The Examined Life

Frontier Justice

2009-09-18T15:44:00.000-07:00

This story caught my eye today, and really made me think. A judge legally taking sports away from a star athlete (and teenager) is quite an act, really -- one which seems unprecedented to me.

My first reaction was that it was over-the-line, not because the crime he committed wasn't bad enough -- it was -- but because sports is usually viewed as a positive in the lives of young men (especially ones who grow up in ghettoes). With his crime, the kid had already lost his chances for scholarships with countless colleges. Taking this away seemed to me to be counter-intuitive: Why take away the one thing which could allow this young man to truly improve his circumstances?

But then, upon re-examination, I relized the genius behind the decision. See, athletes are forgiven for all manners of transgressions, from tiny to immense -- all because they are athletes. So, while taking away this young man's greatest lifeline may deprove him of untold money, fame, and opportunity, this also takes away his get-out-of-jail-free card. It very well may be the one thing which forces this guy to actually become a better person.

Think about it: Michael Vick is back making millions after a jail sentence. His crimes may make millions hate him, but it won't stop him from making lots of money or recieving the love and adoration of millions more. Does he ever really have to become a better person, or just act like he has. This decision, however, will force the young man to learn to survive in society without the crutch of sports to aid him. Any future transgressions will not be forgiven so easily. Then again, if he falls into a life of crime or squalor, folks will say this judge robbed him of his chance at escape by taking away the one thing at which he could excel.

All things considered, I like this decision, but I would also allow for a review of the terms after a year or two -- if he's managed to get a job, or enroll in school, and has done well for himself, I would be open to allowing back into sports. Otherwise -- if he improves, but isn't allowed to play sports until he's 24 -- one could argue his potential career will be lost over one incident, with no regard given to how he's rehabilitated himself.

Either way, this makes for a fascinating test-case, a social experiment with a real life in the balance. I suppose the hypothesis behind it would be to discover whether the world may lose a great athlete to gain a good person. That's a pretty fair trade, if you ask me.

Rock You Like A Hurricane

2009-09-18T15:23:00.000-07:00

No, as much as I would like to devote a blog post to The Scorpions, this one is about a whole other kind of powerful force, namely, The U. My favorite college football team, the University of Miami Hurricanes, have been laying dormant for the past several seasons, putting up fair 7-6 type seasons which would be fine for some teams -- like my second favorite college football team, the Stanford Cardinal. But wins in the Emerald Bowl or Humanitarian Bowl aren't sufficient for fans of a school like Miami, where nothing less than competing for a national title is acceptable.

When the schedule for this season came out, it appeared the Canes were headed for a similiarly mediocre fate -- they faced arch-rival #20 Florida State to open things up on Labor Day, followed by tough matchups at home vs. #14 Georgia Tech, on the road at #7 Virginia Tech, and home vs. #3 Oklahoma. Despite the improvements to the program under coach (and alum) Randy Shannon, the Canes did not appear ready for four tough tests in a row to start the season. I told the best Cane fan I know, my buddy Josh, that I'd be happy with a 2-2 start. He concurred. Neither of us understood why Coach Shannon turned down the reported contract extension he received in the off-season with such a tough schedule to start, and some claiming he was already on the hot seat. I also found it hard to believe some of his staements about true Sophomore Jacory Harris -- namely, that he would go down in Cane history with championship QB's and legendary leaders like Ken Dorsey and Bernie Kosar.

Now, I understand. Now, I believe. Jacory Harris looks like a born-leader and potential Heisman Trophy candidate. And suddenly, 2-2 doesn't sound so acceptable anymore.

The Canes are 2-0 after escaping Tallahassee with a win (as if simply escaping Tallahassee wasn't good enough in itself), and beating up on previous Cane-killers Georgia Tech (Tech ruined the Canes shot at an ACC title last year, and also 3 years ago). Now, they face their toughest test yet -- going into Blacksburg to face VaTech. But despite the odds being stacked against them, the Canes have two large factors falling in their favor: 1) For the second striaght week, they have a week and a half to prepare for a big conference matchup, while their opponent has just a week, and 2) Oklahoma's Heisman-winning QB, Sam Bradford, may be out for their matchup.

So, in honor of their hot start, here is a list of the best Canes currently in the NFL. Enjoy.

Not About Baseball

2009-08-25T16:32:00.000-07:00

Sometimes, especially on days like these, I wonder why I'm a sports fan. Last night, I knew better than to watch my baseball team, the ~~Pathetic Fucking Bastards~~ Giants, play the Rockies. Or so I thought.

After a surprisingly feel-good 2009 for the first 4 months or so, the Giants have been getting on my nerves. First, their inability to put togther offense of any kind has worn on me throughout the year -- there are only so many times you can see your favorite pitchers leave it all on the mound while dominating their opponent only to settle for a no decision (or worse, a loss) before it starts to eat away at your soul. After this season, my soul is in worse shape than Michael Jackson's nose. (Too soon?) Secondly, this crucial flaw, which should have cost them their ability to compete for a playoff spot weeks, or even months ago, is only now coming home to roost in new and annoyingly inventive ways -- heading into the weekend in Colorado, they'd gone from leading the wild card chase for most of the year to trailing the red-hot Rockies.

Lastly, after taking the first game in Colorado, they laid a gigantic ~~egg~~ turd at the on-going nightmare that is Coors Field, losing the next two, and endangering themselves of falling out of the race with a loss on Monday to drop 3 of 4 and end up 4 games back of the streaking Rockies. What's more: They had Zito on the mound. And while Zito's been much better lately -- let's face it, as tough as it is for me to say, he's been downright good -- I didn't want to see him pitch with the season on the line.

So I didn't tape the game as I normally do. I didn't intend to watch it. But when I got home and my wife was taking a shower, I didn't think it would hurt to check in on the game. I was wrong.

The Giants were tied, 1-1, so I watched a bit. Soon, after watching their wretched excuse for an offense flail wildly at pitches everywhere but in the strike zone, I gave up on the game -- and the team. Even their best hitter, the Kung Fu Panda himself, Pablo Sandoval, was hurt and out of the game, so no reason to watch. I did, however, keep tabs on the score as I watched shows with my wife all night. 1-1 in the 6th inning turned into 1-1 in the 9th, then 12th, and finally 14th.

And then it happened. The Giants scored. Not once, or twice, but three freaking times! Suddenly, they had a chance. And, much more dangerously, had hope. Now SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION taught me that hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, but I'm certain Stephen King never watched the Giants play (he is a Red Sox fan, after all). For Giants fans, hope is a four-letter word. Well, obviously, hope is a four-letter word for everybody, but it's the bad kind for Giants fans. We learned this in 1987 and '89. And '93 and '97. And again in 2000. And '02. And '03. And '04. Maybe in the 5 preceding years we forgot, but the bottom of the 14th provided an indelible reminder. Watching the Giants "relievers" walk 3 Rockies -- including the pitcher (with the bases loaded!) -- before giving up a back-breaking, soul-crushing walk-off grand slam, was like God whispering "Gotcha!" in our collective ear.

It was apinful loss, on a road trip full of them, for a franchise well-versed in them. But it was a little more even than that. It was a reminder that even the most surprising, joyous, and innocent hopes can be turned into something embarrassing and ugly. And while, I don't like to admit it, I feel like this love/~~hate~~afraid to love relationship I have with the Giants has spilled over into other aspects of my life. I have the same distrust about potentially positive developments, and the same general feeling of unease and impending doom in aspects of my personal life. My writing in particular. I have the same "Why can't I quit this?" reaction to every setback. The same "Why does God hate me so much he must tease me like this?" defeatism. The same "Trying is pointless" pessimism.

I can't say for sure the Giants did this to me. Maybe I was already this way. Maybe I'm so fucked up I unconsciously looked for a team which seemed cursed to fit the feeling I had for myself. But it's hard to believe that when taken in chronological context -- the Giants weren't really cursed when I started watching them. I'd beenb a fan for two years before the first cursed-like event happened (Candy Maldonado, a good right-fielder, losing Tony Pena's flyball in the lights for a triple, and then making a weak throw which allowed him to score the only run in a 1-0 debacle in St. Louis is the '87 playoffs). And it's really only been in the last 16 years -- at least 7 years into my fandom -- when the real karmic shit hit the fan: 103 wins falling short in '93 (the year before the wild card was instituted), two walk-off one-run losses in the '97 playoffs, Benny Agbayani's walk-ff HR in the 2000 playoffs, the big blown lead in the '02 world series, Jose Cruz's dropped fly in '03, Steve Finley's division-clinching walk-off grand slam in '04.

There's really no way I could've know what I was in for. That means fate chose me. Maybe that's why I seem to align myself with the disappointed, the disillusioned, the disenfranchised. Or at least why I think I do. But whether it's actually the case or not is moot. You are you you think you are. And, more and more, I think I'm a near-miss, a could've been, a contender who always falls short, someone who never seems to get (or make) the big break when they need it. Maybe it's my destiny, maybe it's just the shackles I've applied to myself. Maybe I watch way too much fucking sports, and it's poisoned my brain with well-worn cliches about winners and losers, and curses, and teams of destiny.

But the thing is, life really is just like baseball -- just when you're bitching and moaning about the latest loss, injury, or disappointment, there's another opportunity on the horizon. A new game, a new day, a new chance to do something which makes you (and everyone else) forget the skeletons in your closet. This season's not over, it just feels that way. There's always tomorrow -- a new chance to prove all those diappointments were just the appetizer for an epic meal of accomplishment, or another chance to fail in new and appalling ways. Probably the latter.

A Blog Post

2009-08-11T11:50:00.001-07:00

Obviously, I haven't posted in while. I'm not sure exactly why. I guess I'm struggling to find things I feel need writing. Don't confuse that with having nothing to say. I actually have a lot to say -- it just all usually ends up being written in a script, or being told to my wife and/or friends, or lost to the revages of time because I don't feel it's important enough to write.

I think that might be the real problem actually -- the idea that something should be important if you're going to take the time out of your busy schedule to write something down. Especially if you highly doubt anyone will actually read it anyway. It shouldn't be that way. I want to write just for the sake of writing -- that's why I started this blog in the first place. But I've never been a journal type of guy -- I've never had a diary, or jotted down my feelings on legal pads at difficult times in my life.

I'm a writer, sure, it's become ingrained in my DNA. But the desire to entertain or inform is so great, I can't bring myself to write just because. I'll pour my feelings of frustration into a story. Hell, I even used to write a poem here and there back in touchy-feely college days, though I feel distinct embarrassment at revealing that. I've written about baseball for this blog, about football for this one (which I plan to return to here in a couple of weeks for the beginning of the NFL season), and reviewed movies and TV shows for this here blog, but I don't write just for writing's sake.

That was the intent when I began this -- to write whatever popped into my head. But my internal editor seems incapable of allowing that. There must be a reason, a goal. First, I found myself drifting into more and more entertainment reviews -- so I could be that site you went to in order to find out if that show/movie was worth checking out from someone (sort of) inside the entertainment industry. Then it was more sports -- I could be that blog you went to in order to read a snarky take on the sports world (god knows there aren't enough blogs doing that!). But soon it became apparent to me that my writing was totally uninspired and redundant to so many things already available on the web. I wanted to quit, but that seemed even more cliche than what I was already doing.

The only obvious choice is to write about something nobody else writes about -- namely myself. And while lots of other bloggers write about their lives, none actually write about mine, so it would be unique. Well, unique-ish. But I just don't find my life to be all that interesting. Maybe nobody really does. But a hell of a lot of people spend a lot of time on their blogs pretending they do. I just can't bring myself to write something I doubt anyone finds entertaining. Sure, nobody's probably reading anyway, so who could be bored? But that's not the point. The point is, I've been trained through screenwriting to believe writing should entertain. Boring = death. So if my life is boring, it's the last thing I should write about.

Another factor is timing. If I had started the blog when I was taking lots of meetings around town pitching scripts it could've been good -- the world of pitching movie ideas in Hollywood from the inside. Sure, I couldn't have revealed too many juicy details without risking my livelihood, but it could've been good. The same could be said if I started the blog right after my writing partner and I sold our pitch, THE DISCIPLES OF DARRYL to Intrepid Pictures and began the development process. I've written about it a bit here, and again the caveat regarding my career security woul've still applied, but keeping a running diary of my experiences would've been interesting. Instead, I started the blog right as screenwriting -- or at least the business of screenwriting -- began to take a back seat in my life.

But now I'm writing a new screenplay -- one I'm exceptionally excited about -- and writing as much as I have in a long time. The ideas are flowing, and while 99% of the best stuff will probably find it's way into my script, I feel like they're might even be enough to carry over to here. Of course, I'll have to wedge it in between the screenwriting, the football writing, the (almost) full-time job, and the time spent with my wife, but maybe there's a small crack in there I can exploit. No promises, but I want to continue writing here -- even if it's navel-gazing minutia like, Oh I don't know, this post right here as a matter of fact. I don't know why I feel the need to make this declaration. I doubt anyone's reading, so maybe I'm just making it to myself. I just think this forum is too valuable, too open, too flexible, too much fun (potentially) to waste.

I'd liek to write reviews of things I've seen recently -- FUNNY PEOPLE (they weren't), BRUNO, PUBLIC ENEMIES, reality TV, something -- but when I do that, I feel like it has to be, you know, actually good. When I write about whatever stupid thing I'm thinking/doing, it can be crap -- like this -- and still not be a failure. It's sort of like that first lesson every writer has to learn: If there's something on the page, then it's not a failure. Making it good? That's the second step.

The 2nd Half

2009-07-17T21:59:00.000-07:00

The Giants second half began with a tough loss -- 2-1 in 14 innings at Pittsburgh, where the Giants have struggled mightily in recent years. Lincecum was dominant, but it wasn't enough, as stale OF prospect named Garrett Jones hit 2 homers to beat the punchless Giants, who scored just one run and needed an error just to get that.

Will this great pitching, no hitting continue? Will it spur Sabean to make a desperate play for veteran bats? Is this the beginning of the end, or the end of the beginning? Or is it the middle of the end? Or the beginning of the middle of the end? The end of the middle? Only time will tell.

Pic courtesy of FriscoJoe over at McCovey Chronicles.

Vote Pablo!

2009-07-05T17:30:00.001-07:00

New Bruno Trailer

2009-05-24T23:31:00.000-07:00

Movie Trailers - Movies Blog

Giants = Bad: Padres 3, Giants 2

2009-05-21T23:27:00.001-07:00

'Nuff said.

Are We Having Fun Yet?: Padres 2, Giants 1

2009-05-21T00:08:00.001-07:00

Not much to write about this one. Again, the Giants couldn't score (for the second straight night their one run was a pathetic excuse for one which came on an out and nearly a double-play). Again, they left a man at 3rd with one out to cost them the run which could've sent the game into extra innings. Again, they wasted a great pitching performance -- though for a welcome change it came from Jonathan Sanchez, who'd been struggling. Again, the Giants lost 2-1. Again, they lost at San Diego -- 0-5 to start the year.

The Giants fell below .500 for the first time since April, and things are looking pretty bleak from the offensive side. They can hit with no one on, but they can't get a big hit to drive in a run to save their lives, and the panic at the plate in those situations is palpable. The panic in the manager's office is pretty obvious too, judging from Bruce Bochy's comments on the feeble offense on Tuesday, and by the fact he wrote out a lineup for Wednesday with Aaron Rowand leading off. That might have been the one bright spot -- Rowand had 3 hits.

TOMORROW: Tim Lincecum loses 2-1 to ex-Giants Kevin Correia as the Giants set a major league record by stranding runners at 3rd with less than 2 out in every inning.

Spotted at Runyon Canyon...

2009-05-20T13:59:00.000-07:00

Yesterday walking the canyon, I passed Matthew Perry, looking very gray, sporting a goatee and listening to his iPod. It's amazing to see certain stars out and about in Hollywood due to how gray their hair is. You don't realize they always have their hair colored before appearing in movies, TV, or even talk shows, so you get this idea of them being younger than they are. This is because once people find out you're old, you become less of a commodity in show business. So a few stars -- Ben Stiller comes to mind -- walk around LA with very grey hair, but never have even one grey hair in any of their movies. Matthew Perry is apparently a member of this group.

So is Nick Cage, but I think with him it has more to do with bad hair than grey hair. That, or an obsession to come up with the most insane hairdo's imaginable. This is my personal favorite:

YOUR San Francisco Giants: Padres 2, Giants 1

2009-05-19T23:57:00.000-07:00

This is the Giants -- like it or not. They will waste leadoff doubles with alarming consistency. They will leave men on 3rd with less than 2 out. They will threaten to score over and over, and fail over and over, just to lose by 1 run. And, it appears, they will do it most of all while Barry Zito is on mound -- the better his performance, the more frustratingly ineffective their offensive attack will be. This was again the case Tuesday night as the Giants wasted yet another impressive outing by the resurgent Zito, who had to realize his fate after just 2 innings.

In each of the first 2 innings, the Giants had their leadoff man reach 2nd base with nobody out (and in each case, in the person of one of their fastest baserunners -- Eugenio Velez and Randy Winn, respectively), but failed to even advance them as far as 3rd. In the meantime, Zito allowed nothing 2 runs, each coming on solo HR's (both with 2 out to make it even more frustrating). other than that, Zito was great, going the route, as he watched the Giants squander yet another man-on-2nd-no-out situation and other potential rallies. In all, they went 0-12 with RISP, 0-11 in the first 4 innings alone.

The biggest villain on offense had to be Rich Aurilia, who looks about as done as you can look. Aurilia flailed in attempts to advance a runner from 2nd, and also to drive one in from 3rd with one out, striking out both times. Aurilia can only play 1B at this point in his career, and he can't hit, so I'm not sure what role there is unless they come up with a new one called D.S: Designated Strikeout. If Jesus Guzman, the 1B prospect tearing it up at AAA, isn't called up soon, Aurilia could burn through all the good will he's earned with fans (including this one), and the Giants may end up D.H.-ing a pitcher during interleague play, Rays-style.

TOMORROW: Sachez v. Gaudin.

Balks, Walks, Cain Rocks: Giants 2, Mets 0

2009-05-18T12:57:00.000-07:00

Matt Cain for the block, indeed. Cain did what he does -- fall behind batters, walk guys, run up his pitch count, then make great pitches to get out of seemingly impossible jams. Also, in his bag of tricks: Get inadequate run support, then take matters into his own hands, driving in a big run. The only aberration: Getting great bullpen work. Not so much from Bob Howry, who got through the 7th, but walked Luis Castillo to open the 8th -- an unforgivable sin in a 2-run game -- but definitely from Jeremy Affeldt, who got out of a big time jam in the 8th (his second escape act of the series) and Brian Wilson, who at least partially redeemed himself for two losses in the series, by saving it with a 1-2-3 9th.

The Giants somehow kept the Mets off the board despite several promising rallies -- usually started by walks, most notably Cain three free passes to open the 2nd -- using clutch pitching and good D (primarily Travis Ishikawa's 3-2-3 DP on a scorched line drive one-hopper). The Giants offense scratched out their 2 cheapie runs with the help of 3 balks by the very un-steady Mets starter Mike Pelfrey, and a clutch hit by Cain.

Of course, you might not have realized any of this by watching the game on ESPN's Sunday Night Baseball as color commentators Steve Phillips and Joe Morgan did nothing by drone on about the Mets and their leadership situation, completely ignoring the game being played before them. Something else you might have missed: The formerly hard-luck Cain is now 4-1 with a 2.65 ERA.

TOMORROW: Off-day Monday, Tuesday, the Giants travel down to San Diego for a threesome with the Padres (not as sexy as it sounds), with Barry Zito taking on Chris Young in the opener.

This Is Not A Recording: Mets 9, Giants 6

2009-05-16T21:06:00.001-07:00

More of the same for the Giants, who basically took the worst of the first two games of the season and combined them in Game 3 -- poor starting pitching over come by good offense, followed by leaving in the starter too long, and bad relief pitching -- especially in the 9th -- plus an extra helping of bonehead managing to lose it.

This time it was the Unit getting the Giants in an early hole, 3-0 to Johan Santana. That would be enough most days, but the Giants fought back to tie it at 3-3. Johnson and the bullpen immediately gave it all back and more, allowing 4 runs in the top of the next inning. Down to Santana again, the Giants looked like toast. Again. But they came back. Again.

The Giants scored 3 to get within 7-6, and got the tying run on base to lead off the 8th. But their rally died when they made an out on the bases (their 3rd of the day) on a busted hit-and-run, which was just a terrible idea by Bochy. It was a 3-2 count, but Travis Ishikawa was at the plate -- a big-time strikeout threat -- and the not-too-speedy Juan Uribe was on base. After the Giants gave up their requisite 2 runs in the 9th, the game was over.

Unfortunately, his is becoming the status quo for the Giants -- doing just enough to give yourself a chance, but not enough to win. It was less than 100 hours ago, they were 4 games over .500, hadn't lost any of their last 9 series, and were going for the sweep against the poor, pathetic Nats to go 5 under for the first time since 1994. Now they are 18-18 and have to avoid their own sweep at the hands of the mighty Mets, who's middle of the order has feasted on Giants pitching. It's not just them, either: The Nats scored a lot of runs, even in their losses (7 each), so it's been all homestand so far. Suddenly, it's the offense which has become their only hope. Strange days, indeed.

TOMORROW: Matt Cain for the block.

...And That's When Depression Set In: Mets 8, Giants 6

2009-05-16T00:58:00.000-07:00

So many things went wrong for the Giants on Friday night -- starting pitching, bullpen, defense, clutch hitting, managing, luck -- you could write a long, detailed essay on the multi-faceted failure. But that could take years and cost millions of lives. In my opinion, this game came down to one boneheaded decision by Bruce Bochy. And now, because of it, the Giants have a 3-game losing streak, and are back to letting the Dodgers (now 6 games up) run away with the division.

It was the 6th inning, and the Giants looked to have the game well in hand. It was 5-1, and Lincecum had struck out the side the previous inning. But his fastball velocity was a bit down, and he was leaning heavily on his changeup. In the top of the 6th, as his pitch count rose over 100, he allowed 2 runs, closing the gab to 5-3. It was pretty clear he was done. Sure, if the Giants went -2-3, and his spot didn't come up, maybe you could send him out until a baserunner got on, and hope he had a quick inning. Only the Giants didn't go 1-2-3, and Lincecum's spot did come up -- with a man on 2nd base. An insurance run. An engraved invitation to pinch-hit. Somewhere deep in the recesses of Bruce Bochy's brain he thought"Pinch hit? But that's just what they're expecting me to do."

Bochy let Lincecum hit, and briefly looked smart, as Lincecum singled in the runner. That positivity didn't last long. In the top of the 7th, Lincecum allowed a hit and a walk, and was pulled from the game without recording another out. Merkin Valdez also faced two hitters, and failed to record an out -- a walk to Gary Sheffield, and a 3-run double by David Wright to tie the game, 6-6. Jeremy Affeldt came in and did a great job of holding the score right there by striking out the side after Wright stole 3rd with nobody out, but it was useless -- the Giants were going to do whatever it took to lose this game.

They proved that yet again when they stranded Randy Winn at 3rd with 1 out in the bottom of the 8th, although that had as much to do with bad luck (Winn's ball missed being a HR by a foot, and with 2 outs, Rich Aurilia scorched a liner that Alex Cora stabbed at SS) as it did poor hitting (Aaron Rowand continued his LVP-caliber season by grounding weakly to 3rd with 1 out).

