridiculously cutthroat. Each of them lower prices consistently. At some point one wonders how a company can even make a profit, the prices are so cheap!
Well wonder no more. This past weekend, Esther's siblings were in town, and Shaunia, her sister in law, was telling about a time when Esther's brother Harry was visiting Shauna when Harry lived in DC and Shauna lived in NY.
At the very time Harry was supposed to leave, he called Shauna and said he's taking Amtrak instead. Shauna asked, weren't you supposed to take the Chinatown bus?
Harry's response was that everyone was asked to leave the bus before it left. Why?
It was being re-po'd!
GHETTO!!!!
Many of you may have heard about the "Chinatown Buses". These buses are chinese-owned operations that take people from Chinatown to Chinatown, all across the Eastern Seaboard. It's a cheap option if you want to go from, say New York City to Philadelphia (a trip Esther and I have done).
Anyway, like any chinese line of businesses (such as Chinese Restaurants) the competition between the bus companies are ridiculously cutthroat. Each of them lower prices consistently. At some point one wonders how a company can even make a profit, the prices are so cheap!
Well wonder no more. This past weekend, Esther's siblings were in town, and Shaunia, her sister in law, was telling about a time when Esther's brother Harry was visiting Shauna when Harry lived in DC and Shauna lived in NY.
At the very time Harry was supposed to leave, he called Shauna and said he's taking Amtrak instead. Shauna asked, weren't you supposed to take the Chinatown bus?
Harry's response was that everyone was asked to leave the bus before it left. Why?
It was being re-po'd!
GHETTO!!!!
Friday, July 11, 2008
Fantasy Football - Rising WRs?
Now that I've posted a formula for QBs, can I make the same statement for WRs?
One that you probably won't find in most FF rags?
Sort of. A big indicator is if a WR who was a rookie or second year player is named the starter after spending the previous season(s) on the bench. Terrell Owens in 1997, Santana Moss in 2003 and TJ Houshmenzada in 2004 come to mind.
Another indicator is how they do in training camp, particularly if they are a rookie. Take Marques Colston. Drafted in the last round of the 2006 NFL draft, he fought his way up to be a starter and has had 1000 yards receiving in each of his first 2 seasons. He was also named a starter at the end of the 2006 training camp.
Now there ARE exceptions to this rule: Dwayne Bowe missed most of training camp last year and still had nearly 1000 yards receiving as a rookie. Still, who are the prospects to watch for?
Ted Ginn Jr. Drafted #9 to be the next Devin Hester, Ted found his first year to be a struggle, from typical rookie issues to a lack of QB (and team) stability. Yet a light came on for Ted at the end of 2007, and he found himself as the slot man by the end of the year.
This year, he moves up to the starting lineup where the increased opportunities alone will give him more chances. Add to that his special teams value (if your league counts points for that) and you have a huge sleeper for 2008.
Derek Hagen. Like Ted, he will be a starter for the first time, and he has had two years of NFL experience. He has shown promise at the NFL level from day one, and in a rebuilding year for the Fins could be a stud in the making.
The only thing that has kept him from taking the next level is his propensity to drop the ball. This was his kryptonite leading to his days at Arizona State.
Derek is someone to watch in training camp. If his "dropsies" seem to cured, grab him!
Devin Hester. Speaking of Devin, he is just learning how to play the WR position. Unlike everyone else on this list, Devin was a cornerback in college and so his learning curve is a lot steeper.
Already the best special teams player in the NFL, the Bears have been frantically figuring out how to maximize his talents as much as possible. Thinking they could have the next Steve Smith, the Bears have started to play him at WR last year.
So far, coaches are raving at how quickly he's come along. The current Bears WR corp is certainly nothing special so it's not out of the realm of possibility to see him start.
Maurice Stovall. Stovall is the classic "3rd Year WR" who is poised to break out in 2008. He is one to closely watch during training camp. If he progresses to the point where he is named starter you definitely could have the next Marques Colsten. Best of all, there's not much ahead of him that he couldn't start - it's not like he has to beat out Randy Moss and Wes Welker, after all.
I'd be wary however; Jon Gruden is typically unforgiving with younger players, so watch him closely!
Chad Jackson. Speaking of Patriot WRs, there is now an opening with Donte Stallworth gone. Jackson, a fellow 3rd year wideout could take this spot.
Granted, with Moss and Welker occupying the starting positions, Jackson at best probably wouln't crack 1000 yards receiving. And he does have to compete against Jabar Gaffney (who has a good rapport with Brady) and Kelly Washington. But this is the Pats, so you never know. And with teams scheming against Moss and Welker, you know Jackson will draw minimun coverage - if not the 3rd cornerback.
Anthony Gonzalez. Drafted to be the slot receiver for the Colts, Gonzalez has proven he can play at a high level and has earned Manning's trust. When Marvin Harrison was injured for parts of 2007, Gonzalez stepped into the starting lineup seamlessly.
Unfortunately his outlook for taking the next step in 2008 has nothing to do with him. Harrison is getting up in age, and the situation with his gun in Philadelphia may (emphasis is MAY) wind up costing him playing time.
Monitor Harrison's situation closely in training camp, and not Gonzalez. If Harrison is out for any length of 2008, Gonzalez rises to the top of this list. In fact, if Harrison misses all of 2008, Gonzales will become an automatic stud.
Whoever wins the slot position in Cincinnati. What really made the Bengals offense hum was when Chris Henry was healthy. Henry, who was talented enough to start on any other team, thrived from the lack of coverage with defenses doubling on Chad Johnson and Houshmenzada.
Right now the Bengals have a lot of in house candidates, all of whom are very talented. Especially the 3 WRs they drafted this past year.
As you can see, WRs are a dime a dozen. You can afford to "wait" on these sleepers until rounds 8 on, after grabbing your starters.
Sort of. A big indicator is if a WR who was a rookie or second year player is named the starter after spending the previous season(s) on the bench. Terrell Owens in 1997, Santana Moss in 2003 and TJ Houshmenzada in 2004 come to mind.
Another indicator is how they do in training camp, particularly if they are a rookie. Take Marques Colston. Drafted in the last round of the 2006 NFL draft, he fought his way up to be a starter and has had 1000 yards receiving in each of his first 2 seasons. He was also named a starter at the end of the 2006 training camp.
Now there ARE exceptions to this rule: Dwayne Bowe missed most of training camp last year and still had nearly 1000 yards receiving as a rookie. Still, who are the prospects to watch for?
Ted Ginn Jr. Drafted #9 to be the next Devin Hester, Ted found his first year to be a struggle, from typical rookie issues to a lack of QB (and team) stability. Yet a light came on for Ted at the end of 2007, and he found himself as the slot man by the end of the year.
This year, he moves up to the starting lineup where the increased opportunities alone will give him more chances. Add to that his special teams value (if your league counts points for that) and you have a huge sleeper for 2008.
Derek Hagen. Like Ted, he will be a starter for the first time, and he has had two years of NFL experience. He has shown promise at the NFL level from day one, and in a rebuilding year for the Fins could be a stud in the making.
The only thing that has kept him from taking the next level is his propensity to drop the ball. This was his kryptonite leading to his days at Arizona State.
Derek is someone to watch in training camp. If his "dropsies" seem to cured, grab him!
Devin Hester. Speaking of Devin, he is just learning how to play the WR position. Unlike everyone else on this list, Devin was a cornerback in college and so his learning curve is a lot steeper.
Already the best special teams player in the NFL, the Bears have been frantically figuring out how to maximize his talents as much as possible. Thinking they could have the next Steve Smith, the Bears have started to play him at WR last year.
So far, coaches are raving at how quickly he's come along. The current Bears WR corp is certainly nothing special so it's not out of the realm of possibility to see him start.
Maurice Stovall. Stovall is the classic "3rd Year WR" who is poised to break out in 2008. He is one to closely watch during training camp. If he progresses to the point where he is named starter you definitely could have the next Marques Colsten. Best of all, there's not much ahead of him that he couldn't start - it's not like he has to beat out Randy Moss and Wes Welker, after all.
I'd be wary however; Jon Gruden is typically unforgiving with younger players, so watch him closely!
Chad Jackson. Speaking of Patriot WRs, there is now an opening with Donte Stallworth gone. Jackson, a fellow 3rd year wideout could take this spot.
Granted, with Moss and Welker occupying the starting positions, Jackson at best probably wouln't crack 1000 yards receiving. And he does have to compete against Jabar Gaffney (who has a good rapport with Brady) and Kelly Washington. But this is the Pats, so you never know. And with teams scheming against Moss and Welker, you know Jackson will draw minimun coverage - if not the 3rd cornerback.
Anthony Gonzalez. Drafted to be the slot receiver for the Colts, Gonzalez has proven he can play at a high level and has earned Manning's trust. When Marvin Harrison was injured for parts of 2007, Gonzalez stepped into the starting lineup seamlessly.
Unfortunately his outlook for taking the next step in 2008 has nothing to do with him. Harrison is getting up in age, and the situation with his gun in Philadelphia may (emphasis is MAY) wind up costing him playing time.
Monitor Harrison's situation closely in training camp, and not Gonzalez. If Harrison is out for any length of 2008, Gonzalez rises to the top of this list. In fact, if Harrison misses all of 2008, Gonzales will become an automatic stud.
Whoever wins the slot position in Cincinnati. What really made the Bengals offense hum was when Chris Henry was healthy. Henry, who was talented enough to start on any other team, thrived from the lack of coverage with defenses doubling on Chad Johnson and Houshmenzada.
Right now the Bengals have a lot of in house candidates, all of whom are very talented. Especially the 3 WRs they drafted this past year.
As you can see, WRs are a dime a dozen. You can afford to "wait" on these sleepers until rounds 8 on, after grabbing your starters.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Iraq - We Have Our Answer
One of the themes of this election - one that was carried over from 2004 - is the idea of getting out of Iraq. Is there a timeline?
Both Obama and McCain have stated various ideas, in either agreement or disagreement with the Bush Administration.
Well now comes this from the news: The Iraqi government is requesting a timeline, a specific date out. The US, meanwhile, is hemming and hawing.
What?
Let me get this straight - we invade a country with no logical ties to al-Qaida, by announcing the war on TV beforehand we invade we gave Saddam Hussein time to cover up any links to WMDs, we had no consensus or allied support beyond England, we get a new government in place and when this government asks us to leave - we don't???
My father, the biggest conservative I know, was against the war to begin with. Even he had said - what right does the US have to determine who can rule and who can't? After all, isn't the purpose of the UN to be the world's police?
Isn't the purpose of this government to speak for the Iraqi people? In ways that they couldn't under Saddam?
Both Obama and McCain have stated various ideas, in either agreement or disagreement with the Bush Administration.
Well now comes this from the news: The Iraqi government is requesting a timeline, a specific date out. The US, meanwhile, is hemming and hawing.
What?
Let me get this straight - we invade a country with no logical ties to al-Qaida, by announcing the war on TV beforehand we invade we gave Saddam Hussein time to cover up any links to WMDs, we had no consensus or allied support beyond England, we get a new government in place and when this government asks us to leave - we don't???
My father, the biggest conservative I know, was against the war to begin with. Even he had said - what right does the US have to determine who can rule and who can't? After all, isn't the purpose of the UN to be the world's police?
