"… the reason you win or lose is darn near always the same – pitching.” — Earl Weaver
If you’re seeing this, we’re live at the new host. Upgraded version of WordPress, more stable server (it is no longer hosted on a machine that literally is sitting on someone’s desk).
I lost a comment on my forkball article; apologies to Frank M. (I only saw it at the last minute before the cutover).
Let me know if you see any issues.
Hello all.
A quick note: we’re moving the NationalsArmRace.com blog today (June 15, 2013) to a new hosting provider that will give us a lot more stability and should effectively end the downtime issues we’ve been having. The new host also has a better WordPress configuration which should allow us to do some more plug-ins, have better tracking, etc.
We’ll be back soon. Thanks.
Despite not really being a big NCAA basketball fan, I’m as intrigued as the next guy about the tournament, 12-vs-5 seed match-ups, and other statistical oddities. This year, with the alma-mater James Madison University making the tournament for the first time since 1994, I took a slightly increased interest in the tournament. And each year it seems we add to the lists of amazing accomplishments when it comes to upsets (2013’s list is high lighted below in red), mid-majors making the final four, or top teams getting eliminated early.
Here’s some useless trivia on the tournament, collected over the years, updated for 2013’s tournamnet.
NCAA tourney Trivia
Seeding began in 1979, field expands to 64 in 1985 (I’m conveniently ignoring the “expansion” to 68)
Lowest seeds to make final four (since seeding began in 1979)
– #11: LSU 1986, #11 George Mason 2006, #11 VCU 2011
– #9: Penn 1979, Wichita State 2013
– #8: UCLA 1980, Villanova 1985, Wisconsin 2000, UNC 2000, Butler 2011
– #7: Virginia 1984
– #6: Michigan 1992, Kansas 1988, Providence 1987,Nc State 1983, Houston 1982, Purdue 1980
– #5: Florida 2000, Iowa 1980, Indiana 2002
Interesting that no #12 seed, despite 12/5 upsets every year, has made the final four. Clearly its easier to make it out of a bracket from the #11 seed spot, who has to beat #6, #3, #2 and #1 seeds of a region in order, hence getting the #1 seed last.
Lowest seeds to win it/Non #1 or #2 seeds to win it
– #8: Villanova 1985
– #6: Nc State 1983
– #6: Kansas 1988
– #4: Arizona 1997
– #3: Michigan 1989
– #3: Syracuse 2003
– #3: Florida 2006
– #3: UConn 2011
Villanova and Nc State’s runs are among the two best tournament stories in history of course.
#1 Seeds that have lost in 2nd Round: Happened 15 times since expansion to 64 teams in 85
– 1985: #8 Villanova d #1 Michigan (Villanova wins tourney)
– 1986: #8 Auburn d #1 St. Johns (Auburn loses regional final)
– 1990: #8 UNC d #1 Oklahoma (UNC loses next round)
– 1992: #9 UTEP d #1 Kansas (UTEP loses next round)
– 1994: #9 BC d #1 UNC (BC loses next round)
– 1996: #8 Georgia d #1 Purdue (loses next round)
– 1998: #8 Rhode Island d #1 Kansas (loses regional final)
– 2000: #8 UNC d #1 Stanford (loses final four)
– 2000: #8 Wisconsin d #1 Arizona (loses in final four)
– 2002: #8 UCLA d #1 Cincinnati (loses next round)
– 2004: #9 UAB d #1 Kentucky (loses next round)
– 2004: #8 Alabama d #1 Stanford (loses reg. final)
– 2010: #9 Northern Iowa d #1 Kansas (lost next round)
– 2011: #8 Butler d #1 Pittsburgh (lost in national final)
– 2013: #9 Wichita State d #1 Gonzaga (lost in the final four)
I have a theory about college basketball in general, and it is sort of highlighted by the Butler and Wichita State results here. And to a lesser extent VCU’s run a few years ago. The theory is this; with fewer top guys staying all four years, the mid-major teams who recruit a nucleaus of guys who play together for four years end up being nearly as good a team as a team of high-end recruits who are freshman or sophomores. Hence why we’re clearly seeing more mid-major teams working their way through to the later stages of the game. Anyone who calls VCU a cinderella didn’t watch their games; they pounded teams, good teams, ranked teams on their way to the final four. They were no fluke. I talked about this in a March 2011 post with more details. Wichita State this year was a very, very good team. Butler nearly won the national title two years ago.
Why don’t these teams get more national press? Because national writers just assume that because a team plays in the ACC or Big East, they’re better. So we’ll continue to see these “upsets” until eventually we get more national parity in terms of press coverage.