The Mets eventually won by beating Brian Wilson in the 9th inning of a tie game (for the second straight night), but the dye was cast when Bochy (who would later be ejected) left a spent Lincecum in, needlessly risking an insurance run, the lead, and most importantly, Lincecum's arm, by overworking him on a night what he was clearly not his best, after a tough inning. I don't care how tired the bullpen was, especially since Affeldt, their best set-up man, went 2 innings anyway. Boo Bochy. Boo.

TOMORROW: The Big Unit takes the hill in a semi-nationally televised game, trying end the the Giants 3-game losing streak, trying to keep alive his streak of pitching well at home, and trying to help continue the Giants streak of not losing series by giving them a chance to split on Sunday. That's a lot of streaks. Unfortunately, their all going up against Johan Santana, quite possibly the best pitcher in baseball.

The Blahs: Mets 7, Giants 4

2009-05-14T23:33:00.000-07:00

The Giants had been playing well recently, but their series winning streak seemed more like an oddity than a barometer of their strength as a team. They've been a bit lucky play the Nats, and the Dodgers right after they lost Manny. Sure, they were playing well, but so many of those wins were predicated on infield hits and 1-run victories. That trend was bound to turn. A lull in momentum is inevitable in baseball no matter how good you are. When they lost to the Nats on the eve of the Mets visit for a 4-game series, I wondered if this might be the time. Tonight did nothing to quell those fears.

The Giants scored 2 runs in the 8th, tying the game with an improbable comeback. Well, improbable besides the fact that the "rally" was started by an infield hit (Fred Lewis, leading off the inning), and ended with an infield hit (Edgar Renteria drove in the tying run, but appeared to injure his hammy legging out the hit*). But Brian Wilson continued to struggle in non-save opportunities, surrendering 3 runs to Mets in the 9th, allowing them to ice the game.

TOMORROW: The Giants need a win if they plan to at least split this series with New York -- remember, Johan Santana is scheduled to pitch over the weekend. The Good News: The Giants have ace Tim Lincecum taking the hill tomorrow. The Bad News: They'll face Livan Hernandez. I know, Livo is not so good anymore, and comes in with a 5+ ERA, but he's exactly the kind of pitcher who dominates the Giants, and it's the kind of thing that would drive me up the wall. So it's bound to happen.

* The way he left the field, I could easily see Renteria going on the disabled list, so you better get used to Juan Uribe at SS for while.

Sabean FTL: Nationals 6, Giants 3

2009-05-14T02:33:00.000-07:00

I'm pinning today's Giants loss squarely on Brian Sabean. He's the one who gave away Shairon Martis, the rookie who's gone 5-0 to start the season while pitching for a team with only 11 wins, and who held the Giants to 2 hits to keep them from sweeping the Nats. It was 2006 when Sabean traded Martis, fresh off a no-hitter in the WBC that Spring, for crusty vet Mike Stanton in a foolish attempt to make a stretch run. The Giants were barely at .500 and were several pieces away from serious contention, but Sabean made a Sabeanic move by trading the future for a futile shot at the present.

Today, the rookie, pitching for the major-league minimum, beat one the highest paid starters in baseball, Barry Zito. And that's saying something these days. Again, Zito pitched well -- though his line is great because he tired in the 7th, and had some his runners score after he left -- but he wasn't as good as Martis. The Giants could get the sweep, but took the series to keep their streak alive, and prepare for a weekend series against the Mets -- including two nationally-televised games (FOX Saturday, ESPN Sunday).

TOMORROW: Jonathan Sanchez tries to find his groove as he takes on John Maine.

Riches to Rags to Riches: Giants 9, Nationals 7

2009-05-12T22:24:00.000-07:00

The Giants turned their worst loss of the season into their best win with one mighty swing of Pablo Sandoval's bat. The Kung Fu Panda's 3-run bolt of a HR off reformed Dodger Joe Beimel gave the Giants a stirring come-from-behind win despite blowing 4 run 7th inning lead to the worst team in baseball and then trailing with 2 outs and nobody on in the 9th.

It was the Giants first real comeback win of the year, and puts them a season-high 4 games over .500, and guarantees them yet another series win. In the last 9 series including this one, they are now 7-0-2, both those ties coming on the road after losing the series opener. It was also the second game in a row, the Giants have allowed 7 runs (albeit against one of the best offensive teams in the NL so far), yet still scored enough to win it with their hitting (albeit against one of the worst pitching staffs in the NL so far). Oh yeah, and Pablo's HR kep the Giants undefeated when scoring first (14-0).

The Giants comeback followed what could have been a crushing rally by the Nationals, who scored 3 runs each in the 7th and 8th to erase a 5-1 lead and steal a win away from Matt Cain. Cain cruised through the first 6 innings, allowing just what should have been an unearned run (Adam Dunn's double should've been caught by Nate Schierholtz, who misjudged it and saw it clank off his wrist), but ran into trouble in the 7th. With 1 out and none on, and Cain on a pitch count which might allow him to finsih the game, Alex Cintron got his first hit of the year. Cristian Guzman followed with another hit before Nick Johnson crushed a good pitch from Cain (knee-high, outer third) for an opposite-field HR -- his first hit ever off Cain.

Right then, you knew it wouldn't be easy.It didn't take long for that to prove out. Cain stayed in to retire Ryan Zimmerman (who had 2 hits to extend his hitting streak to 30) and Adam Dunn to end the inning, but left after 7, having thrown just 100 pitches (not that much for Cain). The combo of Howry (mostly) and Affeldt (just a little) blew the lead by allowing 3 runs (albeit on some pretty weak contact) and the Giants suddenly trailed 7-5. A sure victory for Cain was gone, and the game seemed lost -- even when Bengie Molina led off the next inning with a HR.

I figured the Giants would lose by one, just to make it that much more frustrating. But with 2 out and none on in the 9th, Emmanuel Burris singled, and after being wild-pitched to 2nd, Edgar Renteria drew a crucial walk in a great ~~at bat~~ plate appearance. That set the stage for Sandoval, whose dramatics had to be all that much sweeter to him following an embarrassing play a few innings earlier when he stumbled trying to leg out a triple and took and header in the basepath.

TOMORROW: Barry Zito takes the mound against ex-Giants farmhand, 4-0 rookie Shairon Martis (who was criminally given awaty by Brian Sabean in the Mike Stanton ~~robbery~~ trade) as the Giants go for the sweep of the Nationals. Will Zito continue his recent run of unexpected mastery, or will he run out of smoke and/or mirrors?

Runs!: Giants 11, Nationals 7

2009-05-11T23:58:00.000-07:00

I guess the Nats pathetic pitching is worse than the Giant pathetic offense. At least for one game, there's no other explanation for what happened in the opener of the 3-game set at Mays Field. Not only did the Giants score 11 runs, but at one point the team which draws less walks than any team around actually drew 5 in a row -- the last 3 driving in runs. And that came after 2 runs scored when LF Josh Willingham whiffed on a can of corn off the bat of Fred Lewis in one of the most embarrassing efforts you'll see in the outfield. They also got clutch hits, including one from a reliever. So, there's that.

The only downside of the long inning was that The Unit seemed to stiffen up. Up to that point, Johnson had allowed 2 runs (both on solo HR's) through 5 innings, striking out 9 and not walking anybody. Afterwards, he couldn't record another out, going HR, single, wild pitch, double before being pulled. He won -- #298 lifetime -- kept his streak of dominant pitching (yes, he allowed 4 runs in 5 innings, but 9 K's/0 BB's is dominant) at home --to off-set his terrible pitching on the road. It also kept alive the possibility of The Unit going for win #300 at Seattle, which would be pretty damn cool. For that to happen, he'll have to beat Johan Santana and the Mets this weekend, so I wouldn't hold my breath. On the other hand, it is at home.

The bullpen made it interesting in the 9th, and Brian Wilson had to come in for the save after pitching 2 innings yesterday in LA, but he only had to throw 3 pitches -- Strike 1, Strike 2, and Strike 3 to Willingham. Wilson seemed a little more deliberate in doing his post-game crossed-arm salute to the sky, possibly due to the Casey Blake incident yesterday.

Don't look now, but the Giants have crept to 3 games over .500, and are just 4 games behind the Dodgers, and just a half-game behind Cincy for the NL Wild Card lead.

TOMORROW: Matt Cain takes his fast start (3-1, 2.61) to the mound against Nats rookie Jordan Zimmermann, who has a very nice K/BB rate (18/6), but has given up a lot of hits (26) and HR's (5) so far (23 innings), resulting in a 5.48 ERA.

O.M.G.: Giants 7, Dodgers 5

2009-05-10T23:38:00.000-07:00

The Giants kept a streak alive by going against a trend. They won another series -- extending their streak of non-losing series to eight -- by winning a game in which they didn't score first. With the victory they're now only 3-14 when failing to score first. They did, however, continue a much happier trend -- scoring a lot of runs (for them) in the final games of series. On this road trip, they put 6 on getaway day in Chicago when needing a win Denver in the same situation, and 7 on getaway day in LA to take this series.

More than that, they won a game when several important factors broke against them -- Tim Lincecum wasn't as sharp as usual (though he still had great numbers everywhere but the "Runs" column), they continued to flail with men in scoring position (including two particularly poor AB's from Pablo Sandoval, who swung at first-pitch low-and-away sinkers to ground out with ducks on the pond), Juan Pierre could do no wrong, and Brian Wilson blew a save.

They won a game they needed to be able to feel like they're still in the race -- 4.5 out, but 2 over .500 -- even though it took 13 innings, they were on the road, and had every reason to believe they should lose. They scored in the 12th and 13th innings just when you might expect them to pack it in, After Wilson blew the save in the 12th, he came back to get the Dodgers 1-2-3 in the 13th, but that didn't stop him from fuming afterwards over mocking from Casey Blake, who took him deep to tie the game. Twitter, mohawks, mocking -- Brian Wilson is a walking controversy.

TOMORROW: The Giants come home to play the resurgent Nats, as The Unit takes on Daniel Cabrera at Mays Field.

Well, So Much For That: Dodgers 8, Giants 0

2009-05-09T19:11:00.000-07:00

No game in May really means anything, but when you're as desperate for competitive baseball as we Giants fans are, you'll take what you can get. So when circumstances put them in position to climb within a few games of the psychically damaged Dodgers and make a race out of the NL West, it took on playoff-like drama. (Not really, but you get the point.) So the way the Giants fell on their collective face on semi-national TV was pretty disappointing. Surprising it was not.

Again the Giants were shut down -- shut out as a matter of fact, by the legendary Eric Stultz -- and Jonathan Sanchez remained maddeningly inconsistent and wild. Sanchez didn't get any help from home plate ump Dan Iassogna, who squeezed him quite a bit, especially during LA's 3-run 3rd inning, or the Giants offense, but he was sub-par any way you look at it.

Again the Giants lost a game in which they failed to score first. They are now 2-14 those games, in stark contrast to their 13-0 record when scoring first. I think the key to that stat is the fact that scoring first guarantees you actually score. The stat could almost be amended to simply "When the Giants score ~~first~~, they win."

The Good News: The Giants still have a chance to win yet another series, continue their impressive streak of non-losing series, and end a tough road trip with a winning record, and they sent out Tim Lincecum. If the hitters can scratch out a couple of runs against Jeff Weaver -- which will be a lot easier if Bruce Bochy will see fit to playing Bengie Molina and Pablo Sandoval at the same time -- they have a shot.

Feelin' Frisky: Giants 3, Dodgers 1

2009-05-09T00:45:00.000-07:00

Since the Giants started 2-7, they've gone on a 13-6 run fueled by great starting pitching, a competent bullpen, and some of the ugliest offensive baseball you'll ever see. It was more of the same tonight, as the suddenly dominant Barry Zito did his thing against the Dodgers for the second time in a week and a half, and the Giants offense scratched out 3 runs to beat the previously 5-0 Chad Billingsley.

For the fourth straight time out, Zito held the opponent scoreless through the first 5 innings. For the first time in those starts he allowed a run before the 7th, and even then he came within inches -- as Fred Lewis allowed a 2-out RBI double by Casey Blake to tick off the edge of his glove. That tied the game at 1-1, and seemed to be yet another bad break for Zito, who seems to have inherited Matt Cain's poor luck from the last 2 seasons. But for once this season, Zito caught a little luck in the next half inning when the Giants scored 2 runs while he was still the pitcher of record.

So Zito got first first win of the year when Brian Wilson nailed down another 4-out save, in what seems to be a growing trend -- Bruce Bochy going to Wilson in the 8th when the right-handed set-up men (previously Howry, tonight Merkin Valdez) struggle to close out the inning in a tight game. Wilson was up to the pressure, and so were the Giants, an interesting turn in what has become a fascinating sequence of events over the last couple of days: First Manny's suspension, then the Dodgers blow a game they led 6-0 after 1 inning against Washington (the worst team in baseball) to snap their 13-0 start at home, and finally the Giants win in LA against the Dodgers ace in their toughest matchup of the series.

Suddenly, LA looks vulnerable, and the Giants look feisty. Of course, while the Dodgers may struggle to score without Manny, we know the Giants will struggle to score. But if the Giants win on Saturday, and head into Sunday going for a sweep behind Tim Lincecum to pull within 2.5 games, I'll be too drunk on optimism and momentum to listen to that kind of reason.

TOMORROW: The biggest game of the year so far (as if that meant anything) -- Jonathan Sanchez vs. Eric Stultz.

...And The Trend Continues To Be Your Friend: Giants 8, Rockies 3

2009-05-07T15:09:00.000-07:00

Another non-losing series (7 in a row). Another game where the Giants scored first and won (now 12-0). Another day bouncing between .500 and one game over (it always feels nicer one game over for some reason). Most importantly, it was another win for Matt Cain, who somehow allowed no runs despite walking 5, and the Giants, who head to LA for a showdown of sorts with the Manny-less Dodgers.

It didn't look good early as Giant-killer Jason Marquis, who dominated them in San Francisco last week, set the Giants down 1-2-3 with very little effort, and Cain followed that by walking the first two batters he faced, and falling behind the next, Todd Helton, 3-0. But Cain managed to entice Helton into a GIDP with a monumental 3-1 change-up, righted his ship, and ended up going 6 shutout innings. By that time, the Giants were up 5-0 -- mainly on the strength of 2 Bengie Molina HR's off Marquis, against whom he'd previously been 0 for 12 lifetime.

Cain had settled down to the point he might've been sent out there for the 7th, but after reaching on an error (a throw which actually hit him in the back) and having to run the bases a bit as the Giants tacked on another couple of runs, he was pinch-run for by Bruce Bochy. The pen handled it from there, and Giants continued their win-one-lose-one streak.

TOMORROW: The Dodger series just a lot more interesting today with the news about Manny's suspension, and the Giants coming in over .500. If the Dodgers win tonight, they'll still be undefeated at home and threatening to run away and hide in the NL West. If they lose, the Giants might catch them just as they cool off. Either way, there figures to be a gaping hole in the middle of that lineup. Hopefully, the resurgent Barry Zito can take advantage and set the tone for the series Friday night. Still, a win will be a tall task -- the Dodgers will throw staff ace, and newly-crowned Giant-killer, Chad Billingsley.

State of the Blog

2009-05-07T12:11:00.001-07:00

I've been seriously considering quitting the daily baseball diary thing. Not just because I'm quitter -- though I am definitely that -- but also because my writing time (and free time in general) has become such a precious commodity. With a job, a wife, and a screenwriting career (such as it is), I have enough trouble squeezing in time to watch baseball, let alone write about it. I think that shows in my effort, as I often squeeze in a perfunctory post late at night, often thinking, "Oh yeah, I still have write something for the blog." That's never the right attitude to go into any creative endeavor.

I know from experience that my screenwriting is much better when I'm excited to start, when I carve out sections of my life in which to work. But that's the thing -- when it's good, it's not work, but play. Sure, as a professional, sometimes you have to force yourself to get into it with a "Time to make the donuts" kid of mentality. But more often than not, I catch myself working without realizing it -- thinking about ways to improve something while in the shower, or the car, or hiking. Hell, that's half the reason I hike every day -- the other half being to keep from being a pale fatass. That hasn't really happened with the stuff about baseball, and there are several possible reasons for this.

Reason #1 I've already mentioned -- free time. That has to come first, and with the caveat that in terms of priorities, writing about baseball on my blog falls pretty low. That leads to Reason #2: I hate not doing things well. If I'm going to undertake something, I want to be proud of the result. That's why I quit so many things -- I don't think I can do as well as I deem necessary. But neither of those reasons shoulder all the blame.

Enter Reason #3: Though I often dreamed of being a sportswriter when I was a kid, it's not really something I've taken to when given the opportunity. The occasional post about baseball allowed me the great opportunity to write for McCovey Chronicles for a couple of interim stints, and I enjoyed it, but by the end, I was ready to stop and never do it again. A few posts about football from time to time got me the opportunity to write a couple of weekly columns for Niners Nation and that was fun, but again, I was looking forward to the end of the season. I don't know if it has more to do with the responsibility of having to get it done, or the fact my mind is so used to running through character traits, arcs, and plot points that it's hard to train it to think up ideas about what to say about sports. But how can that be the case when I spend so much time thinking about sports?

Maybe because I've yet to learn a successful way to channel what I think about into the posts. For screenwriting, I'm constantly jotting down ideas, notes, capturing every possibility, choosing between them, then tweaking them over and over. For sportswriting I find a little time, write some stream of consciousness stuff and hit "Post". That's it. No plan of attack. No notes about how Travis Ishikawa needs to start swinging at some first pitches because pitchers are laying in fastballs and he's falling behind right away. Just throwing shit at the wall to see if it sticks. If you want to do something well, and you're not some kind of genius or savant, you have to put some time and effort in. I haven't done that. The question is, am I ready to? Which brings us to...

Reason #4: Along with the screenwriting, work, and personal life, I also like writing about other things: movie and TV reviews, a post about my life here and there, another Hollywood Horror Show column -- a haven't written one of those in months and I have several good stories just waiting around to be told. I don't want to be all-baseball-all-the-time all summer, ignoring summer movies and all the new TV shows I'd like to review ("Better Off Ted", "The Unusuals", "Southland", even the so-bad-it's-good-or-maybe it's-just-really-bad "Harper's Island"). No matter what I do, I'm definitely going to post more stuff about entertainment.

So, while I'd like to re-dedicate myself and put a little more thought and effort into my posts, I'm leaning heavily toward either giving it up entirely, or reducing it somehow. Of course, as I'm writing this, the story about Manny Ramirez being suspended 50 games is all over the internet/TV/radio and the Giants are beating the Rockies 5-0 behind an "effectively wild" Matt Cain and a power-binging Bengie Molina. So it looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

Manny tested positive for a banned substance, reportedly a fertility drug. He claims it was prescribed by a doctor for a health issue, which seems curious since I haven't read anything about Ramirez trying to get pregnant. You'd think he'd at least wait until the off-season to try and get knocked up. then again, the way he plays LF, carrying a baby around in his womb probably wouldn't make much of a difference.

This is, of course, a very interesting -- and for a Giants fan, entertaining -- story which I'd like to explore a bit over the coming hours/days/weeks. And the timing of the whole thing -- the day before the 2nd place Giants travel to LA to play the 1st place Dodgers, who are undefeated at home and threatening to run away with the division -- makes it all the more intriguing. I can't just quit now, can I?

Just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in.

Same Ol', Same Ol': Rockies 11, Giants 1

2009-05-06T22:12:00.000-07:00

Not much to say about this one. The offense was non-existant, again. The Unit was bad on the road, again. The Giants yo-yoed between .500 and one game over, again. They lost when not scoring first, again (now 2-13, 11-0 when scoring first).

TOMORROW: If history keeps repeating, the Giants will score first tomorrow and win to split the series.

Baseball Like It Oughta Be: Giants 6, Cubs 2

2009-05-05T20:50:00.000-07:00

Today was good day. I woke up late, watched the Giants beat the Cubs behind Lincecum and two 3-run innings. Bengie Molina got the Giants started in fine fashion, as his 3-run HR in the 1st gave Lincecum 3 runs to play with before he ever took the mound. As soon as the TV cameras showed Lincecum in the dugout, pumping his fist like he'd already won, I thought, "That better be enough, Timmy, because that might be all you get". For a long time, it looked like I was right. Lincecum led by the slim margin of 3-2 after 7 innings before the Giants added 3 in the top of the 8th, highlighted by a 2-run double by the eternally-slumping Aaron Rowand.

Getting to watch the Giants play a day game at Wrigley is one of life's simple pleasures. Getting to see Lincecum hold down the Cubbies for the win is the cherry on top. The Giants scoring 6 runs is the tab of acid on top of the cherry.

Bright spots: Merkin Valdez was nasty, and struck out 2 in an inning of work -- he hit 99 and had a devastating slider. Emmanuel Burriss had 2 hits, albeit from the right side. Molina continues to be a not-as-embarrassing-as-it-should-be cleanup hitter. Rowand (see above).

Downside: After getting hot the last 2 games, Fred Lewis looked very bad at the plate, taking a collar and still hasn't homered. Before looking nasty and striking out 2, Valdez couldn't get the ball over the plate with a 4 run lead in the 8th -- he was lucky to get his first out on what would've been ball 4.

Again, just awesome -- real grass, real sunshine, real baseball. Giants at Wrigley. Lincecum. Runs. Not working. Today represented everything great about America.

TOMORROW: The Giants travel to Colorado to play the Rockies, the Big Unit taking the hill against Ubaldo Jimenez (a.k.a. "Battle of The Uglies 2: Rocky Mountain Ugly").

Insert Title Here: Cubs 4, Giants 2

2009-05-04T22:43:00.000-07:00

Didn't see the game. Don't plan to either, though I have it on TiVo. It didn't look like much to see -- Jonathan Sanchez too wild again, offense dominated by Ryan Dempster (who shared a flight with my wife and I to Australia, where we were going to get married in 2004). Ho-hum. Move along. Besides, there's more baseball around the corner: I have the next three days off work -- during which the Giants will play two day games, including tomorrow.

The good news from tonight: Pablo Sandoval is back where he belongs -- hitting .320+ with gap power -- and so is Fred Lewis, who's hitting .312 and taking his fair share of walks. Though I'd love to see him take a couple of trots around the bases before too long, if you catch my drift (Chicago and Colorado aren't bad places to find your power stroke -- hint, hint). Another bright side: The 'pen. The Giants got 2 shutout innings out of both Bob Howry, who's been struggling, and Justin Miller, who'd been surprisingly good.

TOMORROW: An awesome fucking display of baseball -- Tim Lincecum at Wrigley Field in an 11:20 PDT start. God bless America!

There's no "W" in Zito: Giants 1, Rockies 0

2009-05-03T14:34:00.000-07:00

The Giants got great pitching and terrible hitting. This is not a recording. The good news is -- as it has been so often this season -- the offense did just enough to win. Not just the game, but the series -- the Giants 5th straight winning series. Seriously.

The worst part of watching your team struggle mightily to score is that point they reach where it's in their heads, and it seems they can do everything but score. They hit leadoff doubles (as they Giants did twice today in the later innings of a 0-0 game), they get them to third with less than 1 out (once) or even no outs (once), and still can't score. Guys lineout (once), guys hit shots into double plays (once), and guys hold up on balls that get away far eenough for them to score because they're afraid of being the latest guy to blow a rally (twice). Instead they leave it someone else.

