Georgia Boy

Game week

2005-10-04T06:07:00.000-07:00

Still too busy to write much alas.

Georgia at Tennessee (a winnable game I just don't feel like we're going to pull out), Braves versus Stros. Georgia is going to have to do some damage in the red zone, and probably with some big plays through the air, to pull this one out. They can do these things. But will they? And are they ever going to block Mahelona?

Good news for Braves fans: we're not going to lose another game 5 at home. Alas, that's the only good news I expect and we lose the series in 4. I desperately hope I am wrong.

UT Looms

2005-09-26T06:48:00.000-07:00

[b]The Dawgs:[/b]

A typical Mark Richt win? Some form of that phrase is likely to appear all over the papers & Internet this week I'd imagine. The Dawgs played an inferior opponent, moved up and down the field mostly at will, and managed to make the final score look closer than it was in reality. They did this on the strength of 4 trips into the red zone yielding 6 9 points. Yikes.

There was good. That's the best Lumpkin has run all year. Shockley was solid – got off to a blazing start and then was a touch inconsistent (and doubtless the weather played a role here). MSU actually did a solid job of keeping him bottled up, so he wasn't much of a threat to run. Mohamed Massaquoi is starting to look like a player. I'm starting to feel better about the corps as a whole as well. The defense played well, and got pretty good pressure on Jacobs.

There was bad. Coutu missed 2 field goals. One was from 56 yards, true, but it wasn't really that close. Affected by a gust of wind? It was impossible to say for sure and the announcers didn't really discuss it. Speaking of the announcers – a dreadful job by Curry and what's his name. I woke up screaming last night just thinking about them. More importantly though – I'm slightly worried about Coutu. I'd hoped we were finding a kicker, but the Jury appears to still be out. I'm not sure Thomas Brown was 100%, and it certainly didn't help that MSU did a good job against the run. The interior of our line – primarily the centers – had a tough time with MSU. Given who they're going to have to face in two weeks in Knoxville, this is particularly troubling. Shockley did have a few misfires – it happens. He was also sacked 3 times. We're going to have a rough time of it against UT I think.

Where is Sean Bailey? I saw him in the game (he got thrown to a couple of times to boot). He's had some injuries, yes. But it seems as if his season is derailing. McClendon seems to have more of a rhythm with Shockley,a and since we throw to both Tes now that limits how many balls the Wrs get. I'm not ready to call his season a disappointment, but I'd like to see him become a factor again. GATA Sean.

Some more untimely penalties (though one was made up, to be sure; it didn't matter though because the Dawgs got away with one a few plays later). A turnover inside the 10 is a bad thing. The Red Zone offense was terrible.

Still, it's an SEC road win. Nice to have one under our belts. On to Knoxville.

[b]The Georgia Institute of Technology[/b]:

Hey, I think VaTech just scored again.

But seriously – ouch.

[b]Louisville:[/b]

What the hell just happened? This is a particularly troubling game because that's my fantasy QB. How do you lose that badly to South Florida?

[b]Dirty Birds:[/b]

Well, they needed that one. A nice win, all in all. The Defense played pretty good, Vick had a nice (and injury free) day. They really pounded Buffalo on the ground.

[b]Braves:[/b]

Better. Now stop with the comparing Francouer to Vlad, for the love of god.

Weekend quickie

2005-09-23T12:54:00.000-07:00

I'm swamped at work right now, unfortunately. Doesn't look like it's going to clear up in the near future either.

What to make of Mississippi State? I'm just not sure. Their opponents to date have been Murray State, Auburn, and Tulane. They only surrendered 320 yards to Auburn, and 7 of the Plainsmen's points came on a fumble-darter. Auburn is a team still finding itself, so I don't know what to make of that either. Mississippi State only managed 207 yards against what should be a pretty good defense. They gave up 293 against Tulane but only 14 points and held on for the win despite only getting about 220 yards in that one as well. Jerious Norwood is a good running back but I'm not sure this offense is very good. The conditions Saturday's night could be ugly as well – 72% chance of rain.

Mississippi State needs to run to win but I'm expecting Georgia to prevent that. If they don't, well it could be a long fall. Starkville is not an easy place to pay, even when their fans are sans cowbells (Georgia fans traveling to the game should thank g_d for that). But this State team is not cut from the same mold as the tougher teams from the 90s. Dawgs under Richt are allergic to large spreads, so I'm inclined to say take the points.

What I'd like to see is Georgia really take care of business. The team under Richt has tended to have a very methodical approach and performance in games. This has generally been helpful against good/better teams, but not so good against teams of lesser talent. The game was moved to ESPN's prime time slot thanks to the UT-LSU game being moved. So, hopefully Georgia will feel like coming out and playing well, and look good in front of a sizable TV audience doing it.

The Braves – it's too painful for me to talk about.

The Dirty Birds – I'm terrified about this game in Buffalo. The schedule is not easy and I don't want to start 1-2. But we might be doing just that.

Weekends are supposed to be for relaxing

2005-09-19T05:48:00.000-07:00

I've had worst weekends, but this one wasn't fun. Georgia flops on a day it nets 543 yards of offense, only allows 211 on defense, and nearly covers a 38 point spread. The Falcons take the first half off and come up just short, not to mention a potentially alarming injury to Vick. The Braves are comatose. My pro fantasy teams are falling off cliffs. My college team has gotten off to a decent scoring start but finds itself in 6th and the top half of the league is looking to run away.

Obviously Vick wasn't 100% for that last drive. No offense to Vick, but I'm not so sure we shouldn't have just sent Schaub out. What killed me though were two plays in the first half. Michael Jenkins let a big play slide through his hands – something that might have sparked the Falcons and possibly turned the tide of the game. Instead, the went down 14-0. And then later in the second, on forth and maybe an inch from their own 26, Mora punted. I realize that's deep in your own territory. But the Falcons hadn't really stopped the Seahawks all day and weren't getting any pressure. I was absolutely certain Seattle would move down the field like a knife through butter and get points. Jerramy Stevens made a great diving grab – reeling in a tougher to catch ball than Jenkins had – to make it 21-0, and those two plays kind of mirrored the day. Seattle was crisp in execution, the Falcons were not.

As for the Dawgs – it was ugly and it was a tad bit disappointing. They only led 20-7 late in the third. The play until that point was often a bit listless. Georgia needed to run a little more often I think – the rushing stats are nice (29 for 280) but 7 carries and 66 yards came on the final drive of the game. The passing attack was on – when Shockley wasn't misfiring - so the balanced play calling isn't really a surprise and I'm not one of those people who played football in high school and thinks you have to hand it off 70% of the time to win.

But it's more than a little weird to see a team like ULM, even when it gets only 211 yards of offense, run 19 more plays and have the ball for 13 more minutes. One issue early in Richt's tenure was how bad the Dawgs were getting beat up in time of possession, even in lopsided winds. Things got a little better towards the ended of 01 when Veron Haynes became the go to guy, and 2002 continued to see some improvements. It's something Richt has corrected in his offensive game plan, so I don't think this is a return to old form; just an anomaly.

Shockley played pretty good but boy he sure missed a couple of open guys, leading to the dawgs squandering a couple of nice drives and only getting 3 points on two field goal attempts. I don't him to be perfect. I do think that to beat the better SEC teams, we are going to have to make some big plays in the air.

Milner's fumble, and the two misfires on those drives, put a damper on what could have been a very high scoring half. Still, Milner played pretty good and I hope the fumble doesn't hurt his confidence. Coutu's miss was quickly forgotten after his booming 58 yard make. Georgia may have found itself a good kicker, so hopefully the miss was just one of those things.

The Dawgs got a look at an offense that is similar to what Urban Meyer runs. How closely it mimicked Meyer's attack I can't say. A couple of times Georgia's ends badly bit on play fakes and opened up big running lanes. Against the Gators that's not going to cut it. Staying at home is going to be critical come the last weekend of October.

Still, they did win 44-7. Nobody is fretting nearly as much about the offense nearly as much if Shockley hits one of those two post routs, and Coutu makes the field goal. On to Mississippi State!

Weekend Thoughts

2005-09-16T07:05:00.000-07:00

Dawgs win and probably cover. It's a lot of points. But then I think ULM lost to a 1AA or DII school in their previous game. I'm excited that quite a number of backups should get extended time.

The Dawgs welcomed their 20th verbal commitment of the recruiting season yesterday - LB Darryl Gamble. I see speculation that he'll be playing safety in college. Georgia's class is off to a strong start, though as they say nothing is set in stone until they ink on Signing Day and then graduate from highschool. Rumor has it that Georgia will be getting 6 or so kids from this class in this December (including Corry Moon - who came up just short on the SAT last year). Kids who get in for winter count against the previous year's scholarship total, so all of those non-qualifiers might not be as problematic for Georgia as everyone made them out to be.

Thank Gozer the Philly series is over. I think it was kind of a depressing preview of October, but hopefully I'll be proven wrong. Smoltz via Pedro should be a fun one to watch tonight.

Chipper Jones really is having a terrific season. I think had he not gotten hurt (and played hurt for a few weeks), he'd also probably be hitting over .320 or higher (I have no evidence to back this up; just a hunch). He's on pace for something like 45 doubles, 30 homers in a full season. I wonder if this years BB/K ratio (61/47 - and it got worse during the stretch he played hurt; I think he was pressing) is a sign of what to expect from him healthy in the next few years. A step forward if you will, after two years mostly spent unhappy in the outfield. I think this winter is going to be particularly interesting - and I'm sure Chipper to First is going to be a hot topic of discussion. I like LaRoche but I see logic in the move. And if we're not going to hit LaRoche against lefties, he's never going to get a chance to prove himself. Maybe he's better off going somewhere that he'll get 550 ABs.

In any case Andy Marte had a fine season at AAA, and I don't think he was as overmatched as his stats look in his brief time in with the Braves earlier this season. Whether Chipper will want to go to First is another matter entirely (I suspect he might take this differently from the move to the OF, but we'll see).

I still think Kelly Johnson has a future, but something is going to have to happen with he and Langerhans. One of them needs to play everyday. Langerhans has the defensive edge, which makes me think Johnson's future with the team might not be long. Though it's possible the Braves won't bring back Hollandsworth (letting him leave via free agency or trading him), I don't like the idea of either Johnson or Langerhans as an extra outfielder. They're both young, and have growing to do as players. They can only do that playing. With Francouer seemingly entrenching himself in RF, this will not be a situation to watch this Winter as well.

A Win is a Win is a Win

2005-09-12T05:54:00.000-07:00

It was ugly, no doubt about it. South Carolina had their chances, but dropped interceptions and critical penalties helped steal away the upset chance. There was some encouraging things to take from the game, I think. Carolina was better than they thought I would be. I wasn't expecting a blowout but I wasn't expecting the game to be that much in doubt either.

1)Blake Mitchell really impressed me. He made some great throws under pressure. He must have been knocked down at least 10 times. The Georgia pass rush was somewhat effective, and the reason it wasn't “really” effective was Mitchell. I cringed as soon as I saw the safety blitz was on during that SC scoring drive in the second half (but I also thought Blue's rush was poor) because Mitchell had done such a good job.

2)The Georgia secondary has some questions. Tra Battle has impressed me, and I thought Jennings played pretty good. Paul Oliver got badly burned on a play that might have been a touchdown had the ball been well thrown (OTOH, Mitchell was on the run, and it's not easy to throw on the run, particularly for a non scrambler) – he had no reason not to follow the receiver there and I'm not sure why he stopped. Blue had some big hits but right now I think he's been ok and no better. The Cocks didn't run that much so he didn't get a chance to play to his strengths.

Carolina had a number of big pass plays, which is worrisome. But it wasn't always for lack of pressure (see above). Overall, I think it was a pretty good effort by the Defense. And there is still time to improve. Ely-Kelso had a good game, and I think if necessary Richt will be able to lean on the defense as in years past. I'd prefer we not have to do that, of course. The tackling on the first touchdown drive was atrocious but good outside of that. I'm not sure what happened; in fact Ellerbe should have made a play to end the drive during the first series on 3rd and 7. But he went high and slid of Turman's back on a screen (I think it was Turman; might have been the Davis kid). Go for the legs, Johnny.

3)The O-line played pretty well. However, I'll be curious to see how they perform against a deeper, more talented, defensive line that doesn't employ the “gaggle of chicks at a frat party” defensive formation. So the O-line hasn't really faced a true test yet. Shockley was pressured some but I think the line did a good job overall keeping Carolina out of his face. Brown was awesome, and Ware pretty good. The running game was excellent for the most part. Outside of one play that the staff stopped calling, and the awful busted play to start the game, the ground-attack pretty much had its way with Carolina. We just needed to recognize that earlier in the game, perhaps.

4)I'll credit the staff for recognizing that the delayed hand off, against-the-grain, play out of the shotgun was not working and they abandoned it after a couple of attempts. It was a pretty effective play for us last year, but it didn't work well against Carolina. They definitely had it scouted, but I think their defensive style doesn't lend itself well to counters/misdirection. They don't over pursue, and running right at them is too effective to need to run a play like that. And I'll credit Bob Davie for making this point, though it pains me to do so.

5)On the other hand, it would have been nice had the staff realized that going right at the Cocks was the best option. DJ Shockley had some nice completions on the first drive but he did not play well. He made some awful throws (sometimes following an awful decision to throw), and what looked like some poor decisions to run at times. A decent throw at the end of the second half nets Georgia 7 points. Also Carolina had the QB sweep bottled up after the first touchdown.
6)It's kind of spooky to think that DJ very nearly had a repeat of Q-balls awful game in 2000. But I think DJ will be fine. Unlike Q-ball, whom I was terrified of for the rest of the season.

7)Lou Holtz' prediction almost came true, but I suspect it would have been similar to someone with little knowledge of the sport who went to Georgia saying “The Dawgs will kill Boise” in week 1 and then being “correct”. He never really offered up much in the way of meaningful co0mmentary as to why Georgia would win that I saw (note that last part, please). His biggest assessment that came across my table: “Georgia has DJ Shockley and nobody else”. Nice call Lou. I suppose you missed Thomas Brown shredding the Carolina defense. And how badly Charles Johnson and Quentin Moses man-handled that O-line. Or Jarvis Jackson being all over the field. Or. . .well, it's not really worth getting into. I like having Granny Holtz around because he's good for entertainment. He's shit for football commentary. Also, he's really old. Old people are creepy, and smell vaguely of cabbage.

8)It will be interesting to see Georgia's ranking in the blogpoll this week. The blogpoll has a chance to correct some of the problems that normal polls have. I suspect there will be more people willing to drop a highly ranked team because they looked bad, even if it means putting another team in a position that seems too high.

The Cocks are Coming to the Classic City

2005-09-09T12:41:00.000-07:00

And I have absolutely no idea how to feel about the game. The spread seems high - I don't think we've been a good bet in games like this in recent years. There's quite a bit about UGA we still don't know after last weekend. And the same is true of the Cocks, who struggled with a UCF team that is probably better than most people realize (though not necessarily that good).

The lopsided series has had a number of hotly contested games, particularly in recent years. For reasons unknown to me, South Carolina is expert at getting up for the Dawgs. Always has been. SC has viewed Georgia as a stepping stone in the east since the SEC went to the divisional format. Dawgs win; I have doubts about the cover though.

Haikus

2005-09-07T06:02:00.000-07:00

As seen on EDSBS, it's the original football haiku page, Notre Dame style. My muse is stirred.

Gameday needs a new host
get Timberlake on the line
not Janet Jackson

Trev you will be missed
you were kind of spazztastic
sometimes lacked coherence

Trev wore heart on sleeve
approached job in earnest, made
tactical blunder

Boise Zambranski'd
you sweet river in Egypt's land
pundits in reverse

September's dawn breaks
whispers of legends untold
man this sport kicks ass

Weiss leads resurgence
how is the new Pope doing
birth control not bad

Steve threw his visor
to sanctify this season
won't help Carolina

Ok, I think it's time for me to step away from the keyboard. . .

The Charles Rogers Theorem

2005-09-06T09:06:00.000-07:00

Mike Elkon of Braves & Birds fame has a column up at collegefootballnews.com dated last thursday where he provides a road map for picking overrated teams, and then picks a couple. I'm late but it's a good read and he's been saying this stuff for years. If you comment about it nicely on his blog, he may even post his "picking an NCAA champion" rules - which should be revisted (I'm wondering how the past 3-4 champions looked under them) but were pretty interesting a couple of years back.

I link to this for two reasons - Elkon's a good guy and a good writer and it's a good read if you happen to stumble across this page and have never seen his or CFN. But also because he touches on a point that's very near and dear to me.

There are a number of things people generally don't approach rationally. The tendency to weight the latter parts of the season, as well as bowl results, is a good exmaple of this and something to always be wary of. The "spring-board bowl game" thing is something I have especially become a big fan of in recent years, because it really doesn't make a lick of sense. I do think playing in a bowl game is imporant - you get extra practice and it's often good extra work for young guys before spring (and hey, you get benjamins to do it).

Playing in bowl games is certainly *fun* (unless you get trounced). But past performance is not necessarily a good predictor of future outcomes. The national media often treats bowl wins as important for the coming season: it needs to stop doing it.

Anyway, it may prove that the theorem will need modifying. I suspect there is something to having good coaching - Ferentz would seem to overqualify here - and maybe that can help mitigate certain factors. Auburn last year got good line play, so while the skill positions did get a ton of hype, that amy have just been the media (typically) focusing on all the wrong things.

In All Things, A Balance

2005-09-06T06:20:00.000-07:00

It was a good holliday weekend. The Braves went 3-1. The Dawgs proved that technology is the root of all evil. The United States dispatched Mexico to clinch a berth in Germany in 06 (note: I am chagrined to report that I went up to a local bar for the 2nd half the Uga vs Boise contest and was completely unaware that this game was on the big screen behind me the entire time. To be fair, I was completely caught up in the Dawgs but I could have taken in both; hell I'd have seen the goals during the Dawgs' placement of the final nails in the blue coffin).

But with sunshine there must sometimes be rain. I'm reminded why I loath my current place of employment (I mean, outside fo the omnipresent fact that I'm at work here) not once but twice in the first 30 minutes of the short work week's beginning, and my Blog has apparently arrived; special thanks to the spammer who popped that particular cherry. My blog sucks, thankyouverymuch, but it sucks in a special, charming way that only I can accomplish. And this too is about balance.