Closest call 1-16 games
– 1985: Michigan d Farleigh Dickenson 59-55
– 1989: Georgetown d Princeton 50-49
– 1989: Oklahoma d East Tennessee State 72-71
– 1990: Michigan State d Murray State 75-71 OT
– 1996: Purdue d Western Carolina 73-71
– 2006: Connecticut d Albany 72-59 (Uconn down by 12 in 2nd half)
– 2013: Gonzaga d Southern 64-58 (tied later in the game)
I didn’t really think the Gonzaga/Southern game was *that* close … but everyone talked about how they “got a scare.” This was no one-point win or OT win, like we saw before. I remember watching the Georgetown-Princeton game; Princeton had a shot at the end to win it and the shooter was *clearly* fouled … but no call and Georgetown escaped.
Side note: why does Georgetown constantly have issues with these long-shot seeds?
#15 seeds that have won games (7): only FGCU has advanced.
– 1991 Richmond over Syracuse
– 1993 Santa Clara over Arizona
– 1997 Coppin State over South Carolina (then lost to Texas by 1 2nd rnd)
– 2001: Hampton over Iowa State
– 2012: Norfolk State over Missouri
– 2012: Lehigh over Duke
– 2013: Florida Gulf Coast over Georgetown (then won easily in 2nd round over SDSU, lost by 10 in sweet 16)
FGCU was no fluke; they cruised to wins over both Georgetown and San Diego State, and jumped way ahead of Florida in the sweet 16 before sound coaching from Billy Donovan took over and Florida was able to grind them down. If FGCU had just one half-way decent rebounder I think they would have beaten Florida.
#13,14 seeds that have made it to the sweet 16 (6) (none made it beyond)
– #14 Cleveland State 1986 (then lost 71-70 to #7 Navy)
– #13 Richmond 1988 (blown out by #1 temple)
– #14 Tennessee-Chattanooga 1997 (Loses 71-65 Providence)
– #13 Valparaiso 1998 (Loses to #8 Rhode Island)
– #13 Oklahoma 1999
– #13 Ohio 2011
Mid-Majors to make Elite 8 since 1985 (expansion to 64). 11 times now.
– 1981: #6 Wichita State (MVC)
– 1986: #7 Navy (CAA); David Robertson
– 1990: #11 Loyola Marymount (WCC): Hank Gathers & Bo Kimble
– 1999: #10 Gonzaga (WCC)
– 2002: #10 Kent State (MAC)
– 2006: #11 George Mason (CAA)
– 2008: #10 Davidson (Southern): had Stephan Curry
– 2010: #5 Butler (Horizon)
– 2011: #8 Butler (Horizon)
– 2011: #11 VCU (CAA)
– 2013: #9 Wichita State (MVC)
“High-Mid” majors to elite 8 since 79 (Louisville in Metro/C-USA a number of times here)
– 1980,2,3,6: Louisville
– 1981: #6 BYU (MWC)
– 1984: #10 Dayton (A10)
– 1987-1991: #1, #4 UNLV (MWC)
– 1996: #1 UMass (A10)
– 1997: #3 Utah (MWC), Louisville (Cusa)
– 2001: #11 Temple (A10)
– 2004: #1 St. Josephs, #7 Xavier (A10)
– 2005: Louisville (cusa)
– 2007: #2 Memphis (C-usa)
– 2008: #1 Memphis (c-usa), #3 Xavier (A10)
Unlike other pundits, who divide the basketball conferences into “big 6” and “mid-major,” I think there’s a third tier. The big 6 conferences are obvious (Big East, ACC, SEC, Big10, Big12 and Pac10). But basketball conferences like the old Metro Conference, Conference-USA, the Atlantic-10 and to a slightly lesser extent the Mountain West Conference have in many cases been just as strong as the big-6 conferences. They’ve had #1 ranked teams, plenty of #1 overall teams (just see the list above), and i think a distinction between “mid-majors” and these “high” mid-majors should be made.
Mid/High mid-Majors to make final four: (Not counting Louisville pre-Big East here)
– 1979: #1 Indiana State (MVC), #9 Pennsylvania (Ivy)
– 1987, 1990, 1991: #1 UNLV (MWC)
– 1997: #3 Utah (MWC)
– 2006: #11 George Mason (CAA)
– 2010: #5 Butler (Horizon)
– 2011: #8 Butler (Horizon), #11 VCU (CAA)
– 2013: #9 Wichita State (MVC)
Years no #1 seeds didn’t make final 4
– 1980: #5 Iowa, #2 Louisville, #6 Purdue, #8 Ucla
– 2006: #4 LSU, #2 Ucla, #11 George Mason, #3 Florida
– 2011: #8 Butler, #11 VCU, #3 Uconn, #4 Kentucky
Teams to beat three #1 seeds in a tourney
– 1997; #4 Arizona
—
Conferences that have never won an NCAA game: Patriot
—
Only team from a “power” conference never to make the NCAA tournament?: Northwestern
Biggest margin of victory in Final game
– 1990: UNLV over Duke 103-73
– 1992: Duke d Mich State 71-51
Highest combined seed count of any final four?