Isn't the purpose of this government to speak for the Iraqi people? In ways that they couldn't under Saddam?
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Fantasy Football - Formula for Quarterbacks
Most people in my league knows I love running backs. The more the better.
This does NOT mean I ignore other positions however. Far from it, I do scout other positions - particularly the QB position.
In particular, I developed a formula years ago. This has allowed me to pick Kurt Warner off of FA in 1999; Jeff Garcia the following year; Carson Palmer in 2005; and a suggestion to a friend to get Brady Quinn last year (right team; wrong QB).
What is this formula? Essentially, it's the following:
1. A deep corp of WRs
2. A running game to at least keep the defense honest
3. An offensive head-coach/coordinator that likes to pass the ball
4. Success at the position/team during the last half of the previous year
5. Horrible defense
Some cases you have 4 of the 5 (Warner & Quinn had no experience beforehand; Palmer had a decent defense in 2005), but when you have all 5, grab that QB!
In 2007, two QBs stand out with all 5. Denver's Jay Cutler and Arizona's Matt Leinart will in all likelihood ascend to the "stud" tier of QBs next year. Feel free to wait until mid rounds to grab one of them!
In addition, sometimes the system is so good the backup QBs can succeed. Warner and Derek Anderson were the primary examples. Look for Warner this year, as well as Brady Quinn.
One special case is Green Bay. Favre had a renaissance year last year by "playing the system" and taking advantage of his deep recieving corp. Whether Favre comes back or Aaron Rodgers takes the throne in 2008, it doesn't matter - either QB will be a stud as well.
This does NOT mean I ignore other positions however. Far from it, I do scout other positions - particularly the QB position.
In particular, I developed a formula years ago. This has allowed me to pick Kurt Warner off of FA in 1999; Jeff Garcia the following year; Carson Palmer in 2005; and a suggestion to a friend to get Brady Quinn last year (right team; wrong QB).
What is this formula? Essentially, it's the following:
1. A deep corp of WRs
2. A running game to at least keep the defense honest
3. An offensive head-coach/coordinator that likes to pass the ball
4. Success at the position/team during the last half of the previous year
5. Horrible defense
Some cases you have 4 of the 5 (Warner & Quinn had no experience beforehand; Palmer had a decent defense in 2005), but when you have all 5, grab that QB!
In 2007, two QBs stand out with all 5. Denver's Jay Cutler and Arizona's Matt Leinart will in all likelihood ascend to the "stud" tier of QBs next year. Feel free to wait until mid rounds to grab one of them!
In addition, sometimes the system is so good the backup QBs can succeed. Warner and Derek Anderson were the primary examples. Look for Warner this year, as well as Brady Quinn.
One special case is Green Bay. Favre had a renaissance year last year by "playing the system" and taking advantage of his deep recieving corp. Whether Favre comes back or Aaron Rodgers takes the throne in 2008, it doesn't matter - either QB will be a stud as well.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Sports thoughts
Here are some various observations on the sports world (at least according to John):
Could Baron Davis save the Knicks? As many of you know by now, Baron Davis shocked the NBA by opting out of his contract with Golden State and then turning around 24 hours later to sign with the Clippers.
What does that have to do with the Knicks?
Interestingly enough, the media in the Bay Area have proposed an interesting solution: the Warriors offer Al Harrington (his contract expires in 2010) and a protected future No. 1 pick for Jamal Crawford and Zach Randolph?. If I were the Knicks, I'd jump ont this!
Harrington alone would be fine. Add a potential first round pick? Done and done!
Hossa.... what? When the Pens pulled the trigger on Hossa, everyone assumed this was a "go-for-it-now" trade, a deal to get the Pens the cup, and 2009 be damned. If the Pens could resign him great, but if they could not afford it, the trade would be worth it if they could get closer to the cup with him than without.
And that would make sense if Hossa signed a deal way more than the 7 million the Pens were offering in a 5 year deal.
But a 1 year, 7.45 mil deal with Detroit?
It makes no sense. Yes, the Red Wings are the defending Stanley Cup champions. Yes they could repeat next year. And yes, Hossa did say he thought the Wings were closest to the cup.
But the same logic could be applied to the Pens?
I've heard various theories, the most palpable one being that he wanted to wait a year and try his luck next year when the salary cap could rise (the last two offseasons have resulted in higher caps than expected) or try his luck with the new super=league in Russia who has more money apparently than Bill Gates. But if he was going to sign a 1 year deal, why not back with the Pens?
Say the Pens have a rotten year next year. You don't think the Pens wouldn't trade Hossa just like Atlanta did last year? Or any team?
As I am typing this, I see that the Pens have resigned Fleury. This after re-signing Malkin and Orphik yesterday. They have all the core players now resigned. All they need is a #1 winger. Hmmm, who would THAT be?
Brett - please retire. And I'm not saying this b.c I have Aaron Rodgers on my fantasy team.
You had the best season of your career last year since your MVP days. You were an intercepted pass away from the Super Bowl. You left as a hero in Green Bay. And - you have your health and body intact.There is no reason to come back.
You already have your ring. You don't need to leave like Mike Strahan or Jerome Bettis from two years ago. You have nothing left to accomplish.
Assuming you chose to retire for the right reasons, then stay retired. Please.
Could Baron Davis save the Knicks? As many of you know by now, Baron Davis shocked the NBA by opting out of his contract with Golden State and then turning around 24 hours later to sign with the Clippers.
What does that have to do with the Knicks?
Interestingly enough, the media in the Bay Area have proposed an interesting solution: the Warriors offer Al Harrington (his contract expires in 2010) and a protected future No. 1 pick for Jamal Crawford and Zach Randolph?. If I were the Knicks, I'd jump ont this!
Harrington alone would be fine. Add a potential first round pick? Done and done!
Hossa.... what? When the Pens pulled the trigger on Hossa, everyone assumed this was a "go-for-it-now" trade, a deal to get the Pens the cup, and 2009 be damned. If the Pens could resign him great, but if they could not afford it, the trade would be worth it if they could get closer to the cup with him than without.
And that would make sense if Hossa signed a deal way more than the 7 million the Pens were offering in a 5 year deal.
But a 1 year, 7.45 mil deal with Detroit?
It makes no sense. Yes, the Red Wings are the defending Stanley Cup champions. Yes they could repeat next year. And yes, Hossa did say he thought the Wings were closest to the cup.
But the same logic could be applied to the Pens?
I've heard various theories, the most palpable one being that he wanted to wait a year and try his luck next year when the salary cap could rise (the last two offseasons have resulted in higher caps than expected) or try his luck with the new super=league in Russia who has more money apparently than Bill Gates. But if he was going to sign a 1 year deal, why not back with the Pens?
Say the Pens have a rotten year next year. You don't think the Pens wouldn't trade Hossa just like Atlanta did last year? Or any team?
As I am typing this, I see that the Pens have resigned Fleury. This after re-signing Malkin and Orphik yesterday. They have all the core players now resigned. All they need is a #1 winger. Hmmm, who would THAT be?
Brett - please retire. And I'm not saying this b.c I have Aaron Rodgers on my fantasy team.
You had the best season of your career last year since your MVP days. You were an intercepted pass away from the Super Bowl. You left as a hero in Green Bay. And - you have your health and body intact.There is no reason to come back.
You already have your ring. You don't need to leave like Mike Strahan or Jerome Bettis from two years ago. You have nothing left to accomplish.
Assuming you chose to retire for the right reasons, then stay retired. Please.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Fantasy Football Part 2
In this week's installment of my Fantasy Football column, I'll tackle some questions some of you may have been thinking about in the offseason:
Has Eli Manning arrived? Starting in the final week of the regular season (which ironically is the end of most FF seasons) Peyton's younger brother went on an absolute tear. In his 4th season, Eli put the team on his shoulders and led the G-men to come from behind wins against the Pats and the Pack, while composing impressive wins against the Cowboys and Bucs.
So, has Eli become an elite FF quarterback?
Eli's run reminded me a lot of John Elway. Like Eli, he was facing unreal expectations of being a #1 pick in a quarterback-rich draft. Elway's 4th season was in 1986, where "the Drive" killed the hearts of Cleveland and took the Broncos to the SB.
As great of a season Elway had, it took him a few more years to be an elite FF quarterback - almost 8 more to be exact. He needed a head coach in Mike Shanahan to really take advantage of his skills.
Eli is in the same boat. Kevin Gilbride's offenses are known for a power running game and plenty of play-action passes. And the Giants led the league in rushing last year. I expect more of the same in 2008 - of course, with a lot less grief from the press.
Has Larry Johnson hit the wall?After a 2006 season where he set the season record of carries, Larry Johnson was heading up a lot of lists of RBs to take a fall. Sure enough, he was injured against GB and killed many a FF season (mine included). Has LJ started his decline?
No. For starters, the injury, a horse-collar pull, was a freak injury. The same injury happened to Adrian Peterson in Oklahoma, as well as Terrell Owens in 2004. Both came back just fine. Also, the injury (which actually was his foot) allowed him to heal completely as opposed to take a beating over a year.
Plus, LJ despite his age and recent usage, does not have a lot of carries on his body. He has only played 2 full seasons as a starter, and in college he played very little save his senior year at Penn State (note: Rashard Mendenhall has the same history. Draft him!). Michael Turner was lauded as a RB with little wear and tear during the offseason. LJ is also the same.
Add to that the addition to the offensive line, and I would look for a bounceback season by LJ. He may not post the back to back 1700 seasons of 2005-6, but I'd say 1400 is within reach, making him a top 7 RB.
Will any of the quarterbacks drafted this year make any noise? Unless Aaron Rodgers flops, no. Rookie QBs have historically struggled; the transition from college to the NFL is a huge one. Plus the teams that draft them tend to be bad teams.
Only Brian Brohm could break this trend with a young team in GB that made the NFC championship last year. Brohm is a very polished college QB who was deemed the most NFL ready as it was. But he was drafted as insurance for Rodgers who not only played well against Dallas, but has taken all the steps to be a leader this year.
Even the rookie QBs that play well (Trent Edwards last year, Ben Rothlesbuger last year) tend to not put up a lot of FF points anyway; their teams play conservatively. Expect the same for all of them, Brohm included.
Does Mike Martz = Fantasy fireworks?We know his history. Martz turned St Louis into the Greatest Show On Turf. What he did in Detroit may have been even more impressive as journeyman QB John Kitna averaged 4000 yards passing and Mike Furrey (who?) had 98 catches in 2006.
Can he do the same in SF? It's possible. Martz raves about Alex Smith, whos intelligence and athleticism makes him an ideal fit to run Martz offense. Martz also promises Frank Gore and Vernon Davis will be "cornerstones" in the offense.
However, SF's receivers are not the caliber of a Roy Williams/CAlvin Williams or Torry Holt/Isaac Bruce. And the RB has never been a huge point producer (unless they can catch the ball ala Marshall Faulk).
I'd consider Gore as a FF stud; the others I would take a "buy low" approach.
Could the STEELERS be the next FF juggernaut? This is not as crazy as it sounds.
Last year, running Bruce Arians spread offense for the first time, Big Ben set a team record with 32 touchdowns. Willie Parker was leading the league in rushing until he was injured for the year. And Santonio Holmes was a good half away from 1000 yards, averaging a whopping 18 yards per reception.