I tried very much to hex the Carolina Panthers - ranked second in the offseason trendy pick polls - Saturday evening. We shall see if I posessed the focus to pull it off. Lacking the necessary live barnyard animals to complete the ritual, I have my doubts.

Zabranski'd

2005-09-06T05:36:00.000-07:00

Boise State's high tech offense never really got off the ground Saturday. Some thoughts on the game:

1)Temperature was ideal (in part due to the time but it was just a good weekend overall).

2)Jared Zabranski was not ideal. Ok, he was awful. Georgia had a nice 24-0 halftime lead thanks in part to his 6 turnovers, but it should have been worse. Boise's rushing stats are somewhat deceptive – Zabranski and 4 carries for 40 yards, all on scrambles. Take those out, and it looks a bit better from a dawgs perspective. In any case, the ground game never really got going until the second half, when many reserves were in. Boise hit two passes of over 25 yards, but that was it for the big plays.

I feel bad for Jared. He's clearly an able guy and had a bad game (occasionally helped by some pressure and the Georgia defensive Scheme).

3)I have to credit Martinez here. Georgia blitzed rarely (when they did it was effective though), and seemed content to sit back and keep the offense in front of them. It worked. There wasn't much of a pass rush, which is something of a concern, but Boise does have a good line (and an AA candidate at Tackle).

4)Miller was definitely much improved. Jarvis had a solid game. Some of the freshman made mistakes at times but all in all it was a pretty impressive performance.

5)Kickoff returns were appalling. Georgia worked harder on these in the off season, but more work is apparently needed. The return coverage was ok. The actual punting was so so (but then Ely-Kelso was trying to drop a few inside the 20 and that's not easy), the returns and coverage solid.

6)Georgia hurt itself in the first half with drops – drives 3 and 4 weren't extended because people dropped catchable balls on 3rd and 2nd down respectively (the former would have been a first down, the latter negating what would have been third and short). Once the route was on, Brandon Southerland dropped what would have been a big play (and maybe a touchdown, but I suspect not), though it didn't matter.

Outside of that the passing offense was pretty good. Shockley missed a few (one somewhat badly it seems – the long ball Gartrell laid out for and “dropped” appeared to pull TJ off his route, but I couldn't tell for sure), but he generally didn't miss by much (a long one to Bailey was slightly overthrown; the post Bailey ran later was under thrown and probably should have been a TD but it wasn't badly under thrown). TJ Gartrell even tripped over the yellow first down marker. I think we saw the makings of a decent receiving corps on Saturday, but time will tell. Shockley, needless to say, looked good.

7)It's hard to score the ground attack outside of Shockley. Boise State definite put lots of people in the box, and Georgia's attack was inconsistent when handing off. Brown had some very nice runs. 5 backs wound up with carries in the blowout. The run game will need to be better in the coming games, but if people sell out against the run this much Georgia should be able to hurt them in the air.

8)Milner's poor first half (though I'm not sure the penalty call was legit) was made up for with some nice catches and the long TD in the second. If he gains consistency it's going to be a fun fall, and the Dawgs could do some interesting things out of the 2 TE set.

9)I don't know what this game means for Boise. Are they still a 10 win team? If so, it will be a more impressive win later. I'm sure the Boise fans are kicking themselves about the turnovers, but from where I was watching Boise was outclassed. They've definitely got talent, and can be a fun team to watch.

10)Will we learn anything this coming Saturday? Possibly. But maybe not – I'm not sure what to make of the Cocks yet.

Blank to Reeves: Nuh-uhh!

2005-09-02T10:33:00.000-07:00

Seems Arthor Blank was not the man who got the Price deal through. At least, according to Arthor Blank (who some consider to be an authority on Arthur Blank). I don't know who is right and more importantly: I don't care.

I do have one concern. Mr Blank, the correct response to any commentary from Dan Reeves, critical or otherwise, is "Nathan-freaking-Davis". That's all you have to say dawg. He's pretty much left with "your brain has a shell on it" at this point. And that's checkmate.

Jim Brower, you are banished from the land

2005-09-02T07:03:00.000-07:00

Cox knows more than me. The Braves as an organization know more than me. It's why any attempt to critique them in this place is just silly. I could have, for example, complained that Devine's minor league numbers were deceptively good pre-callup (an alarming number of walks *and* hit batsmen was a more telling stat than the ERA) when he was called up, and that it was too risky a move to make. But they know more than me, and even though Devine didn't pan out this time, there is hope for the future (rough outing his first time out back in Richmond though; chin up Joey).

I just don't understane why Brower is pitching in any game of significance right now. I know it was a 4 run lead and that *should* have been enough. And he didn't get any help from McBride or Kolb (gasp). But he has given up far too many baserunners this year - 1.7 WHIP for the season. And he gives up far too many homeruns - 1.7 per 9 innings. He's not having a good year. Please leave him out of any game with an eastern wild card contender (having said that, he'll get some critical outs against the Nats when we next play them, and if he does good for him).

As for Andruw, I don't think it would be a travesty if he got MVP. The award isn't really an MVP award though, it's a quasi "who is having the best year" award as well. So I think Pujols will still get it in the end.

Spurrier Returneth

2005-09-02T05:13:00.000-07:00

And it isn't pretty. What started out as a massacre in the making turned into a pretty tense and enjoyable contest in the second half (admittedly: enjoyable if you are rooting against Spurrier). Cackalacki shot itself in the knee a couple of times but held on to win with a couple of goal line stands.

I see some Georgia fans here and there frothing about SC, but we've got much more to worry about (how good is our team really going to be? Nobody really knows). That said, I thought SC was borderline brutal. No running attack. They gave up 340ish yards to UCF - not an awful total but it sure seemed to come in bunches in the second half. I think the cocks could be in for a long season. But one game does not a season, or comeback, make.

And any Carolina fan that isn't peeking 3-4 years down the road is doing themselves a disservice anyway. It's going to take some time for Spurrier to get Carolina anywhere meaningful, I think.

Thoughts on the Dawgs and Boise

2005-09-01T12:07:00.000-07:00

A few things about Saturday's Boise State vs Georgia match up:

1)“It's not the heat, it's the humidity” is cliché because it's true. There's no getting around that. Anyone who claims otherwise is lying through their teeth. That said, the 5:30pm start time is going to help Boise and Georgia. The heat/humidity combination would have affected the Dawgs too (anyone who claims otherwise is lying through their teeth as well). Would it have affected both teams the same? Well, that's debatable.

If I am reading right, Boise subs fairly liberally. That would help, though it doesn't necessarily equalize things. I don't think Boise's talent pool is as strong or deep as Georgia's, but it's not just about Talent. Weather may play a role, but I don't think it will be a huge one.

2)Boise has more talent than most people realize, and is probably bigger than most people realize if it's true that Dawn Hawkins is a master of understatement. That would seem to align somewhat with what I've been reading when skimming Bronco commentary in various outlets in any case. They have an interesting offense – run & play action. They do a lot with their formations and motion true, but it's pretty fundamental from a strategy standpoint. Grind down the other team on the ground, and when they move the safeties in too close, go for an uppercut.

3)Georgia's OL is supposed to be a strength of the team. For the first time in eons, it's a two-deep that has a good deal of experience. Line play was decent last year, though. The Dawgs allowed 21 sacks (a huge improvement from the 47 in 2003, when it was one and two-year players on the 2-deep for the most part). The team yards-per-carry was only 4.3 last year – hardly otherworldly. Georgia sometimes had trouble in critical short yardage situations, and it experienced serious red zone woes. This is not a line that was dominant last year. Rather, it's play was steady. There is potential to dominate, we'll see how that plays out.

4)If you listen to the AJC, Georgia's red zone woes are apparently due to the fact that Richt calls a screen pass about 55% of the time in the red zone. It's true that red zone play calling has been a problem at times in Richt's tenure, though, and the woes of the previous two years have roots here.

All off season, Richt has said the play book would be very similar to last year's, with some changes. The Staff have made it known that Georgia's talented staple of backs (Thomas Brown, Danny Ware, Kregg Lumpkin) will sometimes be sharing the backfield. Creative use of “they who need a group nickname” could be critical to Georgia's success this year.

But Georgia is going to have to hit big plays in the air too, and Richt knows this. This is especially true since Boise will be happy to keep putting players into the box until there's no more room for anyone to stand. Georgia also likes to make heavy use of the play-action. If some Wrs don't step up, Boise will be able to focus on Leonard Pope and Georgia could be in trouble.

5)Georgia's special teams have been a mixed bag the last two years. Punt coverage and return was borderline spectacular last year – Tyson Browning had some big early punt returns but lost his job to Thomas Flowers thanks to fumble issues. All Flowers did was lead the SEC in return average. Kickoff coverage & return left a lot to be desired. The coverage will be especially important as Boise is dangerous on returns, spearheaded by Quinton Jones. The Dawgs desperately need to get a spark out of the KR game.

6)Given that Boise likes to run, left, right, middle, around, under, beyond, and even occasionally meander off tackle, the play of Georgia's front seven is going to be critical. It hurts that Kedrick Golston will miss the opener. For better, for worse, freshman sensation Jeff Owens is now the #3 DT behind Gerald Anderson and Ray Gant. Keep an eye on the strong side linebacking position. Brandon Miller is the starter with Danny Verdun-Wheeler as the backup (but it's close right now). Miller looked like he struggled to me on defense when he got in last year, but he did wreak some havoc on special teams. He was voted most improved player in the spring and has incredible physical tools. Weekside and Middle will be manned by Jarvis Jackson and Tony Taylor. Both are coming of serious injuries (Jackson off season shoulder surgery, Taylor missed 2004) but are talented. Georgia needs a big day from these guys to help contain the Boise attack.

Reeves: The Price Was Wrong

2005-09-01T10:04:00.000-07:00

I've been swamped at work of late and unable to complete a couple of thoughts on this weekends Georgia contest. Maybe I'll get to that this afternoon.

At lunch, I read an article by the AJC that further discussed the Falcons' severing ties with Peerless Price. Apparently, Dan-o really had a lot to get off his chest concerning the move. Were I to read between the lines, I'd suggest Dan-o feels as if his regime was run aground by forces beyond his control. I can understand wanting to divorce yourself from the move though. After all, the Price can best be summed up as a wreck.

That makes me wonder though. Has Reeves made any questionable football decisions in his life? Nathan freaking Davis ring a bell? Dan-o, this is your life:

1997

- 1st pick is a defensive back - Michael Westbrook - from a team - Nebraska - that barely faced any passing offenses. Given what had happened a few short years before with the exact same type of player - Bruce Pickins - you'd think somebody would have said "Uh, Dan, bad idea".
- 2nd pick Nathan Freaking Davis - a "project" at DT. With your second round draft pick. Nathan Freaking Davis.

Note that he also drafted Tony Graziani that year, and Grazzi some how managed to stick with the team for forever, despite lacking any noticeable ability or upside.

1998
- Bob Halen, Jammi German, Omar Brown. Picked in rounds 2-4. None of them was worth a damn. The German pick was especially appaling because the Dirty Birds needed receving help, and German never did anything in college to suggest he would pan out. Reeves touted it as help for the WR corps. I think I threw something when it was announced.

1999
- Falcs trade their 2000 1st round pick to get a second round pick to take a Dan Reeves favorite: TE Reggie Kelley. Tagliabue cut Mel Kiper's air time on this one for fear that the Birds would get mocked so much people would refuse to watch them on TV.
- This draft yielded Kerney in the first and C Todd McLure in the 6th. Every other pick was wasted.
- Needing receiver help, the Falcons draft 2 guys under 6-feet tall, and without noteworthy speed, in the 4th and 7th rounds.

2000
- No first round pick this year because it was so badly shat on, that it had to be thrown out due to smell.
- The only pick from this draft to make an impact was Derrick Vaughn, who had a good year (or two?) on kick returns. Mark Simoneau did start some. I never liked Travis Claridge.

Dan, I want you to know that I was not behind any of these picks, and I want the world to know that I want you to know this. I don't know - maybe I'm feeling snarky because the cats are away right now.

Harris drops weight

2005-08-25T08:32:00.000-07:00

Some might call it dead weight - I leave that in the hands of the observer. Here is the AJC article from Tony Barnhart, which you can read for free courtesy of somebody who can make decisions for the AJC actually having a clue (someone give that guy a raise too, we can't afford to lose him).

Already we have some problems with some the voters. Like Brenston Buckner, who is playing on Sunday's and I highly doubt will be able to watch enough football to make an informed decision for every team from every region (more on that in a moment).

Any voter with an ESPN affiliation had to pull out because of their contracts. Understandable.

Or talk show radio host Kenny Roda, who has links to naked chicks on his website.

Good grief. Links to naked women and gambling sites aren't what we need to worry about here. What we need to worry about is if each of these people will be able to watch a decent amount of football and try to take in games from all over the country (special thanks to TBS and their nighttime weekly Pac-10 game; that was loads of fun last year and I look forward to caching it again this year). I think many of the pollsters are going to run into the same problems the coaches had (there are only 24 hours in a day). And some will run into the same problems that all humans have (inability to work beyond bias).

Of course, some will get the boot because they don't meet any of the basic criteria ( former college player, coach or administrator, or a member of the media according to the AJC), like Jason Rush. I'm glad his father in law, Troy's head coach, decided to ignore the nomination criteria. If we're lucky dad votes in the coaches poll too.

The Harris voters may or may not prove competent as a whole. They may or may not be able to shrug off the problems inherent in polls. But it doesn't matter anyway - it's still people deciding the outcome of seasons, where we should be doing that on the field.

Heatley Traded

2005-08-24T06:05:00.000-07:00

Reads the somewhat shocking AJC headline this morning. It didn't take much to think about why - and everything I've read since confirms it. Scott Burnside has a pretty good article up on ESPN.com about it.

His article touches on some of the more unpleasant aspects of the trade - Heatley's sliding play over the past few international competitions for example.

I wish Danny the best. I thought he'd be a Thrasher for a long time.

Harris Poll Votes Announced

2005-08-22T12:39:00.000-07:00

Article on sportsline.

Amongs the voters are former atheletes (Steve Largent, Raghib Ismail), CFB Luminaries (Roy Kramer, who promises not to piss off EDSBS this time), and coaches (Garry DiNardo, Lee Corso. Just kidding on that last one). It's too early to say, but I'm guessing they'll be roughly as qualified to do this as the coaches and media. Take that for what it is worth.

The Harris Poll results will debut September 25th, which I think is still too early in the season - too much pre-season bias still in the poles at that point. It's better than before the season, true, but still not ideal.

Now, when there are 4 legit 10-1 teams vying for the right to play USC in the BCS Title game, perhaps we can get another schism in the offseason and next year go into the year with 3 potential champions (BCS, the AP, and pick your favorite remaining faction from amongst the Harris and Coaches). It would be fitting, in any case.

The Witch is Dead

2005-08-19T09:12:00.000-07:00

A Report has appeared claiming that the Atlanta Spirit will buyout Steve Belkin's contract. It's great news for the 37 remaining Hawks fans in the state, and probably decent news for the several thousand Thrashers fans as well. Belkin apparently was into owning a team but not on spending money on that team. Good riddance I say.

Of course, he may well be right about the Joe Johnson deal. The Hawks might be overdoing it for a player they could (over)sign as a free agent anyway (I'm with Braves & Birds - despite posturing I think Phoenix matches the offer, but who knows). The thing is - the actual basketball guy wants to do the deal. And I think it's safe to say he knows a lot more about this than Belkin does. It's true he tried to overpay for mediocre players last year, but he's also responsible for the Hawks drafts of late, and he did do a decent job of gutting the woefully overrated and overpriced Hawks roster that existed when he arrived.

If your going to trust Billy Knight, you have to trust him. If he screws up, then kick him to the curb. Until then, I think he deserves a chance to turn the Hawks around.

Cott on Andruw Jones

2005-08-19T06:36:00.000-07:00

Kevin Cott - aka“The Intern” of Sports Guy Fame - has a nice piece up on Andruw Jones on Page2. It's a pretty good read, nothing earth shattering to be sure; I think it nicely conveys what a lot of people have probably felt towards Andruw over the past decade.

People always want to compare other outfielders to him. Cott aptly notes that the Andruw of today is not the Andruw of a few years ago. Jones is still fantastic in the field, still gets great jumps, and still glides effortlessly. But he's not quite the defensive force he used to be. In his absolute prime, I can't imagine anybody of recent memory being close. He was standing under balls other guys made incredible running or diving catches on. He brought a routine, even strange, beauty to center field. You watched him on his own, and you might have been impressed with his fluidity and grace (you also might also have been somewhat unimpressed, assuming he's too nonchalant). You turned on Sports Center, and suddenly a larger context put his performances into a better perspective. He was standing under balls other guys never got too.

Of course, people always always wanted to compare him to other outfielders. His career didn't get off to the same start as Doc Gooden's, but it's pretty damn hard to top 2 homers in game 1 of the World Series at age 18.

I think Andruw in his prime was head and shoulders above Griffey defensively, though I mostly just saw highlight film of the latter and that always makes it hard to tell. I really think most people will never adequately appreciate Andruw's defensive ability, because you came to appreciate it over time, not with one play or a handful of plays.

Implications of the Boise State vs UGA Game

2005-08-15T13:14:00.000-07:00

If you are an avid reader of all things college football, particularly on the Internet, then you've probably heard tell that the Boise State v UGA match-up could reshape the college football landscape.

Well, it does have a couple of things going for it. Boise State is probably playing in the premiere game of the program's history. It's on the road in a fairly environs, on national TV, and coming on the heels of Utah's appearance in a BCS title game. Up until this point, no so called “mid major” had ever played in a BCS game.

I'm thinking, though, that this whole “change college football forever” thing already happened last year. Boise could run the table or go 10-1 – assume that the loss isn't to UGA. Is it a lock for the BCS either way? No – that will depend in part on how other teams are doing. A bunch of one-loss conference runners-up could muddy the picture. However, any claim to a BCS berth will be aided thanks to Utah's performance last year.

