ItsTheBlog™

Find me the audio for Colin Cowherd's "In the Herd" on ESPN Radio for the day after the NBA Draft. Jason Smith filled in for him and let's just say I'd like to rip him an absolute new one.

And this was national radio. Seriously. What the freaking hell?

Labels: Jason Smith, Terrible

Labels: draft, Durant, Jason Richardson, Oden, Ray Allen, Steve Francis, trade, Wally Szczerbiak, Zach Randolph

Allow me to be frank with you, the reader, right up front. If you are looking for an unbiased article free of presupposition, vendettas, and partiality, please - stop here, close your web browser, and go grab a cross-word puzzle. This is not for you. For those of you that made it this far, let's jump into the cesspool that is the situation of Portland Trailblazers' Zach Randolph.

Labels: draft, Durant, Jefferson, NBA, Oden, Randolph, trade, Yahoo, Zach

Pretty much all the talk up until now has suggested that there is no doubt that Greg Oden will be the first pick in tomorrow night's NBA Draft.

Then, Bill Simmons, whom I generally agree with completely, suggested that the Blazers should select Kevin Durant with their #1 selection.

He just got it flat wrong.

While Simmons does make a good point (that Oden is the guy who plays because he is bigger than everyone else, and Durant is the guy that plays because of his raw talent), that shouldn't be the reason to select Durant first. You can't teach size--we all know that. That's why Shaq (in his heyday) was the game's most dominant player, why Wilt Chamberlain scored 100 points in a game, why Bill Russell won 11 NBA Championships, and why Kareem Abdul-Jabbar has the most points in NBA history.

Granted, many guards/forwards, including Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, and Magic Johnson, have become some of the game's best players ever. But, the point is, size hasn't stopped some of the league's greats, so why hold it against Oden? Simmons says that Oden could easily become like Patrick Ewing or Alonzo Mourning (which isn't too bad, is it?), but he fails to mention that Durant could fizzle into another run of the mill swingman despite lofty expectations.

The fact is that both could become some fantastic NBA players, but the jury is still out. Both have just 1 year of college experience, and some incredible expectations to live up to. Whether they can fulfill them, we don't know.


In the meantime, like I said, you can't teach size. And in a game where the basket is 10 feet tall, I'd take the dominant 7 foot beast over the skinny swingman who can't bench press 185 pounds.

I'm not saying Durant won't be solid, but I think Oden not only has a better chance of becoming a superstar, but fits the Portland Trail Blazers much better.

Trade Randolph for a point guard, and stick young guys Greg Oden and LaMarcus Aldridge down low, with Brandon Roy, Jarrett Jack, and Travis Outlaw outside.

Just my two cents.

11:02 PM EST UPDATE: ESPNNews suggests that the Blazers will draft Greg Oden No. 1. I wrote the above post before seeing that headline.

Labels: draft, Durant, Kevdog, NBA, Oden

It looks like Kevin Garnett won't be donning the royal colors of LA anytime soon. Apparently, the Lakers aren't willing to give anything up in return for Garnett.

For those of you sleeping under a rock the past month, Kobe has spent the last month berating the Lakers front office for failiing to put together any deals to help out the team.

I bet the Lakers don't get Garnett even though they "talks are continuing." Why? Well, the Suns are in talk with Minnesota about acquiring Garnett. That deal would involve Boston. A three way deal is always better (much like a three way 'Yo). Why?

Well, three way deals are very hard for fans to object to. Mostly because they don't understand it. However a deal involving three teams is more able to offset the loss of a superstar like Bryant or Garnett. If Minnesota is getting rid of Garnett, they are going to expect a lot in return. How 'bout some draft picks, and a young player with potential. The problem with the Lakers is they aren't able to deliver the latter.

The Lakers aren't quite back to where they started (with a Kobe throwing a tantrum like a spoiled Hilton). They have restarted talking with Indiana about a possible Jermaine O'Neal acquisition.

Labels: Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Lakers, Timberwolves

John Kruk just said that Peavy, Young, Maddux, Wells and Germano (the Padres rotation) are the 5 best pitchers in the NL West. I'm not kidding.

Sure, all 5 of those guys are better then Brandon Webb, Brad Penny, Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum and Barry Zito. (And Randy Johnson is better then those 5 too, but I left him off cause he's on the DL. Hey John, remember when he threw behind you in the ASG and you decided to turn your helmet around backwards? Good times.)