This year, the Steelers are running the offense for the second year. Holmes is entering his 3rd year in the league - the magical year for WRs. The Steelers lucked out in getting Mendenhall and Limas Sweed. Mendenhall could be a stud anywhere else; he'll split the carries with Fast Willie this year (When Parker went down, the running game went with it.). Sweed provides a huge target at 6'4" and allows Hines Ward to play in the slot, which he is more suited for - Ward's best seasons were when he played alongside 6'5" Plaxico Burress.
Look to Pittsburgh early and often in your FF draft.
Has Eli Manning arrived? Starting in the final week of the regular season (which ironically is the end of most FF seasons) Peyton's younger brother went on an absolute tear. In his 4th season, Eli put the team on his shoulders and led the G-men to come from behind wins against the Pats and the Pack, while composing impressive wins against the Cowboys and Bucs.
So, has Eli become an elite FF quarterback?
Eli's run reminded me a lot of John Elway. Like Eli, he was facing unreal expectations of being a #1 pick in a quarterback-rich draft. Elway's 4th season was in 1986, where "the Drive" killed the hearts of Cleveland and took the Broncos to the SB.
As great of a season Elway had, it took him a few more years to be an elite FF quarterback - almost 8 more to be exact. He needed a head coach in Mike Shanahan to really take advantage of his skills.
Eli is in the same boat. Kevin Gilbride's offenses are known for a power running game and plenty of play-action passes. And the Giants led the league in rushing last year. I expect more of the same in 2008 - of course, with a lot less grief from the press.
Has Larry Johnson hit the wall?After a 2006 season where he set the season record of carries, Larry Johnson was heading up a lot of lists of RBs to take a fall. Sure enough, he was injured against GB and killed many a FF season (mine included). Has LJ started his decline?
No. For starters, the injury, a horse-collar pull, was a freak injury. The same injury happened to Adrian Peterson in Oklahoma, as well as Terrell Owens in 2004. Both came back just fine. Also, the injury (which actually was his foot) allowed him to heal completely as opposed to take a beating over a year.
Plus, LJ despite his age and recent usage, does not have a lot of carries on his body. He has only played 2 full seasons as a starter, and in college he played very little save his senior year at Penn State (note: Rashard Mendenhall has the same history. Draft him!). Michael Turner was lauded as a RB with little wear and tear during the offseason. LJ is also the same.
Add to that the addition to the offensive line, and I would look for a bounceback season by LJ. He may not post the back to back 1700 seasons of 2005-6, but I'd say 1400 is within reach, making him a top 7 RB.
Will any of the quarterbacks drafted this year make any noise? Unless Aaron Rodgers flops, no. Rookie QBs have historically struggled; the transition from college to the NFL is a huge one. Plus the teams that draft them tend to be bad teams.
Only Brian Brohm could break this trend with a young team in GB that made the NFC championship last year. Brohm is a very polished college QB who was deemed the most NFL ready as it was. But he was drafted as insurance for Rodgers who not only played well against Dallas, but has taken all the steps to be a leader this year.
Even the rookie QBs that play well (Trent Edwards last year, Ben Rothlesbuger last year) tend to not put up a lot of FF points anyway; their teams play conservatively. Expect the same for all of them, Brohm included.
Does Mike Martz = Fantasy fireworks?We know his history. Martz turned St Louis into the Greatest Show On Turf. What he did in Detroit may have been even more impressive as journeyman QB John Kitna averaged 4000 yards passing and Mike Furrey (who?) had 98 catches in 2006.
Can he do the same in SF? It's possible. Martz raves about Alex Smith, whos intelligence and athleticism makes him an ideal fit to run Martz offense. Martz also promises Frank Gore and Vernon Davis will be "cornerstones" in the offense.
However, SF's receivers are not the caliber of a Roy Williams/CAlvin Williams or Torry Holt/Isaac Bruce. And the RB has never been a huge point producer (unless they can catch the ball ala Marshall Faulk).
I'd consider Gore as a FF stud; the others I would take a "buy low" approach.
Could the STEELERS be the next FF juggernaut? This is not as crazy as it sounds.
Last year, running Bruce Arians spread offense for the first time, Big Ben set a team record with 32 touchdowns. Willie Parker was leading the league in rushing until he was injured for the year. And Santonio Holmes was a good half away from 1000 yards, averaging a whopping 18 yards per reception.
This year, the Steelers are running the offense for the second year. Holmes is entering his 3rd year in the league - the magical year for WRs. The Steelers lucked out in getting Mendenhall and Limas Sweed. Mendenhall could be a stud anywhere else; he'll split the carries with Fast Willie this year (When Parker went down, the running game went with it.). Sweed provides a huge target at 6'4" and allows Hines Ward to play in the slot, which he is more suited for - Ward's best seasons were when he played alongside 6'5" Plaxico Burress.
Look to Pittsburgh early and often in your FF draft.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
NBA Draft
Well, the draft came and went. And for the Knicks, all I have to say is this:
I sure as heck hope the Knicks know what they are doing.
Danilo Gallinari, the 6'9" small forward who at 19 has yet to scratch the surface, is heading to NY. The question is, will Gallinari be the next Dirk - or will he be the next Darko?
In my previous post regarding the Knicks I had said that they needed to get pick DJ Augustin, which they did not. Jerrod Bayless, a tweener guard who is not a pure point at this stage but is in the mold of Chauncey Billups, was also available. That's a lot of talent to pass up.
I had also said the Knicks should try to swing a deal for Shawn Marion. Supposedly, Danilo has a similar game. Let's hope!
Meanwhile, in all the wheeling and dealing, how could the Knicks not trade off any of their players? Teams like Miami are in an obvious "Win-now" mode - they could easily use Eddy Curry or Zach Randolph (don't tell me Riley doesn't want to take on head cases if he picked Beasley as opposed to Mayo!). Supposedly Minny was looking to deal as well, particularly with the hope of giving Al Jefferson some post help. Now that KG is gone, they definitely have the cap room.
Look at the Nets. They moved quickly and decisively, first dealing Kidd during the season, then trading Richard Jefferson hours before the draft. And the picks they made, from Brooks Lopez at 10 to Chris Douglas Roberts in the second round not only fit needs - they were absolute steals.
I really really REALLY hope the Knicks know what they are doing....
I sure as heck hope the Knicks know what they are doing.
Danilo Gallinari, the 6'9" small forward who at 19 has yet to scratch the surface, is heading to NY. The question is, will Gallinari be the next Dirk - or will he be the next Darko?
In my previous post regarding the Knicks I had said that they needed to get pick DJ Augustin, which they did not. Jerrod Bayless, a tweener guard who is not a pure point at this stage but is in the mold of Chauncey Billups, was also available. That's a lot of talent to pass up.
I had also said the Knicks should try to swing a deal for Shawn Marion. Supposedly, Danilo has a similar game. Let's hope!
Meanwhile, in all the wheeling and dealing, how could the Knicks not trade off any of their players? Teams like Miami are in an obvious "Win-now" mode - they could easily use Eddy Curry or Zach Randolph (don't tell me Riley doesn't want to take on head cases if he picked Beasley as opposed to Mayo!). Supposedly Minny was looking to deal as well, particularly with the hope of giving Al Jefferson some post help. Now that KG is gone, they definitely have the cap room.
Look at the Nets. They moved quickly and decisively, first dealing Kidd during the season, then trading Richard Jefferson hours before the draft. And the picks they made, from Brooks Lopez at 10 to Chris Douglas Roberts in the second round not only fit needs - they were absolute steals.
I really really REALLY hope the Knicks know what they are doing....
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
James Dobson does NOT speak for me!!
This website speaks for itself:
http://www.jamesdobsondoesntspeakforme.com/
http://www.jamesdobsondoesntspeakforme.com/
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Fantasy Football Part 1
Ahhh, yes. It's that time of year... Fantasy football!
I've been playing for 13 some odd years and I've really enjoyed putting my math background to good use. Borrowing heavily from the Billy Beane school of management (read Moneyball if you want more info), it's been a lot of fun for me the last few years.
The past few years, our league has played what's called a Dynasty League, where you can practically keep your whole team (up to 15 players). So there's been a definite emphasis on youth in our league. But that doesn't prevent "old reliables" from being valued.
Anyway, as the year begins, here are my initial thoughts to the 2008 season. I'll be writing a weekly column (that is, once a week), and I will try to post some things that you probably won't see on most FF rags.
1.LT is the number one back in FF, but AP is closing the gap. Most of my league knows by now that I was drooling over Adrian Peterson since he was in high school (yes, I need help:)). And in his rookie year, he delivered! While his rookie season was not on the level of Eric Dickerson (1800+ yds) or Edgerrin James (1700+ yds), his numbers were quite close to Barry Sanders, who like AP rushed for over 1300 yards and was within reach of the rushing title.
Ladainlian Tomlinson, meanwhile continued his reign as the top back in fantasy. He didn't have the year he had in 2006, but was still quite impressive, leading the league in rushing.
Will this trend continue? I say yes - for one more year. LT will be 29 on June 23rd (Happy Birthday, LT!) and the statistics for RBs dropping off at the 30 year mark is frightening. LT in particular has been used quite a bit - not just in the running game, but in the passing game as well (he is one of only 3 RBs to ever amass 100 receptions in a season). AP, meanwhile has already entrenched himself as the #2 back in FF, with Stephen Jackson and Frank Gore close behind among the RBs under 25.
So enjoy LT while you can. Those of you in keeper/dynasty leagues, look to trade him this year. And look at either Jackson or Gore as "buy low" candidates.
2.Darren McFadden will not be the next Adrian Peterson. In fact, D-Mac may not even be the best rookie RB this year!
Most pro scouts were not even convinced that D-Mac was any better than Jonathan Stewart or Rashad Mendenhall, both of whom landed on teams that like to run the ball. Stewart in fact was drafted with an Offensive tackle in the first round who would complete a return to a power running game in Carolina. While there is no argument regarding MacFadden's explosiveness, there are those who question his ability to run in between the tackles, along with his "stiffness" with his hips (this is the scouts talking, not me!). AP had no such concerns.
In fact, his own team has stated they will not use MacFadden like Peterson. They have pointed to Reggie Bush as their model (which if you play in a league that scores for receptions would definitely hike him to #1); plus Oakland drafted Michael Bush as their "power" back last year anyway.
At this time last year, the gap between AP and Marshawn Lynch (who would probably have won rookie of the year any other year) was pretty wide. This year, you could arguably flip a coin between the three rookies. My prediction is that Matt Forte will be the top rookie in FF, with either Stewart or Kevin Smith having a better career than D-Mac.
(incidently, this is a good year to grab a rookie RB in fantasy. All of the RBs mentioned will probably be top 15 RBs by 2009.)
3.Tom Brady will NOT be the best quarterback in FF this year. History proves this point. Look at the "all time" statistical years QBs have had in previous years: Dan Marino, 1984; Kurt Warner 1999; Peyton Manning/Daunte Culpepper 2004. Not only did none of them repeat, they weren't even the top QBs the next season!
If there was a consistent record of that success, that's one thing. But a spike like that doesn't usually last. In Brady's case, he was never even considered among the top 5 FF QBs before any season until this one.