Utah making a BCS bowl (against as big of a sacrificial lamb as we've seen in a long time, to be sure) was a bigger deal than a Boise State victory in Athens would be. Not that such an upset wouldn't be a big deal – and to the Boise State fans it would be everything. But I think the landscape already got changed last year. Utah's making and winning a BCS game could help future mid-majors who claim a spot in one of College Football's “big four”. As sensational as an upset in Athens would be, it would not the long term impact that Utah making the Fiesta will.

Belkin doesn't like Johnson

2005-08-04T07:08:00.000-07:00

So Michael sayeth. I don't get those sports talk stations well down here in Macon, so I don't get this kind of juiciness on the way to work.

The gist is that the trade is being held up because one member of the Atlanta Spirit ownership group doesn't think Joe Johnson is worth it. Well, you're an idiot Steve Belkin.

Hey, Johnson may not be worth it. He may only be partly worth it. It's not outside of the realm of possibility he's a flop. But I know this: he can shoot, he can defend a number of positions, he handled the ball some - spelling Nash, he's athletic. If the Hawks don't sign him, it's going to be a problem for the team. We'll get thirty columns nationwide about how nobody wants to play in Atlanta (again. . .), and how Billy Knight is a bad GM (he isn't). Belkin, how do you think the team is going to do then?

You don't want to sign someone for the sake of signing them. But the Hawks need serious help. And Johnson wasn't really fourth fiddle in Phoenix - they collapsed without him against San Antonio (his missing games was a bigger factor against San Antonio that Sean Marion's relatively poor play). I'm not convinced he can play point full time - I hope other deals will be in the works. If Belkin wants to contest this deal on that, I understand it.

But - you hired a guy to take care of all of this. He knows more about basketball than you do (so does the coach). Let them do their job.

And do us all a favor - sell the Atlanta Spirit to Arthur Blank.

Help on the way

2005-08-01T06:00:00.000-07:00

So, the Braves did make a deal for a reliever – Kyle Farnsworth.

This deal is interesting for a number of reasons. Firstly, I think it's a great move. Farnsworth is having an excellent year. He's been inconsistent in the past, and temperamental. He's been accused of too often just trying to throw the ball by people and not pitch to them. He throws very fast but doesn't get much movement – doubtless one reason he's allowed homeruns at unacceptable rates at times.

Is there a better place for a talented pitcher who hasn't put it all together than Atlanta? Methinks this could be the start of a beautiful relationship. I like Ramon Colon, but I think it's a price worth paying. Zach Minor was a middling prospect at best. So I think the Braves got a good deal here.

Apparently, this thing had been in the works for days as the Braves and Tigers haggled over the exact terms. Amazingly, but not particularly surprisingly, we never heard a peep about it. Schuerholtz often manages to operate under the radar. I don't know if keeping this quiet helped keep the deal reasonable for the Braves. Can Farnsworth close? I'm not sure we need him too (though we must be mindful of Reitsma's arm). I don't know if he has the makeup to do the 9tn inning thing. Which is interesting, because the setup guy may well face more tough spots than the closer in a given season. It's becoming trendy to bring your closer in before the ninth when the game calls for it. If you're facing the heart of the order and up a run, you don't seal the deal in the ninth, you seal it there. I'm happy pitching him as a setup guy for now.

The trade wound up the yummy (chocolate) icing on the Sunday victory cake. Farnsworth is a needed addition to the bullpen, particularly with Powel's nasty and unfortunate injury.

Richt: High Tech offenses are the bomb

2005-07-29T08:18:00.000-07:00

Apparently, there's a new coach in the SEC named Irvin Meyer, and he runs a pretty cool offense. You have to scroll way down to see the question, which amused me considerably.

Q. Mark, on the subject of offenses, have you had a chance to watch Irvin Meyers offense and what are your impressions of it?

Doubtless, it's just a typo and the reporter was asking about Urban Meyer. Still, nicknames come from funny places. I think it fits. The real meat of the answer, though:

“I am very impressed with it[Irvin's offense – PD]. And it's not most complicated thing in the world either. It's really a pretty -- it's just fundamentally sound and stretches defenses a bit farther than they would like to go.”

Richt's teams at UGA have definitely had a defensive minded approach to winning games. Richt has been content to grind out wins on his Defense's back a number of times. I'm going to assume, though, that the guy who helped make FSU into an offensive juggernaut knows how to explore and understand an opponent's offensive scheme to some degree.

The money quote here is “it's not most complicated thing in the world”. I thought Irvin's offense was supposed to be high tech (to be fair, I can never keep track of what makes an offense high tech. Apparently, one of the criteria is “USC killed Oklahoma in the national title game”. Which is kind of elusive as criteria go, but I'll grant you distinctive). Perhaps a Florida or Utah fan can enlighten me. It has certainly been successful – Meyer's teams have been putting up some goodly offensive numbers with it – rough ppg totals of 30, 40, 28, and 45 in his previous four seasons (Gators take note – there seems to be marked improvement in year two at both places). He runs the option out of the shotgun – a concept seemingly sheathed in deep cosmic irony. High tech works for me.

What makes an offense high tech? As a coach, don't you want to make things as easy as possible for your guys, while making it hard for the other guys to both figure out what you are doing on the next play, and stop what you are doing on the current one? A simplistic system can do that – the Redskins ran 5 running plays against the Broncos in 87. They did so out of a number of 1 back formation variants, anywhere from no TEs to 3. Sometimes guards pulled and sometimes they didn't. Timmy Smith danced his way to a super bowl rushing record. Was that high tech? No. But it did what an offensive coach would want – Denver never came close to stopping Smith.

I would argue that there are no low-tech offenses, if I could figure out what makes an offense low tech (there might, be some antiquated ones). That reading college defenses is much more complicated than we the fans realize (and it's much more complicated than reading high school defenses, to boot). Even the more vanilla packages (hi Joe Kines) are not simple to read. Coaches sometimes have to simplify how that is done – sometimes the results are spectacular (Auburn last year and Jeff Tedford's offenses certainly seem to qualify).

Blogpoll 4 - No, it really is personal!

2005-07-29T06:42:00.000-07:00

My blogpoll 4 responses to follow.
Longwinded as always.

1. Who are your rival(s)?

Every Georgia fan (and anyone who has had the misfortune of spending time with a Georgia fan) can tell you about the “big four”: Tennessee, Florida, Auburn, Georgia Tech. For many fans, some combination of this group is “our biggest rival(s)”, sometimes all 4.

Georgia Tech – there's no question. Any time two instate schools play each other, it's a rivalry game. Interestingly enough, I'm not sure it has major recruiting implications. It's definitely a bragging rites game. This series has been in Georgia's favor, with Georgia holding a 56-38-5 edge, 12-3 in the last 15 (Tech's 3 consecutive wins 98-00 helped usher out the Donnan era, in fact). Georgia disputes 2 Tech wins because they they allege Tech used ringers from the Naval Academy. Which is probably true.

Georgia fans will probably tell you that Tech fans have an inferiority complex about the series. Tech fans (all 11 of them) will probably get all huffy and try to make some claim about academic superiority, or their superior “culture”. Or try to talk about Basketball. It is true that Georgia fans often treat this game in a blase manner. It's also true that many Georgia fans would probably be unhappy winning 6 games every 10 years. This game is huge. Georgia's biggest rival? I don't know that I'd go quite that far. There is none bigger, perhaps. Like many rivalry games, it often features contests that are closer than the on-paper match ups would suggest. The Bobo to Corry Allen dagger in 97 was repaid when tech won a 51-48 OT thriller in 99. Jasper Sanks was ruled to have fumbled on the 1 with time running out (replays clearly showed he did not, and Ga would have attempted a chip shot field goal for the win), and then in OT Tech's game winning FG attempt on third down was blocked by Kendrel Bell, only to have Tech fall on the ball while Georgia was celebrating and get an additional attempt for the win.

Auburn – The all-time series is incredibly close (48-52-8, favoring the Plainsmen). The all time series scoring? Even closer: 1618-1619 – an incredible number for a series where 108 games have been played. Neither team is that adept at winning at home; Since 1980 UGA is 3-8 between the hedges, while Auburn is 5-7-1 on the plains. It's billed as the “oldest rivalry in the deep south”, was the first hereabouts to crack the century mark (incredibly, Auburn and Alabama have only met 69 times) and is one of the longest running rivalries in all of college football (unsubstantiated: I've read it's tied for seventh with Oregon-Oregon State).

For every blowout, there are 2 close contests and one is usually a real Barn Burner – like the 1996 first-ever SEC overtime contest. Or the heartbreaking last second failed comeback attempt in Athens in 01 (Richt's first year), where Richt opted for a run from the 2 yard line with little time left on the clock and no time outs. Or the David Greene to Michael Johnson dagger that propelled the Dawgs to their first SEC title in 20 years in 2002. Or loss in OT in 2000.

Auburn is equal to Georgia Tech, for all intents and purposes. Ask 100 UGA fans, and I think you'd have just as many name this game as Tech if they had to pick just one rival. Ask Any Auburn fan, and they'll likely say Alabama first. But Georgia will be right behind them – Georgia and Auburn started playing each other before they ever played their in-state rivals (by a year). Only the Two world wars put a stop to the series (no games played in 1917-18 and 1943).

This is without question the rival Georgia has the richest tradition with.

Florida – Calling this a rivalry will sound funny anyone new to college football in the last 15 years. Since Steve Spurrior took over in 1990, Florida has gone 13-2 against UGA, with UGA's second win coming just last year. Of course, Georgia was 15-5 the previous two decades. Just like there's a generation of Georgia fans who don't understand what it's like to beat Florida, there was a generation of Florida fans who didn't understand what it was like to beat Georgia. This is one reason Spurrier is so revered. Florida's previously unexperienced SEC success was paralleled in the dominance of UGA. Many Florida fans today might dismiss Georgia as a rival, but it's a series that both sets of fans have really cared about, historically.

Of course the game is recognizable for it's famous moniker: The World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party. Played in Jacksonville at a “neutral”site, hordes of fans from both sides flood Jacksonville – ticket or no - to enjoy the festivities.

Georgia holds a 45-35-2 edge in the series, despite the recent inability to beat the Gators.

Other Georgia fans will pick other teams. The South Carolina game is big, despite Georgia's lopsided edge in series (this game is particularly big for South Carolina fans – see Tech – who seem to view Georgia as a stepping stone to their often promised, yet always fleeting, rise to the top of the SEC). The Tennessee game is huge, and after being dominated for most of the 90s Georgia has made it a series again. While it is one of the big four, and has important implications in the east race, it isn't in the class of “rivalry” game the way the rest of them are.

2.Size up your chances in your rival games this year. Pretty straightforward. Try to be objective.

All three games look to be interesting Georgia probably has the least chance against Florida, though I do not think they lack a chance. First place in the east could be on the line when they meet at the end of October. Auburn is going to miss it's departed players I think, but the game coming to Athens doesn't bode well. It's unclear just how good Auburn's offense will be (no way it measures up to last year), though the defense should be tough with two all-world Ends leading the way. Tech will be better than some people think, and that Gaily still isn't much of a coach.

Georgia will do well to go 2-1 in these 3 this year.

3.If you could start up a new rivalry with another team, who would it be? Is there a team out there that you think would make a perfect rival for your team?

Clemson would not exactly be a new rivalry. The teams have played a number of times, Georgia holding a 41-17-4 edge as well as possessing the modern day record for getting a fan base in and out of Clemson, SC, for a game (88 hours). It makes perfect sense – Clemson is actually closer to Athens than Atlanta. I wouldn't mind playing them every year.

That said, I'd go for something a bit more exotic. Since my secret goal in life is to be best friends with all of the bloggers who mock Georgia and the SEC for pathetic scheduling, I'll chose the Washington Huskies. They have an underrated football tradition. Washington state seems like it would be a neat place to visit. It's really far away. Of course, then these people wouldn't have nearly as much to write about, and that would be tragic.

4.Overall, what do you think the best rivalry in college football is? Try to pick one that doesn't involve your own team. What makes that rivalry so much better than all the others?

Hampden-Sydney versus Randolph-Macon. I was there (as a wide-eyed, and inebriated, sophomore) for the 100th game in the series in 1994. Then, it was only the third series in the nation to cross the 100 game mark. There were several thousand people there (no small feat for a school that had enrollment of about 900 at the time), and ESPN sent a pretty big camera crew for it. For those of my readers who are used to big time football (all 4 of you), games at HSC were a lot more like high school games. I enjoyed them, though, and we had two solid teams in my time there.

Hey, if Spurrier is allowed to vote for Duke every year in the first coaches poll, I'm allowed to pick this. Though I'm not an alumnus proper (matriculated for 2 years before heading to Athens), they're still my boy.

5.Lastly, game trophies. What are the best and worst rivalry trophies out there?

I'm not really crazy about any particular Rivalry trophies. Though I wasn't aware of the “Keg of nails” prize for the Louisville-UK winner, and must concur with EDSBS that this is a pretty hard core trophy. Even admiration worthy.

Now the Mayans knew how to do rivalries. When you lost to the other team in that weird game where you had to throw a ball through a 40 foot sideways hoop, you got ritually sacrificed. Everything has been a let down since, I think. Or maybe that was the Aztecs. Anyway, the point stands. I tend to enjoy the games for the games, not so much the prizes. When you aren't playing for the right not to be sacrificed, the prize just seems pale by comparison.

Breathing Room

2005-07-28T13:34:00.000-07:00

At least for now. A nice series sweep of the Nats puts the Braves 3 up on them, 5.5 up on the Mets (who would be doing a service tonight if they went ahead and lost to make it 6).

A couple of things:

1. The offense seems to be going low tide again. Langerhans and Johnson have been slumping. Chipper isn't fully back. Giles has cooled off. We can't have wins without rookie theatrics, though, and Jeff Francouer provided several in the series. He blooped in the winner last night, and had two homers today.

2. Hudson pitched pretty well all in all - hopefully he finds his form from here on out.

3. Why Cox keeps pitching Kolb is beyond me. I know he did better for while, and I want him to do better too. That's two leads he helped mangled in two nights. He just doesn't appear to have it. Brower has been a questionable pickup as well.

Where Scheurholtz is going to find more help is beyond me. Joey Devine got rocked last night. I won't count on seeing him this season. McBride may turn out to be a good releiver.

Anthony Lerew seems to be doing well at AAA, but he's a starter. Still, he could go the Millwood route and relieve in the short term. I'm still hoping for a deal of some sort; we'll see.

4. The Braves are going to have to win on the road in the playoffs. They didn't do that well in the recent road trip, though. The west coast has been bad to the Braves this year.

I'm working on my Blogpoll #4 response, that will have to wait a little longer.

Back in First

2005-07-27T05:21:00.000-07:00

I thought it was a bad call at first, but a later replay from a better angle made the pitch look borderline at best. A call a pitcher probably gets if he's had good command prior, but Ayala's previous 3 pitches weren't anywhere near the zone. A good win after Livan had confounded the Braves for most of 6 innings. LaRoche's homerun in the seventh got it started, true. But Chipper Jones and Brian McCann had come ridiculously close to homeruns in prior innings (Chipper getting robbed on a fantastic catch by Brad Wilkerson in fact). The Braves were starting to get to Livan before LaRoche's blast.

Smoltzie didn't appear to have his best stuff but he pitched very well. The Bullpen did it's job admirably. Andruw is going to get some serious MVP talk, particularly if the Braves win the division. Pujols is having a fantastic year, but Edmonds, Sanders, and Walker are having solid season as well (when healthy). Andruw, thanks to injuries, doesn't have that around him (LaRoche comes to the closest, followed by a currently slumping again Giles). Lee is not playing on a playoff contender, which may hurt (but won't kill, by any means) his chances.

Sportsline said the game had a sellout crowd of 43,000. No it didn't – Turner Field capacity is in the 52-54k range. Frank Robinson was lamenting the ball 4 pitch saying “you pitch it down the middle because nobody swings at ball 4” - not true with a Cox led team. Bobby green lights on ball 4 more than anyone. My gut says Andruw was taking anyway, but he may well have picked out one part of the plate and said “if it's a fastball here, I'm going after it”. Still, I think Frank is right that a 3-0 count with the bases loaded is the wrong time to nibble.

Livan Hernandez thought the pitch was perfect. Maybe he saw it after the game, but he certainly wasn't in a position to judge that during. The ball call was fitting though; Hernadez deserves to have the worst karma in sports (well, outside of Owens or Bonds maybe) and any team he plays for should inherit that karma. Thanks again, Eric Greg.

Even after all these years, stepping into first place like this still feels good.

Chaney to MSU

2005-07-26T11:21:00.000-07:00

A couple of days late on this one. Congrats to Chaney, I hope he has a successful career.

Georgia's 2005 recruiting class has certainly seen better days (EDSBS should probably update that count at some point). Signs point to a huge class this year – as many as 30. Georgia already has a number of recruits planning to enroll in January (thus counting against 2005's total), and there is some talk Corry Moon will join them. I'm not sure how much room there is to fit in under last year's class; UGA signed 17 and was expecting two more players to arrive from Hargrave and I believe had room for 15 or 16 when the dust settled. With 6 casualties (Moon, Dewberry, Chaney, Sesay all couldn't get it; Lang and Bryant opted to go elsewhere) and one player-incident being investigated (Tavares “TKO” Kearney), Georgia is going to have some room.

Albert Hollis II gave up his scholarship, so that's room for a January signee. I'm sorry he never got to play last year – he had a rough career battling some devastating injuries. I don't understand why Richt didn't get him in because there was ample opportunity, even just 1 special teams play, but then Richt figured on having him back one more year (he was a lock for medical hardship). And there's always some attrition – juniors who go pro or players who leave (Michael Cooper). I figure Georgia to get as many as 4 players in under 2005, but it could wind up being less or even more.

NCAA takes aim for satire, parody

2005-07-26T08:08:00.000-07:00

Apparently, the NCAA isn't content with being mocked. They're not going to take it lying down any more. Rather than do the logical thing - fix the problem, they've instead decided to make it impossible to be mocked. Truth is stranger than fiction, I guess.