Peavy yes, Young maybe. But the buck stops there.

Damnit, somebody shove a donut in this guy's mouth and shut him up.



Steve Phillips: The Cardinals and Yankees are both dead.

No way, ya think?

Labels: John Kruk, NL West, Padres, Steve Phillips

I concur with ChinMusic on this issue.

It appears as if success is being defined in terms of two factors--championships and excitement. Why aren't the Spurs exciting to watch? Because we live in CA. The Spurs are the most exciting thing that San Antonio has (after the Alamo* of course). But we have no interest in them so it isn't exciting to us. Also, what is exciting? A huge number of points scored? Slam dunks? Fast places Steve Nash Suns style of play? All of these things are subjective. Granted one of the best things about sports is that anyone can have an opinion. I may think that opinion is wrong, but so long as a person backs up that opinion with some reasons and statistics, I'll respect them.

But it seems as if we are trying to come up with an objective top ten based on some criteria that we could all point to and agree on. So why is excitement on there? Shouldn't it be just statistics? Because, I bet that there are plenty of San Antonio fans out there who think Duncan is the most exciting thing since sliced bread. I don't even think excitement should come into play as a factor here.

Is an exciting dunk worth more points than a layup? Granted, a play does have more impact if it can change the momentum of a game, but all things being equal, statistics are the most accurate way players can be compared.

Furthermore, ratings have been down for all sports this year. Look at the Stanley Cup Finals? And playoff hockey in general? Worst ratings in years. So, I find fault in the argument that low ratings equals less excitement.

I think the low ratings for both leagues had to do with the fact that San Antonio and Anaheim are both small markets. Small market means fewer fans watching the games on television.

Again, this is just my opinion. Out of the four contributing authors to this blog, I know the least about basketball (although my fantasy league performance would suggest otherwise).

*Note: Did you see it in today's Press Enterprise? Paul Reubens might be bringing back the belowed Pee-Wee character to the big screen.

Labels: Duncan, hockey, San Antonio Spurs, Stanley Cup

Rumors today suggest that the Lakers and Timberwolves have entered into discussions that would bring Kevin Garnett into Los Angeles, in an effort to please Kobe Bryant.

You have to think that Kobe would like this, but then again, this is the same Kobe who didn't want to share the spotlight with Shaquille O'neal. Unfortunately, you can't have your cake and eat it too, or, that is, want to be the sole superstar, while actually having a succesful team. So, perhaps Kobe has learned this lesson, and based on his recent suggestions that the Lakers should pursue some moves, it sure seems like Kobe will like this one.

But how does it work?

The details are sketchy at this point, but whether it is a multi-team deal or simply just Lakers/Wolves, it appears Odom, Bynum, and the No. 19 pick in this year's draft would have to be included.

I was one of the biggest naysayers of the earlier rumor that Jermaine O'neal was headed to town for BOTH Odom and Bynum. However, KG for both those players? No question about it. I'm a fan. Lakers would still need a point guard, but the Kobe-Garnett combo would make everyone happy: Lakers fans will fill Staples Center seats, Garnett will be thrilled to get out of Minnesota and will be paired with a superstar, Kobe will have a chance to win again with a superstar big man by his side, and Lakers management will likely not have to deal with Kobe's complaining for the rest of the summer.

I'm a fan. Bring KG to LA.

Labels: Kevdog

Stat of the day: Since the start of the 2005 season, the Angels lead the Majors in wins with 232 through Saturday, followed by the Yankees and Red Sox, tied at 228. The A's and Mets are tied for fourth with 220.

Labels: Angels, wins

Our friends over at FJM helped me out in what seems to be impeccable timing. See article titled "Someday You, Too, Could Be Drastically Overrated."

Thanks for the bone, guys.

Labels: Eckstein, Willits

Unfortunately, I don't know enough about NBA history or current talent in the league to formulate my own top 10, but it seems to me that success (and by success I mean rings) in the NBA is weighed more heavily when determining a players greatness then in any other league.