Of course, most experts point to Randy Moss as the difference maker, and I'll grant you that. But Brady threw 50 TDs! Think of it this way - Moss broke Jerry Rice's TD record, and both WRs were consistently among the league leaders in TDs. Did either of their QBs break even 40 TDS in any of their seasons? No! Culpepper came the closest in 2004 with 39. But, Moss was injured for a fair portion of the season.
Brady broke Manning's record of 49 TDs, set in 2004. Manning didn't even break 30 the next year - and he's considered Mr. Consistency!
Let someone else pick Brady as their #1 QB. I'll pass on that pick.
4.Randy Moss, however will be the #1 WR in again. Go back and look at the tape of last year. Moss was regularly beating double and triple coverage for many of his TDs (He beat the entire Jets secondary at one point. Sigh!). With Belicheck on his behind and Brady having his back, there is no reason for him not to be. Moss knows he won't get this shot anywhere else. For the first time in his career he has found a team and system where he can succeed both on the field and off. He may not put up 24 TDs again, but remember his 98 receptions and 1491 yards were NOT career highs. In fact they were right among his average before he was traded to Oakland. I'd pencil him in for 94-1500-18TDs easily, numbers that should keep him at #1.
5.If Brady is not the #1 FF QB for 2008, who will be? Here's my prediction: Carson Palmer. Palmer threw for 4000 yards and 26 TDs, and yet he had what folks considered a down year. 20 interceptions will do that to you.
It's not like Palmer suddenly forgot how to throw. The biggest obstacle was a lack of a running game. Rudi Johnson, a traditional FF bedrock of 1300 yds and 12 tds each year, had a down year when he tried to lose weight for the 2007 season. What's worse, his backups in Chris Perry and Kenny Irons were injured - Irons, drafted specifically to be Rudi's backup, tore his ACL in preason. So everyone and their mother knew Palmer was throwing.
And despite his "bad" year, both Chad Johnson and TJ Houshmanzada had career seasons, with Ocho Cinco setting team records in recieving yards and TJ leading the league in receptions (also setting team records). So somebody was benefitting!
With a more balanced running game (and the same putrid defense) expect Palmer to rise up and take his crown as FF's #1 QB. Remember, you read it here first!
I'll be posting more thoughts next week.
I've been playing for 13 some odd years and I've really enjoyed putting my math background to good use. Borrowing heavily from the Billy Beane school of management (read Moneyball if you want more info), it's been a lot of fun for me the last few years.
The past few years, our league has played what's called a Dynasty League, where you can practically keep your whole team (up to 15 players). So there's been a definite emphasis on youth in our league. But that doesn't prevent "old reliables" from being valued.
Anyway, as the year begins, here are my initial thoughts to the 2008 season. I'll be writing a weekly column (that is, once a week), and I will try to post some things that you probably won't see on most FF rags.
1.LT is the number one back in FF, but AP is closing the gap. Most of my league knows by now that I was drooling over Adrian Peterson since he was in high school (yes, I need help:)). And in his rookie year, he delivered! While his rookie season was not on the level of Eric Dickerson (1800+ yds) or Edgerrin James (1700+ yds), his numbers were quite close to Barry Sanders, who like AP rushed for over 1300 yards and was within reach of the rushing title.
Ladainlian Tomlinson, meanwhile continued his reign as the top back in fantasy. He didn't have the year he had in 2006, but was still quite impressive, leading the league in rushing.
Will this trend continue? I say yes - for one more year. LT will be 29 on June 23rd (Happy Birthday, LT!) and the statistics for RBs dropping off at the 30 year mark is frightening. LT in particular has been used quite a bit - not just in the running game, but in the passing game as well (he is one of only 3 RBs to ever amass 100 receptions in a season). AP, meanwhile has already entrenched himself as the #2 back in FF, with Stephen Jackson and Frank Gore close behind among the RBs under 25.
So enjoy LT while you can. Those of you in keeper/dynasty leagues, look to trade him this year. And look at either Jackson or Gore as "buy low" candidates.
2.Darren McFadden will not be the next Adrian Peterson. In fact, D-Mac may not even be the best rookie RB this year!
Most pro scouts were not even convinced that D-Mac was any better than Jonathan Stewart or Rashad Mendenhall, both of whom landed on teams that like to run the ball. Stewart in fact was drafted with an Offensive tackle in the first round who would complete a return to a power running game in Carolina. While there is no argument regarding MacFadden's explosiveness, there are those who question his ability to run in between the tackles, along with his "stiffness" with his hips (this is the scouts talking, not me!). AP had no such concerns.
In fact, his own team has stated they will not use MacFadden like Peterson. They have pointed to Reggie Bush as their model (which if you play in a league that scores for receptions would definitely hike him to #1); plus Oakland drafted Michael Bush as their "power" back last year anyway.
At this time last year, the gap between AP and Marshawn Lynch (who would probably have won rookie of the year any other year) was pretty wide. This year, you could arguably flip a coin between the three rookies. My prediction is that Matt Forte will be the top rookie in FF, with either Stewart or Kevin Smith having a better career than D-Mac.
(incidently, this is a good year to grab a rookie RB in fantasy. All of the RBs mentioned will probably be top 15 RBs by 2009.)
3.Tom Brady will NOT be the best quarterback in FF this year. History proves this point. Look at the "all time" statistical years QBs have had in previous years: Dan Marino, 1984; Kurt Warner 1999; Peyton Manning/Daunte Culpepper 2004. Not only did none of them repeat, they weren't even the top QBs the next season!
If there was a consistent record of that success, that's one thing. But a spike like that doesn't usually last. In Brady's case, he was never even considered among the top 5 FF QBs before any season until this one.
Of course, most experts point to Randy Moss as the difference maker, and I'll grant you that. But Brady threw 50 TDs! Think of it this way - Moss broke Jerry Rice's TD record, and both WRs were consistently among the league leaders in TDs. Did either of their QBs break even 40 TDS in any of their seasons? No! Culpepper came the closest in 2004 with 39. But, Moss was injured for a fair portion of the season.
Brady broke Manning's record of 49 TDs, set in 2004. Manning didn't even break 30 the next year - and he's considered Mr. Consistency!
Let someone else pick Brady as their #1 QB. I'll pass on that pick.
4.Randy Moss, however will be the #1 WR in again. Go back and look at the tape of last year. Moss was regularly beating double and triple coverage for many of his TDs (He beat the entire Jets secondary at one point. Sigh!). With Belicheck on his behind and Brady having his back, there is no reason for him not to be. Moss knows he won't get this shot anywhere else. For the first time in his career he has found a team and system where he can succeed both on the field and off. He may not put up 24 TDs again, but remember his 98 receptions and 1491 yards were NOT career highs. In fact they were right among his average before he was traded to Oakland. I'd pencil him in for 94-1500-18TDs easily, numbers that should keep him at #1.
5.If Brady is not the #1 FF QB for 2008, who will be? Here's my prediction: Carson Palmer. Palmer threw for 4000 yards and 26 TDs, and yet he had what folks considered a down year. 20 interceptions will do that to you.
It's not like Palmer suddenly forgot how to throw. The biggest obstacle was a lack of a running game. Rudi Johnson, a traditional FF bedrock of 1300 yds and 12 tds each year, had a down year when he tried to lose weight for the 2007 season. What's worse, his backups in Chris Perry and Kenny Irons were injured - Irons, drafted specifically to be Rudi's backup, tore his ACL in preason. So everyone and their mother knew Palmer was throwing.
And despite his "bad" year, both Chad Johnson and TJ Houshmanzada had career seasons, with Ocho Cinco setting team records in recieving yards and TJ leading the league in receptions (also setting team records). So somebody was benefitting!
With a more balanced running game (and the same putrid defense) expect Palmer to rise up and take his crown as FF's #1 QB. Remember, you read it here first!
I'll be posting more thoughts next week.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Has the internet ruined music?
Has the internet ruined music? Well, it depends on how you look at it.
It used to be when you thought of really big rock groups, the Stadium headliners, the groups you'd see today as worthy of being inducted in the Rock and Roll "Hall of Fame" you had groups like The Police, U2, Van Halen, REM, Metallica, Tom Petty...
Who do you have now? Coldplay? Radiohead? Would you consider those groups on that level? Maybe even Dave Matthews?
I read an interesting article about this in the Post Gazette, which used this very example. It used to be that when a record label "discovered" a group, they had time to develop and refine their sound. The article goes on to mention how nowadays, with Youtube and Myspace it doesn't take much for a group to get popular, and then "bypass" the time needed for refining their sound. Even itunes is musician friendly.
I can somewhat relate to this. I've been taking jazz piano lessons for the last 18 months or so. My wife will be the first to tell you how much my playing has improved over the last year or so.
Last year I was gigging quite heavily between playing reggae and jazz. And yet I knew that I could have been better, that I had the desire, but my fingers had not caught up with ears.
Anyway, I don't think the internet has "ruined" music, but I do think that the music industry does need to adapt.
Look at video games. You can get and play plenty of games on the internet, yet the demand for quality computer gaming easily funds large gaming companies (let alone stand alone consoles like the Wii, Xbox, PS2+3, etc.).
It's going to take some creative thinking, a "business model" innovation to catch up with the technological innovation.
It used to be when you thought of really big rock groups, the Stadium headliners, the groups you'd see today as worthy of being inducted in the Rock and Roll "Hall of Fame" you had groups like The Police, U2, Van Halen, REM, Metallica, Tom Petty...
Who do you have now? Coldplay? Radiohead? Would you consider those groups on that level? Maybe even Dave Matthews?
I read an interesting article about this in the Post Gazette, which used this very example. It used to be that when a record label "discovered" a group, they had time to develop and refine their sound. The article goes on to mention how nowadays, with Youtube and Myspace it doesn't take much for a group to get popular, and then "bypass" the time needed for refining their sound. Even itunes is musician friendly.
I can somewhat relate to this. I've been taking jazz piano lessons for the last 18 months or so. My wife will be the first to tell you how much my playing has improved over the last year or so.
Last year I was gigging quite heavily between playing reggae and jazz. And yet I knew that I could have been better, that I had the desire, but my fingers had not caught up with ears.
Anyway, I don't think the internet has "ruined" music, but I do think that the music industry does need to adapt.
Look at video games. You can get and play plenty of games on the internet, yet the demand for quality computer gaming easily funds large gaming companies (let alone stand alone consoles like the Wii, Xbox, PS2+3, etc.).
It's going to take some creative thinking, a "business model" innovation to catch up with the technological innovation.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
The Mets suck!!!
Ugh!
Well, we know now what the real problem is with the Mess.
Getting fired at 3:15 in the morning??? A press release??????? After making them fly across country?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Personally speaking, I've been laid off a lot of different ways. I can probably speak better than anyone on how classless this is.
What makes this even crazier is how this contrasts to the class that Willie has been all these years. He definitely deserves better.
Where to begin?
1.Willie. Really, was this his fault? If you think it was, ask yourself this: what was the difference between him now and the Mets of 2006? The one who nearly made the World Series with one good pitcher? The one whos season ended with their MVP candidate at bat?
Look at the Mets of 2005. The parallels are ridiculous! A lack of power at 1B and the outfield, a bullpen that failed to hold leads for their ace, and it resulted in a 83-79 season. After the 2005 season, Omar responded and got Delgado and Wagner.