To be fair. . .well, to try and be fair because they make it so hard, I can understand the movement to try and "level" the recruiting playing field somewhat. I don't fully agree with it, but I can understand why they want to do it. But I think this rule is silly, to say the least.

Braves to McBride: Are you the Keymaster?

2005-07-22T07:24:00.000-07:00

Macay McBride was summoned by The Powers That Be yesterday after the Braves sent Kevin Gryboski packing. Braves & Birds has a good rundown of the reasons for trading a reliever who was having a good year at a glance. Like Elkon, I too still have painful memories of 2002. A topic for another time (I have a very large underground vault – bigger than what you see at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark – where all my painful Braves memories are storied. I have quite a few, you see. . .).

What do we know about Mr McBride? Since he's in virtual limbo, I can't tell you anything about 2005 – he's already disappearing from all the sites where I get minor league stats, and hasn't shown up on any site as a major leaguer where I might get to view them (hurry up, Sportsline).

We can look at the rest of his career, however:

480 IP, a 1.28 WHIP, 3.11 BB/9, 8.36 K/9, .37 hr/9 a K/BB of roughly 2.66. Those numbers are pretty good. The BB/9 is a little high, but he strikes out quite a few and K/BB is over the 2.0 line (generally a good thing). The Whip is decent. The Hr/9 is outstanding. I don't know how often guys do this in the minors, and I'd love to have his major league equivalences (my stuff is at home, alas, and you can only get those AA or above anyway)). We have what looks like a hard thrower who keeps it in the park and could improve a little in the control department.

Of interesting note is that he started for all of his career through 2003. In 2004, though, he had 12 starts and appeared in 26 games as a relevier. Where he had dominated rookie ball and both levels of A, he seemed to hit a wall in AA. The move to the pen helped, and he finished what I recall as being a poor start with a 4.44 ERA, but pretty decent numbers overall. The Walks and Whip were significantly higher, but I believe partially a reflection of his out-of-the-gates performance. He was 1-7, and I think he was like 0-6 in this first 10 starts.

This year he was doing pretty good, but nothing spectacular comes to mind. I don't know what any of those per nine innings numbers looked like right now. He's a solid, if not good, prospect. And a guy who could be a force in the pen in the long run. He's young, 23 this October I believe (Libra 4ever my homie).

McBride could easily be an upgrade over Gryboski, who appeared to be enjoying success but looks like he was pitching much better than he should have been (see above article). It will be interesting to see him in action. I think it's reasonable to say he could contribute right away, and become someone Cox relies on. The proof will be in the pudding.

Gameday to do Pitt vs Notre Dame

2005-07-21T05:55:00.000-07:00

Or so it seems. There's some UGA fans frothing about this - fans of any team are wont to froth in these situations though. Nothing new there.

I'm inclined to think that the BSU v UGA game is going to be far supperior, and a better place to be. That said, I'm glad Gameday won't be there - I have nigthmares from the last time. Part of me looks at this and says "well, here's another reason that the outcome of the this game, no matter who wins, won't really shakeup the landscape of college football". It seems that these tendy BSU upset picks are sometimes enamored with the idea that a BSU win is going to turn college football upside down. Well, I don't think so.

Not that it won't matter. But these things move in steps. Utah in a BCS game, and winning that game (though really, can anyone recall a bigger sacrificial lamb in the last 20 years?) was a huge deal and another step in the process for mid-majors who are looking to get more credibility. A win for BSU is another such step, but I'm not sure it's a bigger one. Perhaps Gameday not being there is indicative of the fact that the so called mid-majors have more clifs yet to traverse before College Football Armageddon?

I think there's a simpler answer here, and perhaps the above is all tertiary, or a non-factor. Gameday is going to go where the ratings are. I don't know what ND's television draw is like these days; when they aren't playing Michigan or USC, I find watching them on TV to be excruciating at the best of times. However, we have two programs, one with tremendous history but the other not without it's own history, that have two new coaches. NFL guys to boot. This is a game with magnetism - or so I assume ESPN thinks.

Gameday is alwys going to go where the ratings are. No mystery there.

NCAA hard up for action

2005-07-20T10:57:00.000-07:00

The NCAA is serious about cracking down on gambling by collegiate athletes. It's worries are legion. Too many atheletes are gambling according to a cited study. The fix is an ugly monster. And who should we take in the BSU UGA opener?

Choice quotes:

”Rachel Newman-Baker, the NCAA's director of gambling activities, said Tuesday the group hoped to re-establish contact with the odds makers to watch for instances where heavy wagering has caused significant changes in point spreads or for the casinos to pull games off the board.

The steps were presented to the NCAA's management council during its meeting this week near Los Angeles.

The NCAA has not yet decided how it will communicate with the sports books, but might do so directly or through Nevada casino regulators, Newman-Baker said.”

This is good. The NCAA is going to ask Joe Six-Pack to walk into a casino, look for a line, and then find out why it got taken off the board. I'll admit I've never been to a casino in Vegas. I'm not sure they actually announce why lines are taken off the board, though. Oh, speculation often abounds, and sometimes it's pretty good speculation.

But odds makers don't take lines off the boards simply because of some funky betting patterns. There might be a number of reasons – they might be waiting on word of whether certain players are allowed to play. Sometimes lines don't even appear until midweek – I can assure you that athletes laying down wagers is not the cause of that.

Further, I can doubly assure you that if every athlete who bets gambles every penny they own or borrowed from an alumni on one game, on the same team, the lines probably won't move that much. Millions, if not billions, of dollars are changing hands in this mega-industry. I'm guessing that the sum total of athlete wagers, and wagers made by their next door neighbors (seriously – what's the harm in dropping a couple of passes?), is far far exceeded by the sum total of every other dollar bet on a given game, assuming that game as some national attention (I doubt the Division II football championship game garners as many wagers as Oklahoma vs Oklahoma State, but I could be mistaken).

Actual point shaving/tanking a game for gambling purposes is nasty. It can wreck a sport. I can't tell if the NCAA thinks that the odds makers just “know” every time there is a legitimate chance it is going to happen, but I think there's some dissapointment on the horizon if this is the case. I applaud the NCAA for trying to be wary of the issue as well as offering education on gambling for colegiate athletes. However, this is the NCAA. Headless chicken springs immediately to mind. So excuse me if I view all of this with a grain of salt.

Lineup Dilemna?

2005-07-20T05:20:00.000-07:00

The return of Chipper Jones to the Braves leaves Bobby Cox with something of a dilemma . Chipper spent that majority of his career hitting 3rd. He likes hitting third. And, his numbers hitting third are nothing short of terrific. The previous few seasons he hit fourth (a strategic error in my opinion – I will note again I don't manage a baseball team and never will). He didn't like hitting fourth. His numbers hitting fourth suffered – though his playing LF also contributed (probably more so). Rumor has it he sulked some hitting fourth, but you didn't see it publicly. Larry's a gamer.

The Braves have been terrific going Furcal-Kelly Johnson – Giles – Junes – LaRoche/Franco. Why mess with a good thing? Well, Cox didn't – Larry hit fifth each of the previous two nights. I suspect it won't last.

Kelly Johnson appears to be a middle of the order guy – one day/. He's got a pretty sharp batting eye, he's worked counts at times, and that propensity to get on base made him a good #2 option. However, he's slumping badly. It happens. He's a 23 year old rookie. His once outstanding BB/K ratio, where he had more walks than strikeouts is heading steadily in the wrong direction. He's 6-37 by my count since the Brewers series, with 0 BBs versus 13 Ks (putting his previously outstanding season ratio at 25/41). This was preceded by a hot streak where his Ks had been rising steadily (he was still drawing walks). Lately it seems all he does is strike out (he sure just missed an opposite field home run two nights ago, though). Major league pitching seems to have caught up with Kelly Johnson, at least somewhat. If the Braves are right – it's just a hiccup at the start of a young player's career. He'll adjust back. I think his future is bright. He had significant strikeout totals in the minors -110 at low A. But he had 70-something walks that year, and always seemed to draw a decent amount. He rose quickly through the system – generally playing at or below the average age for most levels.

Bobby, as Rafael Furcal will attest, will stick with you. How long he can stick with KJ remains to be seen. If he has to move KJ down, Giles logically goes back to hitting second. And then what? He could just put Chipper back into the third spot. That probably makes the most sense.

However, here I'm not so sure it may not be better to hit Chipper cleanup and let Andruw hit third. When Sheffield was in town, hitting Chipper behind Shef was silly. Sheffield doesn't need protection and won't benefit from it, really. He draws a lot of walks because of a very keen eye. Yes, you can “pitch around” him, but if the rest of the lineup is doing it's job that's going to be a disaster when he hits fourth. More importantly, I don't think Sheffield benefited hitting in front of chipper.. Chipper, OTOH, has a good batting eye. But not as good as Sheffields. I actually think he'd have benefited – and his statistics would have reflected it. We'll never know.

I think Andruw might be better off in front of Chipper than vice versa. And, I think Chipper will be happier hitting cleanup this time. He's back playing 3B, for one. Two, this team looks like too much fun to play with – how could you not enjoy yourself? I think the lineup might benefit more overall in this scenario.

But it may not come to pass. KJ may hit (and walk, hopefully) his way out of this slump. I'll be curious to see how it plays out.

Can't You Here Me Knocking

2005-07-19T06:18:00.000-07:00

I don't want to blow my load here - there's lots of baseball left to be played. But August Practice looms, which and of itself isn't that big of a deal (yes, I do obsessively follow my team's preseason exploits; however I seek penance later for this, and this sets me apart from most fanatics). However, the thing that comes after preseason practice is by definition the season. And that part is fun too. It promises to be an interesting fall for both the Falcons and the Bulldogs, assuming I can survive it.

Unlike so many of the football fans in the south, I love Baseball. In light of this, the title is certainly apropos. I don't think either Chipper's nor Andruw's second home run actually ever landed last night - those images were digitally added. Both are somewhere zipping past the Earth's second Lagrange point, destined to exit our universe and disappear into the void forever.

.5 games between us and the struggling Nats. The Nats, as you may have heard, were like 163-2 in 1 run games in the first half. Record in 1 run games tends to fluctuate wildly from year to year. Certainly, things like a good bullpen help in close games. So does a timely offense. However, the Nationals incredible +9 Pythagorean win performance at the Allstar break (the Braves were -4) had people wondering how well it would hold up. Impossible to say, though I think the recent struggles are more of a slump than a sudden correction, I suppose that distinction is something the historians can quibble over in hindsight. The point being: the nats won't just suddenly revert to a team playing at +0 and roll over for the Braves.

Hampton's first outing back was not encouraging - it happens. Hudson's was. Chipper became only the third man in baseball history (Mickey Mantle and former Negro League player "Shakes" Johnson being the other two - you don't know about it due to a nasty governmental cover up) to achieve orbit with a baseball. It was nice to see his teammate would not be out-done. Chipper is probably going to experience some short term struggles as he gets back to major league speed, but I think all in all it's promising.

Will Chipper do ok hitting fifth? Yes, but will he do ok hitting fourth? I think so (more on that later).

It's hard not to be in a good mood this morning. Washington, I'm going to take you down.

Blog Poll 3

2005-07-18T13:30:00.000-07:00

In a move that can only be described as a horrific self promotion, I'm linking to my Blogpoll 3 discussion post. See, I started it Friday, but couldn't finish until today. I can't for the life of me determine how to move a post up and down in the list (ridiculous). Which is a non issue; the spellcheck on this thing is so attrocious I'll do them all before hand in the future anyway.

If you'd like the cliff notes version:

Georgia won't miss many unheralded guys, GATA Kelin Johnson, Gators vs Cocks sounds fun , East Coast 4 ever.

If you'd like the bookaminute summary:

Man can't write babbles on for a little while

Gammons: Sheffield clutch

2005-07-15T13:05:00.000-07:00

Couldn't help but triple take this blurb from a recent Peter Gammons entry at espn.com:

"a reputation as one of the most-feared clutch hitters of his time"

Hold on a second there, professor. A reputation with who? I can't seem to dig up an article - it was possibly Rob Neyer - where someone looked into the phenominon, so I'll skip that aspect for now.

A clutch hitter should come up big in big situations. Unfortunately, I can't give you stats like "ABs after the fifth inning when his team was tied or down by 1-3 runs". Let's look at his post season statistics. As a rule, every game in October is pretty important.

Year Team G AB R H HR RBI BB SO SB CS OBP SLG AVG
1997 FLA 16 50 13 16 3 7 20 8 1 0 .521 .540 .320
2002 ATL 5 16 3 1 1 1 7 3 0 0 .348 .250 .063
2003 ATL 4 14 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 .294 .143 .143
2004 NYY 11 48 9 14 2 7 9 9 0 1 .404 .500 .292
TOTALS: 36 128 25 33 6 16 38 20 1 1 .435 .445 .258

Sadly, I'm too lazy to format this in a table. I'll tell you what you need to know:

In 128 post season atbats, Sheffield is hitting .258 with 7 home runs. He is posting a .880 OPS, which is very good (thanks mostly to his uncanny eye for the strike zone). He has 25 RBI in 36 games. Not bad - runs are scarcer in October - but not otherworldy (quick math makes that look like pace for about 100 in a normal season).

For Atlanta in 2002-03, he compiled 30 ABs and 3 hits. 3 hits. He had a fantastic post season in 97 and a pretty decent one last year, but when the yankees needed him the most he couldn't produce (but then, neither did anyone else on the team; I'm convinced this was some sort of karmic boomerang for 96). In 2003-03, he had Chipper Jones hitting behind him (and this, plus the move to LF, seems to have hampered Chipper's production), so he had plenty good protection.

I don't know if I can ever allow someone who went 3-30 for one postseason stretch to be called clutch. Yes, I am viewing this through my tomahawk shades. No, I won't apologize for that. Sheffield was a big reason we floundered those years.

Blogpoll 3 - In 3D

2005-07-14T11:40:00.000-07:00

I'm not really a conformist by nature, and I'm something of an introvert. Yet at times I've always been comfortable riding along with the masses. What herd am I following now? Whoever the hell signed up to participate in the Blogpoll. I can only identify 3.5 people doing it. Interestinly, like orgies, this really adds to the appeal.

It's late, but that's how I get down.

Q: Which unheralded player on your team will be the hardest to replace?

A: Georgia didn't lose many seniors from the 2004 team. Of course, some of the names are recognizeable: David Green, David Pollock, Thomas Davis, Fred Gibson, Reggie Brown, Odel Thurman. They all played big roles (still to varying degrees) in 2004, and they'll all be missed. What's interesting is that outside of the big names, it was mostly underclassmen contributing. Jeremy Thomas was a steady fullback, but all he really brought to the table over Des Williams was consistency. Williams' performance got better (and more consistent) as the season went on, and he played more and more. I'm not sure Thomas is going to be missed. No, it's mostly backups from the rest of the senior class.

Thanks to offseason attrition, Arnold Harrison sort of wins this award by default. Harrison was a steady, though not spectacular, linebacker. There is young talent at the position, but issues (Derek White), injuries (Jarvis Jackson), and inconsistent play (Danny-Verdun Wheeler) mean that a veteran presence like Harrison's would be nice. However, I don't think it will be sorely missed (I reserve the right to take that back), nor terribly difficult to replace.

Q: Which seemingly inconsequential player could make the biggest impact?

A: Kelin Johnson, a sophomore safety. Johnson had an excellent year on special teams last year - that proving grounds where freshman often start to find their feet. A virtual unknown out of highschool, he seems to have decent speed and atheletic ability. Georgia had some serious secondary problems last year. They stemmed largely from the fact that:

1) Thomas Davis is a linebacker. A darn good athelete - good enough to play safety in college. But he's a LB masquerading as a classic strong safety. He's better around the line of scrimmage than 25 yards away from it.

2) Greg Blue is Thomas Davis, only significatly less speedy, athletic. And good.

Blue isn't bad and he can hit, but he made Davis' cover skills look good. If you can't add: Georgia cloned and played the same player, albeit one of them was of lower quality due to NCAA rules, at two positions last year. Both safeties.

Johnson looks like the "centerfielder" they have been missing since Sean Jones' ill-faited exit-stage left as a junior in 2003 (and believe me, he was missed more than anyone last year). Is he as good as Jones? Not right now. Can he be? I doubt it (but then I can't say it's impossible). Jones was superb. Can he provide some sort of boost to the at times porous pass defense? If so, Georgia's corners will really appreciate it. Georgia is sure to feel the loss of David Pollock, and the pass rush may suffer accordingly. A good cover safety matters now more than ever.

Tra Battle isn't bad, but he is what he is (a hard working, modestly talented, former walk on). I have hopes Kelin can take a starting safety job by Boise St, and give us some solid play back there. His superb special teams play lends me hope that he can tackle decently, because Blue has been known to wiff on occasion.

Q: Which regular-season game that won’t feature your team would you pay the most money to see this season? Why?

A: Florida versus South Carolina. Urban Meyer is the second coming. Steve Spurrier started it all. Something has to give here - and while it will most likely be the Gamecock's relative lack of talent, it's kind of an interesting game anyway. Meyer will apparently start a second offensive revolution in the SEC with his "high tech" offense. Even if he doesn't reinvent sliced bread, he should be an interesting addition to the SEC for a school that is not fully recovered from the Ron Zook hangover, and it will be a neew offensive look courtesy of one of the brightest young minds in the sport. Spurrier put the SEC into the modern age with a firm kick in the ass. It's kind of an interesting subplot.

I'm not sure Spurrier's return to college football will be as rosy as many others seem to, and that could ruin the fun in this game (not as much as the talent gap, but what are you gonna do?). I don't envision Spurrier now enjoying the things he used to loathe about life in College Football. Perhaps one of the fine gentlemen at EDSBSD can elighten me further, but I was under the impression SOS did not like to get on the road an recruit (something that will probably be doubly important at SC). Not that he didn't do it, but that he delegated more than many coaches do perhaps. And SC has a fanatical fanbase, perhaps moreso than any other in the SEC (look, they've been tricking themselves into thinking a program breakthrough was looming for time out of mind - you want to huge them for staying positive and then slap them to bring them back to reality). Unrealistic expectations could be worse at SC.