When you're winning 5-0 in the 6th, a lineout to 2B with a man on third is a minor annoyance. When it's 0-0, and the guy on the mound is threatening to take shutouts into the 7th three times in a row without a win to show for it (more on that in a moment), that same lineout is a tragedy worthy of an opera. Schierholtz's lineout to 2B with the potential winning run on third and 1 out was bad luck, but the Giants are also making a lot of that lick -- lewis could've scored on a wild pitch earlier in the AB had he tried it.

And the bad luck leads to bad decisions from the manager, too. Witness Bruce Bochy's decision to PH Bengie Molina for Fred Lewis in the 7th. Rather than have the red-hot Lewis -- 3 rockets on the day for 2 hits: 1 to LF, 1 to CF, 1 to RF -- face a LHP, he went with Molina. This, despite the fact a double play would end the inning, and Molina undisputed King Of The DP. Of course, that's what ended up happening, and the Giants wasted a 1st and 3rd, 0 out situation. It was also their last chance to make a winner out of the suddenly hard luck Barry Zito.

Zito must have caught whatever curse Matt Cain had the last couple of years, because he went winless again, despite going 7 innings and allowing 0 runs twice over the last 3 starts. Both games were 0-0 when he left. That's same serious Cainage right there. Of course, the bright side is that he's pitching not just like the non-embarrassing #4 or #5 starter that I hoped he might turn into, but a real live ace. I doubt that will continue, but I'll enjoy it while it does, and keep hoping when he things finally even out, he'll settle into a middle of the solid rotation guy. While the odds are against that, his peripherals from his last two 7 inning, 0 run outings are encouraging -- 5 K's/0 BB's last time, and 4 K's/1 BB this time.

Just like the last time, the Giants came back to win 1-0 in the 10th after Zito was no longer around. Last time, the winning hit came from PH Bengie Molina. This time, it came from PH Rich Aurilia. The hit scored backup C Steve Holm, who walked and advanced to 2nd on a sac bunt by Randy Winn. Holm had a nice day in his first start of the year, notching a hit, walk and sac bunt while catching a 10 inning shutout. Not bad for a guy who was 0 for 18 in AAA before being called up.

TOMORROW: The Giants fly into Chicago for their only trip to Wrigley Field -- just a 2-game series. Jonathan Sanchez will take the hill against Ryan Dempster. Can the friendly confines of Wrigley awaken the Giants slumbering bats? God, I hope so.

There's no "O" in Giants: Rockies 5, Giants 1

2009-05-02T17:42:00.000-07:00

Again, the Giants offense came up small. This reminded me of what my old high school English teacher used to call the Giants: "The Pygmies". That certainly describes the team today, when they came within a Pablo Sandoval HR from being shut out by Giant-killer Jason Marquis (4-1, 1.98 ERA lifetime).

Matt Cain was off his game, allowing 5 runs, but a good offensive team might have taken advantage of the solid relief work and won the game, 7-5 or something. Not this team. At least, not right now. The starting pitching can't be perfect (see today), so they need to step it up a bit to give them a chance. Otherwise, Brian Sabean might see a team one power hitter away from contending and get a not-so-bright idea.

TOMORROW: Zito vs. Jason Hammel. Hammel has a 5.59 ERA and a 1.97 WHIP this year (5.89 and 1.65 career), and yet I still feel like he's the favorite.

Unit-ed: Giants 3, Rockies 2

2009-05-02T00:42:00.000-07:00

I'm sensing a trend in Big Unit starts -- dominant at home, bad on the road, dominant at home, bad on the road, dominant at home. This is a little worrisome as half his starts this year will come on thee road, but then again, half will come at home. It's too early to draw major conclusions from these results (especially the two bad starts), but this appears a classic glass half-full/half-empty, good news/bad news situation. Or, more precisely, a Good Unit/Bad Unit situation.

On Friday night, he was definitely the Good Unit. The result was 7 innings, 4 hits, 9 K's and no runs, as the Giants won 3-2. The game was well in hand -- 3-0 Giants -- through 7 innings before the Giants set-up men did their best blow the lead. Struggling righty set-up man Bob Howry allowed a leadoff HR to Chris Ianetta in the 8th, and Jeremy Affedt allowed 3 hits (though 2 were of the cheapie infield variety which a better SS then Renteria would've probably turned into outs) while only getting 2 outs.

Then Bruce Bochy did something he's been doing more and more after avoiding it the last season plus -- bringing in Brian Wilson to get a 4+ out save. In this case, Wilson was up for the task, though he needed the help of Renteria, who did a good job to stop Garrett Atkins' grounder in the hole from going into LF to keep the potential tying run from scoring. That loaded the bases, but the situation wasn't quite tough enough for the adrenaline junkie Wilson. So he ran the count to the next hitter, Ryan Spillbourghs to 3-2 before striking him out on a high fastball. Wilson walked one in the 9th (can't make it too anti-climactic) before striking out Ian Stewart to end it.

Again, the Giants offense did just enough to support the good pitching. Leading the way were Pablo Sandoval, who stayed hot, getting two hits (including an earth-shaking triple), and Travis Ishikawa, who stayed both hot and power-unlucky with two hits, including an RBI double, which would've been a HR in almost any other park. Ishikawa could easily have a couple of HR"s this year, but remains stuck on zero because of the park he plays in.

In fact, Fred Lewis, who's been slumping quite a bit lately, also has zero HR's. That gives the Giants three most impressive (and potential middle of the order) young hitters -- Lewis, Sandoval, and Ishikawa -- with 1 HR total. If this trend continues, I don't think the pitching can keep them afloat, but I'll enjoy it while I can. What I won't enjoy, however, is seeing Emmanuel Burriss continue to flail away at MLB pitching. I was in favor of giving Kevin Frandsen the starting 2B job before the season, and am even more so now. At this rate, it won't be long before those two players swap places -- Burriss to Fresno, Frandsen to The City.

April Flowers: Giants 9, Dodgers 4

2009-04-29T23:21:00.000-07:00

The Giants April schedule is over, and they end it with a 10-10 record. From where I'm sitting, that's something to build on. They were 2-7, and looking lost. Since then, the starting pitching has been every bit as good as I thought it might -- even better, considering Zito's newfound decentness -- and the everything else has been just good enough to win.

Tonight was more of the same -- Lincecum dominating, the offense contributing more than usual, the bullpen less. The Giants rarely score 9 runs (or get 4 hits from Renteria), but Lincecum pitched well enough to win 4-3. The Giants team which played the Dodgers in this series was a complete turnaround from the one which was swept in LA on a 0-6 road trip. They very well could've swept this series, but for a total fundamental breakdown on Tuesday.

If you believe the starters can keep this up, which is unlikely, then the Giants are in good shape. The hitting will likely improve at least a bit as the year goes on as young players get some experience, and the overworked troika in the bullpen (Wilson, Affeldt, Howry) should get another arm when Sergio Romo comes off the DL soon. With lots of young stars coming up through the minors, the future would look mighty bright.

If the starting pitching falters, however, it could get ugly very quickly. While Giants have lots of good young starters in the minors, the ones at AAA Fresno are not particularly enticing. The hitting will likely improve, but I don't expect it to be much above average if at all. And the D and bullpen aren't good enough to save the day. Barring a major trade, the starters are the keystone the season rests on.

So far, so good.

TOMORROW: Off-day. The Giants are back at it Friday night as they host the Rockies. The Big Unit will take on Ubaldo Jimenez in a battle of historically ugly vs epically ugly.

Memoirs of an Unemployed Man, Part 2: Enter the Crazy Flower Lady

2009-04-29T13:25:00.000-07:00

Way back in my unemployed days, I wrote what was to be Part 1 of what was to be a 2 part piece on my job search. I promised Part 2 would come shortly, then warned my word isn't worth shit. I made good on one of those two statements. I had good excuses -- I moved, I got a new job, I polished a couple of scripts -- but I never did follow my with the conclusion. But now, after some gentle prodding from a the regular reader of this blog, I'm finally coming through with the long-awaited Part 2...

In my marathon search for employment, I began looking for any kind of part-time job which could get some cash flowing in. One such job was a flower shop which delivers to Hollywood production companies, restaurants, and clubs. It seemed like a pretty chill gig -- driving around Hollywood, dropping off flowers, setting them up, and watering the ones already there. It was only about 4 or 5 hours a day, which would allow me lots of time to write and hike and watch baseball -- my three food groups.

When they called me back, I was actually kind of excited -- the lady on the other end of the line talked about the A-list Oscar party they'd just worked, and how she didn't like drama. It seemed like a good fit. I made an interview for the next afternoon. It was a bit of a hike out to West LA where the shop was, and upon getting there, I found there was very limited parking. I found a spot in a residential neighborhood a block away, taking note that I'd only be safe there for half-hour.

The woman let me in the door, and handed me an application. I filled it out and was surprised when she handed me another packet to fill out. This was a 50 question personality test. For a job delivering flowers. It had questions like "Which is more important, being right or being fair?" I quickly filled it out, trying hard to not fall to far on either side of the fence. Not too passive, nor too aggressive. Not to selfish, or selfless. Not too prideful, or too insecure.

When I finished, she went through that packet first, clearly eager to find out who I was. She might have accomplished this by actually, you know, talking to me. Instead, she used a key -- a grid printed on a sheet of paper -- to decipher the answers to my "test". She told me I was very zen, but also quite forceful. That I was neither too left, nor too right. I was, basically, right down the middle. She loved this, but what really seemed to clinch the deal was my birth year -- 1971. You see, that is the Year of the Pig on the Chinese calendar, and she was both Chinese and also born in '71, so she understood exactly what this meant. She went on to explain to me how we were a very good match, and how I had "open, honest eyes", and "positive energy". When she explained that it was also nice to have a "hunky guy" delivering her flowers, I started to wonder if this was a job interview or blind date.

It was around this time, I noticed that I only had 5 minutes to move my car before I got a ticket. I mentioned this to her, and she went on a long explanation of how parking was tough in the area, and how I'd have to park 3 blocks away and walk over some train tracks and a field to get to work everyday. When I had only 2 minutes, I reminded her again about my car. Just a moment, she promised, saying she was printing me out directions on how to park. It appeared I was hired, so the last thing I was going to do was walk out on her at that point, but she just kept talking and talking -- about the job, LA, life in general, spirituality, religion, everything.

Finally, she told me to come in at 8:30 the next morning, and let me go. It was 30 minutes past when I had to move, but I still jogged all the way (in dress shoes), hoping to avoid a ticket. But I got there to find one sure enough -- for 58 bucks. I was pissed, but calmed myself a bit by thinking about how I'd just landed a job. In hindsight, it should've been a sign.

The next day, I made sure to be up and out of the house early, making sure not to be late due to LA traffic. I also had to allow extra time for the walk from my car. Because of this, I was quite early. I killed a little time in my car, reading a magazine, but still got to the store about 15 minutes early. I thought this might be a good sign to my new employer that I was responsible, prepared, and on the ball. Instead, I got yelled at. "You're early", she said "Try not to do that. Now you've got me off my schedule." Of course, what throws someone off their schedule more than an employee arriving a little early to work?

Before long, she was showing me all the ropes of the job -- and expecting me to pick it up on the fly. That's okay, I like a challenge. Before long, the company van was all loaded up -- to her extremely detailed and very high standards -- and we were ready to leave. I got in the driver's seat, her riding shotgun, and left. We were 10 feet out of the parking spot before she began to criticize.

The breaks on the van were brand new, and I had never driven it, so the initial trip down the alley behind the store was a little herky-jerky. "These breaks are tight", I said, explaining. "No, they aren't -- they're perfect", she retorted. "I just had them replaced." I tried to be diplomatic: "New breaks are always tight -- that's good, I just have to get used to them." Before I could finish, she yelled at me that I wasn't paying enough attention to the "very dangerous" blind corner we were approaching. I shut up and navigated it, and were on our way to our first stop. Before getting there, she criticized my speed ("This van is harder to stop than you think"), my lane choice ("Most accidents happen in the left lanes, I try to stay right"), and my stopping ("You should stop at least 15 or 20 feet behind the car in front of you -- that way, if we're rear-ended, we won't hit the car in front of us"). "Oh dear", I thought to myself. "This will not end well", I'd think to myself.

But this constant harping was punctuated by what appeared to be her fawning over my every comment or joke. She'd compliment my looks, or my personality, I'd play it off with a casual line, and she'd giggle ("You're such a Piggy", she'd say, delighted -- apparently meaning such a typical person born in the Year of the Pig"). When I told her something about my life, a certain unlikely turn of events, she she'd virtually squeal: "Piggy luck! Piggy luck!" I mentioned she was crazy, right?

The first stop was uneventful, but on our way to the second, I could tell that wouldn't repeat itself. She began to get very nervous and talkative about the next job -- delivering and watering orchids for a big production company in town called Relativity. She said they were her biggest clients, and we must slip in and do our work silently -- invisibly -- so as not to disturb these artistic geniuses. I could tell by now this lady had serious issues with stress, and it was starting rub off: I was already imagining who from the entertainment world I might run into at Relativity, and how embarrassing it might be. My conclusion was that the most embarrassing run-in would be with the managers I just fired, second would be the producers who bought my pitch a couple of years earlier.

By the time we arrived at Relativity and lugged all our supplies upstairs, it was pretty hot, and I was sweating. This was just one of the problems she noticed once we were inside -- I was sweating too much, not working fast enough, making too much noise, etc. In the beginning, she was walking me through everything, explaining how to do the job, but at some point she just told me to go do things -- never explain how they should be done. Then she criticized how I did them, as if she had explained it to me before -- she hadn't.

Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse, who do I see? The producers who bought my script in the lobby, waiting for a meeting. At first, I thought it was my imagination -- it couldn't really be them. But it was. Luckily, they were both so involved with their Blackberrys they didn't seem to notice me. I did my work, and avoided them. But when she came to check on my work, something awful happened -- she recognized one of them. They had worked together at Warner Bros. a few years earlier, and struck up a conversation. I was -- painfully -- just a few feet away, but I kept my head down, made myself look busy, and tried to stay under the radar. Because I only met this producer in person once (when we pitched), and had 90% of our contact over phone and e-mail, I don't think he recognized me, but it was embarrassing nonetheless.

Mercifully, he was called into his meeting shortly thereafter, and we got back to finishing our work. But it wasn't that merciful -- she complained we were taking too long to finish there because of me not working fast enough (her 10 minute conversation with the producer while she could've been showing me what to do and helping out apparently had nothing to do with this fact). As we finished, she seemed increasingly annoyed by the fact, I didn't know how much to water orchids (keep in mind, I'd never done it before, and never claimed to have). She ordered me to water one, then stared daggers at me while I did.

"Am I doing it wrong?" I asked. No answer -- just more daggers. The fact this evil face staring back at me belonged to the same lady who was fawning over just moments earlier made it even more off-putting. "I must not be doing it wrong, but I have no idea," I continued, "because you're just giving me that look of death." Still no answer, just a very angry and frustrated sigh and shake of the head. Now, I know this isn't going to work out, so why not be honest? "Look, this clearly isn't as good a fit as you thought it would be", I said. "So just tell me how to do it, so we can get out of here. I'll finish out the day, and you'll never have to see me again." This seemed to draw her out of her shell a bit. She showed me how to finish up, we silently gathered our things, and loaded them into the van.

Once inside the van, she wanted to open up and talk. "So, what do you think?" she asked. "I think I'm not as good as you need me to be, and you're not as patient as I need you to be. It's not a good fit. I think we finish out the day, and then go our separate ways." She loved this. Loved it. Complemented by honesty, praised my communication skills, even laughed at my earlier "Look of death" comment. Several times. She kept saying it over and over, laughing each time. As we continued on for the rest of the day, she was much more open and helpful, and continually talking about how good a fit we were. Seriously.

At the end of the day, she talked about the next day's schedule. I still had this job. The question was: Did I still want it? The answer: In this economy, yes. There was no talk of our problems, and it seemed she'd moved on. So I showed up for work the next day -- more than a little nervous about what direction this would go. I made sure to arrive right on time -- not a minute early -- but she claimed I was a minute or two late. I should've just left right then. We packed up the van, and I pulled out, making sure not to hit the brakes too hard. I turned the opposite way down the alley to avoid the dangerous blind corner -- she said that was a no-no because the bumpy alley the other way was worse. Here we go again.

The trip to Hollywood was much smoother this time -- I made sure to stay right, stop 20 feet behind cars, etc., etc. -- and she spent the entire time opening up to me about her life as if I was her shrink. She talked about how much she hated the superficiality of plastic surgery, then explained how she had her teeth whitened and got regular botox implants. She talked about how hard-working "her people" were, while "Mexicans in LA are all so angry". It was an eye-opening experience. Still, it was better than being yelled at. It wouldn't last long.

The first stop was at Eva Longoria's restaurant on Hollywood Boulevard, where the criticism and dagger-shooting began again. Again, she didn't give me the necessary details for how to do the job, then went crazy when I didn't know them, or accomplish them quickly. I wasn't alone -- she also laid into a bartender who wasn't doing anything wrong either. The main point of contention -- at least for me -- was the fact she was constantly telling me how to count, as if not understanding that was the key to my slowness. Every time there was an issue, she'd explain to me how to count quickly. It was really annoying.

Finally, she said, "We're late, we have to go." I explained there were still two things on her checklist we had to do. "We don't have time", she said. While she was clearly emotional, I was matter of fact: "Then which should I not do." Again, no answer -- just daggers.

The situation finally reached its boiling point at the next place, where she again tried to explain how you count. "That's it", I said. "You can stop with the training. This will be my last day." "Why?" she asked. Are you kidding me? I explained why she was so hard to work with, how she criticized, and went from one extreme to the other. Mostly, I explained that an angry glare doesn't convey any helpful information. I told her she was the hardest person to work with I'd ever met, and that I'd finish the day if she liked, but would much prefer walking away right then.

She was legitimately shocked, and asked how I would get back to my car. I said it didn't matter -- that I would be so happy to not have to work for her anymore, I'd be willing to walk home and call a cab. She appeared hurt, but offered to cut me a check right then for my services and would allow me to go. I took it, threw off the company polo shirt I was wearing, and walked home -- about 12 blocks. Later that night, I had my wife drive me over to West La to pick up my car. Even in this economy, you have to draw the line somewhere.

As I've said since, it all ended up working out for the best -- I have a better job, in a better location, working for a better boss, and earning more money. You know what I call that? Piggy luck!

Not Ready For Prime Time: Dodgers 5, Giants 3

2009-04-28T23:47:00.000-07:00

The Giants had enough talent to win tonight. They went up against a pitcher who's owned them and hit his well enough to win. And their own starter, Jonathan Sanchez pitched well enough to win. But none of those things happened, of course. And the impediment to their success was themselves.

On offense, baserunning mistakes and that old favorite (you guessed it) poor situational hitting cost them several runs. On D, fielding errors cost them a couple of runs and forced Sanchez to throw extra pitches which lead to him leaving the game after just 5 innings. Oh, and they walked nine hitters. Despite those gaffes, they still almost won the game. But they're not quite good enough to make this many mistakes and still beat a good team.

The Dodgers had something to do with this result as well. Rafael Furcal used his great arm to gun down Randy Winn in the 1st inning on a play when it looked like he'd score easily. Then the threat of Furcal's arm caused 3rd base coach Tim Flannery to hold up Travis Ishikawa on a play he probably could've scored on. Finally, Ishikawa compounded the error by getting doubled off 3rd on a lineout by Emmanuel Burris.

Juan Uribe had a particularly shitty game, making a big error, and failing to knock in a run, despite batting with 8 men on in 3 AB's with a total of 3 outs (1st and 2nd with 0 outs, bases loaded with 2 outs, bases loaded with 1 out). Bobby Howry lost it in the 9th, but by then, the Giants sloppy play had already all but sealed their fate.

TOMORROW: Tim Lincecum tries to win the rubber game of the Dodger series, thus striking a devastating blow to the heart of pure evil.

Rebound: Giants 5, Dodgers 4

2009-04-28T01:07:00.000-07:00

The Giants bounced back from a crushing loss to beat the hated Dodgers Monday night. That would be a nice win any day. But when you consider the Giants got a great start out of Barry Zito, only to blow a 3-0 7th inning lead in the blink of an eye, and trailed before coming back to win, it makes it all the sweeter. Add to that, Brian Wilson's dominance (1-2-3 9th, all K's) after his nightmare 9th inning Sunday, and Twitter controversy", and you've really got some drama and intrigue.

The Giants could be on a 7 game win streak if not for one bad inning at the worst possible time, but it's hard to be too disappointed with a win against LA and a hard-fought .500 record. Not to mention surviving a tired bullpen only arms -- the little-used Merkin Valdez was the other. I don't even mind that Valdez struggled and vultured the win from Zito. In fact, that kind of makes me happy.

TOMORROW: Jonathan Sanchez takes on Giant-killer Chad Billingsley.

Heartbreak: D-Back 5, Giants 4

2009-04-27T00:30:00.000-07:00

This was the worst loss of the year, as the Giants turned a 4-1 9th inning lead into a 5-4 12 inning loss. How disappointing was it? Let me count the ways:

1) A win would've given the Giants a rare road sweep -- one inside the division, no less -- after starting out 0-3 on the road.

2) It would've raised their record above .500 to 9-8. Instead, they drop back below to 8-9.

3) Hard-luck Matt Cain would've gone to 3-0, but again bad hitting and relief costs him a win. He still stands at 2-0.

4) Their winning streak would've run to 6, but is instead stopped at 5.

5) All momentum seems gone as they jet back home to face the 1st place Dodgers. And because of Brian Wilson's blown save, and the game being extended into the 12th inning, the bullpen has been over-used and abused heading in.

That, and it happened on a Sunday, while I was enjoying the game live. If that's not enough, Justin Upton hit his game-tying HR just as I realized a computer crash had cost me three hours of work. L-A-M-E.

TOMORROW: Giants/Dodgers at China Basin. If that pumps you up, I have the perfect cure. Barry Zito is pitching.

.500 And Loving It: Giants 5, D-Backs 3

2009-04-25T23:46:00.000-07:00

The streak of great performances by the Giants starters is over, but the Giants ability to do just enough to win continued. Of course, it was the D-Backs, so I'm not sure just what that really means yet, but a win is a win. And when you take 6 of 7, you don't ask questions. You just keep smiling. And when a win gets you back to .500, that goes double.

The Unit was malfunctioning tonight, unable to throw strikes consistently, walking 7, and getting yanked in the 4th inning. It being his first start back in Arizona, I'm willing to cut him a little slack, but his ERA is 6.16 after 4 starts, and one of those a 1-hitter for 7 innings. Johnson was able to hold the damage to a minimum -- 2 runs -- and keep the Giants in the game. This allowed the Giants to storm back with 4 runs in the 5th to take the lead. The big blows were a 2-out 2-run double by Renteria after a great AB, and a HR by the very next batter, Randy Winn.

Though they tacked on another run later, that was all the Giants would need. Justin Miller allowed a run in his 1.2 innings, but Jonathan Sanchez, Bob Howry, Jeremy Affeldt, and Brian Wilson are held Arizona scoreless. The pen has been mighty for some time now -- especially the Affeldt, Howry, Wilson troika -- but it's been overshadowed by an even more impressive rotation.

TOMORROW: The Giants go for the rare road sweep behind Matt Cain, who will attempt to raise his record to 3-0. John Garland will start for the D-Backs.