– 2000: 22 (Mich St 1, Florida 5, UNC 8, Wisc 8)
– 2011: 26 (Butler 8, VCU 11, Uconn 3, Kentucky 4)
Lowest:
– 1999, 1997: 7: 3 ones and a 4
– 1993: 5 (3 ones and a two)
– 2008: 4: all four #1 seeds made the final4
Teams to win NCAA title, finishing undefeated
– None since 1979 (when seeding started in the tourney)
– 1954: Kentucky (but barred form post-season for ineligible players)
– 1956: San Francisco
– 1957: UNC
– 1964: UCLA
– 1967: UCLA
– 1972: UCLA
– 1973: UCLA
– 1973: NC State (barred from post-season recruiting violations)
– 1976: Indiana (just voted best ever NCAA team)
Teams to enter Tourney Undefeated, but lose
– 1979: Indiana State: Lost in final to Michigan (Larry Bird’s team)
– 1991: UNLV: lost to Duke in National semis
Lowest Seeding ever given to a power6 conference team?
– 2008: Georga was a #13 seed
– 1999: #13 Oklahoma 1999
– 2013: Oregon, Cal and Ole Miss all given #12 seeds from power conferences.
Non Baseball post.
Just a quick shout out to my alma mater James Madison University, who won the CAA tournament on 3/11/13 and returns to the NCAA tournament for the first time in nearly 20 years. To say that JMU has not been an impact school in the basketball world is a slight understatement; they hadn’t even made the CAA tourney final since 1997. They only managed to win the CAA tournament in 1994 by virtue of a last-gasp 3-pointer to win the game 77-76 by star-turned-states’ witness Kent Culuko.
Since JMU last was in the NCAA tournament, they fired Lefty Dreisell, who was brought in to revolutionize the program with his reputation and give it national credence but managed just one appearance in his 9 years at the school (he clearly could recruit better than he could coach, a statement many old-school University of Maryland fans probably agree with too). Since Dreisell’s departure JMU has gone through a series of medicore coaches with even more mediocre results. They are also in the midst of a horrid stretch against their biggest CAA rival, George Mason, who have won 9 straight versus JMU and an astonishing 18 of the last 19 meetings. This is nearly a complete reversal of the series outcomes for the first decade or so of this rivalry and does a good job of stating just how far the two teams’ fortunes have diverged.
The CAA has grown up in the last decade without JMU’s involvement, with Mason and VCU making final fours and teams like ODU, UNC Wilmington and Richmond (now with the A-10) routinely reaching the tournament and getting marquee wins. JMU was a great team in the early 80s, making three straight NCAA tournaments AND winning a game in each of those tournaments, but has just one NCAA appearance (in 1994) since. That’s 30 years, one tournament apperance.
Lets hope they get a decent seeding and can take out a #3 or #4 seed.
(Editor’s Note: I first started writing this post in May of 2011, came back to it in August of 2012. Suddenly in Feb of 2013 this whole post got “scooped” by Craig Calcaterra on HardballTalk. Don’t you hate it when a post you’ve had in draft mode forever is essentially duplicated while you sit on it? At least it gave me some reason to finish it and finally publish it).
In early 2011, After watching a re-run of “Four Days in October” of the fantastic 30-for-30 series I got to thinking about the “leading” sports obsession, per city, around the country. There were numerous shots of the town of Boston, its fans, the bars, etc, and one clearly got the impression that Boston is a “Baseball town.” This got me thinking: what is the Leading Sport in every pro town in America?
(coincidentally, if you’re also a fan of the 30-for-30 series, I posted a review and ranking of all 30 original episodes in December 2010. ESPN’s 30 for 30 site also has a ranking page where, after you vote, you can see the results. I put in my own rankings on the Dec 2010 post, which I may re-publish at some point).
Here in Washington, clearly we are a Football town. The Redskins are king; every local sports radio show dedicates large portions of its programming to the Redskins in season or out, because that’s what draws. The other pro teams in town are of only passing interest to casual fans, are mostly followed by die-hards (like me and the Nationals of course), but if they have a run of success (as with the Capitals now and the Nationals in the first half of 2005 or in 2012) then suddenly they’re popular. But Football will always be king here. Some local sportswriters have mentioned the Jayson Werth walk-off in game 4 of last year’s NLDS as the moment that “Washington became a baseball town,” but I just don’t see it.
How about the other major sports towns in America? I took every town that has 2 or more pro franchises (since obviously, if you live in Jacksonville with only one major franchise, the answer is usually pretty clear) and put my thoughts down. Feel free to debate, criticize, or tell me I don’t know what i’m talking about. The towns are listed by category, in descending market size.