I think the reason for this is because basketball, more than any other sport, can be dominated by one or two players. Unlike baseball where a pitcher can only contribute once every 5 days or a hitter gets 4-5 at bat's/game, the NBA player can play nearly every minute of the game, and in many cases, be instrumental in every play (a la Kobe "only passes to those who pass it back" Bryant)

If this is in fact your logic, then I don't see how you can keep Duncan out of your top 10. The Horry argument doesnt hold water: Horry was never the centerpiece of a great team, he was simply on the right team at the right time. Duncan has been the reason for the Spurs 4 championships. Without Duncan, San Antonio would be known for nothing more then the Riverwalk. Whether he is "boring" to watch or not is irrelevant. He's called "The Big Fundamental" for a reason. He plays the game the way it's supposed to be played, and although flash and lack of sportsmanship have become the face of the NBA, I applaud Duncan for playing the game right. The numbers don't lie, and neither do the rings.


Here's my question, if Duncan had won 4 rings for a team in a major basketball market (Los Angeles, Chicago, New York), would he be automatically thrown into your top 10?

Labels: Duncan, rings, san antonio

Tim Duncan just won his 4th NBA Championship in what has been a relatively boring career. The Big Fundamental just doesn't excite--but he gets the job done. With titles in 1999, 2003, 2005, and just 2 weeks ago in 2007, Duncan has to be included among the greats in NBA history--right?

Named MVP of the Finals during those first 3 championships, Duncan took a secondary role this time around to 2007 Finals' MVP Tony Parker. Keep in mind that he still averaged over 18 points, 11.5 boards and more than 3 blocks per game during the series. Parker may have been MVP, but there's no question who the Spurs' leader is.

So here's my question: where does Duncan rank in terms of the best players in NBA history? To be more specific, is Tim Duncan one of the top 10 players in the history of the league?

We know that the number of championships is certainly a factor in determining this ranking, which is why we can't include players like Karl Malone, John Stockton, Charles Barkley, and more in this list. But it definitely isn't the only factor, thus eliminating one of my personal favorites: Robert Horry and his 7 NBA championships.

So does Duncan make my top 10? Not quite. Could he? Sure, in time. Perhaps when we look back in NBA history, we may see Duncan and his 4 (+?) championships and call him one of the top 10 best players ever. But not yet. Part of the reason for this, unfortunately, is that he (and the teams he has played for) have been so boring to watch. Wonder why no one tuned into the Finals this season? The Spurs were playing...again! Even with Lebron there in the series, it just isn't all that exciting to watch Duncan and the Spurs pound away slowly. Fans typically prefer the run and gun style of the Phoenix Suns, Dallas Mavericks, etc., and the Spurs just don't cut it there.

It's a shame that this hurts my idea of Duncan and his successes, because he's had several. But I can name about a dozen players that I'd put ahead of Duncan on a list of the NBA's All-Time greats. West, Bird, Russell, Johnson, Jordan, Abdul-Jabbar, Chamberlain, O'neal, Robertson, Cousy, Mikan, and Bryant (yes--that Bryant), to name a few, would all be on my list (in no particular order) ahead of Timmy.

You've had many successes, Mr. Duncan. 2 MVP's, 3 Final's MVP's, 4 Championships, and you're one of the best players in NBA history. But you don't quite crack my top 10.

Labels: Bryant, Duncan, Kevdog, MVP, NBA, O'neal, Tim

So I'm sitting there withAlvin Davis watching the Yankees/Giants game today on Fox Saturday Baseball and since the ASG is in San Fran this year, they were showing a clip of the 1984 ASG that Dwight Gooden k'd 6 straight. The 6th straight victim: Alvin Davis.

I quickly made a note in my cell phone to remind myself to blog this, because it was tight.

Labels: Alvin Davis, ASG

Just realized this one today...

Giants send:

Joe Nathan
Francisco Liriano
Boof Bonser

to the Twins for...

wait for it...

Here it comes...

it's gonna be good...

A.J. Pierzynski.

A bit anti-climactic, I know.



Brian Sabean should lose his job. Now.

Ok, we just had to post this, hope you don't mind, Paul.

Labels: Brogan, Dirk, Kobe, Nash, Paul

"Willits is Angel's new Eckstein"

Oh. No.

I looked up "Eckstein" on www.dictionary.com, I think the definition will surprise you...

Eckstein: noun. gritty, gamer, tough, annoyingly troublesome. baseball player.

I also found this picture next to the definition...


I read the rest of the article, and it was all over the place. He actually didn't mention Eckstein once in the entire article. Usually, if you put something in the title, you should expand on it in the actually text. That's just me though. Oh wait, he did once...

"This is what they needed. Another David Eckstein, with more tools."