In The Zone: Giants 5, D-Backs 1

2009-04-24T23:38:00.000-07:00

Again, this was how Brian Sabean drew it up before the season -- great starting pitching, decent enough hitting, and solid defense. The defense and the hitting haven't been very dependable this year, but the pitching is starting to look like something the team can count on.

Counting on opposite-field HR's by Edgar Renteria, and getting 12 K's from your starter is not something they can do on most nights, but when Lincecum pitches it's certainly not surprising. Unfortunately, it's also not suprising to see the Giants leave runners at 3rd with less than 2 out again and again. Tonight, Aaron Rowand did it twice himself, and he wasn't alone. But when Lincecum is on, it doesn't matter much, as long as you score him a couple.

Rowand helped him off to a good start with a fabulous play to save a run in the 1st inning, cutting off a Stephen Drew double into the gap with a quick slide, then popping up and, in one motion, hitting the cutoff man with a strong throw. Lincecum then struck out Mark Reynolds to keep him there, and got out of the inning unscathed, going 8 innings and allowing only a single run and walk to go with the dozen K's (he struck out 13 D-Backs in SF less than a week ago).

The Giants managed to score 5 runs despite their lack of good situational hitting, mainly because of Bengie Molina, who hit one HR with the bases empty, and one ringing double with the bases full, driving in 3 runs total. He may not be the ideal cleanup hitter, but he's our cleanup hitter, dammit. Other highlights included Pablo Sandoval's 2 hits and a walk (yes, you read that right), and Fred Lewis chipping in 2 more hits to raise his average to .360.

For six straight games, the Giants have had dominant starting pitching -- not just in terms of results, but also peripherals -- and have won 5 of those 6 games. Lincecum has been the poster boy of the rotation, and for good reason, but it's nice to see all 5 guys contributing so well at once. It's gotten so good that the team can skip Jonathan Sanchez after a great start and not skip a beat., there might have been some controversy over choosing him and not Zito, but not when The Albatross goes out and mows down a division rival in a 1-0 extra inning win. It's too early to take these types of numbers too seriously, but there's no reason we shouldn't enjoy it.

Real Sunshine, Real Grass, Real Baseball: Giants 1, Padres 0

2009-04-22T13:18:00.000-07:00

It was great to see a giants game live today, great to see a businessman's special -- my favorite games -- and great to see Barry Zito pitch like something more than a shadow of his former self. He was far better than that -- throwing 7 shutout innings, striking out 5 and walking none. it was the second straight game in which a Giants starter with control issues had 5 K's with no walks, and the 5th straight game a Giants starter pitched very well.

Luckily for the Giants, they avoided dropping a second of those five by being shutout when they scored the game's lone run with 2 outs in the bottom on the 10th. As Jon Miller said on the postgame show, right now the best way to describe the Giants is "If they score, they win".

It seems I was wrong on my prediction of Schierholtz getting his first start, but I was close: Andres Torres got his first start instead, and scored the winning (and only) run. I would've gone with Nate, who is now the only Giants position player yet to start a game, but Bochy's hunch paid off.

Hell, he even put Pablo Sandoval in catching gear for the first time today, and gave Bengie Molina the day off (the day after Steve Holm was brought up to provide a real backup catcher -- I'm sure if that timing makes sense or not), and had both players play major roles in their victory. Sandoval caught a 10 inning shutout and made a couple of nice plays (and one bad throw as well). Molina came off the bench to win the game with a double, scoring Torres, who had singled and stolen second.

Torres showed today how much better he is than Eugenio Velez -- he made a great defensive play, helped with the bat, and looked fantastic on the bases. Meanwhile, Velez has shown to be a terrible defender and baserunner (despite his great speed). In the 10th alone, the difference between them was clear. After Torres got himself in scoring position, Velez had a chance to play the hero, and struck out. Worse, than that, he realize it. After swinging and missing at strike three, he waited around at home plate as if he thought he got four strikes. The ump had to tell him to go away, holding out three fingers as if to say, "Can't you count to three, moron?" Because Velez still has options, I wouldn't be surprised to see him return to AAA.

TOMORROW: Off-day.

Mini Link Dump

2009-04-22T12:01:00.000-07:00

Screen Junkies has a compilation of great movie deaths. This is why I like Screen Junkies.

The Trend Is Your Friend: Giants 8, Padres 3

2009-04-21T22:41:00.000-07:00

The trend of Giants starting pitchers delivering great starts continued, as did the trend of me having to follow the game online and watch it later on TiVo. This is because I am whipped and need to spend time with my wife in the evenings after we get home from work. So, usually I'm watching shows on TiVo while I record the game. But not tomorrow -- I'm off work, and will be watching the businessman's special in my boxers. The bad news: Zito's pitching.

But there will be plenty of time to be glum about having to sit through a Zito start tomorrow. Tonight I'm just happy to watch Cain go to 2-0 by allowing 2 runs in 6 innings (with 5 K's and no walks!), and, more surprisingly, getting terrific run support -- mainly from Edgar Renteria, who made his first Giants HR a grand slam. Travis Ishikawa also had a nice night -- at the plate and in the field.

I'm also thankful to have power. Last night, just as the wife and I were settling in to watch shows, we lost our electricity. On the hottest day of the year (no coincidence I'm sure). No AC. No TV. No internet. After a few hours, no computers (the batteries ran out). Finally I tried to go to sleep, even though I can only sleep with the TV on, and tossed and turned for a couple hours. Just as I finally fell asleep, the power came back on. It was one of the worst night's sleeps I've ever had.

Also, I was unable to post late last night, as I'm accustomed to. I had planned to write an off-day post, but at least it wasn't a game day, or I would've broken my streak (it may be only two weeks, but I'm such a quitter, I've already impressed myself. Sad, isn't it?) Also, I had planned a special bonus post -- finally telling the story of the Crazy Flower Lady. But with no computer (the only one with batteries was playing 'Twilight' -- don't ask), I was unable to finish it. And because it turns I have one last round of notes on a script I've been polishing, I probably won't get to it for another couple of days.

RANDOM PREDICTION: I think little-used Nate Schierholtz will start in RF in the series finale. He's only had 5 AB's so far this year, but had a double as a pinch-hitter, and a day game after a night game is the perfect time to rest a vet like Winn or Rowand. Also, Nate's a high fastball hitter, and that's starting pitcher Chris Young's specialty pitch. But really, I think Bochy will think, "Hey, Nate's hitting .400, and he's also a lefty. And that Chris Young -- he's a righty", and from there it won't take him long.

RANDOM GRIPE: As much as I love Kruk and Kuip -- and I love them dearly -- they have one annoying trait: They tend to be apologists for some of the players, especially veterans. Being ex-ballplayers, it's no surprise, but they're so great in every other way, it kind of stings to hear them parsing their words, and bending over backward to avoid criticism. Tonight, Aaron Rowand got a terrible jump on flyball -- something which is less and less rare -- they were each guilty of making excuses for him. Kuip said he thought the ball would go futher, and Kruk wondered aloud if the ball might have knuckled. I'm not grizzly vet, but it looked like an end-of-the-bat bloop all the way to me. Later, when Rowand did get a good jump on a ball to make a nice play, they went out of their way to praise him.

TOMORROW: See above.

Near Miss-tory: Giants 2, D-Backs 0

2009-04-19T20:51:00.000-07:00

All my life as a baseball fan I dreamed of seeing a no-hitter. I've had a lot of close calls -- 8 2/3 innings from Scott Garrelts at a game I was at in 1990, 8 from Trevor Wilson, and several close calls by Matt Cain -- but never seen one. In that time, I've seen the Giants no-hit 5 times (three straight by guys named Kevin -- Gross, Brown, and Millwood). When the Giants signed Randy Johnson, I briefly considered the possibility he could be the one to break the streak, before writing it off due to his age and injury limitations. Today, he made me reconsider that dismissal.

The Unit went 6 no-hit innings before allowing a hit, and completed 7 innings in just 73 pitches. He was dominating and efficient, a rare at all, but especially so on the Giants notoriously wild staff. If he'd still had the no-no, he could've gone the route, and I still wonder why Bruce Bochy pulled him with such a low pitch count. No matter, though, as the struggling Bob Howry threw a perfect 8th inning, and Brian Wilson tossed a dominating 1-2-3 9th with 2 K's.

The pitching is in full domination mode right now, the last three starts all fantastic, but you must factor in the opponent. The D-Backs have had as much trouble scoring runs as the Giants, which showed itself this weekend: Each game resulted in a shutout, all decided by identical 2-0 scores. Six runs total.

Though they scored twice what the D-Backs did, the Giants were almost more inept, consistently leaving men at 3rd with less than 2 out. This has been an especially trait, seeing how the team doesn't hit for power and thus must rely on the little things. Still, a win is a win. And the Giants can use all of those they can get right now. And a 1-hit shoutout to preserve a series win ~~might be~~ is the highlight of the season so far.

TOMORROW: Off-day. The Giants will look to avenge their sweep at the hands of the Padres on Tuesday when they visit San Francisco. Matt Cain will take the hill, and with his luck, he'll probably be facing Jake Peavy. Well, what do you know, it is Peavy.

Impotent: D-Backs 2, Giants 0

2009-04-18T23:39:00.000-07:00

It's good to see the pitching is back. Not that there was any question in my mind Lincecum would bounce back, but it was still nice to see. Of course, it was not nice to see that performance wasted by the Giants offense, which continues to be anemic on a good night and non-existent on a bad one. Tonight was a bad one.

Both teams are playing so poorly offensively, it's to know how much to credit the pitching. When Dan Haren continues to dominate while getting no support (1 run in 3 starts), it's clear he's that good. The same can obviously said for Lincecum, especially on a day when he tied his career-high with 13 K's.

Add to Lincecum's dominance the performances of Cain and Sanchez, and there's plenty of reason for excitement about the Giants young pitching. Unfortunately, until ~~they trade for Albert Pujols~~ the offense comes around, they will suffer many wasted efforts and earn lots of undeserved L's and ND's. Today, they left two men at third with less than two outs, one in the 1st inning. Conversely, Arizona did really come close to scoring until the 9th, when they plated two to win it.

Also unfortunately, the Giants haven't gotten much from the older guys in the rotation -- Zito and Johnson. They'll never get anything from Zito, but I'm still holding out a lot of hope for Johnson. Speaking of which...

TOMORROW: The Big Unit takes on D-Back youngster Max Sherzer as the Giants try to avoid a third straight series loss.

Dealin': Giants 2, D-Backs 0

2009-04-18T00:06:00.000-07:00

Now that's more like it.

Pitching, defense, and just enough O -- that's what this team looked like in the catalog when I ordered. Jonathan Sanchez was dominant against a team who's hit him well in the past (and shut down Connor Jackson, who'd owned him). Fred Lewis kept hitting, and stopped misplaying flyballs (at least for one night). The bullpen finished off the effort, Wednesday night's goat Bob Howry getting a key strikeout when it was needed to pick a Bengie Molina error, and Brian Wilson notching his first save of the year. Just like they drew it up.

That doesn't all mean a lot -- certainly not as much as the six piss poor outings which preceded it -- but it was nice all the same. It was also nice to see longtime minor leaguer and 31-year old rookie Andres Torres hit just his second career HR and then sprint around the bases as if he thought he was on the 24 second clock. It was also good to see my first KNBR post-game wrap (featuring Mike Krukow, Duane Kuiper, Jon Miller, Dave Fleming) of the year. Unfortunately, the post game show this year looks worse than ever -- some forgettable guy and a stumbling, mumbling JT Snow (Sorry, JT).

The Diamondbacks were struggling almost as bad as the Giants coming in, so hopefully they can get well against Arizona. Speaking of which...

TOMORROW: Ace Tim Lincecum tries to get well -- from a slow start, and from an ailment which has caused him to lose some weight and velocity -- against Doug Davis.

Mailing It In: Dodgers 7, Giants 2

2009-04-16T23:13:00.000-07:00

This is all I need to say about tonight's game: I didn't think to TiVo it even though I knew I'd miss some while I came home from work, forgot about it until I was halfway home and the Dodgers were coming up in the 1st. Then I heard Vin Scully mention it was Zito on the mound, and I immediately went to change the station, but before I could, Rafael Furcal took him deep. I never followed another pitch, and again forgot all about the game while I caught up on some quality TiVo. By the time I remembered to check the score, the game was over. That says it all about the '09 season so far -- very forgettable.

Walk of Shame: Dodgers 5, Giants 4

2009-04-15T23:22:00.000-07:00

I could fire off a hell of a rant about the Giants right now. They've certainly earned it. Now that the relief corps joined the rest of the team by crapping the bed tonight, I could include just about every player on the team. I could do that. But it's late, and I just don't have it in me. So instead, I'll make this short and to the point...

THE GOOD NEWS: The Giants lost a heartbreaker to the Dodgers tonight, making an improbable comeback on a dramatic HR just to blow the lead late and lose on a walk.

THE BAD NEWS: Zito pitches tomorrow.

TOMORROW: The Dodgers light up Barry Zito to complete a sweep of the Giants.

Off Day Odds & Ends

2009-04-14T16:30:00.000-07:00

A couple of sure-to-depress stats from the Giants slow start:

-- They hit 3 HR's on Opening Day, none since.

-- They have not drawn a walk for three consecutive games (73 AB's), their longest stretch since 1976.

If those trends -- little patience or power -- persist, it will be a long year, even if Lincecum, Johnson, and Sanchez turn things around nicely.

While the San Francisco Giants have been stinking it up of late, the San Jose Giants are on fire -- both on the field, and at the ticket window. In fact, many observers are suggesting they might be one of the best minor league team in recent memory, carrying a truckload full of the best Giants prospects, and a few of the best prospects in baseball. Scott Ostler had a nice column in the Chron yesterday, chronicling the squad, which contains the likes of Angel Villalona, Buster Posey, Madison Bumgarner, Tim Alderson, Nick Noonan, Conor Gillaspie and Brandon Crawford.

The Grind

2009-04-14T00:01:00.000-07:00

I have the next two days off, which is a much-needed break. I've worked six straight weekdays in a row, and while that might not sound that bad to you working stiffs out there, for me it's a marathon and a half. I haven't really worked in three years, and haven't worked full-time in over a decade. Think about that for a minute. Crazy, isn't it?

The good news is I got a great job. It's in a decent neighborhood (Brentwood), which isn't too far away, and has flexible hours which don't force me to get up too early, or stay too late. Not only that, but I have a cool boss, a fairly interesting job, and a good salary. But it's still work -- real work -- and that's just not something I'm used to. I don't know how all you lifers do it.

Very Bad Things: Dodgers 11, Giants 1

2009-04-13T21:16:00.000-07:00

The fanboy optimism is officially dead.

I'm not giving up on the Giants this year or anything, but those Spring dreams of a dominant rotation, a solid bullpen, and a surprisingly decent offense leading the Giants to a Cinderella season are long gone. Right now, I'd take a .500 season and 3rd place in a heartbeat.

We all knew this year would be a growing experience, but the learning curve may be a bit steeper than some imagined. After following up the not-so-lowly Padres (6-2 now, by the way) with a blowout loss to the Dodgers, it's clear this team has some serious strides yet to make before they start trying on any glass slippers.

I didn't see one minute of the game -- I was at work, and though it's on my TiVo I have no intention of watching. Usually during this part of the season, I'll watch parts of games I know the Giants have lost just to experience the sensation of seeing my team play real, meaningful baseball. But the brand of baseball the team's been playing lately -- get down early, never come back -- gets old real easy.

The team has been awful since hitting the road. The starting pitching has been abysmal, the offense anemic, and the defense atrocious. That's four A's, which is coincidental, because the Giants are playing like a team of AAAA players. Luckily for them, the Diamondbacks have been just as bad, so the 2-5 Giants have some company in the NL West cellar.

TOMORROW: No game. What, no game?! On a Tuesday?! Who the hell made this schedule? Why wasn't the off day today? Can someone explain this to me? Oh well, the way the Giants are playing, a day off can't hurt.

THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW: During this poor start to the season, few players remain blameless -- Brian Wilson and a couple of relievers, due to their lack of playing time, and Matt Cain due to his great start (the only quality start from a Giant in '09). Cain takes on Dodger youngster Clayton Kershaw.

One False Move: Padres 6, Giants 1

2009-04-12T14:23:00.000-07:00

The Padres were ugly today, but the Giants were uglier. The issue I wrote about yesterday -- the Giants starters inability to go deep into the game, and keep the team in it -- reared its ugly head yet again. More vexing is the fact Tim Lincecum struggled for the second time, against a team he's dominated in the past. Along the way, a couple of other problems have come to light. Like rivers running into the ocean, these two other factors are helping contribute to the larger issue:

1) One bad inning. The starters haven't really pitched all that poorly overall, but three of the six starts went from soild/spectacular to crummy/crappy in one inning -- a couple on one swing of the bat.

Randy Johnson's dominant start was ruined by his first ever HR allowed to a pitcher, and he ended up only going 5 and allowing 4 runs. Johnathan Sanchez was dealing last night -- save for some control issues, and Henry Blanco -- but lost on two walks, an infield hit, and a two-out double, which turned a 2-1 game into a 5-1 game over. Today, Lincecum was his usual self until two outs in the 3rd when a defensive mistake cost him three runs and many, many pitches, blowing open a taut, 0-0 affair. In each of the latter cases, the pitchers actually retired Brian Giles with a runner on 3rd and one out with the run scoring, and only needed to get Giant-killer Adrian Gonzalez to escape the inning without any damage. Close, but no cigar.

2) Bad defense. In each of those aforementioned jams, the pitcher could've also escaped if just for some solid defensive play, but both were let down by young player's gaffes. Last night, sandwiched between Sanchez's costly walks, he got what should've been a huge out when Jody Gerut hit a roller to 3B, but Pablo Sandoval couldn't field it cleanly, then turned the wrong way when attempting to throw to 2B. The play was ruled an infield hit, but a good 3B could've made the play. Sandoval is not a good 3B, time will tell if he's good enough to not stay there, but the early results have been a little shaky.

Today, Fred Lewis was the culprit. Lincecum got what he needed from his face-off with Gonzalez -- a meekly-hit fly ball -- but Lewis butchered it badly. First, he got no jump at all on the ball, standing flat-footed for a moment. It seemed obvious to me the ball was a bloop, not a blast, but these things do happen -- especially on a sunny day. But the next mistake is much harder to understand: He charged in on the ball, then, for no apparent reason, stopped for a beat as if he thought the ball would go over his head*. By the time he recovered to keep coming in on the ball, it was too late. He dove and came up with the ball, but it was clearly on a short-hop. The run scored, the inning continued, and the next batter homered, and suddenly it was 3-0 Pads and the game was over for all intents and purposes.

If the Giants don't mend these cracks in the facade, they seemingly have no chance to be competitive. Winning with pitching and defense only works when the defense shows up. And it also helps if the pitchers don't invite trouble with walks, and implode when things go sour. Because the offense certainly can't be depended upon to bail them out of a hole. They looked bad on Sunday, particularly Lewis, who continued his bad day by striking out with a runner on third and one out in the 6th, swinging for the fences when he should've been trying to make contact and halve San Diego's 2 run lead.

* Lewis let this happen to him in that same inning as well -- drifting back on a ball which then sailed over his head.

TOMORROW: The Giants travel up the 5 to LA, where they'll take on the Dodgers in their home opener. Randy Johnson will take on some Dodger jerk (Chad Billingsley, to be specific).

A Giant Problem: Padres 6, Giants 3

2009-04-11T19:56:00.000-07:00

It's much too early in the season to make any kind of long-term judgments about the Giants, but an alarming trend has begun to show itself. We all knew thee starting rotation could be a huge strength for the team, but the dirty little secret no one wanted to mention were all the questions on the staff -- three youthful, relatively inexperienced starters, two old folks (one in age, the other in stuff) with decline questions.

So far, we've a little bit of everything -- Lincecum and Sanchez were amped and wild, and wasted great strikeout stuff by falling behind hitters. Zito still looks done, and while Randy Johnson looked good, he could break down at any moment. Cain was solid, but he hasn't proven to be over the occasional youthful wildness, either. Because they're not eating very many innings -- only Cain got past the 5th -- the bullpen is being taxed. This is a recipe for disaster, especially with so much youth in the 'pen -- Valdez, Hinshaw, Martinez*.

Sanchez's performance on Saturday night was maddeningly familiar. He was very successful when he got the ball over the plate against the Padres -- at least when he wasn't pitching to Henry Blanco -- but he spit the bit in the 5th, done in primarily by a walk to Jake Peavy. He almost recovered to get out of it, retiring Brian Giles on a shallow fly with the bases loaded, but got burned on a game-deciding, two-out, three-run double by Adrian Gonzalez. Sanchez tempted fate and lost, and when you're up against Peavy that's all it takes to lose.

The Giants offense didn't pick him up, and can't be counted on to bail out many starters from big deficits. They look a little feisty, like they could be decent, but they're not carrying anybody. That means the starters need to pull it together quick or the Giants could find themselves at the bottom of the NL West. Which is kind of like being the flabbiest, most bruised up stripper at the club. Bottom of the barrel time.

* According to the excellent Andrew Baggarly, Joey Martinez is still in the ICU for precautionary reasons, but could be back pitching as early as the end of May.

TOMORROW: The Giants send their top dog out to avoid the embarrassing sweep at the hands of the downtrodden Pads as Lincecum takes on the crafty Chris Young.

Movie Review: 'I Love You, Man'

2009-04-11T18:13:00.000-07:00

This is the part where I act like an authority on entertainment, and criticize the work of professionals who are, without exception, more successful than I in the industry in which we both work. Some people would say this is proof I have "balls", or "chutzpah" in Jewspeak. Others would say it's proof I'm a "douchebag". To catch up on any old reviews, you can find the link on the right hand side of the page, or just click here.

Yeah, that's right -- a movie review. Bet you forgot I even did these anymore. After three months without one, I think I did, too. But with Spring spring, and summer blockbusters just around the corner, you can expect to see some more, so let's get back in the flow, yo:

The "bromantic comedy" has become a staple of the male 18-34 demo comedy, especially among the Judd Apatow mafia -- 'Superbad' and 'Pineapple Express' are tow recent examples. Though the idea that two straight guys can have a "romance" of sorts, has been a subplot in many movies lately, John Hamburg's 'I Love You, Man' takes it to the next logical step -- giving it all the usual conceits and structure of a romantic comedy.

Hamburg (of 'Meet the Parents' fame) directs, and also co-wrote the script with Larry Levin. Paul Rudd, usually a bit player as the best friend, or one of the gang, plays the lead. With Jason Segel playing his platonic love interest. Rudd's Peter and Segel's Sydney have all the familiar plot points in their bromance -- meet cute, awkward first date, escalating feelings, breakup, makeup, etc. The result, while not ground-breaking by any means, is effective.

Rudd is solid as the slightly off Peter, a guy who doesn't have any guy friends, and acts a little nervous and creepy when he does get around one. Rudd normally plays the glib, easy going type, so it's a bit odd to see him "play down" to Peter, especially since it's his story, and the movie rests on his shoulders. It's during this time the movie suffers through its only real uncertainty. Frankly, it's a little hard to buy Peter's charm with the ladies coupled with his awkwardness with men. The bubbling, and especially the babbling lingo he utters, gets a bit much at times, but Rudd still manages to pull it off with his charming, easy-to-root-for persona.