Now I can understand the logic that Willie should have been fired after the collapse last year. I wouldn't have agreed with it - after all, they hired a manager with no experience, what did they expect? - but I can at least understand it. Now of course, NO ONE is talking about Willie.
2.Omar. Omar has made a lot of good deals; however, the lack of a power bat should have been addressed during the offseason. Again, look at the difference Delgado made in 2006. When his bat slowed, they could have theoretically protected themselves with a legit power bat in RF or LF. Particularly with the interest in Heilman. Either way, he's on the firing line now.
3.Fred Wilpon. Really who is the common denominator here? The Wilpons have allowed this culture to exist since the 1980s. I think without the Wilpons changing the Mets will have to succeed despite themselves.
One of the issues is that the veterans started losing respect for Willie. Well, supposedly, "confidential" conversations between Willie and management regarding such players leaked to them. Again, how is Willie - or anyone - supposed to have a chance in this situation?
In all this mess steps in poor Jerry Manuel. He deserves a lot better. Ironically, his managerial record is almost identical to Randolphs....
Well, we know now what the real problem is with the Mess.
Getting fired at 3:15 in the morning??? A press release??????? After making them fly across country?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Personally speaking, I've been laid off a lot of different ways. I can probably speak better than anyone on how classless this is.
What makes this even crazier is how this contrasts to the class that Willie has been all these years. He definitely deserves better.
Where to begin?
1.Willie. Really, was this his fault? If you think it was, ask yourself this: what was the difference between him now and the Mets of 2006? The one who nearly made the World Series with one good pitcher? The one whos season ended with their MVP candidate at bat?
Look at the Mets of 2005. The parallels are ridiculous! A lack of power at 1B and the outfield, a bullpen that failed to hold leads for their ace, and it resulted in a 83-79 season. After the 2005 season, Omar responded and got Delgado and Wagner.
Now I can understand the logic that Willie should have been fired after the collapse last year. I wouldn't have agreed with it - after all, they hired a manager with no experience, what did they expect? - but I can at least understand it. Now of course, NO ONE is talking about Willie.
2.Omar. Omar has made a lot of good deals; however, the lack of a power bat should have been addressed during the offseason. Again, look at the difference Delgado made in 2006. When his bat slowed, they could have theoretically protected themselves with a legit power bat in RF or LF. Particularly with the interest in Heilman. Either way, he's on the firing line now.
3.Fred Wilpon. Really who is the common denominator here? The Wilpons have allowed this culture to exist since the 1980s. I think without the Wilpons changing the Mets will have to succeed despite themselves.
One of the issues is that the veterans started losing respect for Willie. Well, supposedly, "confidential" conversations between Willie and management regarding such players leaked to them. Again, how is Willie - or anyone - supposed to have a chance in this situation?
In all this mess steps in poor Jerry Manuel. He deserves a lot better. Ironically, his managerial record is almost identical to Randolphs....
Friday, June 13, 2008
Boston - the center of the sporting universe???
Since when is BOSTON become the center of the Sporting Universe????
The Red Sox are the defending World Series champs for the second time in 4 years. The Patriots were one David Tyree miracle catch from a perfect season, and a 4th Superbowl in 6 seasons. And the Celts - after finishing dead last the year before, are a win away from winning the NBA title (Knicks management - are you paying attention to this???)
A lot of this is due to some new talent. The Red Sox, besides having their pitching rebuilt, is centered around David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez being the most feared 3-4 hitters in baseball. The Pats took off after taking a chance on Randy Moss. And we know what the Celts did, importing KG and Ray Ray to Paul Pierce's side.
I'm going to add one more reason to this - controversial as it is....
Boston is now a city that has overcome it's reputation for being racist.
Think about this for a minute. David Stern never wanted to admit this, but what fueled much of the fanbase of the Lakers-Celtics rivalry was race - Magic was black, Bird was white. When you thought of "Hall of Fame" Red Sox players pre-Manny/Pedro, you thought of Ted Williams, Carl Yazstremski, Wade Boggs, Roger Clemens. The most prominent black Red Sox until they got Pedro was Jim Rice, whos surliness not only cost him any shot at the hall of fame, it only pushed the reputation more of Boston being hostile towards blacks. And let's not forget what happened to Paul Pierce during the 1999 season with him being stabbed.
Yet this perception has begun to change. When the Red Sox finally started making the post season consistently during the 90s, they were led by Mo Vaughn, who did his best to turn the reputation around. The Celts brief turnaround during the 2002-3 season was driven by Pierce and Antoine Walker. Still, Boston had a reputation for being hostile towards african-americans, and as a result many stayed away.
Garnett was initially leery of Boston because of this reputation, but Pierce did his best to convince him otherwise - and look at the result. Corey Dillon and Randy Moss had media reputations far worse than Rice - and yet the Patriots were able to not only integrate them but they were arguably the engines that ran the last two Pats teams that made the SB. None of this was possible even 10 years ago.
This is not to say Boston is no longer a "racist" city. Nor is this saying Boston really was one ten years ago. What this *is* saying is that the perception no longer exists to many black atheletes.
After all, the Bruins are still struggling....
The Red Sox are the defending World Series champs for the second time in 4 years. The Patriots were one David Tyree miracle catch from a perfect season, and a 4th Superbowl in 6 seasons. And the Celts - after finishing dead last the year before, are a win away from winning the NBA title (Knicks management - are you paying attention to this???)
A lot of this is due to some new talent. The Red Sox, besides having their pitching rebuilt, is centered around David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez being the most feared 3-4 hitters in baseball. The Pats took off after taking a chance on Randy Moss. And we know what the Celts did, importing KG and Ray Ray to Paul Pierce's side.
I'm going to add one more reason to this - controversial as it is....
Boston is now a city that has overcome it's reputation for being racist.
Think about this for a minute. David Stern never wanted to admit this, but what fueled much of the fanbase of the Lakers-Celtics rivalry was race - Magic was black, Bird was white. When you thought of "Hall of Fame" Red Sox players pre-Manny/Pedro, you thought of Ted Williams, Carl Yazstremski, Wade Boggs, Roger Clemens. The most prominent black Red Sox until they got Pedro was Jim Rice, whos surliness not only cost him any shot at the hall of fame, it only pushed the reputation more of Boston being hostile towards blacks. And let's not forget what happened to Paul Pierce during the 1999 season with him being stabbed.
Yet this perception has begun to change. When the Red Sox finally started making the post season consistently during the 90s, they were led by Mo Vaughn, who did his best to turn the reputation around. The Celts brief turnaround during the 2002-3 season was driven by Pierce and Antoine Walker. Still, Boston had a reputation for being hostile towards african-americans, and as a result many stayed away.
Garnett was initially leery of Boston because of this reputation, but Pierce did his best to convince him otherwise - and look at the result. Corey Dillon and Randy Moss had media reputations far worse than Rice - and yet the Patriots were able to not only integrate them but they were arguably the engines that ran the last two Pats teams that made the SB. None of this was possible even 10 years ago.
This is not to say Boston is no longer a "racist" city. Nor is this saying Boston really was one ten years ago. What this *is* saying is that the perception no longer exists to many black atheletes.
After all, the Bruins are still struggling....
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
OBAMA
Well, it's official: Obama is now the democratic nominee. A few thoughts:
* It's pretty interesting all the people who I've found out that are supporting Obama. Certainly, most (if not all) of the musicians that I know. But also, a fair amount of Christians as well. There's an interesting article in the NY Times that talks about how a new generation of Christians are tired of being pigeon-holed as blind supporters of the Republican party. One person in particular voiced his support for Obama in the article.
Now, the NY Times is notoriously a liberal newspaper so I'll take that perspective with a grain of salt. But even among the folks I know I can't recall the last time I saw so many christians not only support a non-republican candidate, but support him wholeheartedly, with no fear of what their christian friends may think. Also, just about every christian and musician I know who is supporting Obama is doing it for reasons that are well thought out.
* For those who still question Obama's faith, I have a question - would you vote for McCain? What evidence is there of HIS faith? Obama invites this topic; McClain only recently brought it up.
* It was nice to see Hillary show her true colors. In the very day that should have been Obama's, the very night that the issue of party unity should have been addressed, Hillary would not concede. From the day Hillary first ran for NY Senator, I was very much against her very obvious run for Presidency. Of course, she has in the last few weeks shot herself in the foot as she has alienanted her fellow senators that are democrats - the very senators who she will need to work with in a few months. And any possible hope that she could have had to be Obama's VP choice was shot as well.
* Of course, who WOULD be a good VP candidate? Well, if not Hillary.... why not Bill? From Obama's perspective, this makes a lot of sense; who else can say that they have a former president in their inner circle to lean on for advice? From Bill's perspective, well let's face it - after being president, what other job could be as satisfying?
* It's pretty interesting all the people who I've found out that are supporting Obama. Certainly, most (if not all) of the musicians that I know. But also, a fair amount of Christians as well. There's an interesting article in the NY Times that talks about how a new generation of Christians are tired of being pigeon-holed as blind supporters of the Republican party. One person in particular voiced his support for Obama in the article.
Now, the NY Times is notoriously a liberal newspaper so I'll take that perspective with a grain of salt. But even among the folks I know I can't recall the last time I saw so many christians not only support a non-republican candidate, but support him wholeheartedly, with no fear of what their christian friends may think. Also, just about every christian and musician I know who is supporting Obama is doing it for reasons that are well thought out.
* For those who still question Obama's faith, I have a question - would you vote for McCain? What evidence is there of HIS faith? Obama invites this topic; McClain only recently brought it up.
* It was nice to see Hillary show her true colors. In the very day that should have been Obama's, the very night that the issue of party unity should have been addressed, Hillary would not concede. From the day Hillary first ran for NY Senator, I was very much against her very obvious run for Presidency. Of course, she has in the last few weeks shot herself in the foot as she has alienanted her fellow senators that are democrats - the very senators who she will need to work with in a few months. And any possible hope that she could have had to be Obama's VP choice was shot as well.
* Of course, who WOULD be a good VP candidate? Well, if not Hillary.... why not Bill? From Obama's perspective, this makes a lot of sense; who else can say that they have a former president in their inner circle to lean on for advice? From Bill's perspective, well let's face it - after being president, what other job could be as satisfying?
Friday, May 30, 2008
International Game?
In watching the NBA and NHL playoffs, it strikes me how much better the European and Canadian players are than their American counterparts.
Why is this?
Oh, I don't mean to say that the US isn't producing good players. But for every Kobe Bryant, there are several Tony Parkers and Manu Ginoblis. The Lakers themselves reloaded around Kobe with European players. And in the NHL you have the aforementioned Pens (see previous blog entry) going up against a largely European machine in the Detroit Red Wings.
So what am I getting at?
Why are players coming from Europe (and Canada in the case of hockey) so much better at such a young age?
I'll explore this topic a little more - as well as solve college athletics - in one fell swoop in my next blog entry. Stay tuned:)
Why is this?
Oh, I don't mean to say that the US isn't producing good players. But for every Kobe Bryant, there are several Tony Parkers and Manu Ginoblis. The Lakers themselves reloaded around Kobe with European players. And in the NHL you have the aforementioned Pens (see previous blog entry) going up against a largely European machine in the Detroit Red Wings.
So what am I getting at?
Why are players coming from Europe (and Canada in the case of hockey) so much better at such a young age?