Four (or more) Sports towns
1. New York: Baseball. Despite having so many sports choices, I think the history and continued dominance of the Yankees makes NYC primarily a baseball town. That’s not to say that a city of 8 million people doesn’t support its football, basketball or hockey teams, but none of the other NY-based franchises have consistently been as good or in the news as much as the Yankees.
2. Los Angeles: Basketball. As with the Yankees of New York, the Lakers status as one of the marquee franchises (if not THE marquee franchise) of the NBA makes this a basketball town first and foremost. The Dodgers have 50+ years of history in the town, but the Lakers rule. Note; of all its major city counterparts, Los Angeles is also the closest to a “college town” that you’ll see. USC and UCLA both have major sports programs, the area hosts the Rose Bowl every year, and other lesser sports schools such as Loyola Marymount, Pepperdine, and Long Beach State all have had their moments in various college sports.
3. Chicago: Baseball (but open for debate). The Baseball history is obvious, with both teams having 100+ years of history and the Cubs being one of the marquee franchises in the sport. The Bulls clearly made the town a Basketball town for a sustained period of time, but I don’t get the impression they’ve supplanted the Cubs. The Blackhawks are an Original Six hockey team, and the Chicago Bears have been around since the beginning of organized professional football (In fact, they won the first NFL championship in 1933). So there’s a ton of sports history in this town. But do the other sports supplant the baseball culture?
4. Philadelphia: Football. The Phillies have re-made themselves into a dominant force in Baseball over the past few years (2012 notwithstanding), but nothing stokes the fire of Pennsylvanians as much as the E-A-G-L-E-S.
5. Dallas/Fort Worth: Football. Can’t get much more important to a town’s psyche than the Cowboys. Even if the Mavericks win a title and the Rangers make the World Series.
6. Miami: Football by attrition. The South Florida populace is so irritated with Jeffrey Loria that they’ll probably never be baseball diehards. The Heat? LeBron is johnny-come-lately. Hockey? In a town where it never gets below 60? Can’t see it. In fact, Miami may really be the most apathetic sports town out there. The rise of the U of Miami football team helped, but that fad has passed and Miami football barely draws any more. I don’t think you’d really say that the town is crazy over its Dolphins, but is it crazy about any of its teams?
7. Washington: Football. The Redskins rule (as discussed above), and the other teams are only of passing interest if they’re winning (which, in the Wizards case, hasn’t happened since the late 70s).
8. Detroit: Hockey. The Red Wings are an institution, and they don’t call Detroit “Hockey Town, USA” for nothing. The Tigers were a laughingstock for years, the Pistons had a slight run of glory under Isaiah Thomas, and the Lions are in the midst of a horrible period. Even with Detroit’s run of glory in the past decade, the Red Wings keep on rolling.
9. Boston: Baseball. The hold the Red Sox have on the psyche of New Englanders in general is legendary. Boston’s other teams have had sustained runs of greatness lately, and of course the Celtics rival the Lakers in terms of legendary franchises. But if you have to pick one team I still think its the Red Sox.
10. Atlanta: Football, I think. The Braves made the playoffs 15 straight years but the team couldn’t sell out its playoff games. I don’t think the town really cares about its hockey or basketball teams that much (in fact, the Hockey team moved to Winnipeg). How about the Falcons? Does the rise and fall of the Falcons drive sports talk in Atlanta? Perhaps the presence of Georgia Tech and SEC football makes the town more apathetic about its Pro teams.
11. Phoenix: Debatable as well. I’d guess Basketball as being the longest tenured professional team in Arizona. But, a number of teams now have spring training in Arizona and the Diamondbacks have a relatively recent World Series victory. The Arizona football team may have made a run to the 2009 Super Bowl but Arizona didn’t even have a football team for a number of years with the Rams relocation.
12. Minneapolis: Has to be Football. The Twins are contenders now but it wasn’t too long ago that the team was in supposed danger of contraction (thanks to their penny-pinching billionaire owner Jim Pohlad and his father). The basketball team is a punchline in the league. One of the few major northern/cold weather cities would be a natural for Hockey, but the North Stars left town and I had to look up the current pro hockey team’s franchise name. The Vikings current stadium is in dis-repair, and there’s rumors that the team may move from the area (perhaps to Los Angeles to continue a trend the Lakers started in 1960). There’s a voter backlash against paying for billion dollar properties that serve only to further enrich billionaire NFL owners, so the natural move for the Vikings may be to move out of town. Which is a shame for football diehards in the Twin Cities area.
13. Denver: Football. They only got baseball and hockey within the past 20 years, and i’m pretty sure the Nuggets don’t outweigh the successful Broncos.
Three Sport Towns
1. Houston: I’d say Football, if only because its Texas (where football rules) and because the baseball team has a history of underperforming. Houston is definitely a destination spot for NBA players (tax purposes, warm-weather city) but does it out-shine the Texans? Clearly it isn’t the Astros, who may lose 115 games this year.