I need to make on thing clear: ECKSTEIN HAS NO TOOLS!

He's 5'7".

That's not a tool. No, Joe Morgan, being diminutive in size is not a tool, no matter how much you say it in one broadcast.

He has no arm strength.

No, making what is a routine play from short look like he is trying to gun out a guy at the plate also, is not a tool. It's in fact the polar opposite of a tool.

Zero power.

I can see it now... Joe's brain: Eckstein hit 3 grand slams in one year, that shows me he has some serious power" Fluke Joe, Fluke.

He hustles. Yes. That's correct. He does. So does about 99% of every other mother humping big leaguer. This takes no talent.

And no, this is not even an article about Eck. Or about how much Reggie is like his little twin. Reggie actually is better, bigger, stronger, faster, hits for more power, throws well, and was expected to be a big leaguer. Eckstein sucks. The rest of the article is about where Reggie came from or something. And how his sister could ball him up on the hardwood.

Wrap up: Reggie=tightness. Eckstein=overratedness.

Labels: Eckstein, hustle, Reggie

No, this article isn't about another incident that occurred during Kobe's time in Colorado. This is about Kobe's future. Kobe Bryant will demand a trade. No question about that. The interesting thing about Kobe Bryant is that he is the only player in the NBA to have a no-trade clause in his contract. This means that Kobe cannot be traded without his permission. Essentially, Kobe has become France on the UN Security Council--Kobe has the power to singlehandedly veto any trade if he fills it is not in his best interest. So, the only way a trade will be carried out is with Kobe's assent.

The first question then becomes, what does Kobe want? Well, Kobe will want to play in a large market. He's used to that in Los Angeles. It's going to have to be a big market which immediately reduces the chances that he'll end up in a small city. Additionally, Kobe will want to play on a team with talent. Remember, because Kobe has the power to veto a trade, he can choose not to go through with the trade if the team he is going to is giving up too much.

The second question is what do the Lakers want? The Lakers will want to ideally send Kobe to the Eastern Conference (so he doesn't end up hurting them too much) and will want to gut that team of all its talent. The problem with trading a player like Kobe Bryant is that there is no equal out there in terms of talent. A one-for-one deal wouldn't work because the Lakers will always be on the losing end of that deal. So, the Lakers will inevitably end up gutting a team of its talent. But the problem here is that the Lakers will not trade Kobe if they do not get enough back in return. However, if the Lakers end up getting too much back in return, Kobe will veto the trade.

Herein lies the Catch 22 (or 24 in this case). So, unless a third team is added into the tryst, the chances of a trade are nill. Chad Ford over at ESPN outlines two trade scenarios involving three teams regarding Kobe.

His first scenario has the Bulls sending Gordon, Tyrus Thomas, and P.J. Brown to Washington and the No. 9 pick to LA. The Lakers send Bryant to Chicago. And the Wizards send Arenas and Etan Thomas to LA.

Granted Arenas is no Bryant, but as my fantasy basketball team can attest, Arenas is an up and coming star with lots of potential. Arenas would do wonders for any team, especially when the Lakers lose much of the Kobe problem. If I were a Laker fan, I would have much to be excited about with Thomas and Arenas coming to LA.

The second scenario is the exact same except for the substitution of the Boston Celtics and Pierce.

I think the possibility of the second trade happening might be considered too good for Boston and not enough for the Lakers. Pierce is an excellent player, but I really don't feel he has the same amount of untapped potential that Arenas would give the Lakers.

And both of these scenarios are mere fantasy if Chicago isn't a big enough market for Kobe. But, if it was big enough for MJ, isn't it big enough for KB?

Labels: Arenas, Boston Celtics, Bryant, Kobe, Los Angeles Lakers, Pierce, threesome, Washington Wizards

So lately I've been reading up on some of Tim Brown's blogs. This guy went to USC and studied Journalism. He's been writing for over 20 years for notable sources such as the LA Times and the LA Daily news, but he baffles me. The more I read, the more I think to myself,"Wow, this guy gets paid (probably a lot of money) to write for a living, and I'm doing it for free here. And he's not very bloody good."

Please, allow Tim to explain himself:

"Sosa bonked his former Chicago Cubs with No. 600, and they him with his former No. 21. After hitting all but 55 of those home runs with the Cubs, Sosa reached his career milestone against Jason Marquis, a free agent who was assigned Sosa's old uniform number. Guess that settles that."