I'll explore this topic a little more - as well as solve college athletics - in one fell swoop in my next blog entry. Stay tuned:)
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
What should the Knicks do now?
Well, the draft lottery is over - and the Knicks wound up with the 6th pick.
What exactly should the Knicks do?
If they truly want to run Mike D'Antoni's system - and get their salary cap situation down - this is what they should do:
1.Keep any player who's contract expires after this year. This includes Stephon Marbury. The Knicks should suck it up and deal with him for a year - perhaps even shift him over to shooting guard - but as they are not going anywhere for a year, make the best of it.
2.If they do make any trades, take back expiring contracts, not more bad ones. Do the reverse of Isiah Thomas. After all, Isiah got them into this mess - it only makes sense to do the reverse, right?
Fact is, the Knicks do have some players that would garner interest. Big men such as Eddy Curry and Zach Randolph. Or hustle players such as David Lee. See which players would garner interest. Here's a deal:
3.Trade either Curry or Randolph to the Heat for Shawn Marion. Marion, who thrived under D'Antoni, would be an instant fit for the Knicks, who have a huge hole at the small forward position. With the lack of firepower, he'd get a lot more touches with the Knicks than he did in either Phoenix or in Miami - and remember, he left the Suns due to the lack of touches. Getting either big men would be a huge upgrade for the Heat, and allows them to draft Derrick Rose at PG. Marion meanwhile is in his final year - if he's not happy he, like Marbury, is free to go after the 2008-9 season.
4.Look to draft DJ Augustin. Augustin is the second best PG in the draft after Rose. What he is not is an undersized "2" as OJ Mayo, Eric Gordon, or Jerod Bayless. And the Knicks have a small SG in Marbury anyway.
The exception I would make is Mayo, who has the size and game of Dwayne Wade. However, he probably will be taken in the top5, if not top 3.
5.By all means, make sure they are in good salary cap shape for the FA class of 2010. Here's a list of who's available (note - anyone over 30 is eliminated):
Studs: LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Amare Stoudemire, Joe Johnson, Dirk Nowitzki, Josh Howard, Tracy McGrady, Tyson Chandler, Eddy Curry, Manu Ginobili
The Rookie Contracts: Shelden WIlliams, Rajon Rondo, Adam Morrison, Tyrus Thomas, Rudy Gay, Kyle Lowry, Randy Foye, Marcus Williams, Josh Boone, Renaldo Balkman, Mardy Collins, Brandon Roy, Sergio Rodriguez, LaMarcus Aldridge, Quincy Douby, Ronnie Brewer, Andrea Bargnani
Role Players: Amir Johnson, Al Harrington, Derek Fisher, Mike Miller, Darko Mlicic, Udonis Haslim, Quentin Richardson, Raja Bell, TJ Ford
Obviously, this list begins at James, with Wade, Nowitzki and Bosh as the next tier. Assuming that D'Antoni is still coaching the Knicks, players like stoudemire and Joe Johnson are a natural fit as well. Either way, they need to be ready for a potential bonanza.
If they truly want to run Mike D'Antoni's system - and get their salary cap situation down - this is what they should do:
1.Keep any player who's contract expires after this year. This includes Stephon Marbury. The Knicks should suck it up and deal with him for a year - perhaps even shift him over to shooting guard - but as they are not going anywhere for a year, make the best of it.
2.If they do make any trades, take back expiring contracts, not more bad ones. Do the reverse of Isiah Thomas. After all, Isiah got them into this mess - it only makes sense to do the reverse, right?
Fact is, the Knicks do have some players that would garner interest. Big men such as Eddy Curry and Zach Randolph. Or hustle players such as David Lee. See which players would garner interest. Here's a deal:
3.Trade either Curry or Randolph to the Heat for Shawn Marion. Marion, who thrived under D'Antoni, would be an instant fit for the Knicks, who have a huge hole at the small forward position. With the lack of firepower, he'd get a lot more touches with the Knicks than he did in either Phoenix or in Miami - and remember, he left the Suns due to the lack of touches. Getting either big men would be a huge upgrade for the Heat, and allows them to draft Derrick Rose at PG. Marion meanwhile is in his final year - if he's not happy he, like Marbury, is free to go after the 2008-9 season.
4.Look to draft DJ Augustin. Augustin is the second best PG in the draft after Rose. What he is not is an undersized "2" as OJ Mayo, Eric Gordon, or Jerod Bayless. And the Knicks have a small SG in Marbury anyway.
The exception I would make is Mayo, who has the size and game of Dwayne Wade. However, he probably will be taken in the top5, if not top 3.
5.By all means, make sure they are in good salary cap shape for the FA class of 2010. Here's a list of who's available (note - anyone over 30 is eliminated):
Studs: LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Amare Stoudemire, Joe Johnson, Dirk Nowitzki, Josh Howard, Tracy McGrady, Tyson Chandler, Eddy Curry, Manu Ginobili
The Rookie Contracts: Shelden WIlliams, Rajon Rondo, Adam Morrison, Tyrus Thomas, Rudy Gay, Kyle Lowry, Randy Foye, Marcus Williams, Josh Boone, Renaldo Balkman, Mardy Collins, Brandon Roy, Sergio Rodriguez, LaMarcus Aldridge, Quincy Douby, Ronnie Brewer, Andrea Bargnani
Role Players: Amir Johnson, Al Harrington, Derek Fisher, Mike Miller, Darko Mlicic, Udonis Haslim, Quentin Richardson, Raja Bell, TJ Ford
Obviously, this list begins at James, with Wade, Nowitzki and Bosh as the next tier. Assuming that D'Antoni is still coaching the Knicks, players like stoudemire and Joe Johnson are a natural fit as well. Either way, they need to be ready for a potential bonanza.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Fleury
I'd never thought I would live to see the day that I would be rooting for any of the teams in Pittsburgh, but I've become a fan of the Penguins.
In watching the Pens, here's a question I would ask: what would it have been like for Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, and Roy to be on the same team during the 80s????
Because that is what the Pens have in their precious foursome of Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Fleury.
It's not like this was unexpected. All 4 players were picked in the top 5 of each respective draft, with Crosby and Fleury going 1st overall and Malkin a potential #1 if not for Alexander Ovechkin. Crosby in particular has been dealing with the Gretzky comparisons since he was a teenager (with The Great One giving his seal of approval). As for Fleury, there are very few goalies picked 1st overall, so folks knew he was going to be special. Anyone who saw Malkin as a teenager saw the same physical skillset that Lemieux had when he dominated Quebec Jrs.
The surprise is that Malkin is not only a better player than Ovechkin, he may be the best player in the game right now. (Which, ironically is the same argument folks here in Pittsburgh had 20 years ago regarding Lemieux vs. Gretzky).
The surprise is Staal, who nearly scored 30 goals as a rookie and has the same two-way game and nose for scoring shorthanded goals is Messier. No one would compare his leadership skills to Messier's (then again no one could possibly compare to Messier in that regard); however, it took a few years before Messier's body matured enough to be a complete player. Staal is already ahead of the curve, and the roles he is currently taking (and excelling at) in the playoffs are what Messier typically took when he was 2nd line center to Gretz.
The surprise is Fleury, who in sitting out this year due to injury, seems to have figured things out and is taking the "next step" in his evolution. Goalies typically develop later and his progress is what you'd expect a couple years from now. Fluery has arrived.
And this is on the heels of last year's surprise, Crosby winning the Hart and Art Ross. Most people had expected this by year 3 or 4. Again, he has arrived, ahead of schedule. Not even 21, Crosby is the face of the new NHL - the LeBron James on skates and the best player in the league.
(this btw isn't even taking into account Sergei Gonchar playing as one of the best offensive defenseman in the game, a shrewd signing that was panned at the time).
Perhaps this is why Ray Shero shocked the NHL and pulled the trigger to get Marian Hossa. He knew what he had, and that the Dynasty has arrived - now. A year ago, I was telling folks that the Penguins had the look of the Oilers dynasty of the 80s. If it's possible, this team might eventually be even better...
Regardless of whether the Pens can beat the Detroit machine to win the Cup (I personally think they will after dispatching the Rangers but this could be like 1983 when the Oilers steamrolled into the finals but lost to a veteran Islanders team at the end of their dynasty) folks should remember where they were when they saw the dawn of a new dynasty. Like Tiger winning Augusta in '97, Jeter playing in his first October in 96, and Vinitieri shocking the world in 2001.... or Edmonton in 1984. But just imagine if that Edmonton Dynasty also had Lemiuex centering the second line and Roy behind the pipes. That's what we have in Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Fleury...
In watching the Pens, here's a question I would ask: what would it have been like for Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, and Roy to be on the same team during the 80s????
Because that is what the Pens have in their precious foursome of Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Fleury.
It's not like this was unexpected. All 4 players were picked in the top 5 of each respective draft, with Crosby and Fleury going 1st overall and Malkin a potential #1 if not for Alexander Ovechkin. Crosby in particular has been dealing with the Gretzky comparisons since he was a teenager (with The Great One giving his seal of approval). As for Fleury, there are very few goalies picked 1st overall, so folks knew he was going to be special. Anyone who saw Malkin as a teenager saw the same physical skillset that Lemieux had when he dominated Quebec Jrs.
The surprise is that Malkin is not only a better player than Ovechkin, he may be the best player in the game right now. (Which, ironically is the same argument folks here in Pittsburgh had 20 years ago regarding Lemieux vs. Gretzky).
The surprise is Staal, who nearly scored 30 goals as a rookie and has the same two-way game and nose for scoring shorthanded goals is Messier. No one would compare his leadership skills to Messier's (then again no one could possibly compare to Messier in that regard); however, it took a few years before Messier's body matured enough to be a complete player. Staal is already ahead of the curve, and the roles he is currently taking (and excelling at) in the playoffs are what Messier typically took when he was 2nd line center to Gretz.
The surprise is Fleury, who in sitting out this year due to injury, seems to have figured things out and is taking the "next step" in his evolution. Goalies typically develop later and his progress is what you'd expect a couple years from now. Fluery has arrived.
And this is on the heels of last year's surprise, Crosby winning the Hart and Art Ross. Most people had expected this by year 3 or 4. Again, he has arrived, ahead of schedule. Not even 21, Crosby is the face of the new NHL - the LeBron James on skates and the best player in the league.
(this btw isn't even taking into account Sergei Gonchar playing as one of the best offensive defenseman in the game, a shrewd signing that was panned at the time).
Perhaps this is why Ray Shero shocked the NHL and pulled the trigger to get Marian Hossa. He knew what he had, and that the Dynasty has arrived - now. A year ago, I was telling folks that the Penguins had the look of the Oilers dynasty of the 80s. If it's possible, this team might eventually be even better...
Regardless of whether the Pens can beat the Detroit machine to win the Cup (I personally think they will after dispatching the Rangers but this could be like 1983 when the Oilers steamrolled into the finals but lost to a veteran Islanders team at the end of their dynasty) folks should remember where they were when they saw the dawn of a new dynasty. Like Tiger winning Augusta in '97, Jeter playing in his first October in 96, and Vinitieri shocking the world in 2001.... or Edmonton in 1984. But just imagine if that Edmonton Dynasty also had Lemiuex centering the second line and Roy behind the pipes. That's what we have in Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Fleury...