2. Toronto: Hockey. One of the original 6 NHL franchises, a troubled basketball squad and the general dissatisfaction in Canada re: professional baseball since the strike.
3. Oakland: Football. Raider-nation is psychotic. The A’s lack of expenditure and outright politicking to move to San Jose has soured the community on baseball to the point where large swaths of the outfield are tarped over during regular season games. Golden State has reached the playoffs once in the past 18 years.
4. St. Louis: Baseball. Perhaps Football, with the run-and-gun Rams and the incredible noise they generate in their indoor stadium. But St. Louis has the 2nd most successful baseball franchise in the sport (in terms of World Series victories) and a continual line of success.
5. Pittsburgh: Football. No one can trump the Steelers, not even the owned-by-team-legend Penguins. In most other cities this would be a hockey town.
6. Tampa Bay: Football. Despite a recent run of success, the Rays barely draw (though have great TV ratings). The Lightning are a great team … but I can’t see such a warm weather city really dedicating itself to a cold-weather sport. So by default we have Football.
7. Cleveland: Football. The moving of the original Browns franchise was one of the true tragedies of sports relocation; a beloved team that was well supported picking up and moving. So controversial was the move that the city was allowed to keep its name and almost immediately an expansion team was “invented” to give back to the city.
8. Milwaukee: Football, if you count Green Bay as being in the Milwaukee Market. And I do, which may or may not be considered “correct” in the opinion of Wisconsin natives.
Two Sport Towns: these towns are either-or, and mostly football wins.
1. San Francisco: Football. Despite all the history with the Giants, going to 49ers games reinforces the notion that the Bay Area loves its football. This is the single city for which I disagree with Calcaterra, perhaps because I’ve seen 49er games and, well, they’re just as crazy as Raider fans.
2. Seattle: Football. Seahawks games are notorious for being amongst the loudest in the league despite an open-air stadium. The Mariners have some history of success, and a great following, but don’t out-weigh the Football team.
3. San Diego: Football again; the baseball team doesn’t really draw and this beautiful-weather city doesn’t like to commit to spending its sunny evenings at baseball games. Of course, it would help if their owner would open up his pocketbook once in a while.
4. Baltimore: Football. It was a travesty when the Colts left town, but the team has embraced its Ravens. The Orioles had their shot to take over the town during the no-football period, and it looked as if they just might. With one of the crown jewel stadiums in the league they shot to the top of the baseball world (for a time in the mid 90s it was Baltimore with the highest payroll in the league, not the Yankees). Unfortunately owner Angelos has run the team into the ground, and the changing baseball market forces now mean that Baltimore is destined to be a 2nd tier team for the extended future.
5. Cincinnati: Baseball. Both pro teams (Reds and Bengals) have respected histories and long line of success. And yet both teams have struggled as of late. The Reds have 3 World Series victories since 1940 but none since a shock win in 1990, and its been a long time since the Big Red Machine was in effect. But the Bengals have never won a superbowl and havn’t even reached it since 1988. By virtue of the Reds recent run of success I’ll go with Baseball.
6. Kansas City: Football all the way. The Royals may look dangerous this season, but they’ve lost an entire generation of fans to ineptitude. Meanwhile the Chiefs are an original AFL landmark and make Arrowhead one of the best home field advantages in the league.
7. Indianapolis: Arguable. Indiana is the heart of Basketball middle-america, the home of Hoosiers and major basketball pride in the high schools and colleges. So are the Pacers the leading sports interest? Not with the sustained success of the Colts football team, led by possible best-ever player Peyton Manning. But Manning is gone, and I think Basketball is still king.
8. Charlotte: none? Charlotte is home to the Panthers and to the Bobcats. Because of the college-basketball crazy state of North Carolina, one would think that Basketball would be king. But the new franchise has one playoff appearance in its history and seems to be going backwards under new owner Michael Jordan (at least in the opinion of basketball pundits and observers). The Old franchise was so abhorred due to owner’s George Shinn’s personal conduct that the community more or less boycotted the games, forcing their move to New Orleans. Meanwhile are the Panthers the hot name in town either? They’ve made one super bowl appearance but finished last year 2-14. I’m going with Basketball just by default.
9. New Orleans: Football! With an exclamation point; the “Who-Dat” Saints have always been the soul of this sports-town. 2010’s Super Bowl victory was just icing on the cake. The basketball team shouldn’t have been moved there to begin with, and struggled so badly that the league bought out Shinn’s interest in order to keep them (for whatever reason) in New Orleans. (Perhaps a move to Seattle is in the cards?)
10. Nashville: Football. The Predators are never going to out-live the pull of the Titans.
11. Buffalo: Tough one. I’d go Football if only because the city still holds on to its great run of super bowl appearances, except that the team is playing “home games” in Toronto every year. The hockey team has never won the league but has been a pretty strong lately, so I’m going with a Hockey town.