Peter's lack of a strong personality early on is off-set by those around him. His fiancee, Zooey (Rashidi Jones), and her friends Denise and Hailey (a decent Jaime Pressley and a great Sarah Burns, respectively) are plain-speaking and colorful, as is Denise's husband Barry (a nasty John Favreau). The quality ensemble casting continues throughout Peter's family -- loving mom (Jane Curtain), distant dad (JK Simmons), and gay brother (Andy Samburg). These supporting characters, along with a few others (most notably, Thomas Lennon), help carry the story until Segel shows up at the first act break.

Once Segel's Sydney does arrive, he shakes up Peter's world, giving him -- and the movie -- the electricity he/it needs. He's Peter's polar opposite (fulfilling another rom-com staple) -- confident, relaxed, and seemingly apathetic about how others see him. Sydney helps draw Peter from his shell -- drinking, jamming, going to a concert, even pushing him to work harder at his real estate job. Segel is great as Sydney, keeping the laughs coming, and adding a much-needed wild card into the mix. His riffs on society's habits and rules are the highlights of the movie.

'I Love You, Man' is solid, if not revelatory comedy by talented professionals. It's the kind of movie you shouldn't rush out to see, but it is the kind you should enjoy if you do.

Using the age-old Hollywood scale of judgment -- HIGHLY RECOMMEND/RECOMMEND/CONSIDER/PASS (circle one) -- I rate 'I Love You, Man':

RECOMMEND

...And The Beat Goes On: Padres 7, Giants 3

2009-04-10T23:12:00.000-07:00

Not much to talk about tonight. Zito pitched, and the Giants lost. That's how it works. Barry did his thing -- allowing runs (4) and baserunners (9) while not eating many innings (4). He threw a bit harder than he has recently, and his breaking ball had some bite. But when you're a veteran and have your best stuff and are that unsuccessful, you have major issues.

On the postgame show, Mike Krukow made excuses for Zito, saying it was just nerves in the 1st inning, when he allowed 3 runs, that he settled down after that, and that his next start would be better. I'm sick of excuses for Zito -- now, he had "opening night jitters", next he's given extra rope because he's always been a slow starter. Then, before you know it, it'll be mid-season, and those same apologists are predicting a big 2nd half and getting all worked up for the random competant start. But down deep we all know what we have -- an albatross. The only question is whether is how soon the Giants come to terms with this and pull him form the rotation.

Zito wasn't the only thing wrong with the Giants on Friday night. The defense let him down a bit, and the offense was generally lethargic, save for a couple of stunted rallies with the Giants down 4-2. One ended on an Ishikawa GIDP with the bases loaded and none out and a pathetic K by Rowand, the other was dashed by a dazzling tying HR-saving catch by Scott Hairston on a drive by Molina to CF, followed by another flyout to the wall by Ishikawa. Hairston followed that with a 3-run HR to ice the game, and Pad's won 7-3.

Bright spots: Emanuel Burriss (his first two hits of the season, along with two walks), Fred Lewis (another hit and walk, hitting .500) and new call-up for the DL-ed Joe Martinez, Justin Miller (two scoreless innings).

TOMMOROW: Jonathan Sanchez has the unenviable task of taking on Jake Peavy. Hey, it could be worse, Jonathan -- you could have Barry Zito's stuff.

See No Evil: Giants 7, Brewers 1

2009-04-09T23:55:00.000-07:00

Very scary moment in the game tonight as Giants rookie pitcher -- and team-leader in wins -- Joe Martinez was struck in the head by a line drive off the bat of Mike Cameron. Martinez was bloodied and dazed, but walked off under his own power, and seemed okay pending tests. It doesn't seem serious, which on a day where one baseball player has already tragically died after pitching the best game of his life, is welcome news. Because that is all terribly depressing, I'm going to ignore it for the rest of this post:

I've determined the secret to winning Giants baseball -- I need to not watch it live. So far this season I've had to TiVo two games because of work, and the Giants are 2-0. I've watched one game live, and they are 0-1. Some people will tell you three games isn't a large enough enough sample size to determine trends about baseball. Those people probably also hate America. Until I have any more evidence, I'm just going to go with the old scientific theorem, "The trend is your friend".

Matt Cain was great, and more amazingly, he got run support, as the Giants won it, 7-1. Cain allowed only 1 run and 6 baserunners in 7 innings, while striking out 5. He accomplished this against a strong Brewer lineup, settling in nicely after a bit of a lucky start, when two long flyballs to ~~right~~ Death Valley were knocked down by the wind and died in Randy Winn's glove at the wall.

Speaking of Winn: He looked great in the field and at the plate -- a good sign for the notoriously slow starter -- and more and more, I'm coming to believe those who believe he's one of the more underrated players in baseball. He plays very well in the toughest RF in the league, hits .300 (3 of the last 4 years), draws walks, and steals bases at a very high rate (42/47 last 2+ years). If he has another good year, the Giants may be able to trade him for something shiny at the trade deadline if they fall out of the race.

Not that I'm thinking they'll be out of the race. In fact, if the prospects I had the most confidence in coming into the season -- Sandoval, Lewis, Ishikawa -- keep hitting (though I doubt Lewis will hit .500+), I might struggle to supress my fanboy optimism. I know the Giants have a potentially great rotation, but there's no guarantee it'll workl out that way. If the offense was good enough that they didn't need a dominant staff, I could be talked into their chances to win the division. Yeah, that's right -- I said it.

TOMORROW: The Giants take it on the road down to San Diego, where they take on the lowly Padres. Lucky for San Diego, the Giants are throwing Barry Zito -- the perfect cure for my fanboy optimism. He'll take on the Padres' Shawn Hill.

Nothing To See Here: Brewers 4, Giants 2

2009-04-08T23:32:00.000-07:00

In their first game of the season, the Giants heralded starting pitching looked bad, but they won. In their second, it looked great, but they lost. It's not quite that simple of course -- Lincecum actually had good stuff on Opening Day, only lacking command, and Randy Johnson may have looked great, but he still gave up four earned runs in only five innings in a 4-1 Giants loss.

But don't pay too much attention to the Big Unit's 7.20 ERA, that stat betrays all the others -- only four hits and one walk to go with seven K's. His fastball was in the low 90's and crisp, the slider was breaking, and his change -- which he threw more tonight than he did all Spring, according to Mike Krukow -- was devastating. Johnson was done in by just two pitches -- they resulted in two HR's which knocked in all four Brewers runs. The first was a mistake: a hanging slider to Mike Cameron (previously 2 for 29 vs. the Unit) in the 2nd inning for a solo shot. The second was a fluke, a devastating one.

Johnson was cruising with two outs and nobody on in the 5th, when he gave up a double to Bill Hall (previously 0-14 vs. Johnson for his career). He followed by intentionally walking punch-and-judy hitter Jason Kendall to get to pitcher Yovanni Gallardo, which seemed like a decent move until you realize Kendall has had 3 HR's in 789 AB's (1 every 263 AB's) over the last two seasons while Gallardo has had 2 HR's in 49 AB's (1 every 24.5 AB's) over the same period. Make that 3 HR's in 50 AB's. Johnson made the pitch he wanted to -- an chest-high fastball -- but Gallardo went deep, becoming the first ever pitcher to take the Unit out of the park (I did say "fluke").

Suddenly a 1-1 game with 2 out in the 5th and the Unit dominating in his first start as a Giant, turned into 4-1 Brew Crew and the Giants wasting every good opportunity to score. Molina hit into a double play (shocker!) with men at 1st and 3rd with 1 out, and they wasted a 1st and 2nd, no out situation as well. Finally, they scored to pull within two runs and loaded the bases for Molina with two out, but he failed to come through. In other words, it was typical baseball -- your pitcher looks great, you bunch baserunners for the meat of your order, and you still get beat. Back at 'am tomorrow. Speaking of which...

TOMORROW: Matt Cain takes on Manny Parra in a rare 4:05 start at Mays Field. Twilight games often make for low-scoring affairs, and so do Matt Cain starts. But now that I've written that, look for a 12-11 game.

Day 2, Game 1: Giants 10, Brewers 6

2009-04-07T22:18:00.000-07:00

This season, the Giants will survive only if their pitching holds up, because their offense won't give them much. In their first game of the 2009 season, not so much. It was Opposite Day at Mays Field, as Tim Lincecum struggled mightily -- as did a couple of the relievers who followed him (though Joe Martinez vltured a win in his big league debut despite struggling) -- the the prolific Giants offense out-scored the Brewers 10-6. While Lincecum struggled with his command all day (which was just three innings -- the shortest start of his career), just about every hitter had a big day.

The Giants compiled 12 hits, hit three HR's (something it took them 64 innings to accomplish last season), and even did a lot of the little things right (sac fly, successful hit-and-run, even a perfectly-executed butcher boy base hit by Lincecum). They also did some things very sloppily -- particularly Pablo Sandoval's D at 3B, but also including a very bad throwing error by Fred Lewis in LF.

The power came from Randy Winn, Bengie Molina, and Aaron Rowand, who bounced back from a terrible Spring to have two hits and a walk. Travis Ishikawa hit what would've been a grand slam in almost any other park in the first inning, but since it was to Triple's Alley, he had to "settle" for a three-run triple. Sandoval, Burris, and Lewis all chipped in, and one can only hope this was a sign of good things to come. Though, definitely not this good.

The pitching, likewise, will likely not be this bad. Lincecum didn't appear hurt, or really that far off -- it seemed to be a case of overthrowing leading to poor mechanics and rhythm, which isn't hard to understand. He is the defending Cy Young winner, and this was his first Opening Day start. Plus he met Sully Sullenberger like two minutes before the game started, and that can't help but throw you.

Watching the game on TiVo this afternoon after I got off work, I was reminded why Kruk and Kuip are tow of the best announcers in the game. They pointed out how small Ryan Braun is for a power hitter, and Krukow likened him to Will Clark, showing his swing, and how he maximized his strength with toque and timing. Moments later, they showed video of The Thrill hitting one out to compare and contrast. Kruk capped it off with a quote from Rick Reuschel, inspired by Clark's ability to hit: "A genius is a guy who makes something hard look easy".

This first game could be viewed by those looking to jump to conclusions as the first win of many for a maturing team, or a sign of the youthful, sloppy play which will plague the Giants all year. But it's probably neither -- just one game of 162. Who knows what the next 161 will bring. Whatever it is, I'm ready. Baseball is back. Yippee.

TOMORROW: A night game, so I might actually get to catch some of it live. The Giants will whip out the Big Unit, as Randy Johnson makes his SF debut against Yovani Gallardo.

Opening Day... Sort Of

2009-04-06T23:48:00.000-07:00

It's only opening day, and I'm already struggling to get in my promised daily post about baseball. This is true for two reasons: 1) I finally got a job* -- and a damn well-paying one at that -- and today was first day, so I'm very tired, and 2) The Giants didn't play today, and most of the teams which did, played to blowouts. And the most interesting matchup on opening day -- Red Sox vs. Rays -- was rained out. It just as well -- I would've missed all the action anyway, while at work. I won't be working completely full time, though, and will be able to make my own flexible hours (Hooray!), so I'll still be able to catch all the Giants games (live or on TiVo), plus a lot of other games this season. That's the good news.

The bad news is, the Giants might not play for awhile. They're scheduled to play tomorrow, but Andrew Baggarly (and everyone else) is predicting rain, so who knows. The only thing worse than not playing on opening day is following that with a rainout -- or worse, a long rain-delay, which could waste a Tim Lincecum start.

The best game from today was probably the crazy comeback in St. Louis, where brand new closer Jason Motte blew his first save chance. The most interesting performance probably belonged to C.C. Sabathia, who got smoked in Baltimore. Mark Texiera also took a collar and left five men on base. Think the Yanks fans are already getting heated on the talk shows about those contracts?

* I still have lots of things from my job search I'd like to write about. Hopefully, I'll still have the time now that it's over for awhile (knock on wood)

MORALLY OUTRAGED UPDATE: According to the excellent El Lefty Malo, the only reason the Giants didn't play on opening day is because they chose to have one more exhibition game. Why schedule yet another spring training game at the end of the longest exhibition season ever? For money of course. And let me tell you, without an ounce of irony, that I am shocked -- shocked! -- that a major baseball owner would place the pursuit of money above the enjoyment of the fans.

MPAA = EVIL

2009-04-03T14:21:00.000-07:00

Kevin Goldstein has a great post on his great blog, The Big Picture (permanently linked on the Blog Roll on the lower right-hand side of the page) today, chronicling the last -- and most egregiously idiotic act by the Motion Picture Association of America. The MPAA is in charge of rating movies, and they have never been accused of being anywhere close to competent at that job. On the contrary, they have been lambasted for years by filmmakers -- Matt Stone and Trey Parker come immediately to mind -- and have even had a documentary made about how silly and prejudiced they are, regularly going easy on incredible violence while harshly punishing anything sexual.

The best evidence of this double-standard may be the recent case, chronicled by Goldstein, of 'Naked Ambition: An R-rated Look at an X-rated Industry', and how they received a red-band rating for their trailer despite the fact it contains absolutely no nudity, sex, or swearing. That's right, they felt it should not be seen by those under 18 because it's about sex, even though there's none to be seen. If that's not puritanical thinking, I don't know what is. And yet, they'll take it easy on the next torture porn vehicle which comes their way, even if it contains a teenage girl getting skinned alive and fed her own entrails.

It's (Almost) On!

2009-04-02T19:35:00.000-07:00

Don't let the fact I haven't written much about the Giants, or baseball in general, convince you I've given up on this whole Giants Diary idea. I still plan to write a little something -- usually a very little something -- every day of the baseball season, I just haven't had much to say during Spring training -- there's just something so meaningless and hypothetical about it. More like a tease, then the real thing. This year, because of the WBC, Spring training lasted even longer, giving it an even more useless feel.

But now the clubs are back in their big league cities -- I'm watching Tim Lincecum mow down the A's right now (3-0 Giants in the middle of the 3rd) on Comcast SportsNet Bay Area (thanks, DirecTV!) -- and the season finally feels like it's actually going to happen. The first game (or "Opening Night" as ESPN prefers to call it) is Sunday, most teams open Monday, and the first Giants game (against Milwaukee) is Tuesday.

It's great to see the big league parks again -- especially ~~PacBell Park~~ ~~SBC Park~~ ~~AT&T Park~~ Mays Field -- and it doesn't hurt when the first time up in their home park your team puts up three runs. That's not likely happen too often this year with a Giant offense everyone agrees is a weak spot, but I think they have a few hitters who could be better than a lot of people think. Fred Lewis, coming off an impressive first full year in the majors, is one. Travis Ishikawa, a once-fallen prospect coming off a revitalizing and dominant minor league season, is another. But the most excitement surrounds fan favorite, Pablo Sandoval, who's already starting to earn some national recognition.

Only time will tell, but as a Giants fan, I go into this year with much more enthusiasm than in any year since at least 2004. It may come to nothing, but at least for now, it's Spring and I'm hopeful, and there's something to be said for that.

Bruno

2009-04-02T18:45:00.000-07:00

The long-awaited trailer for 'Bruno', Sacha Baron Cohen's follow-up to 'Borat', hit the web today, and it looks just about how you'd expect it to -- funny, borderline-offensive, and boundary-pushing comedy peppered with condescending and exploitative humor aimed at Christian folks from the midwest and south. Not that there's anything wrong with that. On the contrary, although it does not look to be quite as good as 'Borat', I still can't wait until it comes out.

Here's the red-band trailer:

I think my favorite moment is him picking up the black baby on the luggage carousel, followed closely by the bondage situation at the mall and the O.J. line.

Cool Change

2009-03-27T19:18:00.000-07:00

Watching the NCAA tourney, you've probably noticed the new broadcasting lineup CBS is running out. It's been quite a change after years of the same faces in the same place. Here's a quick rundown of the moves, along with my thoughts on them:

MOVE: Billy Packer is gone.

MY THOUGHTS: Awesome. Billy Packer was a surly old curmudgeon, who did nothing but whine and complain about everything. College basketball is fun, and the announcer should exemplify that (I mean, who's the most well-known, popular college basketball announcer there is? Dick Vitale -- the exact opposite of Packer). CBS didn't have to get Vitale, anybody would've been an improvement. Nobody liked Billy Packer. Nobody. Seriously, not one person. If you think you know somebody who liked him, you're wrong. If someone told you they liked him, they were lying. If you think you liked Billy Packer, you've lost touch with your own feelings, and you're probably bi-polar. I'm not a doctor, but I'm pretty sure, that's the diagnosis. GRADE: A+

MOVE: Clark Kellogg replaces Packer as top color analyst.

MY THOUGHTS: "Interesting" was my first thought. I know he's done color before, and I remembered him being good, he really fit well in the studio with Greg Gumbel and Seth Davis, and I wondered how he'd fit with lead play-by-play man, Jim Nantz. It turns out, he fits just great with Nantz, and seems equally good there as in studio (making him the Cris Collisworth of the NCAA's). Though he might not want to try quite so hard -- to me, it seems like he's been laughing awfully hard at Nantz's quips. Nantz is capable of humor, but he also throws out some wooden lines -- especially the clearly planned out ones he delivers at the buzzer of the National Championship game ("There's a new Dean in college basketball!") -- Kellogg would do well to only laugh at the funny ones. So far, he's practically cracking up at the starting lineups. I'd hate to see him encourage Nantz to break out his C-material (God help us all). Packer's one bright spot might have been that his dour demeanor kept Nantz from getting too giddy, and kiddy. But the important thing is, Kellogg has the kind of enthusiasm and positivity which best suits the NCAA game. GRADE: A-

MOVE: Greg Anthony replaces Kellogg as studio analyst.

MY THOUGHTS: This is the pleasant surprise in the bunch, and really, the key to the whole new formation. Anthony plays well off Gumbel and Davis, and is every bit as good as Kellogg, and maybe even better -- though that is probably more a function of it being a fresh face. But that aspect can't be overlooked. Change is good. It keeps things fresh. Especially when you can change the small things, while leaving the successful foundation intact. Not only Anthony's presence refreshing, but it also allows Kellogg to move to a new position while staying in the forefront of the picture. And when you realize Anthony is much younger than Kellogg, who is much younger than Packer, you realize that's another way to keep things from getting too musty. It is a young man's game after all. I'm glad CBS recognized that they needed a guy who probably listens to hip-hop more than a guy who looked and acted like somebody's creepy uncle. GRADE: A

The other faces and voices are the same -- Gus Johnson still has more enthusiasm and energy than any other announcer in the world, Dick Enberg still has the golden pipes, and Bill Raftery still has onions! These changes have only served to make a good thing better, and though this year's tourney has lacked a little of the drama we've come to expect, the announcing has been as good as ever.

Nothing To See Here

2009-03-24T03:22:00.000-07:00

You might be expecting me to wax poetically about the exciting conclusion to the WBC, discuss the action in the first two rounds of the NCAA Tourney, or look ahead to the Sweet 16. You might think I'm going to break down some issue related to the Giants, or maybe write about something entertainment-related. But I'm not. Instead, I'm writing about why I'm not writing. I haven't done a post recently because I'm a) busy doing a re-write for an interested producer, b) looking for a job*, and c) just wrapping up a move (and still waiting for the phone company to hook up my line -- or even act like they give a shit that they fucked up the installation in the first place). Until then, I'm piggy-backing on a neighbor's wi-fi, and very strapped for time/inspiration, and this blog has to fall behind all those responsibilities on my priority list. Hopefully, that will change soon.

* And the crazy stories from this are piling up quicker than I can write them.

Barack's Baracket

2009-03-18T09:41:00.000-07:00

President Obama made his picks for the NCAA tourney on ESPN.com. Looks like the Prez is a front-runner -- he picked three #1 seeds, and a #2 (Memphis, who many people claim got screwed out of a #1). Way to be a front-runner, Mr. President. For a liberal preaching change, those are some pretty staid, conservative picks. I hope your plan to fix the economy is more imaginative than your bracket.

Bunch O' Shite

2009-03-18T01:37:00.000-07:00

Today, I enjoyed a rarity -- a meeting at a studio that went well and was promising, with notes given which made sense and were helpful. It had gotten to the point I was doubting whether those even existed anymore. It may not lead to anything, but it was nice just to be reminded of the possibilities. In celebration, I'm posting a buffet of treats. Links, photos, news, I got it all. And you want it. You know you want it. You want it so bad, you dirty little tramp, blog you.

--The WBC marches on, and so does the U.S. squad, who won in dramatic fashion in an elimination game. The semi-finals now include the U.S., Venezuela, and Korea, who beat Japan again to win their pool. Japan now plays Cuba in an elimination game to determine the final semi-finalist.

--Sasha Baron Cohen aired some footage of his upcoming movie based on his gay Austrian character, Bruno, at SXSW, and Cinematical has some really great spoilers.

--Screen Junkies has their list of the best 80's TV theme songs. That's why I love them.

--And finally, this is a Stormtrooper taking a dump:

This Year's Jason Ellison?

2009-03-15T02:13:00.000-07:00

In my first spring training post, I said exhibition games meant that "some prospect/reclamation project will become the dazzling phenom who hits .460 and fools you into thinking they might contribute this year (see: Ellison, Jason)." Well, it's starting to look like this year's ~~prospect~~/reclamation project is 31-year-old OF Andres Torres, a 10-year minor leaguer who's spent the vast majority of the last six straight years in AAA.

In fact, in that time Torres has had more AB's in AA (305) than the majors (257). His line in the majors --.210/.258/.276 -- doesn't bode well for his chances. Nether does his pedestrian minor league line of .272/.363/.396, or his age, though he has had decent lines in AAA the last couple of years. Still, on most teams, Torres just sniff a roster spot. But on this Giants team, anything's possible -- especially when you're hitting .433 with as many AB's as any plater on the team.

It's a nice story for now, and will be a really nice story if he makes the opening day roster. A nice story for him, that is. For the Giants, not so much. They already have OF spots held for Randy Winn, Fred Lewis, Aaron Rowand, and Nate Schierholtz. That's four, right there. Though the waiving of Dave Roberts would seem to open a spot for a 5th OF/pinch-runner type, that would likely go to Eugenio Velez. So, could they keep six OF's? Sure -- like I said, anything's possible with this roster. And Velez's ability to play 2B makes him more than a pure OF. John Bowker could be in the running for that six OF spot, but he's young, still has options left (unlike Schierholtz), and could probably use a full year at AAA to see what he can do. Torres has already had that year at AAA -- five times or so -- and the Giants might take that, and his spring, to heart. That's just the kind of short-sighted, bone-headed crap they do.

Russell Maryland & the Link Dump

2009-03-11T20:48:00.000-07:00

Three links today, but first a quick story: I've been a Miami Hurricanes fan since I was a kid in the early 80's (Bernie Kosar Era), and saw a parade of talent trvel through there on their way to great careers. Despite all the high-flying offensive talents, big-play defensive backs, and dominant pass rushers, some of my favorite players growing up have been defensive tackles (Warren Sapp, Jerome Brown, Russell Maryland).

Recently, my writing partner, Barry, got me some freelance copywriting work for a PR company. It turned out to be writing bios of former NFL players who are participating in a football camp in Dallas. They have played for eight Super Bowl winners between them, so you may have heard of them: Reggie Barnes, Brian Williams, Ray Mickens, Tony Tolbert, and... Russell Maryland. So that's what I did last night for my job -- wrote a bio for one of my boyhood heroes. Not bad work if you can get it.

College Humor has some parodies of those DirecTV ads. careful, a couple of these are pretty tasteless. Just how I like 'em.

If you know me, you know I love lists. Today, I have two of note:

1) Bullz-Eye has a list of their biggest Oscar snubs (and they titled it after another Oscar snub you may be aware of).