After I read the first sentence, I had to stare at it for about 30 seconds to decipher it. Then, after I was still befuddled, I read the rest of the paragraph, just hoping maybe he would throw me a life line or something. Sure enough, he did.

"...and they him with his former No. 21."

Hm. What? Oh ok, I get it now... I think. Hold on Tim, let me see if I'm on the right track here-- Sosa bashed big fly #600 against the Cubbies, and somehow, you felt the need to connect the fact that he hit it off Jason Marquis (Jason Scott Marquis from Manhasset, NY) who happens to wear #21. Oh, Slammin' Sammy used to wear that number. Yup. This is far too ironic for me. I can't go on any futher. I'll just stop my thought mid blurb:

"Guess that settles that"

Ok, I guess so. Keep the in depth analysis coming, Tim.

Oh and I think that guys getting paid over $4 million a year get to pick their own number. But you're right, he was probably assigned #21 to stick to Sammy. Everything is coming full circle now...

According to Skip Bayless, A-Rod (affectionately known as "Lightning Rod") has no mental toughness. Right. I don't want A-Rod on my team because he has no mental toughness. I'm just going to let that soak in. Now let this soak in: .315...(BA) ...27...(HR)...73...(RBI)....417...(OBP)....685...(SLG)...

AL Ranks: RBI's: 1st. HR's: 1st. OPS: 2nd (1.101!!!) RBI: 1st. SLG: 1st.

Please, someone take A-Rod, lock him in a basement and teach him some effing mental toughness. He has none. While he's down there, we'll take Scott Brosius back at 3B. That guy was mentally tough. He won some world series' I hear. That takes mental toughness. A-Rod never will. He's not mentally tough. He just smashes the living poop out of the ball. And he's about to hit his 500th HR, and he's 31 years old. Dude...Skippy... A-Rod's gonna hit like 9456 homeruns by the time he retires.

Skip Bayless's top 3 action movies: (only the 1st one even matters)

1. Die Hard

Skip:"Bruce Willis is underrated, a lot of people on this show think he is overrated, but I think he is underrated"

Skip's mind: Bruce has mental toughness. He should play 3B for the Yankees. The man made "Die Hard" and now he's got "Live Free or Die Hard," like the 275th best movie of the year coming out.

Bruce Willis. Underrated. But A-Rod has no mental Toughness. Seriously Bruce, let A-Rod in on that mess.

2. Predator Whatever.

3. Wild Bunch Whatever.

Labels: A-Rod, Bruce, Mental Toughness

Reggie Theus was named coach of the Sacramento Kings this week, replacing Eric Musselman after his disappointing 33 win season which included a DUI for the coach. Things aren't pretty in Sac-town. What happened to the team in the early decade which was an overtime victory away from the NBA Finals (and arguably the NBA Championship) in 2002. Then, they dealt Chris Webber, Peja Stojakovic, lost Bobby Jackson, Vlade Divac and just about all the rest of the crew minus Mike Bibby.

Now, it's Reggie-Time, or "Hang Time," considering Theus' former role as Coach Fuller on NBC's Saturday morning sitcom. Unfortunately for the Kings, this is almost the best coaching experience Theus brings to the Sacramento bench. OK, so that's unfair, as Theus went 41-23 as head coach at New Mexico State over the past two seasons. But, this is Reggie's first NBA gig. Not that this is a huge problem, but I have a feeling that coaching Julie Connor hasn't quite prepared coach Theus for the (Ar)test that lies ahead in Ron-Ron. Artest just recently was quoted as saying that he regretted how his Pacer career ended, and that if he hadn't reacted so quickly, he'd "still be a Pacer now."

A couple of things:

1. Does this mean that Artest isn't happy to be in Sacto? I can't blame him if he isn't. Playing for a mediocre team in a small market where he can't boost his rap career can't be all too pleasing. Perhaps a new coach will help things, but on the other hand, rumors have been flying and Artest may want to be shipped out.

2. Interestingly, on hiring Theus, Kings exec Geoff Petrie cited one of the most intriguing things about Reggie as his ties to Las Vegas (Theus played at UNLV from in the late 1970s, leading them to the Final Four in 1976). The Maloof Brothers, owners of the Sacramento Kings, also own the Palms Casino, and have been agressively rumored to want to move their franchise to the Sin City for years now, and this may be just another step in that direction. Bringing in another guy into fray with Vegas ties who may advocate for that move certainly doesn't hurt its chances of happening.