Summary by sport:
Thoughts? Feedback? Do you think I have some of these cities mid-pegged?
Did Papelbon inadvertantly open up a whole new PED angle? Photo Keith Allison via wikipedia/flickr
The latest salvo in the “Questionable Performance Enhancing Drug” storyline in today’s professional baseball landscape was this interesting statement from Jonathan Papelbon last week; he and other Boston teammates frequently were injected with the drug Toradol by team doctors when they were feeling “run-down” or overly fatigued in order to get a quick pick-me-up for a game. Apparently Toradol had the effect of giving players a four hour window of feeling “pretty damn good” and it was used by a portion of the Boston clubhouse. Its also in use in many other clubhouses (though apparently not in Philadelphia, who told Papelbon his Toradol days were over).
Ok, how is Toradol not a Performance Enhancing Drug? It certainly seems to qualify based on WADA’s “Three Criteria” for PEDs:
(2/15/13 update: The Red Sox trainer who administered all this Toradol apparently “flouted” state laws by doing so, as reported by Jeff Passan, who is all over this case.)
By the way, WADA adds a drug to its banned list if it qualifies for TWO of the above three categories (hence the addition of things like “Deer Antler Spray” despite it having no known side effects, since it clearly seems to violate the spirit clause).
This leads me to my larger question: Why is Toradol, and as a side effect Steroids and HGH “bad” but the use of Cortisone, Toradol considered “ok” in terms of usage? What do Cortisone shots do? They enable a player to play through pain that otherwise may keep him out. Uh … isn’t that the definition of a “performance enhancing” substance?? Our own Ryan Zimmerman clearly benefited from cortisone shots in 2012; his before/after splits after receiving shots in his shoulder are pretty distinct and obvious. Cortisone itself also fits the 3 WADA principles; it enhances performance, it has side-effects that many doctors are quite worried about, and I’m sure some would agree it changes the “spirit of the game” in some ways.
If your answer involves something along the lines of “PEDs are banned because they’re illegal” then I’ll counter with this: Steroid’s aren’t illegal; they’re just controlled. But so is Cortisone; you can’t just inject yourself with the stuff without a doctor’s order. And so is Toradol; you can’t go into your local supermarket and buy injectable Toradol. And so is HGH: ask yourself why most elderly persons keep bottles of the stuff on their bed-side table? Even something like a B-12 shot raises some issues; lots of players get B-12 shots and swear by the natural effect it has, but as with Toradol I’m pretty sure you can’t just get injectable B-12 and administer it yourself. Even though B-12 is naturally occurring, in order to naturally consume the amounts of B-12 being injected you’d likely have to eat a bushel of clams (or some other high B-12 food) every day.
Honestly I may have the biggest issue with the classification of HGH as a PED, when you think about what HGH is (a naturally occurring growth hormone that is generates solely to help the body heal itself after an injury or illness) and then think about what Cortisone accomplishes for athletes. So its “ok” to take a Cortisone shot that treats inflammation from an injury/strain so that you can go out and play better … but its NOT ok to take a naturally occuring suppliment to help with the same issue?? The only reason adults don’t heal as fast as kids is precisely because our natural HGH generation slows as we age … and doctors prescribe HGH to help the elderly heal from illnesses and injuries all the time. Isn’t this inconsistent?
And all the above just talks about various medications. Lets talk about the in-vogue plasma-replacement treatments that Kobe Bryant popularized and which have now been done by others, including Alex Rodriguez and Bartolo Colon. In this op-ed piece from Jeff Passan from Dec 2011, he discusses the blurry line between PEDs and legitimate surgical procedures. The article has a very in-depth description of the A-Rod procedure and raises the question as to what defines a Performance Enhancing Drug? If blood doping is illegal, how is a procedure that filters out platelets and re-injects them to targeted spots legal? Colon was out of the game in 2010, got the procedure and suddenly is a 116 ERA+ pitcher in 2013; isn’t this concerning?
Passan takes things one step further, comparing the healing effects of HGH with these new treatments that A-Rod and Colon got and makes a very good point; these new-fangled surgical procedures absolutely qualify for WADA’s 3 criteria. Passan has also asked the same questions I’m asking in a June 2006 article that started about HGH but ended with this same general question. And he makes very good points about cortisone, HGH, Testosterone and even Tylenol usage. Its worth a read.