2) Screen Junkies has a list (and clips) of the 9 best movie scenes involving vomiting. Sounds good, don't it?

UPDATE: One more diamond found in the internet rough which I had to post...

Dutch Don't Die!

2009-03-11T01:48:00.000-07:00

It's late, and I've got a job interview in the morning, so I'll make this quick: I may have tried to kill of the baseball team from the Netherlands after their loss to Puerto Rico yesterday, but they refused to go. Today, they repeated their shock-the-world upset of the Dominican Republic in one of the more exciting baseball games I've seen in a long time -- impressive, considering it was 0-0 game heading into the 11th inning. The D.R. team scored once in the top of the 11th, which seemed to clinch it (they hadn't allowed an earned run to the Dutch in 19 innings, and the Netherlands looked very feeble at the plate all game long). But the Dutch came back to score twice in the bottom of the inning (with quite a bit of help from some shoddy Dominican D).

Now the D.R. is out -- a national embarrassment for the popular favorite -- and Team Dutch goes against Puerto Rico (and the Giants' Jonathan Sanchez) for the pool title.

In the later game, Cuba narrowly avoided a shocking defeat to Australia, coming back to win 5-4 on a 2-run HR with 2-out in the 8th. Now, Cuba moves on, and Australia plays Mexico to see who moves on to round 2 and who goes home.

Still Drinking the WBC Kool-Aid

2009-03-10T00:58:00.000-07:00

Turns out Cinderella's missing shoe really is a glass slipper, and not a wooden clog.

The baseball team from the Netherlands -- or, as I like to call them, The Dutch Boys of Summer -- almost pulled off another miracle on Monday, but their bid to beat Puerto Rico and advance to the next round of the WBC was dashed by a late rally by the home team.

The Dutch Boys led 1-0 in the 8th inning behind great pitching for them and bad baserunning by their opponent -- the same recipe that led them to an improbable upset of the Dominican Republic on Saturday. But in attempting to score their second straight shocker, they had played with fire all game, stranding Puerto Rican baserunners all over the place -- including escaping a bases-loaded, one-out jam in the 7th. In the 8th, they walked the bags full, and failed to escape. Yadier Molina doubled home the tying and go-ahead runs, and the home crowd in Hiram Bithorn Stadium went crazy, as P.R. went on to win, 3-1. So, the Dutch Boys are going home, and Puerto Rico will now meet the D.R. team for the top seed in Pool D, with the loser also advancing.

In a similar battle for top spot in Pool A, Korea eeked out a classic pitcher's duel over Japan. The Korean pitching silenced Ichiro and the home crowd in the Tokyo Dome, and scratched a run across the plate against the equally great Japanese pitching (including the amazing Yu Darvish). It was very compelling, taut baseball, though I dislike team Japan's uber-small ball approach -- down one run, they bunted a runner to 2nd in the 8th with one out. Many people hate the bunt in all instances, but I think it has its place. That being said, there is absolutely no place for a one-out bunt (pitchers excepted), and that goes double for when you're down to your last five outs. Not only that, the runner was Ichiro -- fully capable of stealing bag. Just terrible baseball right there.

I prefer Team Korea -- specifically the two gargantuan sluggers in the middle of their lineup (don't ask me their names, I'll just say, "Lee or Kim"). The first is about 250 pounds, and he's the small one. The other is about 270 (most in his gut) and led the Korean league with 46 HR's. 520 pounds between them -- that's a lot of dog. They look like Asian lumberjacks and swing for the fences. My kind of guys.

Korea's big bonus for their win over Japan? There region winner status means they won't have to open against juggernaut and likely region winner Cuba. Instead, they'll first take on either Mexico or Australia while the Japanese get Cuba. Just as exciting to watch in that round: Once Team Cuba comes to American soil to play, how many players will try to defect in the interests of ~~multi-million dollar major league contracts~~ freedom?

Spotted at Runyon Canyon...

2009-03-09T16:03:00.000-07:00

I've written before about my almost daily treks up Runyon Canyon here in Hollywood, and how it's a hotbed for star sightings. It's so commonplace, it doesn't really excite anymore -- unless it's an exceptional celebrity, or they're doing/saying/wearing something amusing.

Yesterday, I had a bit of a thrill seeing Mickey Rourke driving by in a convertible with a pretty lady, his ponytail blowing in the breeze. Today, I wasn't too excited to see 'American Idol' Season 1 contestant Ryan Starr (twice), although I've always thought she was kind of cute (in spite of overly-glam outfits and a lackluster singing voice -- two attributes which directly led to her appearance in the Lingerie Bowl. But it was what she was doing/saying that caught my attention.

The first time I passed her, she was very carefully and purposefully pulling up her short so as to absolutely maximize the surface area of her exposed midriff (there's nothing more embarrassing than the fashion faux pas of having an only 80-90% bared midriff, believe me). The second time I saw her, she was very animatedly chatting to her friend, seemingly complaining about something. As I passed, I heard her spit out the words, "I woulda won that damn show if I just..." By then, she was out of earshot. I assume she was talking about 'Idol', but what didn't she do which kept her from winning? "If I had just..." what? "Sang well"? "Sang naked"? "Slept with Simon Cowell"? Slept with Paula Abdul"? The suspense is killing me!

Nether Regions FTW! (UPDATED)

2009-03-08T00:48:00.000-08:00

I've been a big fan of the World Baseball Classic ever since they announced the idea. I've always been a fan of making lineups -- the best in the NL/AL, the best switch-hitters, best under-25 team, etc. -- so the idea of breaking down the best players in the world by nationality had me at hello. Then, in 2006, I was unemployed (what else is new?) at the time of the inaugural tournament, so I was able to lounge about, watching the games at all hours of the day.

That initial tournament was intriguing, and there were some great sights and sounds -- most notable for me was the scene in Florida when the Dominican Republic and Venezuela opened their against each other, and the performance of Daisuke Matsuzaka for eventual winner Japan -- but there was something a little lacking. namely, classic games. There were a couple of close games -- Mexico's 2-1 win over the U.S. to eliminate the American team, and a japan/Korea game come to mind -- but the tourney was sadly lacking in drama. I still enjoyed the experience and looked forward to this year's installment, but I wasn't sure the WBC quite lived up to its name. It delivered the World, and it delivered Baseball, but it wasn't quite Classic.

That may have changed on Saturday, when the string of four games -- including two nail-biters and one major upset -- felt like another tradition from this time of year: March Madness. The day started out with a Cinderella story -- the team from the Netherlands taking down the vaunted Dominican Republic squad. The Netherlands only have one real major league pitcher, and even that's Sidney Ponson, not exactly a world-beater (as Giants fans know all too well), and even less quality help on offense. So there was no way to think they could hold down the D.R. team -- even one without A-Roid, Manny, Pujols, Soriano, Aramis Ramirez, and Adrian Beltre. They still had David Ortiz, Hanley Ramirez, Miguel Tejada, Robinson Cano, Willy Aybar, Jose Guillen, etc, and even manager Felipe Alou lamented, That was a team we should have trounced 9-0". More amazing is that the Netherlands managed to win 3-2 despite only getting three hits, all of the infield variety.

The upset can only be truly understood when looking at the number and quality of major league talent on the two rosters. here's a quick look:

MLB players -- D.R.: 23, Netherlands: 2
2008 All-Stars -- D.R.: 4, Netherlands: 0
Career wins -- D.R.: 518, Netherlands: 95
Career HR -- D.R.: 1,801, Netherlands: 82
2008 salaries -- D.R.: $83.4M, Netherlands: $0M

As Rick Sutcliffe said, "That's like Appalachian State beating Michigan". I rarely listen to Sutcliffe when he's not completely hammered, but when he's right, he's right.

The second game of the day was the best matchup on paper -- the U.S. vs. Canada. The Canadians gave the Americans a great game, taking it right down to the wire before losing 6-5. There were some especially impressive performances from several Canadians: Russell Martin and Joey Votto each had a double and a HR -- Votto getting four hits -- and reliever Phillipe Aumont was truly filthy in getting out of a bases-loaded, no-outs situation. But in the end, the Americans prevailed behind HR's from Kevin Youkilis, Brian McCann, and a opposite field bomb from Adam Dunn, which provided the eventual-winning runs. The game ended dramatically as U.S. closer J.J. Putz retired Canada's 4 and 5 hitters, Justin Mourneau and Jason Bay, with Votto on second base representing the tying run. With the home fans on their feet cheering for their guys to come through, and the players on the bench really into each pitch, if you squinted just right, it kind of looked like October.

There were two more games after that -- Panama vs. Puerto Rico and Italy vs. Venezuela -- but neither offered the kind of thrills the first two games did. (Though it was a lot of fun to say the names of Italy's starting lineup over and over just to hear them -- Davide Dallospedale, Valentino Pascucci, Guisseupe Mazzanti, Mario Chiarini.) Still, it had that same electricity, unpredictability, and rah-rah enthusiasm that's made the NCAA tournament must-se entertainment for sports fans for years.

But to become a tradition, the WBC has to have drama, and signature moments -- much like it did on Saturday. To foster fans, all it takes are great stories and highlights. Before long, there's enough history that what was once a revolution is now part of the establishment. That's how it works. There once was a time, not that long ago, that the wild card in baseball felt new and illegitimate. But after a few years, and some great moments, it's now as second nature as the World Series. And unlike some other newfangled traditions, like interleague play, I don't think this will get old. Sure, some star players may participate once, then beg off. But I think many more could feel like they're missing out on the fun (I bet a few U.S. stars saw the highlights from the Canada game and felt like it might've been fun to be a part of that -- can spring training be that much better?)

I also think new rivalries will be born, existing ones will be enflamed, and soon, more and more baseball fans (and hopefully players) will look forward to the WBC, and take pride in how their country performs. Especially now that baseball is no longer in the Olympics, this seems to be the only real way to represent your country on the field.

UPDATE: I'm watching the Dominican Republic/Panama game on Sunday and was reminded of something I forgot to mention last night (yet more evidence writing in the wee hours is a sketchy proposition): Willy Tavares was a major goat for the Dominican squad in their opener. In the 5th, he failed to score from 3rd (and tie the game at 3) on a passed ball, when it was clear he was unprepared -- heading back to the bag -- as the pitch got away. In the 7th, he led off and tried to bunt for a hit, but failed. With his team still down one run in the 9th, Tavares opened with a walk, and advanced to 2nd on an out. Then, inexplicably, he was thrown out trying to steal 3rd base with Hanley Ramirez at the plate. This gift out allowed the ~~Netherlanders~~ ~~Netherlandians~~ ~~Netherlandites~~ Dutch to pitch around Hanley and go after Jose Bautista, who struck out looking to end it while Hanley was stealing 2nd. Dominican manager Felipe Alou confirmed today, Tavares was not given a steal sign, and took the (bad) risk on his own.

Random Video: Now With Even More Random!

2009-03-06T04:03:00.000-08:00

This is a crazy ~~commercial~~ ~~short film~~ I don't know what, which advertises Gatorade in the form of a parody of 'Monty Python and The Holy Grail', starring Kevin Garnett, Derek Jeter, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and others. If that doesn't already sound like the most random thing ever, keep in mind it's like nine minutes long. I really don't know what to make of it. Is it terrible or fantastic? Inspired or desperate? Maybe a little of all of the above. I just don't know. Judge for yourself:

The Big Ugly

2009-03-04T01:09:00.000-08:00

This year's Giants team intrigues me. They should be mediocre at best, and bad if a few things (namely, age and injury) don't go their way. Their offense is well below average, not boasting one legitimate middle-of-the-order hitter. Their defense is nothing special, with a few real question marks. Their bullpen is still largely unproven.* But their rotation, on the other hand, looks to be a strength, and could be a tremendous strength.

Everybody knows about reigning Cy Young winner Tim Lincecum. Matt Cain has been one of the most underrated starters in baseball over the last few years (mainly because of the bad record he's compiled due to fact the team scores an average of -1.6 runs a game in his starts). Jonathan Sanchez seems to be an up-and-comer, and was one of the top strikeout pitchers in baseball among starters last season. Barry Zito is probably a lost cause. That leaves Randy Johnson, and on his left may hang much of the potential and intrigue for this Giants team.

When the Giants signed Johnson this year, it seemed like a good deal -- he still strikes out a lot of guys, had decent overall numbers last year (3.91 ERA, 1.24 WHIP), and stayed relatively healthy (184 IP). But the deal has gotten better and better ever since. First it came out that Johnson's back wasn't completely healed from surgery last season, and is much better now. Then he showed up in camp and reportedly started teaching Matt Cain all sorts of tips on pitching. Now, he's started actually pitching in games, and the results are dominating. Today, pitching against his old club, the D-Bags, The Unit dominated, putting up this line: 3 IP, 2 H, 1 BB, 0 ER, 7 K.

If he can stay healthy and put up numbers as good as or better than last year (playing half his games in a much better pitcher's park), he could give the Giants a powerful, potentially dominating top three starters with Lincecum and Cain. If Sanchez can continue to harness his potential, they could have four starters who strike out as many as any in the game (all in the top 22 of the NL last year in K/9). Reports out of Arizona even have Zito throwing harder this year and looking much more athletic after his rigorous off-season training program ("He's in the best shape of his life!!!"). If he could stay even around league average, and the others thrive, they could potentially have one of the best rotations in baseball. In their park, that could keep them in contention for a bad NL West even with a weak offense.

Of course, the more likely scenario is Johnson is effective, but misses time due to injury. Sanchez probably puts up some great outings, but also suffers through some growing pains. Cain could easily continue to suffer from poor run support. Lincecum could... No, I refuse to admit that Lincecum is anything less than super-human. The team very well suck, they may go weeks between home runs, but we will always be able to rely on little Timmy for entertainment. Speaking of which, here's Tim (and Randy Johnson) in the entertaining new ad for the video game MLB 2K9 (for which, Lincecum is the cover boy):

* The 'pen suffered a potentially major blow today when it was announced that Sergio Romo is hurt. Romo was fan-freakin'-tastic as a rookie last year (3-1, 2.12 ERA, 34 IP, 16 H, 33 K, 8 BB), and the team was/is counting on him to play a big role this year, so all us Romosexuals need to keep our fingers crossed.

Memoirs of an Unemployed Man, Part 1: The Legend of Gainful Employment

2009-03-03T00:39:00.001-08:00

Being unemployed is old hat for me. I've been lucky enough to find a way to stay "successfully unemployed" for long stretches in my life. When I was a kid, my mom didn't really make me work, and she was generous when I graduated college, and drifted from job to job aimlessly, with sizable gaps in between. When I first came out to LA, I did a lot of short-time work which paid nice chunks -- focus groups, PA work, helping people move, etc. And though I haven't had a ton of success in screenwriting, it has allowed me two long stretches of leisure in recent years.

But what I am not used to is being involuntarily unemployed, as I am now. I've been looking for a job, but unable to land one, which has never been a problem before. Of course, I'm not alone. There are lots of folks out there who are job-searching right now -- many much more desperately than myself. I'm lucky enough to have had some money still squirreled away from the script sale, and my wife just got a promotion/raise/office, so I'm not going to begging you for spare change outside the 7-11 anytime soon. But in these troubled economic times, I can't wait until the very last moment to get a job, so I'm out pounding the ~~pavement~~ internet looking for work.

This has led me to find out a few, very alarming things, chiefly that a huge portion of the ad listings fall into two categories: spammers and scammers. The spammers are just trying to get you to go to their site, fill out their survey, or join their site. The scammers are a whole different breed of scum. They run all manner of fake listings in an attempt to squeeze a few dollars out of you before you realize there is no money coming back. Many offer you a great income from the comfort of your home, or in your spare time -- always a red flag. Some ask for a small upfront fee, others offer pyramid schemes dressed up as corporations. One actually sends you checks which you can cash before you have to send out a percentage of it from your account -- only later do you find out the check bounced and you're out the money.*

After you steer through all that crap, you find the few actual jobs out there to find the pickings pretty slim. Many aren't worth applying for, and the best ones are flooded with so many it's hard to get through. But recently I did have a couple of interviews, which led to one short-lived, but very eventful job. It was a bad match, but a good story: The Ballad of Crazy Flower Lady. I've been wanting to write about it, and urged to by others, but I'm afraid it might end up being a novel. Only one way to find out, so I might as well give it a shot. Look for it in Part 2, coming ~~tomorrow~~ ~~soon~~ whenever I damn well please.

* I think in this way, one could argue, the internet has made the job market a worse place. Yes, there are advantages -- speed being chief among them -- but what was so wrong about searching the want ads in the paper? At least they were real. Mostly. I did run into a couple of pyramid schemes in my day, but nothing like there is now.

2000 Words

2009-02-28T00:51:00.000-08:00

I haven't had much time to write lately. I've been busy looking for a job, finding a job, working, quitting, and looking for a job again -- more on that (and the crazy lady I briefly had the misfortune of working with) later, time-permitting. But I heard a picture's worth 1,000 words, so I thought I'd make up for the recent dearth of prose with 2,000 words worth of comedy in the form of my favorite two photos found online this week.

The first goes out to all those worried about the current lackluster state of our beloved country:

The second is a rare look behind the curtain at genius, as we examine the craft of one of our finest thespians:

Near Perfect

2009-02-23T01:18:00.000-08:00

If you were following my Oscar predictions, and didn't put some money on them in Vegas or with your bookie, then you missed out. I went 7 of 8 on the major awards, missing only Sean Penn. I was pretty sure about Mickey Rourke, but Hollywood preferred a referendum on gay rights to the coronation of a prodigal son.

Missing a perfect night by what was probably only a handful of votes is frustrating, but knowing I beat Nate Silver (6/8) and my wife (5/8) cushions the blow. The big winners tonight besides Penn: 'Slumdog Millionaire', Danny Boyle, Kate Winslet, Penelope Cruz, Dustin Lance Black, and Simon Beaufoy. The biggest loser was Rourke, but the most acclaimed role of your career can never really be considered a "loss".

Oscars... For The Ladies II

2009-02-22T14:47:00.000-08:00

Just sneaking in this last preview so I can be officially wrong about one more thing tonight...

BEST ACTRESS

Anne Hathaway in 'Rachel Getting Married'
Angelina Jolie in 'Changeling'
Melissa Leo in 'Frozen River'
Meryl Streep in 'Doubt'
Kate Winslet in 'The Reader'

THE NOMS: Pretty good. Since I didn't see two of them ('Frozen River' and 'The Reader'), I can't say for sure, but the other three were all great performances.

WHO SHOULD WIN: Probably Winslet. I know, I didn't see it, but she's supposedly the only good thing in it, and she was also great in 'Revolutionary Road'. She's been nominated six times, she deserves it.

WHO WILL WIN: Winslet. The Academy knows she's due.

The Oscar Goes To... Some Writer II

2009-02-21T23:10:00.000-08:00

Because I'm too lazy to even watch the DVD's of the Oscar winners I have sitting on my entertainment center, I thought I might as well do these last couple previews in case I don't get to them by 5pm tomorrow.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Courtney Hunt for 'Frozen River'
Martin McDonagh for 'In Bruges'
Mike Leigh for 'Happy Go Lucky'
Dustin Lance Black for 'Milk'
Andrew Stanton and Jim Reardon for 'WALL-E' (Story by Stanton and Pete Docter)

THE NOMS: I haven't seen two of them -- though I'm still hoping to watch my DVD of 'Frozen River' (no, this is not a recording), which was a big winner at the Independent Spirit Awards tonight -- but the ones I saw ('Milk', 'WALL-E', and 'In Bruges') were all exceptionally written. I'd have loved to see Charlie Kaufman's 'Synecdoche, NY' -- another winner tonight at the Independent Spirit winner -- but without seeing all the nominees I can't exactly cast stones. Well, I could, but they'd be very uninformed stones.

WHO SHOULD WIN: 'WALL-E' will make a strong case with its style, substance, and message. 'Milk' also has a message, and a great performance by Sean Penn to carry it. The other three are low-budget, independent films. That's great for the Independent Spirit Awards, but at the Oscars, it probably won't fly. I say 'Milk' edges out 'WALL-E' based on the timeliness of its issue, Penn's performance, and the whole live-action thing. If so, it'll be the second straight year a writer's first produced screenplay wins them an Oscar (after Diablo Cody's 'Juno').

WHO WILL WIN: I liked 'Milk' quite a bit, and admired 'WALL-E' even more, but 'In Bruges' was the best surprise of the year for me. And I think it announced Martin McDonaugh as a great voice to watch for in the future.

Oscars... For The Ladies

2009-02-20T01:53:00.000-08:00

Only a couple more left after this, which I'm holding off on in hopes of still seeing 'Frozen River' and 'Rachel Getting Married' before the Oscars...

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Marisa Tomei in 'The Wrestler'
Viola Davis in 'Doubt'
Amy Adams in 'Doubt'
Taraji P. Hensen in 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button'
Penelope Cruz in 'Vicky Cristina Barcelona'

THE NOMS: I like 'em. No complaints at all. All the women were great, and I got to see Marissa Tomei parade around topless. What's to complain about?

WHO SHOULD WIN: A really tough call. All the performances were great, but we can narrow them down with some quasi-logic. Tomei showed too much skin to win -- strippers don't win Oscars. Davis and Adams will split votes from 'Doubt'-lovers (not really, but it sounds good). Cruz and Henson were the meatier of the roles, so I'll call it two-horse race. It's not much more than a coin flip, but I'll go with Hensen, just because she gave 'Button' its badly-needed heart.

WHO WILL WIN: I mentioned earlier that I disagreed with Nate Silver on one category, and this is it. He likes Hensen, and she was great. But I'm going with Cruz.

Giants Diary: The Rites of Spring

2009-02-19T14:55:00.000-08:00

In my first baseball post last week, I mentioned a few of the things we'd undoubtedly see around the Giants spring training in near future -- things we see every spring. Already, less than a week later, several have have come to pass:

I wrote: "It means sore hammies, and tendonitis, and various tweaks and turns which will worry me that they'll become the next catastrophic year-ending injury". Within 24 hours, Noah Lowry, who missed all of last year with arm woes, experienced soreness in his shoulder. Now he says he's doing much better, but until he takes part in an organized game -- something he hasn't done in about 18 months -- I'm not expecting anything from him this year.

I wrote: "we will soon be deluged with reports out of Scottsdale about the dazzling skills and bright futures of some Giants prospects as well as the always-popular "He's in the best shape of his life" and "Last year's bad season was actually die to an unreported injury" stories."

Today, MLB.com Giants beatwriter Chris Haft obliges, with both a story about the triumvirate of young infield prospects vying for the starting 2B job, and another about the "leaner and meaner" story of new Giants SS, Edgar Renteria. Henry Schulman of the Chron also chips in with a "leaner and meaner" piece on Matt Cain.

I'm still waiting for a good "unreported injury" story. I'll keep you posted.