A vote for Obama
As many of you who know me can attest, I am an unabashed supporter this year for Obama. Here's why....
First off, I feel that our country is not particularly in good shape. Specifically we as a country seem more divided than united. Now, perhaps a lot of this is being driven by talk radio, but it really seems like this is the result of very polarizing figures in the White House, specifically Bush and Clinton before him. Perhaps it was like this during the Reagan administration as well; I have to plead to the ignorance of my youth for that time. All I know is that we seem very divided as a nation.
Consequently many of the candidates running are a result of this situation. Essentially the feeling that I get with most of the candidates is that "I have my viewpoints and ideas, you are welcome to be part of my side but if you don't agree with me the heck with you". Even more disturbing is when you see the majority of the candidates on TV, all of their support base look just like the candidates. They aren't even trying to reach beyond folks who "look" like them.
Where Obama differs on this is that he is reaching out to "groups" of people that ARE different than him. What I get from his actions is "I'm willing to listen". I think this is an important quality of any leader. I *also* think this is something faith driven in him, which is why I said I like how his faith works.
I've used the example of him speaking at Rick Warren's church. Here is the text of his speech: (http://obama.senate.gov/speech/061201-race_against_ti/) as well as an article in Time Magazine about it (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1565076,00.html).
If you read his speech, you'll notice a couple of things. One, he calls himself a fellow Christian. If he's not a Christian, he was seriously putting himself on the firing line. Two, he gives Bush credit where it's legitimately due (Which to be honest is more than I would do). That's something none of Bush's opponents have done.
Then there is the impact of him speaking at Saddleback. I am not a Rick Warren fan at all - I think his books seriously dumb down Christianity - but the way he lives his life definitely honors God (he does a 90/10 tithing where his family tithes 90% and their family lives off of 10%, plus they no longer collect a paycheck at Saddleback) and from what I see of Saddleback it definitely seems like a "legitimate" church. I don't think Rick Warren would have asked a non-christian to speak, particularly a politician - after all, if it was just a matter of asking a democrat, he could have asked Hillary Clinton who was far more visible at the time.
From the cynical viewpoint, was it calculated? Definitely. Still, the big thing is that Barack spoke at a venue and to an audience that no other Democrat would speak at. And just as telling, you don't see any of the Republican candidates speaking at a traditionally Democratic stronghold.
Going back to this "I will listen" perspective: I think our next president has to have this viewpoint, not just in terms of advocating "change" but also with foreign policy. Beyond the war, the biggest issue I have is that the idea that the United States is the only superpower left, and thus we are the big bully on the block. (Ron Paul has this viewpoint - to the extent he wants the US leave the UN - which is why I won't vote for him.).
Fact is, China is already the equal of the US and in 10 years India will probably be the third.
The viewpoint that the rest of the world has is that the US will not listen to anyone. I"m not saying he has to agree but he should at least TRY to understand what the perspective of the other person is saying, which ironically Jimmy Carter managed to accomplish this with his work in 2002, thus winning the Nobel Peace Prize.
Most of the Arab world already has this viewpoint of us, and I don't think we can "win the hearts and minds of the Arab world" as Bush wants to do without some level of change of perspective from our end (especially not after calling Iran one of the "Axis of Evil"). Now, listening is NOT the same thing as agreeing. But what I get from Obama is that he is willing to work with people who don't necessarily see eye to eye with him, who may not worship at the same church that he does. I don't get that from anyone else. And in a nation of different viewpoints and people, isn't that what a leader is supposed to do?
In terms of Obama's faith, he has said that he's a Christian. More specifically he's said the following about how he came to be a Christian:
"...was not raised in a religious household." He describes his mother, raised by non-religious parents, as detached from religion, yet "in many ways the most spiritually awakened person that I have ever known." He describes his Kenyan father as "raised a Muslim," but a "confirmed atheist" by the time his parents met, and his Indonesian stepfather as "a man who saw religion as not particularly useful." ... in his twenties, while working with local churches as a community organizer, he came to understand "the power of the African American religious tradition to spur social change. It was because of these newfound understandings—that religious commitment did not require me to suspend critical thinking, disengage from the battle for economic and social justice, or otherwise retreat from the world that I knew and loved—that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity United Church of Christ one day and be baptized."
You would expect Obama to say something like "Belief in God gives me comfort" or something like that. The Clintons have said this for example. This on the other hand is rather pronounced, more specifically as he did not grow up in a Christian household.
Obama was also honest about how during his formative years he did drugs and alcohol to push his questions away. In other words, he had a hole in his heart that he tried to fill with other things before he understood who God was. That seems pretty legit to me.
In his time as a Christian, I really see God working in his life to reach out to others who aren't the same as him. From his work as a lawyer working with underprivileged and disadvantaged to speaking at Saddleback, he's constantly breaking down barriers. In a way, I guess you could say that I relate to that:). But more specifically I feel this is a God thing simply b/c he's doing what does NOT come naturally. Frankly the Civil Rights Movement of the sixties was only able to gain steam that way, when whites worked with blacks. And I think Obama's whole professional life is about this.
Where Obama stands on the "issues". I don't agree with everything that he wants to do - then again I don't agree with everything of any of the candidates. However many of the differences are moot points to me. I've already explained my viewpoint on Abortion. Healthcare is another. Given how rich the Pharmaceutical and Insurance companies are, their lobbying power is probably the equivalent of the Tobacco industry or the NRA. And frankly I do think there needs to be some sort of universal health care, just not the extreme level that the Democrats are asking about. I'm more for a "baseline" type health care system, or at least something along the lines of a $4 generic drug plan.
I agree with his stance on the war, and I especially agree with his stance on education (ask any teacher what No Child Left Behind has made things worse not better). More specifically his position on issues such as Education seems like he actually SPOKE to the experts - the teachers, educators, etc. Those of you that are parents, look closely at some of the viewpoints of the other candidates and ask any expert in that field you know (such as a teacher for education) and get their opinion.
Ultimately Obama seems to be willing to listen, as I have said before. If the experts (say the Generals in Iraq) tell him differently than what he thinks, I think he would change his mind.
First off, I feel that our country is not particularly in good shape. Specifically we as a country seem more divided than united. Now, perhaps a lot of this is being driven by talk radio, but it really seems like this is the result of very polarizing figures in the White House, specifically Bush and Clinton before him. Perhaps it was like this during the Reagan administration as well; I have to plead to the ignorance of my youth for that time. All I know is that we seem very divided as a nation.
Consequently many of the candidates running are a result of this situation. Essentially the feeling that I get with most of the candidates is that "I have my viewpoints and ideas, you are welcome to be part of my side but if you don't agree with me the heck with you". Even more disturbing is when you see the majority of the candidates on TV, all of their support base look just like the candidates. They aren't even trying to reach beyond folks who "look" like them.
Where Obama differs on this is that he is reaching out to "groups" of people that ARE different than him. What I get from his actions is "I'm willing to listen". I think this is an important quality of any leader. I *also* think this is something faith driven in him, which is why I said I like how his faith works.
I've used the example of him speaking at Rick Warren's church. Here is the text of his speech: (http://obama.senate.gov/speech/061201-race_against_ti/) as well as an article in Time Magazine about it (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1565076,00.html).
If you read his speech, you'll notice a couple of things. One, he calls himself a fellow Christian. If he's not a Christian, he was seriously putting himself on the firing line. Two, he gives Bush credit where it's legitimately due (Which to be honest is more than I would do). That's something none of Bush's opponents have done.
Then there is the impact of him speaking at Saddleback. I am not a Rick Warren fan at all - I think his books seriously dumb down Christianity - but the way he lives his life definitely honors God (he does a 90/10 tithing where his family tithes 90% and their family lives off of 10%, plus they no longer collect a paycheck at Saddleback) and from what I see of Saddleback it definitely seems like a "legitimate" church. I don't think Rick Warren would have asked a non-christian to speak, particularly a politician - after all, if it was just a matter of asking a democrat, he could have asked Hillary Clinton who was far more visible at the time.
From the cynical viewpoint, was it calculated? Definitely. Still, the big thing is that Barack spoke at a venue and to an audience that no other Democrat would speak at. And just as telling, you don't see any of the Republican candidates speaking at a traditionally Democratic stronghold.
Going back to this "I will listen" perspective: I think our next president has to have this viewpoint, not just in terms of advocating "change" but also with foreign policy. Beyond the war, the biggest issue I have is that the idea that the United States is the only superpower left, and thus we are the big bully on the block. (Ron Paul has this viewpoint - to the extent he wants the US leave the UN - which is why I won't vote for him.).
Fact is, China is already the equal of the US and in 10 years India will probably be the third.
The viewpoint that the rest of the world has is that the US will not listen to anyone. I"m not saying he has to agree but he should at least TRY to understand what the perspective of the other person is saying, which ironically Jimmy Carter managed to accomplish this with his work in 2002, thus winning the Nobel Peace Prize.
Most of the Arab world already has this viewpoint of us, and I don't think we can "win the hearts and minds of the Arab world" as Bush wants to do without some level of change of perspective from our end (especially not after calling Iran one of the "Axis of Evil"). Now, listening is NOT the same thing as agreeing. But what I get from Obama is that he is willing to work with people who don't necessarily see eye to eye with him, who may not worship at the same church that he does. I don't get that from anyone else. And in a nation of different viewpoints and people, isn't that what a leader is supposed to do?
In terms of Obama's faith, he has said that he's a Christian. More specifically he's said the following about how he came to be a Christian:
"...was not raised in a religious household." He describes his mother, raised by non-religious parents, as detached from religion, yet "in many ways the most spiritually awakened person that I have ever known." He describes his Kenyan father as "raised a Muslim," but a "confirmed atheist" by the time his parents met, and his Indonesian stepfather as "a man who saw religion as not particularly useful." ... in his twenties, while working with local churches as a community organizer, he came to understand "the power of the African American religious tradition to spur social change. It was because of these newfound understandings—that religious commitment did not require me to suspend critical thinking, disengage from the battle for economic and social justice, or otherwise retreat from the world that I knew and loved—that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity United Church of Christ one day and be baptized."
You would expect Obama to say something like "Belief in God gives me comfort" or something like that. The Clintons have said this for example. This on the other hand is rather pronounced, more specifically as he did not grow up in a Christian household.
Obama was also honest about how during his formative years he did drugs and alcohol to push his questions away. In other words, he had a hole in his heart that he tried to fill with other things before he understood who God was. That seems pretty legit to me.
In his time as a Christian, I really see God working in his life to reach out to others who aren't the same as him. From his work as a lawyer working with underprivileged and disadvantaged to speaking at Saddleback, he's constantly breaking down barriers. In a way, I guess you could say that I relate to that:). But more specifically I feel this is a God thing simply b/c he's doing what does NOT come naturally. Frankly the Civil Rights Movement of the sixties was only able to gain steam that way, when whites worked with blacks. And I think Obama's whole professional life is about this.
Where Obama stands on the "issues". I don't agree with everything that he wants to do - then again I don't agree with everything of any of the candidates. However many of the differences are moot points to me. I've already explained my viewpoint on Abortion. Healthcare is another. Given how rich the Pharmaceutical and Insurance companies are, their lobbying power is probably the equivalent of the Tobacco industry or the NRA. And frankly I do think there needs to be some sort of universal health care, just not the extreme level that the Democrats are asking about. I'm more for a "baseline" type health care system, or at least something along the lines of a $4 generic drug plan.