Here’s another question: why is it “ok” to have performance-enhancing surgical procedures (Lasik surgery, Tommy John surgery, or any manner of surgery involving transplanted ligaments or tendons) but it is NOT ok to use drugs that have the same general effect? If I can take a pill that gives me 20-10 vision, which enables me to see the baseball better and become a better hitter, would that be considered a PED? I’m pretty sure … but yet people go get laser surgery and can get their eyes fixed to this level of quality any day of the week. Perhaps this is a ridiculous example but my point stands; whether or not your performance is enhanced by virtue of a bottle or by the knife, aren’t these valid questions? We’re starting to hear of psychotic parents of teen-aged pitchers actually getting “preventative” Tommy John surgery done, knowing that most pitchers who have the surgery see improvement in certain aspects of their game (since the Ulnar Ligament connector is actually strengthened in this surgery over how it grows naturally). Is this … ethical?
And then there’s this interesting point, which was proposed on a BS Report podcast done between Bill Simmons and Chuck Klosterman last week. If HGH is considered a PED, and HGH’s sole purpose in life is to help people get better after being sick … then why aren’t classes of anti-biotics such as Amoxicillin also considered PEDs? What is the difference? Klosterman then made the additional (scary) point that PED usage and testing may all be for naught eventually; Genetic testing and DNA manipulation may get to the point where there can BE no test to find out whether someone’s been genetically manipulated in order to be a superior athlete. Testing has been trailing the science for years in professional sports … it may eventually be rendered completely moot. Of course, taken the the ridiculous extreme, do we really want a slew of genetically engineered super-athletes competing for our enjoyment? Why not just invent a bunch of robots to play these games?
Food for thought. I know we’ve discussed some of these topics here before but do you worry about the inconsistencies in professional sports PED policies? I’m not sure I have an easy solution, but I will say that the classifications of drugs seems arbitrary in some cases.
Sorry Lance, your 7 titles are no longer. Photo AP via si.com
(Editor’s note: on this holiday workday when nobody’s likely reading baseball blogs, I’m clearing a topic that i’ve been collecting links and thoughts on for the better part of a year. For months and months I’ve collected URLs for stories related to Armstrong. I think part of this post is merely a cathartic cleansing of this draft blog post from the my WordPress instance so that I don’t have to look at it any longer. But if you’re interested, read on. This is a nice little timeline of events that led to his downfall at the end).
For months and months, I defended Lance Armstrong as being somewhat victimized by what I thought was an over-zealous pursuit of him based on evidence that wasn’t “court of law” worthy. I think at the beginning I may possibly have thought he didn’t cheat, I definitely defended him in arguments among friends, saying that hearsay and testimony did not equate to scientific evidence in my mind. The Tyler Hamilton interview on 60 minutes was pretty damaging though, and I began to waver in my beliefs that perhaps Armstrong was just the sole guy in a sea of cheaters. After the federal case was dropped but the USADA case kept going, I began literally to feel like some sort of national witch hunt was underway, and my defense of Armstrong was less about his guilt or innocence and more about not agreeing with the vendetta that was clearly against him in the eyes of certain people (the head of the USADA Travis Tygart, Christine Brennan at the USA Today, etc).
Coincidentally, I hadn’t felt this way since the Pete Rose situation, where I felt like former baseball commisioner Bart Giamatti spent far too much time going after Rose, to the point where the pursuit of Rose felt like it was a personal vendetta. (Coincidentally, if you’ve read the Dowd report, and if you’re familiar with the Rose situation, you’ll realize that my “feelings” were really misplaced. My Dad in particular has zero sympathy for Rose, nor does a lot of the baseball community, and after going back and reviewing the literature at the time I realize that my “memory” of the time period was skewed. I was a bit too young to really understand the issues at hand). For the USADA’s head, I thought this was similarly a personal vendetta gone wrong. I wasn’t alone; see the links below for congressional outrage over the findings this summer from those who thought the same vendetta thoughts.
Its clear now, I was foolish to ever defend him, even in casual sports-fan conversations. Not only was he a fantastic cyclist and an inspiration to an entire generation of cancer fighters and survivors, he was also apparently the ring-leader of the greatest doping scheme ever concocted. He tested negative for PEDs hundreds and hundreds of times over his career. He kept clean while hundreds of his fellow riders were found to be dirty. That’s an achievement.
What I don’t get is this: why would Armstrong admit to this now? He’s already stripped of his wins, he’s already banned from competitions, he’s already resigned from Livestrong, he’s already lost his sponsors, and he’s already being sued by former sponsors and others looking to recoup losses. What is his motivation now? I mean, you’ve lied for 10 years, why not continue to live the lie at this point and keep the bravado up. I don’t know. Perhaps its just as simple as releasing the burden of guilt. But what has changed now in January of 2013 vis-a-vis this guilt versus the last decade or so? Does he really want to get his name cleared just so he can compete in triathalons on the side? Does he think that he can get his ban reduced now, after all that has happened?
Apparently the question was asked and answered in the 2nd part of the interview (which I havn’t gotten to yet; having a newborn at home gets in the way of little things like TV, sleep, etc) and the answer seems to be “Guilt.” Guilt on Armstrong’s part as he watched his 13-yr old son defend his father’s honor to a friend. His confessions seem more understandible now. This point is confirmed in this link here (which is also on the below timeline).