3. On the other hand, Theus was on the team when it first moved to Sacramento in the mid-1980s, and has said he really enjoys the place. So, who knows?

Labels: Artest, Hang Time, Kevdog, Kings, Reggie, Theus

Is copying off a friend's test cheating? Yes. Is claiming extra deductions on your tax return cheating? Yes. Is taking a secret drug that is supposed to make you stronger, able to recover from injuries faster, and keep you healthier cheating? No--unless it's steroids.

You see, the answer in today's day and age is that performance enhancing drugs are illegal. One need look no further than Floyd Landis, Jose Canseco, Mark McGwire, and Shawne Merriman to determine that steroids are not okay. They are not okay because in today's day and age the public opinion has weighed in and decided that the detrimental effects of steroids on a player outweigh the benefits received from the drugs (ie. increased performance).

The problem is that when these players were confronted with this situation, there was no public opinion for them to rely on. Instead, these players were forced to consult a crystal ball in an attempt to predict what side the public would ultimately weigh in on. They were forced to make a decision, back then, of how the public would react to steroids once they learned enough about it to make an educated decision.

Most fans live in a world where all drugs, herbal supplements, and other substances should be completely banned. The problem with this camp is that it denies the reality that many people take drugs every day. Be it a steroid to suppress an allergic or asthmatic reaction or a multi-vitamin to keep someone healthy, people in today's society routinely take over-the-counter and prescription drugs to improve their health. One need look no further than the medicine cabinets of today's average American to learn that he partakes in a variety of subtances. The average life expectancy statistic can attest to this. As the life expectancy of an average American increases, so does our use of substances to maintain our health.

A small minority of fans believe that all drugs should be legal. There are two ways this argument is made. First, these fans argue that the sports world should be a free market where each player is judged based on his talents alone and that drugs should play no part in consideration of how a player performs. The second argument is that the professional sports league has no place regulating this aspect of an athlete's life. Sadly they are both mistaken.

Addressing the first argument, a free market only works when every player is on a level playing field. When one player uses performance enhancing drugs to increase his stats, the non-using player is therefore at a disadvantage simply because he does not use (either by choice or because he is not aware of the drugs). One may argue that the athlete has no one to blame but himself for failing to take advantage of this drug, but this disregards the risk of harm the drug may have on the athlete.

The problem here is that the league has a duty to take care of its members. Even the NFL recognizes this and offers a pension program to players who have taken part in a certain number of seasons in the NFL. Recognizing that players might suffer long term trauma, the NFL has established a disability program where players are compensated for the injuries they suffered while playing football.

The problem with arguing an open market theory is that this would force the responsible sports league to completely forego that duty. It is as if the NFL would say "I don't care about your injuries, play and injure yourself, but we are not responsible."

Long gone are the days when a league would completely distance itself from an athlete who ended up injured from participating in the sport. Instead, leagues are undertaking a duty to ensure the safety of their athletes.

The second argument mentioned above is that a sports league has no place regulating this in an athlete's life. However, this could not be further from the truth. In the four main sports (baseball, basketball, football, and hockey), there are all sorts of regulations regarding equipmeny. Your bat can only be this light, the field must only be this long, etc. However, leagues have already taken steps to regulate aspects outside of an athlete's performance on the court. Take the basketball dress code for example. Here the league has chosen to regulate a non-athletic aspect of an NBA player's life. Thus, this type of regulation is not without precedence.

Additionally, there are the side effects of steroids that must be addressed. The main purpose for most sports to place steroids in the "illegal" category is because of the harm posed to the players who use them. This isn't an instance where the league is trying to stifle performance. No no. In reality, each league is trying to do its best to make its league more competitive. Instead, the leagues have determined that the risk of harm from the use of steroids far outweights any competitive advantage it may give to its players.

Interestingly enough, the effects of steroids vary depending on who is using them. Males tend to become "feminized" when they use steroids and experience things such as: reduced sprem count, impotence, development of breasts, and shrinking of the testicles. Females experience: facial hair growth, deepened voice, and breast reduction. Common side effects to both sexes include: acne, bloated appearance, weakened tendons, premature heart attacks and strokes, and liver damage. Additionally, steroids may stunt the growth of adolescents. Steroids also include numerous changes on the internal structures that may be hard to see from the naked eye ('roid rage anyone?).

