What the F--k?!?

With the college basketball season right around the corner, the NCAA just tweaked their rules regarding proper behavior while on the bench. Read about in the NY Times Here.

According to the NCAA, here are some of the behaviors that can be considered unsportsmanlike and spark a technical foul without warning:

• Talking to an official in a disrespectful manner; Trying to influence an official’s decision;

• Using profanity or language that is abusive, vulgar or obscene;

• Objecting to an official’s decision by rising from the bench or excessively using gestures that either demonstrate officiating signals or displeasure with officiating;

Really? Is this really a problem in major college athletics? When asked for clarification, the NCAA stated that even if an official hears profanity from a coach directed within a huddle to his own players, that was grounds for a no-warning technical.

Watch out Coach K. Myles Brand wants to give you the ole Ivory Gargle.

The Point of No Return

Pitcher of Record

Baseball is the most intricate and detail oriented sport in America (Cricket has it beat, but I am not worried about sticky wickets). It is that detail that makes it great, and frustrating. Its detail is one of the reasons the modern fan does not appreciate baseball because they are either too stupid or too impatient to understand the nuances. However there are some rules that make absolutely no sense, and were obviously made in the 1800’s. The rule that bothers me the most is the rule behind the pitcher of record.

In order to earn a win as a starter you must go 5 innings. If you go under that you do not qualify, regardless of the score. You can lose if you go under 5, but not win. By itself that rule does not seem intimidating, or complicated, or jaded or whatever you want to call it. The problem arises when it comes time to decide who does actually win.

The part of the rule that gets me is if a starting pitcher leaves a game with his team winning before he pitches 5 innings, he is still ineligible for the win, even if the score does not change. In that situation, it is up to the discretion of the official scorekeeper to declare the pitcher of record. Therefore the official scorekeeper decides which relief pitcher did the most to contribute to the win, and that pitcher gets the win. But the starting pitcher cannot get the win. So as long as the score never ties and the lead never changes, the official scorekeeper decides the winner.

So here is my problem, didn’t the starting pitcher contribute the most to the win? Didn’t he do enough for his team to win? Shouldn’t that be the measure of who gets the win? In the logic of the rule some guy who comes in with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th and gets 1 out can get the win for only facing 1 batter, but the starter who went 4 2/3rds innings and only let up 1 run can’t get the win. Also by that logic, every subsequent pitcher can give up 2 or more runs, thus giving up more runs than the starter, but as long as the lead does not change the official scorekeeper still must chose someone to get the win, and it can’t be the starter.

The starter can leave a game with the score 2-1 in the 5th with a blister, and by the end of the game the score is 25-17 he still can’t get the win. He could have the least earned runs, most innings pitched and most strikeouts of entire staff for the night, and still not win. I think that is a travesty of the rule system.

This is obviously an archaic rule hearkening back to the days before regular relief appearances and fragile starters. For Cy Young to not go 5 innings he either had to give up like 20 runs or get shot by Ty Cobb. Back then I understand the rule. But today it makes no sense. So shouldn’t we change the rule?

I have 2 possible solutions. First we can change the rule to read that a starting pitcher can only win if he leaves the game with his team ahead (pending runners and earned runs factored in), but there is no minimum. Or, we change the ‘win’ stat to reflect who earned the win, the starter win (SW) or the relief win (RW). For example if a starter goes only 3 innings, but his team never trails and wins the game he can earn a SW. But if a reliever comes in and cleans up the mess he earns a RP. This would fix the problem and add a new stat for fantasy junkies and Elias to track.

At the end of the day this situation only happens a handful of times a season, but with fantasy championships and players’ salaries tied to these stats, every win counts. Just think, if they kept those stats maybe ‘The Loogy’ would have won.

How Hot is that Seat, Exactly?

On the heels of the news from ProFootballTalk's Mike Florio that Ocho Cinco wants out at the end of the season, one must wonder exactly what Marvin Lewis has to do to get on the hot seat with Bengals management. From a sports gambling website, I looked at the odds of who will be the first coach fired. Surprisingly, Marvin was not in the top ten! I know that Cincinnati is in a glee considering that we have become the first city in American sporting history to have an African-American MLB manager and NFL head coach at the same time, but that situation cannot trump performance.