Still, this one has to be tough for the Gator faithful. I can't imagine what it would be like to face a former institution (I'd love to get a shot at a Donnan coached team, as a side note). I futher can't imagine getting beat by one - something I don't think the Gator faithful have to be worried about. Will they mock the visor tossings? Pick on any of Spurrier's press conferences? This game is uncharted territory in the mondern day SEC - where everything is under a microscope and every fan of a team had to sign a contract saying that he or she hates every other team with a passion not understood by most normal people (For unfathomable reasons, Mississippi State fans are also forced to carry cowbells. To more than just MSU games - as I once observed at a Braves game. Odd decision, that).

Me, I want to be at this game. It should be a fun football game if Florida doesn't route SC.

Q: If your team were a rapper, who would it be and why?

A: My team would be bullet-riddled and lying in a gutter, ironically (in the Morisettian sense of the word) on the very evening it discovered a major record label would be producing it's album,and that it could finally leave this sorry existence behind. East Coast 4 ever and all that jazz.

Mid-Terms

2005-07-11T06:34:00.000-07:00

Time for some mid-term grades for the Braves. It's too bad that they couldn't trim the Nationals' divisional lead further, but they are in pretty good shape. T he second half has great promise with a number of key players returning, but they probably still need to trade for at least one reliever. Never mind the "they need an OF" nonsense. It may well prove to be necessary to deal for one, but the offense (as you shall soon see) has done very well.

Infield:

Giles is having a good season despite a slump early on when he was pressing too hard to make up for Chipper's absence. His BB/K is returning to historical levels, and he could be poised for a monster 2nd half. The 1B platoon was responsible for 18 homers and 81 RBIs, and both members have an OPS of .810+. The fill-ins at 3B have been decent in Chipper's absence. Chipper may have been on the way to a career numbers before injuries first hindered and then derailed his season - his return will be welcome. Estrada has been decent but is off last year's .830 OPS pace, McCann has been the best #2 not just for his bat but the fact that his presence in the lineup has Smoltz acting like a 27-year old. Furcal is now the most frustrating Brave. Great SB numbers (29/34) and a recent surge (that has contributed to the Braves' offense of late), and vastly improved defense are still hurt by the fact that he won't take walks anymore. The leadoff hitter's job is to get on base, period. He;s a big part of the problem.

Grade: B
forecast: if Chipper returns soon, and returns to form, this could be a terrific Infield.

Outfield:

He's finally doing it. Andruw is having The Season(tm). A 930+ OPS, a the ML lead in homeruns, and he's put the team on his back while Chipper has been injured. I know Derek Lee is in the triple crown hunt. So what. The Cubs are not in the playoff hunt, again, and I'm not sure the Braves would be in this position without Andruw. How is he not the MVP?

Ryan Langerhans' offensive performance is not up to par, but he's only 25 and this is his first season. His defense has been stellar, though. His bat will need to improve if he's going to be a viable every-day option. Kelly Johnson, on the other hand, looks like the real deal and he's only 23. He's struggled of late, with a major surge in his K's, but he still has 25 BBs in only 132 ABs and has shown decent power. Not bad, given his age and inexperience. Whoever sat him down and said "we're going to work on your mechanics at the plate son" deserves some sort of award, because I can see this guy being around for a very long time. His defense appears above average if nothing else. Could be a future middle of the order guy.

The Mondesi/'Jordan experiment has been a total failure. Jordan is still a fiery competitor but he just doesn't have the tools he did 5 years ago. Jeff Francouer's debut has been electric but the strikeouts are probably more telling than the homeruns. He's so young - I'm not sure how long he'll be able to contribute but he definitely has potential.

Grade: B-
forecast: Pretty good. It would be especially good if Andruw stymied Lee on the triple crown.
forecast: how will the rookies hold up in the second half? A slump by either or both wouldn't be unexpected - it's common amongst first timers. It could cause the Braves to make a move.

Overall Offense::
Runs: 428 (3)
OB: .331 (13)
Slg: .434 (3)
Hr: 100 (4)
BB: 295(6)
Avg: .263 (7)
Bean Count: 24.0 (2 - tie)

Bean count was created by Rob Neyer - it's your composite rankings in home runs hit, walks taken, home runs allowed, walks allowed.

Anemic offense? Not hardly. This is not a team in need of an OF, particularly with Chipper's return. Though with two rookies manning the corner OF positions, anything could happen, and they could both see second-half slumps as major league hitters figure out their weaknesses. Still, the Braves are scoring plenty of runs these days thanks in part to KJ, Andruw, Furcal, and Giles.

Grade: B+
forecast - pretty darn high. Imagine if Kelley Johnson adjusts and keeps drawing walks in bunches, and Chipper returns and starts hitting. We're suddenly a deadly lineup. Johnson's interesting, because he appears to be a lefty who has little trouble with lefties. He's got a decent eye for the strike zone, and power. Langerhans needs to be more productive at the plate. If Andruw keeps this pace he may be MVP.

Starting Rotation:

Smoltz has returned with a band and shown very few problems in the tough "back to the rotation" transition. He's the legitimate #1 guy now, and he came up with a number of big games during the Braves' swoon. He's a stopper. Hudson was a tad disappointing after a good start, but his return will be welcome. So will Hampton's, who doesn't really have particularly good numbers but gets grounders, keeps the ball in the park, and wins ballgames. John Thompson will be missed. Horacio Ramirez has been inconsistent and hasn't shown the form of two years ago. Jorge Sosa has been surprisingly effective as a starter. One wonders if he is better suited for starting long term, but getting him fully converted could take some time. Kyle Davies has shown promise but I fear Cox is overworking him, and he's still very young (21). He may not be fully ready for the majors - though one wonders if his current stint is as much an audition for other teams as anything else.

The Braves have used a variety of spot starters outside of Sosa with mixed results. The return of Hudson will be big but he's got to quit allowing so many baserunners.

Grade: B
forecast: good. Despite Hudson's mixed early results, he's a very good pitcher and his presence as the #2 will benefit everyone behind him. I'm always worried that one day Hampton will cease having success, but he's definitely got Guile taken care of.

Bullpen:

By far the biggest problem area. Reitsma has been decent but I'm not sure if he's well suited for closing, and you have to worry about his wearing down. Blaine Boyer has been fantastic since his call up and his future appears to be in the pen (he had struggled as a starter all year until being moved to the pen shortly before his call up). Sosa's return could really bolster the unit, but he's been more effective as a starter. Can he duplicate that in the pen? He walks too many people, and while no pitcher can live with walks relievers can live with them less. He seems to have closer makeup, though, if he can get his control down. Adam Bernero pitched well early but has been awful since. He just gives up too many hits (.315 avg against). Gryboski has decent numbers, but he's one of those "how is he doing this well?" guys - a .292 avg against and a whip of about 1.5. Keeping it in the park has been his only salvation. John Foster has been good since his callup, but is still relatively untested. He's pitched decent of late, but the first half has been an unqualified disaster for Dan Kolb. The jury is still out on Jim Brower, but he was released for a reason.

Grade: C-
forecast: without a move, this could be a problem area for the Braves. And that's with Sosa returning to the pen and throwing well. I suspect we'll see at least one move on this front, though not necessarily for a closer. Joey Devine is now at 8 innings on the season, with 3 hits versus 5 walks (one a HBP) and 11 ks. He's allowed no runs, and has had 3 outings at AA. Still, I don't think he can be counted on to contribute in Atlanta just yet. He's been dominant - 3 of those walks came in his first game pitching (after a layoff following the college season), so as long as the 2 in his next 7 innings is closer to the norm he looks like the real deal.

Overall Defense:

ERA - 3.77 (2)
SO - 488 (15)
BB allowed - 295 (7)
HR allowed - 76(4)
OB% - .333(10)
Avg - .266(11)
E - 47 (tie-2)
DP -100 (tie-3)

Mixed results. The BB allowed, Hr Allowed, and ERA are all good. That's a very low strikeout total, and not typical of a Braves staff. Having Hampton and Thompson as starters is part of the reason for that, though. The defense has been superlative despite some recent errors (chin up, Marte) - and is part of the reason guys like Thompson and Hampton can enjoy success. Furcal Giles have turned into an excellent DP combo.

Grade: B
forecast: a couple of moves, and we could be cooking. If the Bullpen stabilizes, well the sky is the limit.

Coaching:

Frank Robinson is manager of the year unless the Nationals don't win the division (or possibly just if they don't make the playoffs), which is ridiculous. Cox is doing the best job in baseball. I question his moves sometimes but he is the quintessential player's manager. If you have a problem, he'll settle it away from the public eye. He doesn't have many rules. He gets as much out of his 25 guys as they have to give, with rare exceptions. People love to play for him, and free agents often prosper in Atlanta. Mazzone is Mazzone - I'm not sure if he has a legit HoF chance but he should. One wonders if perhaps Pendleton is starting to make his mark as a hitting coach.

Grade: until Bobby and Mazzone don't get it done they get an A.

Overall: I'm pleased. If, before the season, you had told me we'd have used 10 rookies and only be 2.5 games out of the division lead - even to the surprising Nats - I wouldn't have believed you. This could be a truly electric second half. The decline in attendance of recent years saddens me because this may be one of the best products Atlanta has seen. The rookies seem to feed off on one another, and they're play & demeanor is infectious (witness Smoltz chest bumping McCann after a recent win). This squad is so much fun to root for, from all the guys struggling to grow beards to Old Man Franco, the wunderkid who is producing fantastic numbers in part time. I'm as excited about the second half as I have been in a very long time.

It's a hard life living a lie

2005-07-08T05:33:00.000-07:00

That felt really, really good. Sensationally good. The second game of yesterday's Braves-Cubs doubleheader had been somewhat painful. Smoltz didn't have his best stuff, and then was clearly struggling and I'm still baffled why Cox sent him back out there (that 3 quick outs resulted appear edto be a function of the Cub's poor approach at the plate. Smoltz could barely find the strikzone the inning before). Andruw had squandered a rather painful at bat with men on by not grooving on a pitch he had been knocking regularly into the stands.

So what happens? Andruw gets a second chance after a leadoff triple by Giles, and then hits that pitch into the stands. Not content to just have a lead, the Braves decided a big inning might be fun. Not content watching every other rookie make major contributions during the past month, Jeff Francouer drives a ball into left-center for his first major league hit and home run.

Sorry, I'm in proud-papa gushing mode right now. Just 2.5 games back of the nationals, it would be fantastic if the Braves could find a way to shave one off this weekend, right before the break. Still, I'd be pleased as punch with a 2.5 game deficit during the worst allstar break in professional sports.

Down on the Farm

2005-07-07T09:27:00.000-07:00

The Braves called up mega-prospect Jeff Francouer today to replace Brian Jordan, whose gimpy shoulder is responsible for a trip to the DL. On one hand, it's somewhat surprising - Francouer hasn't seen a full season at AA yet. On the other, what's one more rookie? Fancouer is noted for his defense as well as being a "five tools" guy. I'm not crazy about the label, but he has hit for power and shown speed thus far in his career.

Francouer hit .273-13-62 with 13 steals and 20something doubles (can't find the number at the moment, sorry). His plate discipline still has a ways to go, so he could struggle early with such a large jump.

Other prospect news:

Chuck James is having a pretty good season at AA Mississippi. 5-1 with a 2.96 era, in 54 innings he's given up 46 hits, 15 walks (that's an excellent WHIP), and has 66 ks (and every K-related ratio here is outstanding). Pretty strong numbers, particularly with only 4 homers allowed. Ole Chuck is a lefty, and according to Baseball America, left handed hitters are having a little bit of trouble hitting him. To the tune of 10-93 with 42 ks. Those are shocking numbers. James has faced 131 righthanders, who are hitting a bit better against him (.270 ish). That his K's are that different is surprising. He's young, so it may be that oneday he'll do better against RH hitters. Or, this could be a fluke - he's always put up excellent numbers in the minors and always had excellent K rates. Or maybe his future will be in the pen, possibly as a lefty specialist. Who knows.

Joey Devine the Braves first round pick out of NC State, was said to be one of the most major-s ready prospects in the draft. A hard, if goofy (delivery said to be between sidearmed and 3/4), throwing reliever, many predicted he may be on the same track as recent college stars like Houston Street (Oakland) and Chad Cordero(Washington). Well, he walked 3 in his first outing but escaped - nerves I'm sure. 4 innings later, he'd still just walked the 3 batters, had plunked another, had given up no hits or runs, and had 7 ks. I don't know if he pitched anymore in High-A (Myrtle Beach), but he made his AA debut recently with a scoreless, 1 strikeout, inning. The Braves bullpen struggles had to be on the brain when they took Devine - whom they were not expecting to be available. Will he be in Atlanta by September? It's far to early to say. Still, it's not a bad start.

Ande Marte has done pretty well since returning to Richmond. His average is at .283, he's homered a couple of times, and drawn a number of walks. I'm confident we'll be seeing him again in the near future.

So I hate this template

2005-07-06T12:54:00.000-07:00

But it occoured to me that the other one was a little too hard to read. It needed a different folor for the text background and the ohter background. I'm too lazy to wade through what is doubtless some truly frightening HTML and tweak it right now. I promise to do so before the season because if it isn't Red & Black I'm not a true fan.

Also, I realize I have a tendency to carry on. I'd like to be briefer where possible.

Remember that cheerleader you wanted to take to prom?

2005-07-06T11:32:00.000-07:00

. . .only never got the nerves to ask (or, she had a beau).

Recruiting rankings are a lot like that really hot cheerleader, whom for purposes of the discussion was the chearleading captain and probably dated the QB to boot (we may as well ride the cliche for all it is worth). They're both horribly overrated, even if they are fun to ogle. And, looking back some years down the road - they're way different than you remember.

Why are we so obsessed with ranking recruiting classes before any of the kids have actually graduated from highschool? Does this make any sense whatsoever? I mean, the only more absurd thing I can think of would be having a sport where on the field performance only partly dictated season success - where people not involved in any way, shape, or form instead get to pick who plays who, arbitrarily deciding who gets to when the "MNC" (err. . .).

Let's clear up a few misconceptions:

1) Recruiting doesn't matter - Talent is one of the foundations of success. As it so happens, it just isn't the only one.

2) Recruiting rankings are the end all be all - see above. You have to get talent. However, coaching and player development play a huge role in a school's success. I'd argue they play a bigger role (it is two things admittedly). And that says nothing of all the little things that can bite you, like a rash of injuries.

3) Recruiting Guru's know what's what - I think today's generation of recruiting media members have more access to kids than ever before. Most of them focus on smaller regions. They're probably as well equipped to comment on kids as they've ever been.

But, this is an inexact science at best. It's an uphill battle for coaching staffs. Moreso for website staffs who follow teams/areas. Not that there aren't quality writers covering recruiting right now - but some perspective is in order. That shiny five star RB your team just signed might not see 50 carries in his career. There are a plethora of reasons for this.

And you can't know most of them in advance.

4) Recruiting rankings matter - they don't mean squat. Again, these are handed out before players even get into school. Between signing day and the team's first game a lot of things can happen. Not the least of which is - the kids show up to find out that the game at the collegiate level is so far beyond what they're used to it's frightening. Kids are faster and stronger. Systems get more complicated (even low tech outfits employed by all those rednecks in the SEC). Just going to college is often an adjustment for kids - imagine piling having to play a major college sport on top of that.

Why do services even rank teams? Well, it's probably for the rabid fans as much as anything else. If you build it, they will come. But they're generally sensational and low on substance - like a lot of recruiting coverage. So fans have as much to blame here as anyone else, I think.

It would be much more interesting to rank classes down the road. One could "evaluate" them at the end of each year, but it typically takes a couple of years minimum to show big dividends. For every Adrian Peterson, there are hundreds of guys out there waiting in the wings who don't get serious playing time until later in their careers.

Me? I follow recruiting. As I've said elsewhere, I love knowing things about the kids who will come play at Georgia. Not 40 times necessarily. I like knowing a kid is from Augusta Prep as much as anything else. But I sometimes find myself in conversations starting to fall back on "our class is looking to be #8" or "he's a legit 4 start kid!". I hope I can catch myself, because that stuff is silly and should be ignored. I sometimes think there's too much attention paid to these kids now anyway, and if that's the case them I'm as much of a problem as anyone else.

I don't want to abolish recruiting news services, but I sometimes wish there was more perspective from the people who paid for them. Anyway, recruiting rankings & assorted hype are like that Cheerleader. And much like her, 5 years down the road from highschool (including her freshman 15, gravity, and too much time at the Sig Ep house "hanging with all my guy friends!") can sometimes be a revealing thing.

Randomly

2005-07-06T04:58:00.000-07:00

MLB's all star break is looming, with the biggest joke of an allstar game in professional sports to take place during. I should try to pen my thoughts on why I think it is the biggest joke. So I'll try to in the next week. I'm going to start doing some research on matters of actual importance though, so I can hand out report cards for the Braves and possibly some teams around Baseball. And other assorted entities - like Mark Lemke and his statement last night that "sometimes you have to ignore the stats, because teams just win" in reference to a caller and his note that "the Nationals have allowed alot more runs than they've scored, do you think they're overrated?" Yes, that reportcard will include some fun pythagorean analysis, an explanation of how and when stats can be misleading, but also how ones like the pythagorean win-loss record rarely are. Riveting stuff, if you enjoyed math in highschool.

The Dawgs lost two recruits yesterday. One was a surprise only if you like Georgia, are aware that he was supposed to come, but not following the scenario. Of course, I think that is 0 people - everyone aware that he was coming probably follows recruiting to some degree and knew test scores would be an issue with him. Corey Moon did not get his test score and will attend Hargrave Academy in Virginia. The other was a recruit from a year ago - Jamar Bryant. He asked for, and received, his release and will attend ECU. Good luck to Mr Bryant.

Now, if you were told that this means the sky is falling - it is. It's over. Georgia will no longer be a national power after this, because one player can make an entire insitituion. They may as well quit playing football. It was a good run. Feel free to stop reading now, as there will never be another football related comment typed here, ever.

Good Bye.