Wonderlic Me

2009-02-19T01:56:00.000-08:00

Over at Niners Nation, Fooch has done a post about the Wonderlic test, which has been famously used by NFL teams to gauge the mental capacity of college players at the combine. He links to a sample of the test, where you can test yourself. Like Fooch, I got 9 out of 10 questions right in the time alloted (I ran out of time before I could answer the last one), which gave me an estimated score of 45. As Fooch points out, that's pretty good:

A generic breakdown of the scoring looks like this:

50 = highest possible score, superior intelligence
30 = Very bright, you're shouldn't be living at home
20 = average intelligence (similar to IQ of 100)
15 = Equivalent to unskilled worker
10 and Below = Moron, barring unique circumstances

He also lists some scores of interest among QB's:

Drew Henson 42
Alex Smith 40
Eli Manning 39
Brian Griese 39
Tony Romo 37
Drew Bledsoe 36
Matt Leinart 35
Kellen Clemens 35
Tom Brady 33
Steve Young 33
John Beck 30
Philip Rivers 30
Troy Aikman 29
Brady Quinn 29
Drew Brees 28
Peyton Manning 28
Ryan Leaf 27
Ben Roethlisberger 25
Brett Favre 22

Notable Low Scores:
Tarvaris Jackson 19
Derek Anderson 19
Vince Young 16*
Dan Marino 15
Terry Bradshaw 15
Donovan McNabb 14
David Garrard 14
Kordell Stewart 13
Marcus Vick 11
Jeff George 10
Chris Leak 8

Want to test yourself? Go here.

The Oscar Goes To... Some Writer

2009-02-18T18:37:00.000-08:00

Anyone who's read this site for any length of time has read me whine about his screenwriters get the shit-end of the stick, so I'll try to keep it a minimum here. But remember this: Judging a screenplay based on the finished film made from it is a dicey call -- there are a lot of hands which shape a film from screenplay to screen. And that's not to mention the others in development who shape the screenplay from the first purchased draft to the shooting script. As many screenwriters have said before, writing a script and allowing someone else to shoot it is like giving birth to child then having someone else raise it.

It can go both ways -- development execs, actors and directors can add to, or detract from, the original script. When you see an Oscar-nominated screenplay, the film probably turned out pretty well, so before you try and judge the screenplay, you have consider what to examine -- the dialogue (except for obvious improv stuff), the characterizations, the plot points -- and what to ignore: the acting, the cinematography, the music, etc. Since there's no way to knwo who contributed exactly what, it's an almost impossible task. That being said, I didn't read any of the nominated scripts this year, so I'll just have to do what I just you shouldn't really do. That's just how I roll.

In this first of the two screenwriting awards, there's yet another uncertainty to factor in -- since they are adapted, a lot of the credit for dialogue, characters and plot points have to go the original author. Although this year that's a little less of a problem, because two of the screenwriters (Shanley and Morgan) adapted their own plays for the screen -- and one, Shanley, directed as well.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Eric Roth for 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button'
John Patrick Shanley for 'Doubt'
Peter Morgan for 'Frost/Nixon'
Simon Beaufoy for 'Slumdog Millionaire'
David Hare for 'The Reader'

THE NOMS: Once again, I have to recuse myself on 'The Reader' because I ~~refuse to see it~~ haven't seen it yet, but the others seem reasonable.

WHO SHOULD WIN: Beaufoy and Hare both adapted novels, so it's hard to know just what they brought to the table. I like Roth's work in 'Button', and it's much different than the short story, but its similarity to his own previous work ('Forrest Gump'), and the fact the story is a bit overshadowed by David Fincher's visual wizardry leave it a bit short in my mind. Morgan and Shanley adapted their own plays, so they're the auteurs, and both shooting scripts were tight, with rich character, and crisp dialogue. In a close race, I'll take Morgan.

WHO WILL WIN: Shanley and Morgan each have a decent shot, but I say Beaufoy takes the prize on what will likely be a landslide night for 'Slumdog'.

The Silver Oscars

2009-02-18T14:38:00.000-08:00

The great Nate Silver, of Five-Thirty-Eight.com and Baseball Prospectus fame, has come out with his Oscar predictions. If you saw his uncannily accurate predictions of the Presidential election -- he was one of the first to champion Obama's candidacy, correctly predicted a blowout early on, and got 49 of 50 states correctly -- or have paid attention to the rave reviews for PECOTA, the baseball statistical projection system he invented, you'll know he's a man worth listen to when it comes to predictions. I don't know if I've ever had a man-crush on a nerd before, but what I feel for Nate Silver is wrong, I don't want to be right.

So far, Nate agrees with me on all four my predictions -- 'Slumdog' (at an astonishing 99%), Danny Boyle (99.7%!!!), Heath Ledger (only 85.8%), and Mickey Rourke (77.1%). Soon, I'll be finishing off my own predictions, and we'll see how close the rest of our picks are. I guarantee there's already one pick we disagree on. (Can you guess it?) Also, Nate didn't do the screenplay awards, which I of course will do. Maybe next.

The Dodged Bullet Heard 'Round the World

2009-02-17T18:38:00.000-08:00

The harmonic convergence of the A-Roid press conference and the latest installment of Ken Burns' "Baseball" documentary on the MLB Network -- about the 1950's -- both airing today gave me an idea. Everybody knows all about "The Shot Heard 'Round the World", Bobby Thompson's pennant-winning HR against Ralph Branca and the Dodgers in 1951 to complete the amazing comeback known as "The Miracle at Coogan's Bluff", but Alex Rodriguez going to the Yankees instead of the Red Sox in 2004 might be the greatest dodged bullet of all time. While we all know about the "Curse of the Bambino", I'm beginning to think that turn of events might come to be symbolize the dawning of "The Curse of A-Rod".

If you recall, back in that off-season of 2003-4, Boston had a deal in place to acquire A-Rod from the Rangers (along with Magglio Ordonez as part of a three-way deal) in exchange for Manny Ramirez and Nomar Garciaparra. But to make the deal work for the Sox, A-Rod needed to give back a significant chunk of cash off his record-breaking contract. He signed off on it, but the Union didn't, and the deal was dead. It was then that the Yanks jumped in and made a deal to acquire him for Alfonso Soriano and others.

At that point, the Yankees had won 27 world titles since acquiring Babe Ruth from the Red Sox in 1918, and Boston had won zero. Before that, the Sox had won five titles and the Yankees had zero. The change of fortune which Ruth brought to those two franchises by moving from one to the other can't be any more immediate and glaring than what A-Rod has brought. In the five years since he arrived in New York (instead of Boston), the Yankees have won zero titles (after winning four of the previous eight). During the same time, the Red Sox have won two titles, including breaking an 86-year championship drought in Year One of the A-Rod Era by becoming the first team to come back from a 3-0 deficit in the playoffs -- against A-Rod's Yanks.

What's more, in both their championship years, Boston leaned heavily on the bat -- and carefree personality -- of Manny Ramirez, the man almost traded for A-Rod. Meanwhile, A-Rod has consistently failed to come through in the postseason in New York, a city which loves to judge its players on how they play in October. He's never been embraced as a "true Yankee", and now with the admission he's done steroids (though conveniently, not as a Yankee, according to him), it's fair to think he never will. Of course, A-Rod is hardly the first Yankee to run into steroid controversy. In fact, since his arrival, they've also been deluged by it -- Giambi and Pettitte admitting their use, Clemens uncnvincingly denying his.

So the fates of the Yankees and the Sox have seemed to once again trade karmic places in cosmos around the acquisition of a future Hall of Famer. Who knows, if this keeps up much longer, we may begin to see books, and signs and movies about "The Curse of A-Rod" popping up as we did with "The Curse of the Bambino". At least one guy had an inkling it could happen way back in '04. Someday, we might even see the kind of strange ceremonies and makeshift exorcisms around New York which became popular in Boston before they broke their drought. Burnings of A-Rod's jersey and likeness may become commonplace. Hell, it's New York we're talking about -- it might happen next week.

Mo' Oscars, Mo' Problems

2009-02-16T23:44:00.000-08:00

Onward with my crowd-pleasing series looking at the Oscar nominations. You can find previous installments here.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Philip Seymour Hoffman in 'Doubt'
Robert Downey Jr. in 'Tropic Thunder'
Josh Brolin in 'Milk'
Heath Ledger in 'The Dark Knight'
Michael Shannon in 'Revolutionary Road'

THE NOMS: Maybe the most accurate and intriguing group of nominations this year. One of the best ever, really. Downey gets the rare comedy nod for his amazing and groundbreaking performance. Shannon gets a nom despite only a few minutes of screen time with a great performance. Brolin and Hoffman are among the best character actors working today. And Ledger, well, what can I say that hasn't been already regurgitated 1,000 times by everybody in the entertainment media?

WHO SHOULD WIN: Brolin and Hoffman were great, but probably only nom-worthy. Shannon was special in his role, but is out-classed by deeper performances which had much more screen time, and carried their films to a much greater degree. I'd love to pick Downey, who in any other year would deserve it, but honestly, a nom for a broad comedy is as impressive as a win. I'll never know how much Ledger's death had to do with my enjoyment of his performance, but there's no way it wouldn't have ben recognized as great no matter the circumstances. As soon as I heard he'd be the Joker, I knew it had a chance to be special, and it blew my expectations way out of the water. He has to be the pick.

WHO WILL WIN: Are you kidding? The only mystery is who will pick up Ledger's statuette. Vegas has Christopher Nolan at even money.

The Bay Area Baseball Club

2009-02-16T11:00:00.000-08:00

For years now (since at least 2000, and probably a couple years before that), I've been compiling an annual All-Bay Area with my old friend John (Code name: Cyborg). He's an A's fan, who still lives in the Bay Area and therefore sees quite a few Giants games. I am, of course, a Giants fan, who sees a lot of every team -- that's what happens when you're a) perpetually unemployed, b) still obsessed with a child's game, and c) subscribe to the baseball package. Every spring as baseball season is getting warmed up, we trade a few e-mails to compare notes, and come up with the best possible team derived from only Giants and A's players.

As you can imagine, the last few years have been a little lean in terms of talent -- the recession hit Bay Area baseball a bit sooner than the rest of the country. After years of looking at the team we'd put together and thinking "They could easily win the world series", the last couple teams would need to catch some breaks just to compete for a playoff spot. This year's club is a slight improvement -- the Giants pitching and half-decent slap hitters matching up fairly well with the A's middle-of-the-order power hitting -- but it's still a far cry from years past when the lineup was filled almost from top to bottom with prodigious power hitters (albeit, steroid-powered).

So I thought we'd take a quick look at both this year's squad, and also a classic team from recent years. First, 2009's modest pre-season All-Bay Area Team. I took the first shot at composing it with this e-mail:

Here's my preliminary shot at this year's team:

RF Lewis/Winn
SS Renteria
IB Giambi
LF Holliday
DH Cust
CF Rowand
3B Chavez
C Sandoval
2B Ellis

Rotation:
Lincecum
Duchererererer
Cain
Johnson
Sanchez

Bench:
Winn/Lewis
Buck
Crosby
Suzuki

I don't know the A's relievers too well, but it looks like based on last year Devine, Ziegler, and Springer might join Wilson, Affeldt, Romo, and maybe Howry, Hinshaw, Casilla or Wuertz.

Cyborg respoded with a few minor changes:

Is Sandoval good enough defensively to be an everyday catcher? If so, this year's BA team is loaded at that position. How is he at third base? Chavez is a huge health question mark. Is Molina getting to old?

Maybe do this...

C Sandoval/Suzuki....
3B Chavez/Sandoval

One of the big debates on the A's blog is who will be better in 2009, Travis Buck or Ryan Sweeney. Last year it was clearly Sweeney. Since Ryan is better defensively, I'd take him over Buck as a utility player.

As for the bullpen, Zeigler and Devine were amazing (although in a non playoff pressure atmosphere. I wouldn't trust anyone else from Oakland but maybe include Gallagher or Eveland as a long/mop up reliever.

I agree with your starters

I don't think Molina is too old, I just wanted to get Sandoval's bat (which I'm very high on) in the lineup. Placing Suzuki on the roster was more a nod to his being younger, and likely better defensively, which would be important off the bench -- especially if Sandoval was the full-time starter. But I like Cyborg's idea to platoon Pablo at 3B with Chavez, and also behind the plate. However, If that other catcher is going to get significant AB's, I'm choosing Molina over Suzuki based on his better offensive numbers last year (Molina: .292/.322/.445, 16 HR's, 95 RBI's, Suzuki: .279/.346/.370, 7 HR, 42 RBI's). Also, that ay, once Chavez suffers his inevitable serious injury, Molina can play every day.

So, with that in mind, along with Cyborg's other notes, here is the final roster:

RF Lewis/Winn
SS Renteria
IB Giambi
LF Holliday
DH Cust
CF Rowand
3B Chavez/Sandoval
C Sandoval/Molina
2B Ellis

Rotation:
Lincecum
Duchererererer
Cain
Johnson
Sanchez

Bench:
Winn/Lewis
Sweeney
Crosby
Molina/Chavez

Bullpen:
Wilson
Affeldt
Romo
Springer
Ziegler
Devine
Eveland

Not too shabby, but certainly no match for the juggernaut squad in 2000, when both teams made the playoffs:

CF Terrence Long
SS Miguel Tejada
LF Barry Bonds
2B Jeff Kent
1B Jason Giambi
RF Ellis Burks
DH Ben Grieve*
3B Eric Chavez
C Ramon Hernandez

*Or you could put JT Snow at 1B at first, DH Giambi, and put Grieve on the bench.

Tim Hudson
Mark Mulder
Barry Zito
Gil Heredia
Livan Hernandez
Shawn Estes

JT Snow/Grieve
Bill Mueller
Marvin Benard
Rich Aurilia
Randy Velarde

Robb Nen
Jason Isringhausen
Felix Rodriguez
Jeff Tam
Alan Embree
Doug Henry

Now that is an impressive roster. Steroidtastic, even. One could argue the 2002 team was even better -- the Giants came within five outs of a title (D'oh!), and the A's again made the playoffs after winning 20 in a row during the season. Though Giambi and Burks were gone, they still had Bonds, Kent, Chavez, and Tejada (in his MVP year), and devastating pitching. Zito had his Cy Young year, Schmidt was just as good, and Hudson and Reuter also had great years. In the 'pen, the Giants had Nen, Worrell, and F-Rod, while the A's got a dominant year from Billy Koch, and good work from righty specialist Chad Bradford.

It's enough to make a Bay Area baseball fan long for the good old days.

Skipping Around

2009-02-15T22:15:00.000-08:00

After Best Picture and Best Actor, the next logical category is Best Actress, but I've only seen two of the movies/performances and hold out hope of seeing one or two of them before the Oscars (I've even gone so far as to rent the DVD of one -- 'Frozen River'). So, in the meantime, let's go to a category I can write about intelligently (at least in theory):

BEST DIRECTOR

David Fincher for 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button'
Danny Boyle for 'Slumdog Millionaire'
Ron Howard for 'Frost/Nixon'
Gus Van Sant for 'Milk'
Stephen Daldry for 'The Reader'

THE NOMS: Looks good except for 'The Reader' (again), which as I said before, I have not seen, yet manage to dislike anyway. I would've liked to see Martin McDonagh for 'In Bruges', Darren Aronofsky for 'The Wrestler', or Charlie Kaufman for 'Synecdoche, New York'.

WHO SHOULD WIN: Van Sant did a great job, in the most straight-forward cinematic approach he's ever taken, but it comes down to Boyle and Fincher. Boyle was inspired and unique, while Fincher displayed his usual technical mastery. It's a close call, but I give the nod to Fincher, who gives us his warmer, most introspective work to date, while wowing with the visuals.

WHO WILL WIN: Fincher may have told a warmer, more inviting story than he has before, but Boyle made something no one can compare to anything else. While Fincher stands an outside chance, Boyle will be riding a wave of hype along with his film, which could sweep the non-acting awards as a tribute to the film's achievement (voters knowing they can award their favorite performances from the other multi-nominees like 'Button', 'Milk', Frost/Nixon', etc.)

Random Rant & Video: Baseball vs. Football

2009-02-15T17:29:00.000-08:00

Over at Niners Nation, Fooch wrote a post about pitchers and catchers reporting, and opening up the discussion about baseball vs. football. One guy (at least, I think he was a guy. Aw, who am I kidding? He was on a football blog, of course, he's a guy) who was new to baseball made a case in favor of football based on the oldest argument in the book -- "baseball is boring".

I responded, in long-winded fashion (as is my custom), to debate him. I thought I'd re-print it here. Because my comment was filled with misspellings and typos (as is also my custom), I've cleaned it up a bit:

Baseball's boring when you don't truly understand it.

I don’t know of anyone who’s new to baseball who doesn’t think it’s boring. Why? Because it’s a game which needs to be understood to be loved. And I don’t just mean the rules — strikes/balls, force plays, etc. — but also the ever-present strategy. What pitch will he throw? Does the hitter have the green light? Should they bunt? Is the pitcher getting tired? These are all key components experienced baseball fans are constantly thinking about during a game, often while there is no “action” on the field. It’s a game of the mind, and if you’re spending the time between each pitch bored because nothing’s happening, then it’s probably because you’re ignoring all the inherent strategy of the situation. It’s built for thinkers.

Most people love football from the moment they start watching because you don’t need to know anything to enjoy it. You can put a little kid in front of the TV and they’ll immediately take to it, because you don’t even have to know the rules to enjoy the athletic ballet of hitting, throwing, tackling, etc. You can enjoy a game even if you have no idea what a zone blitz or a pulling guard is. That doesn’t mean there isn’t a lot more a thoughtful, knowledgeable fan can pick up during a game, but it’s built for the masses to enjoy easily.

Think of it like food — every kid loves a McDonald’s hamburger, or mac and cheese, or something easy and simple like that, but it takes a more mature pallet to enjoy the nuance of something like a fine wine, or pate, or something complicated like that. That doesn’t mean those complicated things are for everybody — many adults still prefer burgers and fries to gazpacho and quail, just as many people who know both sports prefer football — but you can’t say for sure until you’re at least able to recognize the many subtleties and nuances of baseball.

For me, it might be too close to call. Football was my first love, and like many, I thought baseball was boring as a kid. But now that I feel I have a good understanding of both sports, I think they’re about equal. Of course, I love them for completely different reasons — baseball for its intricacy (the best idea for a game I know of, and also the most perfect rules (notice how they’ve barely changed in 100 years), its strategy, the razor-thin difference between a hanging slider and an unhittable one, and the fact that each side has a completely equal chance at scoring (no clock or field position to hinder their efforts). I love football for its brutality, acrobatics, and pace, its many moving parts, the race against the clock, the gladiator-like specatcle, its immense preparation necessary to succeed (game-planning, film-watching, scout teams, etc.), and the fact the athletes are so good they literally have to change major rules every year just to keep the game fair.

So that’s my long-winded way of saying: it’s a draw.

Since that wasn't very funny, please allow me to make that up to by closing with a much more entertaining take on the Baseball vs. Football debate -- the all-time classic bit by the late, great George Carlin:

More Oscar Thoughts

2009-02-15T11:01:00.000-08:00

The next in our award-winning series on the Oscar nominees...

BEST ACTOR

Richard Jenkins in 'The Visitor'
Frank Langella in 'Frost/Nixon'
Sean Penn in 'Milk'
Brad Pitt in 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button'
Mickey Rourke in 'The Wrestler'

THE NOMS: Right on the money here. You could quibble with Pitt's selection, and some have, but although I think his was probably the weakest performance of the lot, he did have a very difficult role and nailed it. He had to play someone from childhood to old age, only in reverse -- acting young while looking old, and vice versa. The rest are all not only nomination-worthy, but Oscar-worthy, and the choice of Jenkins was a surprising bullseye by a group that often misses the target altogether on small indies and the performances within.

WHO SHOULD WIN: I adore Jenkins' performance, and was truly touched by its grace, subtlety, and nuance, and I very much admire Langella's non-impersonation of Nixon, but this is a two-man race. It's a tough call between Penn and Rourke -- the latter playing a role so close to himself it morphs beautifully into something between art and life, the former playing as far against type as ever and still delivering a typically great performance. The degree of difficulty of Penn's performance is higher, but the result is so moving in Rourke's, I have to go with that. Besides, Penn already has an Oscar.

WHO WILL WIN: Rourke. Come on, it's too good a story for Hollywood to pass up.

MY Oscars

2009-02-14T23:59:00.000-08:00

Okay, it's been quite awhile since the Oscar nominations, but I was busy at the time, and haven't gotten a chance to discuss them. Until now. With the show only a week away, I thought I'd take a look at each of the categories -- what I think of the nominations, who should win, and who will win. I'm going to try to squeeze in as many of these as possible before the big day, but you never know, so rather than hold off on the major awards, I'm starting with the biggie:

BEST PICTURE

'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button'
'Frost/Nixon'
'Milk'
'The Reader'
'Slumdog Millionaire'

THE NOMS: These look pretty good, with one glaring exception. I haven't seen 'The Reader' -- the only nominated film I missed -- mainly because the buzz around it was so bad, but I still feel pretty safe in saying it's a bad choice. Why? Well, for one, some people are calling it the worst Holocaust film ever. Another: Harvey Weinstein. He's known for pimping his films more tenaciously during Oscar season than any other mogul, and calling in all the right favors. Without his push, I doubt this film is nominated. Lastly, both 'The Wrestler' and 'The Dark Knight' were great, and really deserved a nomination, as did 'In Bruges'.

WHO SHOULD WIN: In my opinion, of the noms, 'Button' and 'Milk' were the best films in the traditional Oscar sense, but 'Slumdog' was one of the more unique films I've seen in a while. I understand the buzz it's generating, but my choice is 'Button'.

WHO WILL WIN: 'Slumdog'. It might be manipulative, and a bit un-Oscary, but it's too much of a feel-good hit to lose in a year without a slam dunk Oscar-type lock.

A-Roid Link Dump

2009-02-14T15:55:00.000-08:00

'The Onion' is always a good place to swing by anytime a big story hits it the world of sports, especially since their website has devoted an entire section to The Onion Sports Network. They've predictably been having a lot of fun with the A-Rod fallout, highlighted by a cover story reporting his death.

There's this little gem discussing all the new, unflattering nicknames he will now get (yet completely ignores the obvious, and my choice, "A-Roid"), and they also delve into what Curt Schilling thinks of the situation. But the my personal favorite is the breaking news from the Elias Sports Bureau, revealing the best clean player of the steroid era.

'The Onion' isn't the only place A-Rod is taking snipes from. Joe Torre, his former manager, didn't just rail on him in his new book, now he's calling A-Rod's numbers "tainted". Meanwhile, the publishers of a new tell-all book about him, written by Selena Roberts, the author of the SI article which outed him as steroid user, have announced they're moving up the release date. And just to put the ironic cherry atop the bad timing cake, the University of Miami just happen to choose this week to re-name their baseball field "Alex Rodriguez Park".

It Begins...

2009-02-14T12:17:00.000-08:00

It may not officially be spring yet, but the Giants pitchers and catchers reported to spring training today, which is close enough for me. That means we will soon be deluged with reports out of Scottsdale about the dazzling skills and bright futures of some Giants prospects -- whether they be accurate, or cobbled together out of sunbeams, optimism, and the laughter of children -- as well as the always-popular "He's in the best shape of his life" and "Last year's bad season was actually due to an unreported injury" stories. Not to be confused with the slightly less exciting "If you squint just right it looks like the Giants might have actually chance at contending" and of course, the de rigeur "5 Questions about the Giants" stories.

Soon (11 days), there will be actual games, which means cracks of the bat, pops of the glove, and Jon Miller, Duane Kuiper and Mike Krukow on the radio. It also means some prospect/reclamation project will become the dazzling phenom who hits .460 and fools you into thinking they might contribute this year (see: Ellison, Jason). It means sore hammies, and tendonitis, and various tweaks and turns which will worry me that they'll become the next catastrophic year-ending injury a la Kevin Frandsen (Note: If a season-ending injury to Kevin Frandsen can be reasonably termed "catastrophic", your team may in fact suck").