How prevalent is the use of steroids? Even the PGA is toying with the idea of implementing a drug testing policy. Tiger Woods has put forward the idea that the PGA should be proactive instead of reactive, and I couldn't agree more.

The problem with professional sports leagues is that they are reactive. Drug testing is only implemented after it becomes a problem. In sports that demand a competitive edge out of every athlete, it is simply unfair to change the rules halfway through the game.

Is it fair for Barry Bonds, who has relied on steroids for numerous home runs, to have to play the rest of his career without those drugs? Yes. No one gripes about an umpire who consistently calls the outside corner of the plate. But when the umpire changes the size of the strike zone just a little bit halfway through the game, it isn't fair. In the same vein (pun intended), it's as if Major League Baseball banned steroids during the seventh inning stretch of his career.

Please don't misunderstand what I am trying to say. Am I condoning Bonds use of steroids? No. I am only proferring the argument that Major League Baseball should have been more proactive before this became an issue, rather than changing the rules halfway through the game.

MLB should take a page from the NHL. When the NHL instituted a rule requiring all players to wear helmets, it grandfathered the rule in. Let's back it up. Why did the NHL do this? Because the benefits to the players outweighed the risk of harm they would experience by playing without a helmet. Take one look at the smile of an NHL player for proof of this. But, rather than forcing every player to wear a helmet, the NHL exempted players already playing and allowed those players to finish off a career without wearing a helmet. Should MLB grandfather in steroid use? Well no. But it's attitude should be alot less "holier than thou" when dealing with players who have taken steroids. Afterall, if a drug testing program had been in place before, this would never have been a problem.

And that's my three cents.

--Legal Pundit

Labels: drugs, Floyd Landis, Jose Canseco, Mark McGwire, Shawne Merriman, steroids

Labels: draft, Garnett, Kwame, LeBron, trade

As news continues to surface regarding Kobe Bryant's desire to be traded from the Los Angeles Lakers, the rumor mill is flying. Kobe's most frequent destination? The Chicago Bulls.

Kobe reportedly seriously considered signing with the Bulls in the 2004 off-season when he was a free agent, and Chicago is considered to be one of the teams to which Kobe would agree to be traded.

The match continues to work in that the Bulls could offer a package of young players (likely involving Ben Gordon and Luol Deng) that would please Laker management, as much as it could considering the loss of the best player in the game.

Do I think it will actually happen? Doubtful. And as a Laker fan, I hope not. Is it a possibility, though? Absolutely.

ESPN reported tonight that the Bulls and Lakers have begun preliminary talks regarding a Bryant deal, but Bulls GM John Paxson immediately denied the reports. It seems the media is trying to make it all a bigger deal than it really is. But, the fact remains that Kobe could be Chicago bound, and this image of Kobe donning a Michael Jordan throwback during the 2002 NBA Finals may have instead been a prediction of the future.

Labels: Bulls, Kevdog, Kobe, Lakers, Rumors

After attending the best game I've ever seen in person, I remembered that Craig Biggio, who looked basically terrible at the game, which he has most of the season (.235 BA/ .277 OBP/ .673 OPS) really is a sure fire first ballot punch your own ticket Hall of Famer. Sure, he's struggling to get his hits now, but the guy is 41. When I'm 41, I'm just hoping I can swing my own stick. I give him credit for sticking it out this long. He's got more HBP then anyone in the history of putting their face in front of a baseball, and a career BA of .282 and .365 OBP aren't too shabby either. 1000+ RBI's and walks, 286 dingers, and 412 SB's. He scored 100 runs eight times in his career, and in 1997 scored 146 RUNS! That's 0.901234567 runs/game. Tha's good. No, that's pretty damn good. He's clearly past his prime, and hasn't hit above .290 in 6 years, hasn't had an OBP above .350 in 6 years, but he was a doubles machine and had some power for a catcher turned OF turned 2B.

Here's to hoping you get #3,000... and here's to hoping you retire the day after that. Because right now, it's painful to watch. But while you're playing the Halos (and looking silly vs. K-Rod), I don't feel so bad for you.

Hats off to you Craig, great career, enjoy the hall. Say hi to Joe ("greatest second baseman of all time turned worst analyst of all time") Morgan for me.