Anyway. Maybe, just maybe, the sky won't fall and the sun will rise and Georgia will maange to field a team next year. Speculation on message boards is running rampant - as it is wont to do. Did he get denied by admissions? Nobody knows. All we do know is he asked for his release. It's possible he never got the test score he needed to get in, and that said score was not the NCAA minimum (the lower your GPA, the higher you need to score to be granted full admission). Maybe ECU is taking him as a Partial Qualifier (Georgia does not have room to do that at this time). Maybe he jut decided he'd rather play close to home. Whatever the reason - I do wish him well.

It would be premature to chalk this up as another black mark on the admissions department. EVen if they really denied him admission (though I'd be surprised, because I'm unsure as to why this wouldn't be announced like it was for Jamar Chaney), we don't know that there wasn't a legitimate reason to do so.

Of course, the admissions board really could be off its rocker. I think the best reaction now would be to relax, have a cold one, and just prepare to enjoy the season.

I need a hero

2005-06-30T06:40:00.000-07:00

Preferrably one who specializes in pitching in the 7th, 8th, or 9th innings. I'm looking over pitchers the Braves could try to acquire; the situation is grim. With few sellers and many buyers, the Braves might be forced to relinquish a prospect like Anthony Lerew or worse Chuck James to get a guy who isn't even a closer.

Last nights game was painful - we should have walked away with a win, though I'm not crazy about another 100+ pitch outing from Davies (who was so-so, not great, but admirably pitched out of some trouble). Andruw still very nearly rescued the Braves, but with this bullpen sometimes defeat seems inevitable.

Culprits:

Reitsma - he's having a solid statistical season. No homers, few walks. I'm just not sure if he's suited to close; he's blown a couple of games now. I'd like to track down some of his closing numbers.

Bernero - the BB/K ratio is good (33/11), and he hasn't given up many homers (just over 1 per nine innings). The problem seem sto be his whip; 53 hits allowed for a 1.5+ ratio. He gets hit too often - and runners are scoring. He was pitching well for awhile but has been shaky since, occasionally decent in spurts.

Vasquez - hge's young, and possibly not fully ready. Not much to say here.

I think the problem is that different guys seem to pitch well during differnet stretches, and there always seem to be a couple of guys struggling. Ideally we could go get a couple of guys and figure something out at closer. We don't *have* to deal for a closer -there are guys out there who might be able to get the job done. I'll try to write about them later today.

As of right now, I think youngsters Franceur, Johnson, Betemit, Marte, McCann, and probably Langerhans are safe. If the Braves decide Furcal is the way to go next year, Betemit might not be. I'm not sure any of the pitchers are safe, and while it would pain me to lose a guy like James, Schuerholtz' track record seems to indicate that it might mean we think he lacks something. We've missed on a few (Schmidt, for example), but the Braves have been pretty good predicting who will and won't succeed at this level. Scott Thorman and James Jurries are having solid years, and both play 1B. LaRoche is doing well, and I like him, but they could all move with the Braves eyeing the spot for one of Marte/Betemit/Chipper down the road. I think Langerhans is safe because his defense is good and the bat potential, but I'm not sure hne's quite in a class with the rest of those guys.

I any case, last night was one game and the Braves have a 2-1 series lead. No need to panic, but I've wanted some bullpen moves for some time, and everything the Braves have done thusfar has been mixed (Boyer has been decent, but the other minor leaguers have strugglerd; too early to say with Brower, but my hopes are not up). A win tonight would take the series - and I'll take a 3-1 down in Flordia every day of the weak and twice on Sunday.

We're getting slower, as a species

2005-06-29T11:09:00.000-07:00

. . .Possibly accounting for Andrew Bogut highlight footage from the NBA draft. How do I know we are getting slower? It's all anecdotal, but bear with me.

If you follow recurring and aren't a raving lunatic (by my count there's about 15 of us), and you're a fan of the Georgia Bulldogs, and you subscribe to UGAsports.com, and you checked it recently - pause and breath, if you need to - you were recently treated to a blurb about Florida highschooler Tony Wilson. Wilson, a CB/DB, lists the Dawgs as his favorite. Fantastic - recruiting rankings are an ugly, inexact guessing game, but recruiting is important. He is listed as having run a 4.47 40-yard dash, the over-used speed metric. He ran it at a Nike combine, third fastest at the camp.

Nike is Nike - I don't know when or why they started doing these things. But they're not affiliated with any college or high school. That's sort of important - follow along please.

Am I crazy, or would that time have been something the raving lunatic recruiting fans mocked openly 4 years ago (of course, they're probably mocking it now)? Am I crazy, or are we seeing far fewer 4.3s and 4.4s than we used to? Something in the water? Space-time distortion? People running in pools?

Or maybe it's because we're no longer seeing 40 times reported by the kids high schools. And maybe, just maybe, those highschool coaches weren't exactly using the best methods to determine 40 times, whether through lack of means or understanding of how to properly do it? Note: I am not, nor will I, suggest coaches would ever inflate such a thing. That would never happen. And the guy who was QB at my highschool during my time really did run a 4.19, I swear on all that is good and pure in my life: my niece and. . .well that's it on the good and pure front. While the Nike camps might be providing the whole circus with something it doesn't need - more coverage and attention - perhaps they are to be thanked for producing numbers that don't violate the laws of physics?

Look - it isn't like these coaches are out to screw someone and lie to people. Chances are, they wanted their kid to look as favorable as possible. And honestly, who among us hasn't stretched a tale during the telling for effect, at least twice (once trying to score points with the boys, and once again with the ladies)?

So, have we really witnessed a change in the recruiting landscape? Are we going to be getting better numbers on kids now? I feel like this is something that should get discussed more.
Or maybe I'm crazy as batsh*t. To me, it seems things have changed significantly over the past 4-5 years.

Of course, we still seem to be getting 40-yard dash worship. That's a topic for another time, though.

More on the Hawks

2005-06-29T10:51:00.000-07:00

Mark Bradley says the Williams pick could work out, but that the Hawks needed a 1 or a 5 and made a mistake not to get that. I, in a move pundits are calling "predictable", do not agree.

Firstly, the notion of a traditional center is antiquated. Look, I love bruising 7-footers who can dunk with their eyebrows and eat concreit. Perhaps you haven't noticed - there's just not many of those guys around. What you do need, however, is a physical inside presence who must, if nothing else, play defense and rebound. See the former world champs, the Detroit Pistons. Wallace is a 4. And Wallace, when he's afro'd in any case, is as fearsome as anyone we've seen as some time when he patrols the paint. He rebounds. He blocks shots. He changes offenses. And he even has some offensive ability. To me, the real question is "did the 2005 NBA draft feature any players like that?"

I didn't see any. Bogut looked too easy to push around in the NCAA tournament to me. Also, all of his draft highlights looked like they were in slow-motion, except I don't think that they were. He'll probably be a good pro and I'm probably wrong in questioning that he will be. I'm glad the Hawks don't have him though. There were some noted defenders in the draft, but I don't see any of them excelling at the next level in that area. Perhaps Ike Digou will. Perhaps Fry will toughen up and do so. But perhaps they won't.

Now we absolutely, postively, no question about it need a 1. However, that doesn't mean he have to draft one. See, one things the Hawks need more than a 5, or a 1, or a 63.7 is talent. The Hawks were better than their record indicated last year (no, really!). I think I read a stat claiming 43 of their losses were by 10 points or less. And they played good at times down the stretch - usually failing to do it for four straight quarters. Does anyone actually think "well, they're close on the talent front, they should take a 1 or a 5 no matter what"? I don't.

Also, I think that the roster is not set in stone. Somebody may get traded sooner rather than later. If we can a package Harrington for a good point guard, fantastic. If we can package him for anything useful, I'll be just as happy. Nothing against Harrington, but I'm not crazy about him.

The Hawks aren't as forward-jammed as some think. Childress - can we please stop calling the man 6-8? - is really a 2 I think. Though he's not there yet - he needs a consistent 18-20 footer to pull that off. He'll probably see some forward minutes, but I think as is the position is primarily shred by 3 players for 2 spots. Not too bad.

I don't think Stoudamire is in any way qualified to run the point, nor should he be expected too. I hope the Hawks are wiser than that. Elkon is right to worry about his attitude (whenever he gets around to doing just that), but that was a better pick that some Croatian who will never make it.

I don't know if Williams will live up to that "potential", but I live the movie. We need a big time scorer. We may have gotten one.

Hooray for Tuesday

2005-06-29T04:54:00.000-07:00

I'm still buzzed. Draft day for the three major sports and voting day affect me the same way. Nothing I do or say actually matters on each day. And yet my experiencing them gives me this wonderful little high, as if something I do does matter.

Thoughts. . .

1) My friend Dave and I had to pull out every trick in the book to coax Saleem Stoudamire to fall to 31 (jinxes, reverse jinxes, several consecutive "just accept it, he's a good fit here" moments. The run on foreign players we had been prediction since pick 20 hit late, but it hit. That was enough. Stoudamire celebrated being drafted by the hawks by cleaning his bathroom 11 times*.

He's a good fit. He can make it from 3 states over. There's talk of him playing point, which I don't see. I could see him doing the Steve Kerr thing off the bench. I really like the pick.

2) I love Marvin at 2. I'll admit I was very moved by the USA Today fluff piece yesterday. He's just a likeable guy. I like having likeable, root-for-him, guys. That he's got Tremendous Potential, Huge Upside, and Long only helps.

The Hawks took a turk at 59. He's a guard, which we do need. If nothing else, perhaps he can tell us why it's Istambul, not Constantinople. . .

It's impossible to say how this draft was until we see the kids play. However, I like it. Marvin was the right pick because he's got talent (Tremendous Upside, in fact), he can shoot, and he's a very grounded kid who is a hard worker. Dickie V is wrong about this one - Paul wasn't the pick (Deron may have been). Williams was. Yes, the Hawks have other needs. I hope Williams proves to be too good to have passed up on. I was kind of hoping the Hawks would move up to get Jarret Jack. Oh well.

3) If the Sports Guy does not dedicate 5000 words on Jay Bilas' cyborg replacement going off the depend with the whole length thing last night, I will riot. This has to replace Hubie Brown's Tremendouse Upsides. Bilas took the whole wingspan thing to an entirely new level by arbitrarily changing the definition of wingspawn every time a new player was taken. The only two players he didn't mention wingspawn on were Chris Paul and I think Jarred Jack. I could even see him scribbling calculations every time someone was drafted.

"What do you think Jay?"

Jay muttering "hmm, forgot to carry the two on the last guy. . .err what?"

"What do you think of the Mephis Pick?"

"Tremendous. I love him. He's got a. . ." *checks calculations* "Eleventy Seven foot wingspawn. I love his upside. Also, I think he bends space-time."

So it's an obvious joke that at least 6000 people who write better than me will make. But good lord. By pick 11, every time he mentioned wingspawn or length I found myself giggling uncontrollably. I could feel my sanity slipping.

4) Louis Williams goes 45 to Philly, likely costing a number of people who wagered he wouldn't get drafted. I wish him luck.

I don't really know enough about him to say for sure, but it seems to me he was sorely lacking a grounded presence. He may have been lucky to get drafted at all - why are you in the draft if you're a debateable second round pick? How is going to college and playing for a few years not going to improve you? If it isn't - perhaps you need a new career?

Williams was a star before he was done with highschool, hanging out with rappers and even appearing on a Celebrity Cribs with Little Bow Wow (I think that's who it was). He's never done anything noteworthy. I think it's a shame he was pronounced a star before he'd gotten a chance to begin to earn the lable. Remember when some were suggesting he'd be a lotterly pick? That seems like a long time ago. I'm not bitter because he isn't coming to Georgia - Felton understood which way the wind was blowing and Georgia found someone worthy of the scholarship thankfully.

It just looks like he could have used some advice he wasn't getting. Again, good luck to him.

5) Was I the only person who kept expecting Steven A Smith to start busting out rhymes mid-commentary? He was seriously channeling this Darrel Hammond doing the Reverand thing last night. I was heart broken than he never did it while I watched.

6) The Knicks taking Channing Frye at 8 was too perfect. A frail, "finese", post player is just what the doctor ordered. I had been hoping they'd take a foreigner, though, for sheer comedy value.

7) Was that sound I heard when the Lakers took a highschool project at 10 Kobie's head exploding, or Phil's head exploding? Everyone is on board for this my ass.

*totally forgot to add - I shouldn't poke fun at Stoudamire's OCD and I truly am happy he is a Hawk. I promise this is the last time I will do it. Unlike Tom Cruise and Scientology, I don't blindly hate the entire mental health pofession and then advocate a treatment method - vitamins - that fundmentally does the same thing as the one they scorn - drugs. It's all putting chemicals into your body, guys.

This asterisk was sponsored by Alanis Morrisette, resident of the 51st US state.

Like a kid in a candy store

2005-06-28T07:38:00.000-07:00

Yes, that's me on draft day. I'm still pining for Deron Williams, though I can find a way to live with Marvin (it will be difficult). I've seen some intersting commentary and a fair bit of critique for Marvin of late.

1) People have question his toughness (both of them). Huh? Supposedly he's a very hard worker, and he didn't lament playing on the bench (more on that in a second). Now, he might not be able to physically hack post play in the NBA, sure. But he's got desire and a work ethic. And he seems so grounded. I don't get it.

2) Some have questioned his atheleticism. He's supposed to have it in spades. Is it because he never Shawn Kemps over people in games? Or doesn't dunk like Mike did? Is it the lack of reboundins grabbed above the rim? I guess we'll see, either way.

3) The "He couldn't even start in college!" argument is ridiculous. He joined a team with a coach that, while he has played freshman at times in the past, does not give jobs away. Period. If he has an established starting five, you're going to have to do something crazy, and one of them might still need to screw up to boot, for you to take a job. Roy doesn't care about your talent. You earn your way with him, and then you wait anyway in some circumstances. I don't think it would be fair to categorize this as inability on Williams' part. It could be, but we can't know without practice tape from all of Carolina's practices last year. And something to read Roy's mind.

Now, I definately agree with the growing meme that we're too obsessed with potential/upside. And I can understand being skittish about him for that reason. Potential doesn't mean squat. His purpotedly good work ethic is something I see as a big plus here, though.

4) He showed nerves in the title game. Hey, that must mean he'll do that in every big moment, for ever and ever.

The Hawks have all kinds of picks, and the chance to get some really good players. I'll disagree with Elkon (see top link to the left) - I'm not crazy abotu Morris but only because I think his decision to come out was very questionable - I don't see him being ready.

But I think the Hawks have a good chance to get a couple of guys to help them here. And I think Billy Knight generally has a clue. And I readily admit Smith and Childress far surprassed my expectations. Are we on the road back to the mid 80s, where the Omni rocked and the Hawks might have been one playoff series from greatness - the classic semis matchup against the Basketball Jesus and the Celtics? That's a stretch, right now. But you know, after watching the Hawks some during the second half of last year, and finally becoming an avid scoreboard watcher for the first time since Deke's prime, the air does taste just a little sweater. They have a long way to go, but forgive me my moment of unbridled hope (it is terribly out of character).

I had to say this

2005-06-28T07:05:00.000-07:00

So, I'm definitely not one to get my panties in a twist when someone says something less than glowing about my beloved Bulldawgs. Still, I found this prediction of the Boise State vs UGA opener amusing. What I don't like is when people make bizarre suppositions that do not follow from any factual evidence - or from evidence that does not fit the outcome. So I'm forced to comment, here (I'll try to avoid sounding like most - note, not all, of the UGA fans commenting there).

The author takes the time to point out how awesome Boise's offenses are (PPG average somewhere between 35 and eighty billion over the past 4-5 years), and how average Georgia's are: roughly 28ppg over the last 4 years. And holds this up as one reason Boise will beat Georgia. Huh? The two stats aren't comparable. The teams faced different competition. And despite what the author suggests - Georgia was playing far better talent and defenses in the SEC. I am not an SEC homer (I didn't have a problem with Auburn getting the shaft last year, outside of a general "it sucks to go undefeated in a major conference and get the shaft"; the conference was not strong enough last year to warrant an extra push to get them into the top 2 imo). But Georgia was playing better defenses, consistently, over that time. No reasonable person would suggest otherwise.

Also, the analysis completely ignores certain issues. 4 years ago, Georgia was forced to reply on a true freshman quarterback. Two years ago, it was a predominately freshman/sophomore offensive-line. These things can be problematic in NCAA Division 1 football - for Georgia they were on both occasions. Georgia did not run the Offense it ran the last three years during Greene's first year. Play calling was far more conservative, with far less play action (something Greene was known for). Not that I'd expect things like logic to creep into the discussion. It has become cliche to knock teams who play in "mid level" conferences like the WAC (or the Pac-10; oooh, rimshot!) because nobody plays defense. Methinks one of the real culprits here is that certain teams have been able to get better talent on average - and that makes a difference.

And guess what - the Dawgs have a significant talent edge.

The article makes a lame attempt to dismiss Georgia's "struggles" against Georgia Southern and Marshall. The Thundering Heard were down last year but they've been a tough team since moving to division 1. And The score there did not reflect the game - a game in which Georgia routinely marched past the 50 only to bog down, and the Thundering heard barely mustered up any offense. As for Southern - it's unlike Georgia will face an offence that is significantly "higher tech" (more on that nonsense in a moment) than Southerns. The layperson might describe a running offense as anything but high tech. That's not the case, though. In fact, Georgia Southern's offense is fairly complicated, and incredibly difficult to stop. The author makes a big deal about people not knowing about Boise - well, people don't know about Southern either. See, if they wanted to, Southern could make the D1 leap (they easily surpass the attendance requirements). And they'd be competitive in many small and some mid level conferences. Right now. If they could recruit - and the state they reside in is an underrated talent bed - they could do better. When Southern plays d1 teams it routinely piles up big rushing numbers. It's hung 300 yard+ days on the likes of Florida and Auburn in the past. They've been running this offense for years there. It's a difficult one to defend against.

Of course, Georgia beat Southern by 20 and hung 58(!) points on the board. Methinks the author is enamored by their being a 1AA school, and doesn't understand Southern's true football prowess (wait. . .was that. . .irony? Nah).