This baseball season, the first since I started this blogamajig, I plan on writing something about the Giants each and every day -- however short and superficial it may be -- as a type of Giants Diary (or Gaints Dairy, if I'm feeling dyslexic). That likely won't start until the regular season (let's be honest, it likely won't happen at all if my prior inconsistency and lack of sticktoitiveness is any clue), but since I'm going to at least attempt to do it, I thought I should try to ramp up to that during spring training. That means posting something nearly every day during the spring to get into writing shape. I may interrupt those posts with something about entertainment -- I've been wanting to write something on the Oscars, and also the fact that 'Damages' is making a serious run at being the best show on TV this season -- but I'm going to do my best at coming up with at least one Giants-related (or at least baseball-related) piece per day. For reference, Vegas has the odds of me keeping this up all season at 1,500,000 to 1.

Baseball

2009-02-12T18:05:00.000-08:00

Last week, I wrote about the NFL Films' show, 'America's Game', and said, "If you've never seen it, and you like football, you're missing out." Well, that goes double for Ken Burns' documentary, 'Baseball'. If you're a baseball fan, it's mandatory viewing. It's definitely the best documentary on baseball -- the history of record for the sport, really -- it might be the best documentary ever, period. Granted, it's 18 freakin' hours long (and about to get longer).

It airs on the MLB Network, one inning a week (the first covering the invention of the game and its history prior to 1900, each successive one covering a decade (2nd inning = 1900-1910, 3rd inning = 1910-1920, etc.). Tonight, I'm watching the 5th inning, about the 1940's, which might be the best one them all. Ted Williams and .406 (and the triple crown), Joe DiMaggio and the hit streak, World War II, Jackie Robinson and the color barrier, etc. The episode begins with a scene from a World War II movie where one group of soldiers overseas tests another with questions about what a "Texas Leaguer" is, and how the Brooklyn Dodgers did the previous season.

The next bit, just before the opening credits, which are always accompanied by a different rendition of the Star-Spangled Banner, really resonated with me. Baseball historian Robert Creamer describes a moment when in the army, he was listening to a World Series game, and a sargeant blew cigar smoke in his direction, and the smell took him back to Polo Grounds: "It smelled of cigar smoke, it smelled of urine, it smelled of stale popcorn. But it was my place." It's not often you hear an educated man of letters speak nostalgically about the smell of urine, but I could really relate to it. It's sort of like I feel about Candlestick Park -- it was windy, cold, ill-suited fro baseball, and the seats were too far from the field. But it was mine, and I miss it sometimes.

I think this might be representative of a larger truth about life: If you hate something hard enough, and long enough, you're bound to miss it once it's gone.

Yes, Pecan!

2009-02-12T00:01:00.000-08:00

That's right, Ben and Jerry have done it again, perfectly capturing our country's zeitgeist in a pithy ice cream title. Yes, they have joined the crowd in saluting this new and historic era we've entered by naming an ice cream flavor after President Obama. On his show, Keith Olbermann quoted from an e-mail suggesting some names for a George Bush-inspired flavor. here are my favorites:

"Abu Grape"
"Credit Crunch"
"Heckuvajob Brownie"
"W-M-Delicious"
"George Bush Doesn't Care About Dark Chocolate"

In all seriousness, it's crazy how many people are going out of their way to salute Obama in some way, naming food and drinks and babies and whatever they can think of after him, appearing on the covers of magazines like 'Entertainment Weekly', which never features politics, etc. When I was in Boulder, my buddy was drinking a batch of coffee he bought called "Obama Blend" which supposedly had beans in it which came from his father's home country.

I can't remember this much interest in any president. I don't know if that matters much -- or if the country's morale can have a real effect on tangible things like the economy -- but it sure is different. The only historical comparison I can think of is John F. Kennedy, but that's a total guess since not only had I not been born during his presidency, but my father hadn't even met my mother when he was elected (though my father was an economic adviser to JFK while he taught at MIT).

WTF?!

2009-02-11T13:31:00.000-08:00

Remember how Roberto Alomar went from being really good to really bad in like 15 seconds? Well, we might've found a pretty good explanation. It's hard to maintain a .300 average when you have FULL BLOWN AIDS!!!

Are you kidding me? I can't believe this hasn't come out yet. How does a future Hall of Fame-type player get full-blown AIDS, have to leave the sport abruptly, have his skin turn purple, foams at the mouth, gets sores on his face, and reveals he was once raped by two Mexican men after a minor-league game, the media completely misses it until now? Are they so wrapped up in the steroids no baseball fan I know cares about, that they didn't have five minutes to spare in the last three years to run down a teeny, tiny little story about all-time great who's career was derailed by AIDS, was warned by team doctors of this, and insisted on not getting tested?

Nice going, Mainstream media! Pedro Gomez should've been all over this one. Of course, that's easy for me to say -- an unemployed guy sitting on the floor in his boxers, paging through Alomar's stats on baseball-reference.com to find the exact moment when the AIDS set in (I'm going with 2002).

A-ROID!!!

2009-02-09T14:33:00.000-08:00

It's official -- everyone in major league baseball has taken steroids at one time or another. Today, A-Rod admitted he did steroids from 2001 to 2003 (no way to know if thats the actual extent of his use or not). Whether that's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, we'll probably never know, but even if true, it's hard to say what effect this had on his career -- past, present, or future. It's a little easier, however, to discuss what impact this revelation will have on his P.R. profile.

I think the way this was handled thus far has been a master stroke by A-Rod. Or, more precisely, whatever P.R./crisis management firm he employed to advise him. He didn't let the S.I. story claiming he tested positive fester for days while he looked like a fool (kind of like his recent playoff performances for the Yankees). Instead, he acted fast, came (at least relatively) clean, and shouldered the blame. Except for one weak moment, where I felt he tried to cop out by saying the pressure and the climate at the time in baseball were factors in his decision to cheat, and that he had merely been "naive", I thought he performed strongly. Given a chance to blame the player's union for keeping the samples and letting the positive hit the news, he demurred, taking all the blame himself for creating the positive sample in the first place. In short, I think he hit this situation out of the park. So, for once, A-Rod came through in the clutch.

That being said, this might be the toughest situation involving drugs any athlete has ever had to deal with. We've seen future Hall of Famers like Bonds and Clemens have to deal with the accusations towards the end of their careers. We've seen very good players like Jason Giambi and Andy Pettitte admit to steroid use (though Giambi never actually said it). But we've never seen a future Hall of Famer admit to steroid use in the middle of his career. A-Rod will likely play 10 more years, and approach or break all kinds of records. How will fans deal with this? Like Bonds, he's not the most adored superstar out there -- even by his own home fans. Speaking of Yanks fans, how do you think they'll react to A-Rod coming to the plate at the new Yankee Stadium on opening day? I think it's safe to say there will be at least a few boos.

But how will fans as a whole react? I'd imagine somewhere between Bonds/Clemens, who are pariahs outside their long-time fans, local area and small circle of friends, and Pettitte/Giambi, who continue to play with nary a boo or steroid chant to be heard when they take the field. But which side will it lean towards? I'll say closer to the Pettitte/Giambi treatment, though it could be a little rocky at first. I think the first few times around the league, he'll hear quite a few boos and chants, and see some embarrassing signs -- and not just about Madonna. But within a few years, people will concentrate more on how good he still is (presumably without drugs, but you can't assume anything anymore -- he could be on any number of untestable drugs), and how he at least admitted it, which is what everyone claims Bonds and Clemens (and Pete Rose before them) should've done. You can't say dirty players should just come clean, then refuse to forgive someone who does just that (presumably).

As he said himself in the interview with ESPN's Peter Gammons, he's got a 14-year sample to show what he's done without steroids (presumably) -- the five he's already had, and the nine more he's got on his Yankee contract. But A-Rod has been called "A-Fraud" before these whispers of his steroid use even began. He's been hated for his lack of clutchness, his selfishness, his pretty boy persona, etc. How will this affect that? Will it slow the forgiveness? Stop it altogether? Or will this, along with his admission he's been selfish and immature up until this point, open people up to him? As crazy as it seems, there is an outside possibility this could be just the thing to personalize A-Rod to people. To be perfectly honest, I actually like A-Rod more today than I did yesterday. Not by much, but just a little bit. That's all he needs -- for people to soften towards him ever so slightly. Even if it takes years. In this case, I think A-Rod has time on his side.

Words of Wisdom

2009-02-08T23:31:00.000-08:00

"Fight on my men, Sir Andrew said
A little I am hurt, but not yet slain
I'll just lay down and bleed awhile
And then I'll rise and fight again"

That quote from an unnamed old Scottish warrior, was used as an inspirational tool by former Buffalo Bills head coach Marv Levy. That was one of many interesting, touching, and surprising nuggets to be found in the episode of 'America's Game' about the 1990 Bills. For those who don't know, 'America's Game' is a great show by NFL Films which airs on the NFL Network. The first edition featured all the Super Bowl winners, and the second edition, titled "Missing Rings", chronicles great teams which fell short of a title. If you've never seen it, and you like football, you're missing out. The Bills episode is especially good, mostly due to Levy, who's one of the great character's in the history of football.

Levy was a master of inspirational quotes (Winston Churchill was his favorite source), but this one stuck out to me. The poem is sort of apropos to how I feel after the whole Boulder debacle -- I feel a bit deflated, and disappointed, but I also know I have to re-group. The trip out there was fun, and nostalgic, and an adventure, and while it had quite a cost -- in terms of money, time, maybe even a friendship -- I can't afford to dwell on the past. I have to move forward, and that means interviewing for work and looking at new apartments in LA traffic. May God have mercy on my soul.

Update: Back to LA

2009-02-02T20:00:00.000-08:00

Remember all that stuff I wrote about moving to Boulder? Well, that might've been a tad premature. Really, it was more of a test drive than anything else, and as it turns out, I'm not buying. Although I'll always love Boulder, and visit as often as I can, all things considered, LA has more for me right now -- in terms of career opportunities, friends, and of course, my wife and kids, er, pets. So now I'm headed back this week, and looking for work. If you hear of something, you just let me know.

It's amazing what a little taste of something new can do to remind you of the upside of what was old. It's like the backup QB for an NFL team without a stud starting QB. Every time the starter stumbles, you imagine the backup might be better. But when the backup plays, you usually see pretty quickly why he's the backup. After living apart from my wife, my home, and my routine for a week and a half, I'm ready to get a big ol' heaping of the old.

Notes from the Road

2009-01-25T09:25:00.000-08:00

I'm in Boulder -- and too busy so far to post much (or at all) -- but I wanted to throw something up, if only to assure the two or three people who check this site don't think it's abandoned. A few notes from the road trip out:

--Podcasts are my new favorite invention, and the primary reason I made it to Boulder with my sanity intact. Funny, engaging and informative segments from the likes of ESPN, NPR, and The Onion was all I needed -- very little music (though I had a bunch at the ready) and local radio were almost completely unnecessary.

--As I crossed into Nevada, an automatic camera snapped my photo, like the traffic cameras positioned all over LA to catch people who run red lights. This brought back the unpleasant memories of the cameras catching me running the a red light near my house -- twice.

--The next thing I came to, just across the Nevada border, were the state line casinos -- including "Terrible's Casino and Resort". At first, I thought this was a terrible name for a casino (pun intended), but as I was telling my third friend about it, I realized it might just be terrible like a fox. Or something.

--Utah is filled with extremely polite folks, though possibly inbred.

-- Colorado is even more beautiful than I remember. Seeing the sky, I wonder why it looks so blue. Why the clouds seem so white, and puffy, and perfect. Don't they have blue skies in LA? Aren't there clouds? The answer is that LA does indeed have them, but us residents there are forced to view them through a screen door of smog which dulls them to our senses. Here, everything is crisp and clear, and larger than life -- as if being seen for the very first time.

--The people in Boulder are also a huge improvement over LA people, although the same thing could be said for pond scum, so take that for what it's worth. People smile, everybody you pass on the street says, "Hi", and every time you go out to a bar or restaurant you end up striking up a conversation with someone. I don't know if Colorado holds a better life for me, but I know it's a more pleasant life.

I hope to get up a post on the Oscar noms soon, and maybe even one on 'Slumdog Millionaire', which I finally saw, and how it figures into my Top 10 list. But this blog is lower on my list priorities than it has been recently, what with the screenwriting, a new job, a new home (maybe?), and seeing old friends on the agenda. So we'll see. I know you're waiting with baited breath.

Link Dump

2009-01-15T12:48:00.000-08:00

So, I mentioned in my Top 10 list of movies from '08 that I hadn't yet seen 'Slumdog Millionaire'. It's quickly ascended to the top of the Oscar candidates, but I haven't even tried to see it, because I've heard a couple of takes on it, and am pretty sure I'd hate it. I know, everybody's raving about it -- it's the feel-good, heartwarming, tear-jerking, blah, blah, blah -- but from the sound of the plot, and a description of the storytelling techniques, I knew it wasn't my cup of tea. That's why I didn't feel bad making my Top 10 list without seeing the movie likely to walk away with "Best Picture".

That original take was only solidified when I read Film Drunk's review today, which basically says everything I'd heard, imagined, and feared about the movie. It outlines some specific issues I already had with the movie, the general feeling of absurdity, cliche, and self-satisfaction I expected, and even a couple more weaknesses I hadn't heard of/imagined. I'll probably see the movie eventually -- I'll be in Boulder soon, without much to do, and have already seen all the good movies coming out across the country this month -- but more out of morbid curiosity than eagerness.

Today, Film Drunk also posted review of 'The Wrestler, making me feel bad I didn't call it the best film of the year, which it just might be. Every time I read another review of it, I'm again amazed to think about how great Mickey Rourke's performance was. If he doesn't win the Oscar, I hope he puts whoever does in a Figure Four Leglock a la Brutus "The Barber" Beefcake.

While were talking about movies and dropping links, here's Rotten Tomatoes' Top 10 Sci-Fi Flicks for the Thinking Man. Some good ones on this list, including a couple you don't hear talked about much -- 'Gattaca' and 'Primer' -- along with the more usual suspects -- 'Children of Men' and 'Blade Runner'.

Lastly, I'm headed off to Boulder early next week, so the posting may not be too regular for a while. We'll see how it goes, but I'll be juggling a job, the completion of the script I'm working on, and my football column (at least through the Super Bowl), all while staying at a friend's place, so it could be spotty at best. Then again, I may have to get online to rant about driving cross-country (well, halfway across anyway), or living in snow, or how nice the people outside of LA are, so you never know.

Right now, the biggest issue is that I can't find my favorite album -- Radiohead's 'The Bends' -- for the road trip. I've uploaded all my other CD's to iTunes (finally joining the 21st century), but can't find it anywhere. Was it stolen? Lost? Taken by CD fairies? Did I loan it to someone? I can't make it 1,000 miles on the open road without it, so if I lent it to you, this is the time to return it. My sanity is at stake.

That's it for now. See you when I see you.

Random List: 10 Best Movies of 2008

2009-01-12T13:41:00.000-08:00

Here's my Top 10 films, with a caveat: I have yet to see 'Slumdog Millionaire' which people are raving about (don't you love it when people say that?), and which won a bunch of Golden Globes last night.

1. The Dark Knight -- I'm a traditionalist, and I have to admit, I had a hard time putting this movie in the #1 spot because I don't think of a comic book movie that way. But it was the most fun I had at the movies this year, and there's certainly something to be said for that. Another thing: I loved each of the the movies which follow, but no film this year made me feel like "Best Picture", so why not go with the movie everyone loved? Especially when it had great acting by past Oscar winners and nominees alike (topped by Heath Ledger), was directed by one of the world's best directors (Christopher Nolan), and made some of the best commentary on modern existence, all within what was heretofore a limited, predictable genre. And to think, we thought Tim Burton's 'Batman' -- and Jack Nicholson's The Joker -- was cutting edge 20 years ago.

2. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button -- The visual masterpiece of the year, David Fincher's dark fairy tale about life and death resonated more with me than any other film this year. The only thing that kept it from the top spot is the fact that it didn't raise the pulse, or have me on the edge of my seat, as much as it had me watching in respectful wonder. Great acting, great effects, well-crafted story. One of those Hall of Very Good rather than Hall of Fame types. (My review)

3. The Wrestler -- This was right up there my favorite recent movie-watching experiences. Mickey Rourke's performance (already Golden Globe-winning), was one of the very best in awhile -- a harmonic convergence of actor and character. Directed with remarkable restraint by Darren Aronofsky, the film is a ballad to a man past his prime who's too set in his way to change for the better now. It's funny, real, and heartbreaking. (My review)

4. In Bruges -- The best surprise of the year. A little film with not much fanfare, which delivered laughs, action, and a surprising amount of heart. Colin Farrell is great (he also took home a Golden Globe), as is Brendan Gleeson -- both capturing the humanity with the hitmen they play. The lyrical style employed here by Martin McDonagh, who wrote and directed, is irresistible, and draws you into this light-hearted world of murder-for-hire.

5. Synecdoche, NY -- Most people were too confused by this movie to like it. I wasn't surprised. It isn't for everybody. In fact, this film is only for a thin slice of filmgoers -- ones who like to think a lot, don't mind excessive symbolism and metaphors, or a meandering storyline. It is even more specifically for artists, and especially for writers -- about the creative process, how it affects your life, and how your life affects it. If that sounds boring to you, you're not alone, but for me it was one of the unique pleasures of the year. (My review)

6. The Visitor -- Richard Jenkins' performance as the lead is as good as anyone's this year -- much more subtle than Mickey Rourke's, and not quite as entertaining, but just as solid. A small story about big ideas -- freedom, immigrants, America, love, and the healing power of music. Jenkins allows his character to change greatly over the course of the movie without ever making major changes to his performance. Just the subtle way he allows his body to slowly un-tense as he becomes more comfortable with his new friends and musical instrument speaks volumes.

7. Tropic Thunder -- Not many comedies make this list -- I see it more for achievements, rather than entertainment. But the funniest movie of the year had a couple of the year's best performances -- Robert Downey, Jr., Tom Cruise -- and some of the best sequences -- when the cast is first released into the jungle, when Stiller is captured by Red Dragon, the Asian drug-running gang, when Jack Black's character runs out of heroin. It had a great concept, great cast, and great execution. When you have all that, you can make this list -- even if you're a studio comedy.

8. Milk -- A well-told story, a great performance, and superior supporting cast make this one of the best films of the year. The timeliness of the subject matter didn't hurt, nor did the straight-forward yet loving directorial job by Gus Van Sant, but most of this film's success can be attributed to Sean Penn's performance. It was vivid and colorful, but not over-the-top, or cliche. (My review)

9. Frost/Nixon -- Like 'Milk', this film told a fairly well-known political story in a period piece format, but spends less time examining what happened than why things happened. It introduces us to the personalities and peccadillos behind the great (or not-so-great) men, and allows us to understand the men who shaped the events of their time. I think some more chances could've been taken, but you don't see Ron Howard movies for cutting edge tricks and chance-taking, you see it for well-crafted, populist entertainment. That's exactly what this is. (My review)

10. The Promotion -- Quite possibly, the most underrated movie of the year. Great performances by Sean William Scott and especially John C. Reilly make this film's unpredictable storyline -- is he the hero, and he the villain, or the other way around? -- work, and keeps you rooting for both characters, even though they are usually at each other's throats. That's no small feet. Neither is keeping us guessing how the story will end, which is a rarity when you watch as many movies as I do. Nor making us laugh consistently all the way through, or filling the supporting cast with solid actors giving quirky, funny performances -- Jenna Fisher, Lily Taylor, Gil Bellows.

Near misses: Gran Torino, Defiance, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, 'Vicky Cristina Barcelona'.

Random List: 10 Best TV Shows of 2008

2009-01-09T01:33:00.000-08:00

Okay, here they are , my long-awaited Top 10 list of the best shows in '08:

1. The Wire -- Goodnight, sweet television drama. What more can I say about this show that hasn't already been said? If you watched it, you already know how good it is, and don't need to listen to me. If you didn't watch it, then you're a moron. But a lucky moron -- you still have the chance to see each and every show for the very first time. I advise strongly for you to do so.

2. 30 Rock -- The funniest show of TV got funnier in '08. It features everybody's favorite Emmy winner Tina Fey, and added flashy guest stars just about every week, but it was the regular supporting characters which usually stole the show. Limited to small rules, Tracy Morgan, Alec Baldwin, Jack McBrayer, and Jane Krakowski are all still among the best comedic performers anywhere on TV.

3. Dexter -- Already a great show, Dexter ramped up it's quality even further in '08. It started with a careless Dexter killing an honest man, ands with him cleaning up the streets from a monster he made. The Addition of Jimmy Smits as Dexter's partner in crime was a master-stroke, and allowed the show to stretch its limits. Dexter found himself playing good cop for once, showing us he does know the difference between the bad guys, and the really bad guys.

4. Breaking Bad -- The best new show on TV in '08. It starts with an almost unbelievable premise -- a husband, father, and high school science teacher becomes a meth cooker -- and explains how believable, and real it can really be. It's also cool, and dramatic, and very, very funny. Also: well-acted -- Bryan Cranston already won an Emmy for lead actor.

5. Mad Men -- The first season showed us it was one of the best shows on TV. The second season showed us it has a chance to be one of the best shows ever. It took until the second season for creator Matthew Weiner to really show that meandering, mysterious storytelling that made his alma mater, The Sopranos', such a masterpiece. I can't wait for season three.

6. The Shield -- For most of the show, it was a sleazy good time, a fun ride through the bad part of town, punctuated by tense, surreal moments of high drama. In its final season, it was all tension. By the end, there wasn't a drop of fun to be had for miles. But that was how it had to be. Laughing and joking while breaking laws and making enemies, as Vic Mackey did, can't last forever. The show opened with Vic enjoying a friendly barbecue with his team before ganging up with one to kill another. We knew then he was bad, but he charmed us -- and everybody else -- for a good while. In the end, there was no more fooling, but Vic, the ultimate survivor, was still around.

7. The Closer -- The best procedural on TV. All others above on this list have to entertain, but are not forced to play by the restrictive rules of having to be framed by a crime -- it starts with a murder, and ends with an arrest almost without fail. But all the characters are so real and entertaining -- especially Deputy Chief Brenda Lee Johnson -- and the dialogue is so well-written, it never feels like a cookie-cutter, as so many others do.

8. House -- The show got back to regular business -- set cast, no more "competition" -- and never missed a beat. The subplot with House's best friend Wilson giving up on their friendship was a welcome change from Wilson usual uber-patience with him. The supporting characters have all taken a back seat as most of the personal storylines revolve around House, but that's probably for the best.

9. Lost -- Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in. There's simply been too much time, energy and attention devoted to this show for me to not care about what happens. I've been doubting they will ever come up with an over-arching story which will explain away everything that's happened so far, but I'm still enjoying the ride.

10. Friday Night Lights -- This season's best episode may have been the first of 2009 -- and there's still next week's season finale to go -- but the groundwork was laid in '08 when the show's third season found the same groove they had in the first. In was major bounce-back year for the show, which went of the tracks in season two by trying to sex up the show too much in an attempt to raise mediocre ratings. In doing so, they lost their positive word-of-mouth from fans and critics, and were essentially cancelled by NBC. But DirecTV swept in to save the day, airing the show on their Channel 101. The season was such a success, NBC wants them back -- they'll be airing all of season three starting in two weeks.