Kobe on Kobe:

"At this point, I'll go play on Pluto"





Really, could we swing that?

Labels: Kobe, Pluto

I don't know Sam Perlozzo from Adam, but I did just finish defending the poor guy and he goes and shoots himself in the foot.

"My general thought process was we couldn't continue to lose games, no matter whose fault it was," Perlozzo said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

There we go, let's say we'll stop losing, just because it can't keep happening. Buzz Lightyear to Star Command, come in Star Command: You can keep losing, and you would have! You guys stink this year Sam, just like you have for nearly the past decade.

"I've been around the game a long time, and I know how these things work."

That's why you were fired right there. Joe Morgan has been around the game a long time, that doesn't mean he knows who's the set up man for the Tigers, or who was the last player to go 6-6 in a game (It happened last night, Joe). The time you've spent in the game doesn't make your players perform, or suddenly bust out of an 8 game losing streak.

Tejada running down the first base line: "You know, Sam has been around the game along time, he must know how these things work. I'm going to beat out this weak groundball in the 5-6 hole.

"We never did hit from the get-go," Perlozzo lamented.

Wait, did it just get better??? Yeah, after not making any sense to begin with, he then suddenly defends himself saying that things couldn't possibly keep going as bad as they had been, but then... THEN... he says that. "we NEVER DID HIT from the get go." Then Why...WHY...WHY IN THE HELL did you think that you couldn't keep losing? Not scoring does not equal winning, last time I checked.

"I'm sure I wasn't perfect," he said, "but I can't remember one time going home at night and thinking, 'Man, I blew that game."'

No, Sam, it wasn't all your fault. The Orioles do suck really really really bad. See post below. But you aren't exactly a wizard with your words.

Labels: buzz, lightyear, suck

Allow me to get you up to speeed. Perlozzo's out. And it's all his fault the team was horse poo.




"We felt Sam was prepared, we felt the club was prepared to do battle every night," executive vice president Mike Flanagan said in a news conference. "For [whatever reason], it just wasn't working."

Mike Flanagan. Mikey Mike Flannyganny. Flanagananaman. Did you really think this through? I mean, really... did you dig deep and think this was the best possible statement you could make after firing your manager?

When you bring in middle tier FA's in the last couple offseasons, (Aubrey Huff, Steve Trachsel, Jay Payton, Corey Patterson) is it really Perlozzo's fault you can't win? You're playing in a division the New York Freaking Yankees and the Boston Beat Down Red Sox. You have NO FREAKING CHANCE! Not to mention, Toronto has plenty of money to throw around, and they did. Let's not shoot the messenger here, Flanster. Your teams sucks monkey butt because you don't have enough money to afford big name FA's to compete with the two biggest financial powerhouses in sports.

Anyone who is stupid enough to take this job better just plan on renting a house in Baltimore, because they won't be staying long, especially if you keep blaming the skipper like you just did. I mean come on, how mad can you be? If he's making bad managerial decisions, what's an example? Gee, we're down by 8 runs again, should I pinch hit for Paul Bako with Chris Gomez or Alberto Castillo? I mean come on dude, there's no golden choice here.

Give Perlozzo some talent and maybe he might win a few games. He may not win em all, but don't say he was prefreakingpared for this mess. That's like saying the Cav's were prepared for the Spurs. Sure, they suited up a full roster and ran 'em out there, but they had no chance. If prepared means you have 25 guys on the roster, and they all can manage to find their way to their positions, sure... it's Perlozzo's fault.

Labels: job, orioles, poo, suicide

Ladies and Gentlemen, Boy(d)s and Girls,

It is time. We here at ItsTheLeague.com have been providing an incredible service to our league members for over 3 years now. Between fantasy baseball and fanasy basketball, our league members have enjoyed our enthusiasm and our dedication.

With that, we knew it was time to expand our horizons. We wanted to that those attitudes out beyond ItsTheLeague.com's member base. We wanted to bring our knowledge and our thoughts to the sports world: the average fan looking for a fun read. It will be a tough road to make this blog reach the deepest depths of the Sports Online Universe. But we are dedicated. If you like what you read, tell a friend. If he likes what he reads, tell him to tell another friend. We've got some good insights, and we're confident you'll like it too.

Without further adieu, Jeff Boyd, Trent Knapp, Kevin Reyes, and Daniel Thomson bring you ItsTheBlog.

Labels: Kevdog, Welcome