Now, as for offense tech levels. . .his contention that Georgia has not seen a "high tech" offense is absurd. He's only just gotten back (and methinks, he's back for a rougher time than some realize), but SOS' Fun-and-Gun offense single-handedly modernized the SEC, and played a part in the role of shifting greater college football philosophies. Hal Mumme ran some crazy ones at Kentucky. LSU's offense was hardly chopped liver. Georgia has faced offenses quarterbacked by the likes of Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, and Peyton Manning (not to mention some of the bowl opponents. Hi Drew Brees and Kyle Orton. Oh, and high Travis Dorsch!). Those things (that talent crap I was rambling about earlier) tend to matter more than how l33t the offensive system is. An example offered up is how Oklahoma failed to cover people out of the backfield against USC in the title game. Yes, Boise uses a similar offensive system to USC (or so I am told). My question: so? What does that have to do with Georgia v Boise State? Not much. Sure - sometimes teams fail to make adjustments. Georgia may well fail to (it's happened before. See the Ronnie Daniels Massacre). That Oklahoma failed to make adjustments against the most talented team in college football says nothing about a game being played the next season by two different teams.

It's funny, because the author mostly ignores the other side of the ball - UGA offense versus the Central Fellowship, I'm sorry I mean Boise State, defense. Louisville ran wild on Boise last year. One of Georgia's strengths should be the running game (but we shall see).

Not that I don't think Boise St won't be a tough opponent - Georgia lost a number of key players (Messrs Pollock, Davis, Brown, Greene). Georgia's LB depth has taken a small blow and it isn't even august. The secondary has serious questions (it wasn't that good last year with Davis, though Demario Minter is underrated). Van Gorder is gone, and while I suspect Marinez will be a better hire than many suspect it will be impossible not to miss him (here's a stat for you: go look up how many games Georgia allowed an opponent to score over 30 points under Van Gorder's 4 year tenure). Boise is good, no question about it. They may well beat Georgia. But it likely won't have to do with any of the non-analysis offered up by the article. Ill save my thoughts on that game for another time.

So did we learn anything? I don't know, and I don't care. Except that I'm much better at selecting song titles to tie into blog headers. Though I should point out I am biased.

More on the Marlins

2005-06-24T09:58:00.000-07:00

An interesting stat tossed out by Mark Bradley this morning about the Marlins. Their team average of .273 (good for 3rd in the NL) is 19 points higher than the Brave's anemic .254. However, they have scored 27 fewer runs (I do not know if this reflects last night), admittedly in 3 fewer games. Good for third from the bottom in the NL. Atrocious. The Braves 333 runs put them a respectable 6th. They have a higher team OB% (.338 versus .321 - 3 games shouldn't account for this; I haven't looked at sacrifices though) but 18 less walks. Their team OPS is 14 points higher than the braves (.754). The Braves have a tiny slugging league - 3points.

That last is a misleading statistic - SLG has never really measured power as traditionally purported. The Marlins closeness is thanks to the batting average. The Braves have outslugged the Marlins. 2 more doubles and a triple ( trivial), but 20 more homeruns. They've hit less, true, but they've made it count more. A decent year from Mike Lowell would radically change this, but you can hardly put all the blame on him.

Juan Pierre is definately a problem - the 2-4 hitters (Castillo, Cabrera, Delgado) are having big years. he should be leading the Galaxy in runs scored. You can't do that when you don't get on base. Baseball persona often eschew the sabermetric talk, and often point to guys with low OB% and good (90-100+) run seasons as successful because of speed. Poppycock. Someone like Tony Womack has had that sort of "success" before (I think he scored 111 runs for Arizona in 99 with like 70 steals). However, you could put an aging but still cagey Rickey Henderson (who could post .400 OB%s in his late years regardless of his other stats) at the top of such a linuep and the guy would score 130.

It's unfair to just trash Pierre - he has a .355 career OB% which is far from horrible, and he's had some good years. Still, if I'm McKeon I'm dropping him in the order until he gets it figured out. The Marlins' season is far from over, but either Pierre needs to start hitting or McKeon will have to do something.

Right Bobby?

Tim Duncan Saves His legacy

2005-06-24T05:02:00.000-07:00

. . .and other absurdities.

With a strong 4th period, Tim Duncan had 27 points and 11 rebounds to help push the Spurs to their third NBA title. He also helped erase growing doubts about his ability to get it done under pressure and against a top llight opponent (as if the Lakers 2 years ago where chopped liver). Ducan struggled at times throughout the series as the Spurs bungled a 2-0 series lead, often looking worse than the Pistons did in games 1&2. Articles started appearing all over, naturally, about Duncan and his woes. I wonder. . .why?

If you watched game 7, it appeared that Duncan is not physically 100%. He lacked explosiveness, and at times appeared he had a vertical leap that mine dwarfs. Not much was made of Duncan's physical condition coming into this series, except that he was supposed to be "ready". One would ahve expected that coming out of the Spurs camp. So why haven't more people written about his foot woes, as they did constantly for the rest of the playoffs. Did the world forget he's not been 100% for some time? All of the rest the Spurs got probably helped tremendously, but methinks it wouldn't have allowed him to get to 100% (and possibly not even 90%). I found the whole thing rather strange, to be honest.

Anyway, congrats to the Spurs. Have the Pistons started complaining about the refs yet?

Don't call it a hot streak

2005-06-23T05:57:00.000-07:00

But the Braves are 5-1 with two straight series wins. A nice win last night, tainted slightly by Horacio Ramirez having to leave the game afdter 5 pretty good innings.

Andruw hit one of the deepest game home runs I have ever seen at the Ted. 432 feet my rear end. I think the Braves are one of the teams who computer distance as where the ball hits, not projecting the trajectory as many places do. But I could be mistaken.

Kelley Johnson is now officially on the list of people it is acceptable to have a man-crush on. He hit three absolute ropes last night. I actually beat the announcers by a few pitches in thinking that he has done a couple of things to his batting standce, and I hadn't really taken time to notice. He's far more open now - much similar to Chipper than when he came up. And his hands are down. I just love that swing. I believe it was hit #3 that was a very easy and compact swing, and he just tatooed the ball. Yes, it's a hot streak for him. But the more I watch him play, the more I like him.

Giles had a nice game despite being up and down of late. 2 BBs may bode well. I'm not sure if Pierre gets to that ball if he doesn't lose it, I think it would be close (it's hard not to give him the out with that speed, but it landed deeper than I realized on replay). Furcal had a l.400 night - and I'd take a .250 average if he was going to walk that often. I think pitchers are figuring out Betemit - it generally happens to a rookie at some point. His BB/K was 12/8 some weeks ago and it's gone 2/12 since. How he handles the coming weeks will be telling. I really liked how Blaine Boyer was throwing.

Sighting: Brian Jordan's power was spotted scaping tickets before the game.

I screw a lot better when we're winning

2005-06-22T05:13:00.000-07:00

Especially against divsional foes. That felt good, I'd be lying if I said otherwise. Thoughts:

1) Nice game from Smoltzie, but I don't like his throwing that many pitches this early in the season. The danger of him running out of gas is significant - he hasn't throw alot of innings in years. Conserve early, hit the gas down the stretch. Though that is one way to get the bullpen some rest.

2) Four walks from the braves versus 4 ks was nice. And against a pretty good starter to boot. The braves only had 2 extra base hits but they counted.

3) Kelley Johnson continues his tear with a double and a walk. I think I'm starting to dream about him. Andruw's homer was nice, but so was the walk. If he's walking, he's seeing the ball. If he's seeing the ball, he's blasting homeruns. I don't have any math to back it up, but that's generally a good thing.

4) Pete Orr made two errors, but had two hits to raise his average to .329. He has only 4 walks versus 10ks in 79 ABs, but he has been a nice sparkplug thusfar. Cox has a pleasant quandry right now, I think. All of the rookies have shown promise. Be it with the glove, or the bat, or both. There really aren't enough ABs to go around. This team gets increasingly fun to watch, even when we lose. I can't wait to see who makes a big play next.

5) Wilson with a BB. I feel you, dawg.

Word has it the Braves might be interested in Aubrey Huff, who is not having that good of a season. Still, he's put up pretty good numbers the previous two years. I think he's a pretty good player. I'm not sure how I feel about trading for him. I think I'd prefer relief help right now. Ask me again in a month.

The sleeper has awakened

2005-06-09T06:26:00.000-07:00

The US victory of Panama last night might seem, at a glance, of little consequence. Sure, it moves them one step closer to Germany (a very large step, perhaps). Who among the casual soccer fans in Amercia (all 15 of them) doesn't expect the team to be in Germany? Qualifying is likely assumed.

The US won 3-0 on the road last night. Playing on the road anywhere, with a couple of exceptions (Andorra perhaps), is difficult. Teams are often happy to tie and come away with a point. So a win, and what appears to be a convincing one, is all the more impressive. Even against lowly Panama, who has not faired well in qualifying thus far. They had not lost at home, though, and that's something.

There is a ways to go yet, and the US isn't done improving as a squad (witness the awe of England in a recent friendly, and some struggles in the previous round of qualifying). Many people who will probably play key roles in Germany aren't healthy right now (Eddie Johnson, John O'Brien, to name two). Still, the US is starting to play some pretty good soccer. It's hard not to get excited.

I just need a little fuel

2005-06-08T06:45:00.000-07:00

I still haven't seen a live action replay of Erstad's hit on Estrada. It does look like, on a series of pictures I glimpsed, he is coming in a bit high. I wouldn't call it dirty at this time though - it;s part of baseball.

That said, I'm not sorry Ramirez threw behind Erstad. I don't wish injury on Erstad, but heaven knows the Braves could use a little fire. So it's nice to see a guesture of emotion.

And on an unrelated note - the US plays a very important qualifying match at Panama tonight at 8:30 (EST). A tie here would be nice - taking points away from home is generally a good thing in soccer. I would like more. The US really took care of business against Costa Rica. Let's win here and put ourselves in a very comfortable position, and start preparing for the rematch with El Tricolors. I want to beat Mexico about as badly as I want the Dawgs to beat UF this fall. And that's saying something.

And Bobby shall lead them

2005-06-08T06:24:00.000-07:00

Brian Jordan really must have felt old last night, given that the average age of the people in the lineup arround him seemed about two decades younger than him. The news of Chipper looks bad headed for worse. I'm still not sure when Estrada will be back. Thompson is out forever.

So why not just turn it over to the kids? Marte was doing fairly well at Richmond, and of all the young guys he and Davies are probably the most deserving of the label of "the future" (not that the rest of them don't deserve it). Early returns weren't bad. Marte had a sac fly and took one for a ride later in the game, just missing what would have been his first major league home run. He showed some nice glovework - an area he has clearly put a lot of time into.

Being in the thick of a divisional race, with a bunch of hobbling or struggling veterans and thus needing to make major contributions, is not ideal for one young guy. Let alone 5+. You couldn't ask for a better staff to do it with, though. Bobby is Bobby and I have a feeling the Braves, no matter how the injuries play out, will be in the thick of it come August. I haven't given up hope of a playoff spot either. The sad thing is, we could play as is (make a couple of moves, sure) the rest of the way out, get the wild card or win the division, and Bobby Cox probably still wouldn't be manager of the year.

He has shortcommings - some of the Braves historical October malaise can be lain at his feet. He has been too by the book in the post season, ignoring hot hitters at times for matchups. And over-relying on the same releiver he has used all year, leading to guys getting tired and then flopping. I think that you have to change your philosophy in the post season, and be a little less business-like (which works fantastic during the marathon regular season), and a little more urgent (for the Spring that is October). Still, it's only part of it, and the bottom line was the hitters generally didn't hit and the pitchers sometimes didn't pitch well.

He's had several years where he should have won and did not. My Gut says that if the East produces another playoff team, that team will probably have the manager of the year (save, perhaps, the Marlins). I think Frank Robinson is the front runner right now. People will point to the payroll disparity, to the lack of bona fide stars on a team like the Nationals, and probably be influenced by the fact that the Braves have been in the hunt for forever and a day. That Cox has 2 wins since his recent tenture with the Braves started in 1991 is impressive. But he should have more; (that Jack Mckeon won it in 1999 with the reds over Cox was criminal). Dusty Baker has 3 over that same span - but I don't think he's deserving of more than Cox.

The Braves have had resources over the past decade and a half, and that's why they've won 13 straight divisional titles. But many teams have had resources during that span and not even played .500 ball at times. Cox is part of the reason for that.

Being Steve Bedrosion

2005-06-08T05:16:00.000-07:00

Baseball America said he is one of the most majors-ready players in the draft. USA Today thinks he will be in the Atlanta pen by the end of the year. Both bold statements, and I'm not holding my breath. That said, it's hard not to think the Braves had their current bullpen problems - even if the picture they were looking at was much bigger - when they took North Carolina State releiver Joey Devine. I think a releiver in the high rounds is generally a stretch. A guy who has started most of his life can easily go to relief. The reverse is not true. That said, maybe this was a good pick after all.

He's 5-11 205, and his delivery has been described as "between sidearmed and three-quaters". His impressive strike out numbers at NCSt (75ish in 48ish innings this past year) might be something I'd chalk up to the delivery. However, BA also claimed he throws in the mid 90s, topping out at 97. I doubt very much he'll be in Atlanta this year; it isn't impossible but it is very rare for a player to get to the majors that quickly from any level. Not counting those silly contract clauses like the one Alex Rodriguez had, that dictated he get a cup of coffee in year 1. A couple of years is a distinct possibility - he will join UGA releiver Will Startup at single A. Good luck gentlemen - we need it.

Other noteworthies from the draft nobody pays attention to - the Braves took 14 pitchers in 20 picks yesterday. they took 3 college pitchers in the top 6 picks, something of a rarity for them. Since taking Mike Kelly #1 overall in 1991, the Braves have tended to avoid college guys early. However, in recent years they've taken more. Perhaps the right player just happened to be a college guy. Perhaps there has been a slight shift in philosophy; who knows.

They also took a cuban shortstop with a supplimental pick after the first round. It will be interesting to see how he turns out.

Come back in one year

2005-06-06T08:07:00.000-07:00

For the second straight year, the University of Georgia has denined a recruit admission due to findings by the review board. Last year, it was speedy CB Michael Grant, who it turns out had on his record an "incident". Not much detail about said indicent ever reached these ears.

This time, it was Floridian LB prospect Jamar Cheney. He was denied entrance because the second time he took the SAT, his score jumped so high that the SAT review board flagged it (chaney scored a 1260 the second time, to go along with a 2.9 gpa). Allegedly, he was told it was impossible to score a 2.9 wityh as 1260 - but I cannot verify that, and it's an absurd point anyway.

Jamar was asked to retake the test, but he didn't, because his ACT was good enough to qualify. He may have been advised that the "ACT will be enough", and by Richt no less (again, allegedly). If he takes the SAT again and scores much lower - say 980, that might have lead us to this road anyway. There is a certain special message board out there where fans are doing some frothing, but I don't think this is going to cause UGA to lose Richt. It sucks to lose a recruit like this, but it's one recruit out of many. I wish Chaney the best of luck, even if he winds up at UF. I can empathize with any dissappointment he might feelt - I didn't get into my initial college of choice and it was somewhat gutwrenching.

That doesn't make this a bad move for the UGA review board, though. I don't think there is enough information to say that this time. What I do think is unfortunate is that Chaney couldn't find out until recently - it certainly reduces his plan B options. Most schools probably don't have scholarship room for Jamar. UF apparently does (and has absolutely no problems letting him in on the ACT score it seems, or doesn't care about the SAT score beign flagged; we'll find out Wednesday). Having your college destination up in the air right now would not be much fun.

A point I would like to make: I scored higher than he did in highschool, and my GPA wasn't much better (right at a 3.1). In highschool I really wasn't that motivated - a problem many highschoolers suffer. I didn't spend that much time studying (there were far too many fun things to do - video games, books, tv, girls). I'm sure statistically it bears out there 2.9 with a 1260 is indeed very rare; just like statistically it is rare for a person with under a .5 BB/K ration to hit .300 for an entire season. Rare does not mean impossible. I was told it was next to impossible to raise one's SAT score several hundred points after the first take. I improved mine 150 over 3 tests, and had I taken it a fourth time I'd have added onto that. I took a single SAT prep course, all english focused (and mostly just analogies) - just 2 classes that were 2 hours a piece. I took it before the third test taking - and it helped. I boosted my verbal considerably (my math scores were fairly consistent; I did see some improvement from test 1 to test 2 on math, but scored identically on test 3). I should have taken something for Math - I scored well on math but I think I ultimately underpeformed and the course likely would have been an excellent refresher if nothing else.

Jamar took a prepratory course as well. While it is unlikely it could produce a several hunred point gain all by itself, I don't think this automatically means Jamar's situation is in any way shady. Unfortunately, Jamar probably needed to take the test again. A decent score would have validated his hard work.

Paging Steve Avery

2005-06-06T06:47:00.000-07:00

Kyle Davies is off to a nice start - another young guy turning in a solid performance for a team that is otherwise floundering. However, Cox did something Saturday that made me cringe. Davies threw 119 pitches in his saturday gem. His future - which may or may not turn out to be as bright as his start - is not worth one game, nor one season.

Ron Shandler did some considerable research on the subject of pitcher burnout. I'll have to bring the materials into work tomorrow so I can give all the specifics. However he found that pitchers under the age of 25 that met certain criteria rarely ever threw that many innings agin - and never did so at a high performance level.

the main criteria were:

1. Pitcher threw 200 innings
2. Pitcher averaged over 28.5 batters faced per game
3. Pitcher saw an increase in IP of 50+ over consecutive seasons

Davies shouldn't be throwing 119 pitches. Keep him to 90, and try to limit his innings. He's young, and he may grow into dominance. I doubt he'll average 100+ pitches a game; Cox and Mazzone usually keep their pitchers in the 90 to 100 range. And it is just one game. Avery matched all of those criteria at a young age - several seasons worth. He was borderline fantastic in the early 90s, and never came close to duplicating that success. I'd hate to see Davies go down that roat. Cox and Mazzone certainly know far more about pitching than I do. I'd just as soon take extra care with Davies, though. I know the bullpen is on fire, but neither the game nor the season are worth a career.