I agree with his stance on the war, and I especially agree with his stance on education (ask any teacher what No Child Left Behind has made things worse not better). More specifically his position on issues such as Education seems like he actually SPOKE to the experts - the teachers, educators, etc. Those of you that are parents, look closely at some of the viewpoints of the other candidates and ask any expert in that field you know (such as a teacher for education) and get their opinion.
Ultimately Obama seems to be willing to listen, as I have said before. If the experts (say the Generals in Iraq) tell him differently than what he thinks, I think he would change his mind.
Racism? Cultural ignorance? You decide....
(Note: Boy, can I relate to this story!)
Stopping Traffic in the People’s Republic
By VIVIAN S. TOY
NYTimes Published: May 4, 2008
WERE people gawking at my children? I wasn’t sure.
We were visiting the Forbidden City in Beijing, part of a two-week family vacation to China, when a young woman pulled down her antipollution mask and stared, open-mouthed, at my 7-year-old son, Patrick. She didn’t seem dangerous, just amazed, so I let the moment pass and we moved along to the next stop on our tour.
But the next day, during a visit to the Great Wall, my maternal defenses kicked in when another woman approached us. Without asking permission, she sidled up to my 11-year-old son, Aidan, and draped her arm around him. Her husband was about to snap a quick photograph when I shouted furiously at her in halting Mandarin to get away from my son.
By then, it had become clear why my children were attracting so much attention. They look Chinese, but not exactly. They look Western, but not quite. What they really look like is what they are: a blend of me, a Chinese-American, and my husband, a blond 6-footer of English and Irish descent.
Was I reading more into what may have been simple curiosity? The gawkers reminded me of my own painful experiences of being different: grade school classmates who would pull their eyes into squints and launch into a mocking sing-song; a college adviser who suggested I switch my major to biology since Chinese are better suited for the sciences; colleagues who have mistaken me for some other Asian-American woman.
But when one of Aidan’s cousins, along on the trip, asked what the photo-seeking woman wanted, my son told him: “I guess she just wanted a picture with a cute little boy.” The innocence of his reply made me feel guilty. What if that was all she saw — a cute little boy?
On my first trip to China more than 20 years ago, crowds would gather at the sight of foreigners, especially blond and fair-skinned ones. White people are not quite so exotic these days. My husband hardly merited a second look. But my mixed-race children stopped many Chinese in their tracks.
(To be fair, even in a multicultural center like New York City, where we live, my children still elicit double-takes here and there, and my 14-year-old nephew, who is also mixed race and lives in the city, has been asked the discomforting question, “What are you?”)
Cheng Li, a senior fellow on Chinese government and culture at the Brookings Institution, said the Chinese reaction to my children was not that unusual and, from a Chinese perspective, was not considered impolite or offensive. Perhaps that’s why, when yet another woman stopped me at the Great Wall and asked, very politely, if she could have her picture taken with Patrick, she seemed both shocked and deflated when I snapped, “No!”
“I can’t?” she said, shrinking back and sounding confused.
But Mr. Li said our experience “does kind of reflect some problems that China will have as they deal with cultural diversity, pluralism and tolerance.”
In China, differences are defined largely by ethnicity, he said. Han Chinese account for 93 percent of the 1.3 billion people; more than 50 other ethnic minority groups — all of which we might lump together as Asian — make up the rest. In terms of race, he said, “China is not like the melting pot that the United States is.”
The sheer density of the population may also give the Chinese a very different sense of personal space. “Personal spaces overlap,” said Stuart Strother, an economist who has lived in China and who wrote a travel guide, “Living Abroad in China,” with his wife, Barbara.
“It’s not that you don’t have any personal space, but I may have to share your space,” he said. Perhaps as a consequence, Dr. Strother said, pointing at and touching people, even total strangers, is not considered rude.
He added that Chinese society emphasizes a collective mentality over an individualistic one. “They have an idea that we’re all family,” he said, noting that children in China are routinely told to address relative strangers as uncle or aunt. So picking up someone else’s child, even if you don’t know them, is not considered inappropriate.
He said that when he and his wife lived in Shanghai with their 2-year-old twin sons in 2000, local Chinese would often try to scoop them up in their arms. “A pair of two-year-old blond kids can be hard to resist,” he said.
Shuhan Wang, the executive director for Chinese language initiatives at the Asia Society, said that while Chinese people were generally reserved with strangers and might not initiate conversations with adults they don’t know, the rules for children are different. Children are all affectionately called “little brother” and “little sister,” she said, and, quoting what she said was a Chinese saying — “You treat other people’s elderly as if they are your own, and you treat other people’s children as if they are your own” — she added, “So in a way, everybody in society is extended family.”
All the attention had nonetheless made my children uneasy. I didn’t have the benefit of experts to consult while I was in China, but I felt it was important to tell my children and their cousins, who are also mixed race, to expect more staring and touching. Some Chinese had never seen anyone who was multiracial and they were simply curious, I told them. I suggested that they should stare back and make a silly face at anyone who made them feel uncomfortable — an idea that made them laugh. They tried it a couple of times, too. A few Chinese on the receiving end made their own funny faces in return; a few others turned tail and left us alone.
My husband, Chris Langston, was surprised but relieved that he didn’t stick out. At first, he also found the focus on our children unsettling. But when a young woman came up to him in Xian, midway through our trip, smiling broadly and gesturing that she wanted to pick up our 3-year-old daughter, Katie, and be photographed with her, he agreed. The woman’s sheer delight as she gave Katie a final hug was palpable and infectious.
So we took no offense when a group of ladies pointed and giggled at my children and their cousins in the Shanghai airport. One woman was practically giddy when she spotted Katie and said to her friends: “Look at the smallest one. She’s so adorable, let’s take her home!”
I laughed and said to her, “Yes, let’s take her home.”
Stopping Traffic in the People’s Republic
By VIVIAN S. TOY
NYTimes Published: May 4, 2008
WERE people gawking at my children? I wasn’t sure.
We were visiting the Forbidden City in Beijing, part of a two-week family vacation to China, when a young woman pulled down her antipollution mask and stared, open-mouthed, at my 7-year-old son, Patrick. She didn’t seem dangerous, just amazed, so I let the moment pass and we moved along to the next stop on our tour.
But the next day, during a visit to the Great Wall, my maternal defenses kicked in when another woman approached us. Without asking permission, she sidled up to my 11-year-old son, Aidan, and draped her arm around him. Her husband was about to snap a quick photograph when I shouted furiously at her in halting Mandarin to get away from my son.
By then, it had become clear why my children were attracting so much attention. They look Chinese, but not exactly. They look Western, but not quite. What they really look like is what they are: a blend of me, a Chinese-American, and my husband, a blond 6-footer of English and Irish descent.
Was I reading more into what may have been simple curiosity? The gawkers reminded me of my own painful experiences of being different: grade school classmates who would pull their eyes into squints and launch into a mocking sing-song; a college adviser who suggested I switch my major to biology since Chinese are better suited for the sciences; colleagues who have mistaken me for some other Asian-American woman.
But when one of Aidan’s cousins, along on the trip, asked what the photo-seeking woman wanted, my son told him: “I guess she just wanted a picture with a cute little boy.” The innocence of his reply made me feel guilty. What if that was all she saw — a cute little boy?
On my first trip to China more than 20 years ago, crowds would gather at the sight of foreigners, especially blond and fair-skinned ones. White people are not quite so exotic these days. My husband hardly merited a second look. But my mixed-race children stopped many Chinese in their tracks.
(To be fair, even in a multicultural center like New York City, where we live, my children still elicit double-takes here and there, and my 14-year-old nephew, who is also mixed race and lives in the city, has been asked the discomforting question, “What are you?”)
Cheng Li, a senior fellow on Chinese government and culture at the Brookings Institution, said the Chinese reaction to my children was not that unusual and, from a Chinese perspective, was not considered impolite or offensive. Perhaps that’s why, when yet another woman stopped me at the Great Wall and asked, very politely, if she could have her picture taken with Patrick, she seemed both shocked and deflated when I snapped, “No!”
“I can’t?” she said, shrinking back and sounding confused.
But Mr. Li said our experience “does kind of reflect some problems that China will have as they deal with cultural diversity, pluralism and tolerance.”
In China, differences are defined largely by ethnicity, he said. Han Chinese account for 93 percent of the 1.3 billion people; more than 50 other ethnic minority groups — all of which we might lump together as Asian — make up the rest. In terms of race, he said, “China is not like the melting pot that the United States is.”
The sheer density of the population may also give the Chinese a very different sense of personal space. “Personal spaces overlap,” said Stuart Strother, an economist who has lived in China and who wrote a travel guide, “Living Abroad in China,” with his wife, Barbara.
“It’s not that you don’t have any personal space, but I may have to share your space,” he said. Perhaps as a consequence, Dr. Strother said, pointing at and touching people, even total strangers, is not considered rude.
He added that Chinese society emphasizes a collective mentality over an individualistic one. “They have an idea that we’re all family,” he said, noting that children in China are routinely told to address relative strangers as uncle or aunt. So picking up someone else’s child, even if you don’t know them, is not considered inappropriate.
He said that when he and his wife lived in Shanghai with their 2-year-old twin sons in 2000, local Chinese would often try to scoop them up in their arms. “A pair of two-year-old blond kids can be hard to resist,” he said.
Shuhan Wang, the executive director for Chinese language initiatives at the Asia Society, said that while Chinese people were generally reserved with strangers and might not initiate conversations with adults they don’t know, the rules for children are different. Children are all affectionately called “little brother” and “little sister,” she said, and, quoting what she said was a Chinese saying — “You treat other people’s elderly as if they are your own, and you treat other people’s children as if they are your own” — she added, “So in a way, everybody in society is extended family.”
All the attention had nonetheless made my children uneasy. I didn’t have the benefit of experts to consult while I was in China, but I felt it was important to tell my children and their cousins, who are also mixed race, to expect more staring and touching. Some Chinese had never seen anyone who was multiracial and they were simply curious, I told them. I suggested that they should stare back and make a silly face at anyone who made them feel uncomfortable — an idea that made them laugh. They tried it a couple of times, too. A few Chinese on the receiving end made their own funny faces in return; a few others turned tail and left us alone.
My husband, Chris Langston, was surprised but relieved that he didn’t stick out. At first, he also found the focus on our children unsettling. But when a young woman came up to him in Xian, midway through our trip, smiling broadly and gesturing that she wanted to pick up our 3-year-old daughter, Katie, and be photographed with her, he agreed. The woman’s sheer delight as she gave Katie a final hug was palpable and infectious.
So we took no offense when a group of ladies pointed and giggled at my children and their cousins in the Shanghai airport. One woman was practically giddy when she spotted Katie and said to her friends: “Look at the smallest one. She’s so adorable, let’s take her home!”
I laughed and said to her, “Yes, let’s take her home.”
It's been awhile...
...and sorry for the inactivity!
Anyway, between working 50-60 hour weeks at CTi, doing "start-up" work building a church plant, and music, something had to give. So it was the blog.
Now, that I'm no longer working, I have more free time. I'll be placing some of my thoughts (including some folks have seen over email) and will let folks yell at me at will...:)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)