Marvin, brought in as a defensive guru, leads the third-worst defense in the entire NFL. The offense, which he is remarkably hands-off, has thrived. Yet he doesn't endure the same criticism that he may deserve because of his affable relationship with the local business, religious leaders and press.

"My job is to get the junior college guys to act like they've gone to Notre Dame and Michigan," Lewis said. "As we go, we'll continue to get more of those stable guys. But unfortunately, that's what we're dealing with -- a bunch of junior college guys."

Hmm.. you know what that sounds like? What's that expression that is often bantered around immoral and failing college programs? Oh yeah... Lack of Institutional Control.

Marvin, the bloom is off the rose. Start coaching like your job's on the line. We can all only hope that it is.

Tramp Stamp Nation

Let's see.... how can I best convey to potential suitors the combination of my BoSox allegiance and my sex appeal?

1. Get Boston logo tattooed on the lower back.
2.
3. Mission Accomplished!

At Least It Wasn't 'He Hate Me'

Check out what Wizards G DeShawn Stevenson has been up to this offseason. Apparently channeling his inner 'V.Young' he became the most recent athlete to add his surname across his shoulders.

His plans include eventually adding his number (#2) below the name and, in his words, 'completing the jersey'. With today's movement of players through trades and free agency, let's hope he doesn't add the full Wizards logo to his chest...

Channeling Jimmy Bowden...

A huge offseason looms for the Washington Nationals. They are entering their fourth year in Washington (hey, so am I!) and are prepared to open the $611M HOK-designed Nationals Park in SE DC. They recently hired Stan Kasten (formerly of the Braves) and have developed a plan of building a team and farm system to compete for the long term. In compliance of that vision and financial flexibility, they dropped their payroll precipitously this past year from $63M to $38M.

Here's a look at some of the moves they should and will make this offseason:

First, they should continue to hold the long-term vision of running the club. They have no need to worry about selling seats and luxury boxes in the short term, as they will certainly have a two-three year novelty of fans attending a new park. That being said, revenues will increase and they can make bigger plays in free agency.

Let's look at their existing contracts for 2008

Nick Johnson ($16.5M over 07-09; $5.5M in 08)
Cristian Guzman ($16.8M over 05-08; $4.2M in 08)
Austin Kearns ($17.5M over 07-09; $5M in 08)
Brian Scheider ($16M over 06-09; $4.9M in 08)
Ronnie Belliard ($3.5M over 08-09; $1.6M in 08)
Dmitri Young ($10M over 08-09; $5M in 08)

Their biggest in-house free agents are Ryan Zimmerman and Chad Cordero. They should absolutely sign Zimmerman as he is the new face of the franchise. Cordero had a down year, and I'm in the camp that 'closers' are vastly overvalued. They should be firm in negotiations with him.

Just recently, the star of the 2008 Free Agent class, Torii Hunter stated that he is interested in playing with Dmitri and would give the Nationals a long look. He also specifically stated that playing in majority African-American city would be an enormous plus. The flexibility to go after player like Hunter is exactly why the Nationals showed fiscal restraint in the past year. I could see the Nats getting Hunter with a $50M/5yr deal, with a team option for the sixth. Torii and Dmitri could help recruit LF Milton Bradley, as they could certainly get him on the cheap after his mental antics and torn ACL. He could be had for $8M over 2 with extensive performance and plate appearance incentives.

On the pitching front, I think they should try to resign (or go to arbitration) with their own talent Patterson, Bergmann, Chico and Hill. On the hot stove, I could see them making a move for either Kyle Lohse or Jason Jennings. Both look to command a $30M-$40M deal over 4 years.

Here's the imagined lineup for the 2008 Nats:

CF Torii Hunter
2B Ronnie Belliard
3B Ryan Zimmerman
RF Austin Kearns
1B Dmitri Young
LF Milton Bradley (or, Justin Maxwell, who has been very impressive in AA Ball)
C Bryan Schneider
SS Cristian Guzman

SP Kyle Lohse
SP Shawn Hill
SP John Patterson
SP Jason Bergmann
SP Matt Chico

RP Saul Rivera
RP Chris Schroder
RP Jon Rauch
RP Luis Ayala

By the way, a fantastic resource for MLB contracts:

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/