A couple of additional notes

2005-06-03T10:37:00.000-07:00

Dan doodie was himself victimized by further bullpen lapse. However, it's very difficult to come in and pitch with the bases juiiced like that. If memory serves, Strand rate - the percentage of inherited runners a bullpen strands - normalizes to some number I cannot forget. And lacking the proper link right now, I can't investigate it. It is an interesting stat, however. It suggests that a good bullpen matters but is limited into just how much in crisis situations. A good bullpen can outperform strand rate - but it's tough to get 5/6 guys who all do it. Gryboski has been up and down at best and did not help.

But he shouldn't have been in that position (sorry to pick on you more, Dan-o).

I mis-guestimated Betemit's projections. At his walk rate, he's projecting to a 500-550 AB full slate I think - So 120-130 walks and a 650ish Plate Appearance season. That's a pretty full slate I think. Here are some of his minors numbers :

2000 - low A - 30/37 (BB/K) 69/269 (G/AB) .81
2001 - high A - 23/71 84/318 .32
2001 - AA - 12/36 47/183 .33
2002 - AAA - 34/82 93/343 .41
2003 - AAA - 38/115 127/478 .33
2004 - AAA - 32/99 105/356 .32

I'm sensing a pattern. . .it's not that good. Though people can outperform low eye rations (see: Soriano). It genreally takes very good speed and power.

I can't recall if he gained a couple of years in the great Latino Age Purge, so his listed 24 kind of caught me off guard. It is still young - many guys don't enjoy success until later in their careers. I don't want to see the Braves bet the farm on him and have this just be a temporary thing, while the league slowly adjusts to him. But I'm happy to watch him in the mean time.

Now if only we could grab about 3 releivers. . .

The Braves covered an old phish tune last night

2005-06-03T08:35:00.000-07:00

The song? David Bowie

The lyrics:

David Bowie
(repeat a bunch)
*jammin*

UB 40
(repeat a bunch)
*jammin*

The Braves added a verse last night:

Dan-Doodie
(repeat a bunch)
*commit Hari Kari

I'm sort of speechless right now. It was an interesting game for a number of reasons:

1) Ramirez wasn't very good; neither was he very bad. Again. Is he not 100% yet? Was his early success a flash in the pan? I don't know. 10 base runners and 3 earned runs in 7 innings is not the end of the world. But he isn't very fun to watch pitch right now. It was one of his better road outings, though, so that's something. It also isn't saying very much. Of course, thanks to Dan Doodie (second entry down), he's far and away not the worst pitcher on the team to watch.

2) Dan - I'm sorry man. I have nothing against you personally. Your job is tough - the act of pitching is a complete despoiling of your body/your temple. It's letting the barbarians in and just having their way with the place. Pitching is hard. Pitching in front of thousands of people is harder. Pitching for a team that has won 13 consecutive division titles is harder still.

You've been awful, though. It has to be said. I hope you pull out of it. I do. I hope we can find someone who will agree to take you while we pay 70% of your salary.

It isn't personal. But you are breaking my heart.

3) Wilson Betemit's rising star, thanks in part to injuries, had stalled after a meteoric rise through the organization. He's so young, still. Rigth now, he has 12 BB and 8 Ks in 45 ABs. On pace for 100 ks, full season - no surprise as it follows along with what I remember of his minor league stats. And 144 BBs. That number is incredible. And alarming - because he never did anything close to that in the minors that I can recall.

If he can show patience, work a count, and take a walk, the sky may well be the limit for this powerful looking switch hitter. I don't know where he is going to play and frankly don't much care. Let's give him a shot. Maybe he'll just be a flash in the pan as well. But the braves need juice on offense right now, and he's providing it. Wilson, study the game and improve, if you can.

4) Chipper is slumping. Injuries have slowed down what was a fabulous start, but it's not entirely unexpected. He's a .300 hitter who rarely gets into the mid/high teens - I believe he hit .323 the MVP year, which is outstanding. Still, I was hoping for one of those incredible resurgant seasons. Not that all is lost. He stands at a 33/24 BB/K ratio, which is outstanding. 4 BBs versus 1 K in his last 5-6 games, combined with the paucity of hits, leads me to believe he may be pressing a bit. He had a big AB last night with runners on and didn't produce.

I do not like Bobby having dropped him to 4th. Baseball players are very routine driven - Bobby you know more than me but he didn't like hitting cleanup the last 2 years. Leave him third and just let everyone else deal with it. I don't think it is good for the lineup when he hits fourth.

5) Five walks for the team was a welcome sight, and 5 runs should be enough to win. The bullpen letdown stung because I think we really needed that one.

Elkon is right about something else - when Jones slumps, he slumps. I think I almost seized up after watching him swing at that pitch that bounced in front of the plate, and way outside.

Chin up though; it's a long season, and Bobby will keep them in the hunt.

Overrated. . .Overrated. . .Overrated. . .

2005-06-01T08:47:00.000-07:00

Not just one of the better (if generic) cheers used in all of sports, Mike Elkon links to a pretty interesting "study" of teams versus their pre-season rankings.

I use study in quotes because while it's an interesting piece, as Mike notes polls do not take into account things like scheduling. And that is reflected in this just looking at pre-season versus final rankings. It also doesn't reflect luck (good or bad - hi Colorado!) causing a season to turn one way or the other.

Still, it's intesting to look at. I think Florida being at the bottom is a tad misleading - they're pretty consistently close to their preseason rankings, and I think if a good team plays in a tougher conference you might expect them to finish below a preseason ranking more often than not, particularly when that ranking is so often a top 10 or top 5 ranking (as Florida's so often was). Big differences are also interesting - particularly when they are in the red. What it all means can vary. Often there are funny things in preason rankings - like people ranking a team based on the assumption that something that hasn't happened will. Like a line of underclassmen with little experience pulling together and playing great. Or several previously injured players returning to old form.

So a big negative doesn't necessarily prove a team is overrated; it may just prove that the people picking the rankings were at best overly optimistic or unlucky and at worst stupid. And really, that's what might ultimately be reflected here - that preseason picks aren't always made logically, and that even when they are there is a guess component and nobody can see the future. Still, it's a fun chart to look at.

I am pretty sure it's fair to call Notre Dame the most overrated team in the country. It must have been nice -back before we had electricity, cars, and the ice age - when Notre Dame was head and shoulders above other schools in national coverage. They were probably on TV more often than everyone else (I could be wrong here), and this was a big deal back then. Now? Recruiting is different, with far fewer scholarships available and so much coverage existing for schools from mid level conferences. Boise State gets on TV a couple of times a year - prime time at that. 15 years ago, they'd have been dying to get TV coverage in a bowl game. Notre Dame gets slobbered on by the national media, but they aren't relevant they way they used to be. They have excellent pagentry and tradition, yes, but so do a number of schools. I'm guessing the nation was just under exposed to everyone else for far too long.

Wanted

2005-05-19T12:38:00.000-07:00

One outfielder
A couple of pitchers
soulmate

Outfielder should possess an above average glove and a good bat. Not "Albert Belle, the year he had 100 extra base hits" good. More Luis Gonzales esque - we're reasonable. Outfilder should not be a highmaintence guy in the club house. Outfielder should possess some competitive fire and think that October Baseball is "really important". Cool nickname an added bonus.

Releivers are required to submit to strenuous psycological testing before any contract is finalized. Posteason experience, and preferrably success, a major bonus. Spot starters are also welcome to apply, and long term work may be available pending further tests on John Thompson. Relievers should under no circumstances endorse walks, especially leadoff walks. Long "lettuce" is a downer, but organization willing to compromise. Any outspoken commentary that is remotely political is forwned on by the organization.

Soulmate need not meet any specs save being female. 5'9", somewhat slender but definately curvey with at least C cups, good sense of humor, and empathy for things considered "geeky" is a major bonus. Outgoing and "adventurous" personality is ideal. Jello allergy is a deal breaker.

Baseball players should contact John Scheurholtz. Ladies should email me ASAP, with pictures and proof of identity.

Unfortunately, injuries are not something we can withstand well right now. Whether or not Kyle Davies can pitch well up here remains to be seen. He's clearly part of the club's future, but how much so? Schuerholtz and company have always shown a willingness to part with prospects, and it often seems to indicate in highsight that the club had doubts about a player. Needing 3 players is a problem, and that doesn't speak to possilby needing a new starter.

Sadly, the Braves prospects right now are far superior to my own.

Addendum: oy vey. Two to three months for John Thompson? This is not good. If Davies can't perform well in his first few starts, the club may be forced to seek a starter. That will complicate other deals considerably. I really hope we don't panic and give away guys like Chuck James.

Pre-pre-pre season polls

2005-05-18T06:40:00.000-07:00

Various publications have been releasing pre-season, or preliminary pre-season, or post-post season, or post-season preliminary pre-season rankings for some time now. College football fan - the type that is likely to be on the internet often in any case - is probably either howling with delight or gnashing is teeth because of where his team was. Once again, there's a model here:

1. Legal corporate entity is a rational acting, utility maximizing entity.
2. Legal corporate entity publishes something for a living.
3. Legal corporate entity decides to act on #1. Or, decides to follow along after someone who already did that.
4. Wait for it. . . legal corporate entity publishes rankings to generate buzz.

Why do college football fans fixate on this stuff? Take your typical pre-season rankings. They'll start appearing from the smaller publications as soon as they rush those football previews out the door. Bigger publications like SI, and actual polls like the USA today Coaches Assistant Votes poll, wait until right before the season.

Maybe you were unaware, but there isn't some set guideline for how to do preseason rankings. Everyone doing them is not following some form, e.g. "I'm going to rank the teams on how good I think they are. . .right now". Sometimes people are projecting the order of finish (and that's ultimately what the polls become as the season goes on). Isn't it a bit silly to care about these things? Pre-season polls from the most knowledgeable sources are at best educated guesses, with heavy emphasis on the latter. Does Georgia's ranking (#14 in a recent poll) amount to squat? Not really.

It's true that in the polls factoring into the BCS, preseason ranking can matter. However, there are a number of recent examples of teams finishing in the top 5 that didn't start in the top 10, and a couple of teens winning national titles. The rest are just there to draw attention to the publication in question. They are often written by people who are passionate about college football, yes. And sometimes written by people who have interesting things to say about college football. They amount to squat, in the grand scheme of things. Getting upset about your team's ranking is absurd.

Unfortunately, people just talking about them is what continues to get them published. Or to get those even more absurd polls like "post-string practice rankings" published (find me one team in the United States that didn't have solid if not glowing spring practice press. Just one - I'll qualify it by saying it has to be a D1 team). I like college football discussion as much as the next guy, but there are limits. Unfortunately, I do not appear to be in the majority here.

OMFG! teh physics!

2005-05-17T08:47:00.000-07:00

I hate where the electronic gaming industry is going. Game costs are skyrocketing and in particular PC games are having a harder time getting shelf space, as sales are dropping. There's plenty of people who write eloquently on what is wrong with the industry (see: Greg Costikyan; Where have you gone Joel Mathis?), and they do it much better than I ever could. I feel compelled to comment on this one, though.

Yes, coming soon to your computers is a chip dedicated to doing math calculations for 3d engines. Specifically, it will handle all calculations related to objects bumping into each other. And moving around (or flying around, for those objects that we blow up with rocket launchers).

Here is a choice quote from the article:

According to Ageia, a physics chip can take the predictability out of video games and provide life-like interactions of even small particles. For example, if players of a first-person-shooter fire against a wall, there is little happening today. The PhysX chip however can simulate thousands of interacting fragments, which could create the illusion of disintegrating walls, such as a blown-up wall. Other examples include fluid dynamics with up 40,000 to 50,000 simulated particles per screen, gelatinous characters, windswept hair, loose flowing clothing, finite element analysis (that for example allows realistic display of damage in car racing games).

Gee, someone shove me into a pool because I am getting hot. For all .5 of my readers who don't know me well enough, that previous post was bought to you with Sarcasm(tm). What the hell good is realism anyway?

Well, sometimes it's really important. Ask any flight sim veteran. Or someone playing Madden 2005 looking for a "realistic football experience". However, even in cases such as madden there are a *number* of sacrifices made when going from concept to the playable game. Perhaps you haven't tried madden lately, but it really isn't terribly realistic. It's pretty fun though - and it does a decent job of capturing many of the nuances of the sport. Really, realism is often the enemy of a game. When I play a CRPG, I don't want to have to feed my party all the time. Or make sure they stay regular. Or make sure they stay clean. Best to just assume they're responsible adults who can do all of those things without any hitches. I'd prefer to focus on the hero-ly things they do. Like killing orcs and liberating treasure.

Realism can enhnace a game, but that's all graphics & physics can ever do. Unfortunately, the industry is driven more by the skin deep components of games, like the graphics. Thanks in no small part to the massess who want these products (may you all suffer the pox of 1000 goats). Occasionally the physics component can take on added importance (see those afformentioned flight sims), and that's fine. Sometimes we wind up with a nifty little product that takes something like physics and makes it a core element of gameplay (google Bridge builder if you don't beleive me).

But 30,000 miniscule shards flying off of a concreit wall I just filled full of lead is the type of thing that really doesn't matter. Destructable terrain can be a big deal (see X-com: UFO Defense; one of the best games ever made and done without a physics chip or 3d graphics), and lots of fun. However, it seems to me that if this physics chip catches on it may well have developers spending more time on having their engines do wild and wackhy things, and less time on actually making fun games. That doesn't help anyone.

I think the chip has a good chance to land on the trasheap of "I've got a fantastic idea for a peripheral!" throwaways (which actually exists right next to a landfill containing nothing but Atari 2600 ET cartridges. . .). The article gives you some commentary from the graphics card makers. You have to take everything in an article like this with a grain of salt, but they're right. Graphics cards can do all kinds of stuff and they continue to get more powerful. And you can get a super powerful graphics card for the price of the physics chip (and said chip cannot push polygons or render objects at all). Also, the processing world may be in for some change. Some people thing dual processing systems are the future (you can more cheaply build a dual processor system with 2 2GHz p4s than one uber 3.whatever P4, and you'll need far less power/produce far less heat running it). Processors with multiple "cores" might become common place as well.

Despite the fact that the developer of an AAA title (Big Huge Games, and the solid Rise of Nations) promises to support the chip with it's next release (Rise of Legends - a sequel of sorts to RoN), I think the odds are against this chip catching on.

We're going to town today. . .

2005-05-17T06:25:00.000-07:00

Message boards - the 21st century's bazaars (to paraphrase from another message board denizen). They're often not for the faint of heart. And unfortunately, they're all to often populated by bozos. Like the ugasports.com board, for example. Nothing personal to anyone there (not that they'll ever read this. . .), but who cares if Matthew Stafford is just a top 10 quaterback?

Yes, the latest controversy threatening to tear the board's social fabric asunder is because Stafford, mentioned by many services as a top 3 or better guy, was called a top 10 guy by the rivals main site after he signed with Georgia. SO FREAKING WHAT? Does the Rivals raiting somehow diminish his skillset? Is his talent ceiling lowered because some fat guy who never played sports and does nothing but watch highschool game film, someone who I should point out is hardly an expert, decided to use an inexact ranking system to put 6 other guys ahead of Stafford? Or was the statement just made somewhat generally - as in "he's definately one of the top 10 QBs in the nation; we're not ready to finalize the top few".

That's the thing, most of the people on the board didn't appear to bother to research the context of the quote. This is just a reflection of human nature - too often we get caught up in the sensationalistic. And guess what? Any declaration about Staffard is going to be sensational. Rivals makes money by getting people to pay for their services - information & articles about top prospects. I'm not saying Rivals will just rearrange rankins based on sales projections. What I am saying is that generally speaking, they're going to make every article sensational where possible.

I like the people who wortk for UGA sports.com; they remind me of the Braves announcers (though I think poor Skip is really losing it). The Braves announcers usually have nothing but glowing praise for the other team and other managers. It's annoying at times - they sometimes overlook obvious faults, but you're going to get a somewhat balanced game presentation for them - and they're hometown announcers. I've had minor experience with other team's rivals sites, but what little I had I didn't care for. Warchant made every player seem like they had shrines to FSU set up in their back yards. The UGAsports articles are rarely like that. I'm sure they aren't the only "local" guys doiung a good job, but they're the only ones I see in action often.

The board residents? They fret about the things that all college football fans fret about. And it gets distorted somewhat in this medium. I love reading posts during game weeks. Someone invariably posts the "I'm worried, we're overlooking team X!" thread that gets 70zillion replies. Hey, maybe that person is on to something. Maybe the fans, who have absolutely no control over the game whatsoever, taking the other team lightly is going to cause the hometown boys to lose. And maybe I'm Mary queen of Scotts.

So really, guys, stop worrying about what Matthew Stafford's ranking is. By all accounts, Georgia just signed a helluva prospect, one that is sure to garner some national attention for the school.

The internet is the end all be all of civilization

2005-05-17T05:58:00.000-07:00

I say it because it is true. Unfortunately, the internet is used by the human race, which is %98 comprised of people who shouldn't be allowed to breed. Ever.

The net really is the bee's knees, though. You have more information at your finger tips than every scientist who ever lived up until DARPAnet sprang into being. Even better, it isn't all just the written word. There are other people out there, people like me, representing a "living knowledge base". You simply can't beat it. Unfortunately, the internet is bound by the same laws of the universe that we all are. It cannot spontaneously generate matter (sorry Star Trek fans, it ain't happening. Ever), for example. And it's bound by the single most important law in the history of laws - the Pareto rule. Or the 80/20 rule, as it's frequently known.

To put it in a context I care about: 80% of my effort on a project is spent on 20% of the code I write. Another way to say it would be: 80% of everything is crap. The internet too is bound by this rule, and 80 percent of the internet is crap. Message boards filled with people who forget how to reason, idiots with no social skills pretending to be something they aren't, and sites dedicated to hentai (do not google this if you are squeamish).

The other 20% though. . .glorious. More Porn than you can shake a prosthetic wang at. More facts about your favorite subject that you can shake a stick at (like baseball? Check out the baseball prospectus. Need help with a video game? Try gamefaqs. Curious about evolution - talkorigins.org). For me, though, you really can't beat that living knowledge base.

The problem is getting to it. It's an awful lot you have to wade through, sometimes, to get to that heavenly 20% slice. There's something else about the internet - it tends to warp space time. People's perceptions sometimes go awry, in this place.