Personally, I view cycling similarly to the way I view all the runners in the 1988 Olympic game 100meter final. The entire sport was a mess (is still a mess?), and if you weren’t cheating you weren’t trying to win. That’s a shame to say, but by most accounts it seems to be true. I’m not as concerned about his legacy or his wins or records; just like Barry Bonds‘ 73 homer season, we’ll always have to explain away his accomplishments as being artificially accomplished. I don’t have children who are old enough to have idolized Armstrong and who now need to be told that he cheated, so perhaps i’m more than a bit jaded. I’m also not a massive cycling fan who now feels cheated by this admission.
Here’s the collection of links that more or less follow the timeline, starting mostly with Hamilton’s 60 minutes interview, which seems to really have set off the chain of events that led to his Oprah Winfrey interview.
I think this about covers it. I’m publishing this blog posting and probably will never talk about Armstrong again. And in about 15 minutes, i’m guessing America will do the same.
The most talked about 3rd string QB in sports history. Photo AP via businessinsider.com
Seriously?
The 3rd string quarterback of a mediocre NFL team is in the news, literally every day. Multiple times per day.
Why is there so much press surrounding Tim Tebow?
Just this week, we learned he broke up with his girlfriend, that he’s disappointed about being passed over for the starting gig the last week of the season, that he could have run the wildcat if asked, that he may be heading to Jacksonville, that some ESPN analyst thinks he’s a fraud, that the Jets should just cut him now, and that he would have done whatever his coach asked him. Of the 50-someodd articles in my RSS feed just now, there were no less than 10 related to Tebow.
Why?? Why is he constantly in the news? Is it because he plays for the Jets? I didn’t realize the Jets were such a newsworthy football team. Is it because he’s in New York and there’s just more sports media per square foot there than elsewhere? Possibly. Is it because the closest city to ESPN headquarters in New York and ESPN employs far too many columnists and analysts? Possibly. Is it because Tebow is a former Heisman trophy winner? Doubtful; there’s been numerous Heisman winners who were awful in the pros. Is it because he’s amazingly talented and people really thought he’d be the savior of the NFL? I doubt it; every analysis piece I read seems to come with stated opinions of just how mediocre a player he is.
Can it stop? I’m really, really tired of hearing about him. Most ardent football fans couldn’t name the backups of most NFL teams outside their own rooting interests; why does sports nation need to know the every move of Tim Tebow??
He's ready for opening day 2013! Photo Todd Boss
Here’s the Washington Nationals’ newest fan! Introducing Grant Taylor Boss, born 10/17/12. 8lbs, 3oz, 20″
No word yet whether or not he’s left-handed 🙂
We’ll see how much little Grant affects the blog here; instead of doing late-night writing we’ve already transitioned to late-night feedings. So don’t be surprised if the frequency of updates here slows a bit.
Happy 400th post!
This post, if I trust my WordPress engine to tell me the right number of published articles, we have hit 400 posts in the history of this blog.
Here’s some useless information on the history of this blog and the nature of the posts.
Posts by year:
I really got into the blog in 2011, and the post count was way up for rotation reviews of both major and minor leagues. A new job curtailed my time immensely this year, though I had a good bit of time the last couple of months to post pretty regularly.
Milestone Posts
Other Random Blog milestones
Count of posts by category: (note that these will add up to greater than 400 since some posts get multiple categories):
| Category | # of Posts |
| 30 for 30 | 7 |
| Baseball in General | 117 |
| Chat/Mailbag responses | 37 |
| College/CWS | 1 |
| Draft | 16 |
| Majors Pitching | 142 |
| Minor League Pitching | 65 |
| Minor League Rotation Reviews | 17 |
| Nats in General | 154 |
| Nats Rotation Reviews | 28 |
| Non-Baseball | 16 |
| Uncategorized | 0 |
| Weekly News | 22 |
Top 10 player names mentioned (since I started typing them in as Tags; this is definitely weighted more towards the the past season than earlier, as catching up hundreds of posts with updated tags is not an effort worth finishing frankly)
Peacock gets a ton of mentions, since his call-up in 2011 and his subsequent excellent starts merited a ton of thought as to his future with the organization. As we now know, he was traded away and struggled in 2012. So far, it looks like we traded high.
#1 item I wish I still had time to do:
Other things I’d love to do a better job of doing:
#1 item I wish I could incorporate: I’d love to do interviews of pitching coaches and pitchers at the various levels to talk about pitching strategy, mechanics and whatnot. I briefly pursued getting a Nats press pass but got the impression that the team is less inclined to hand out press passes to blogs such as mine (which provide a heavy amount of opinion and commentary) versus blogs like Federal Baseball and DC Pro Sports Report (which act more like beat reporters and focus on doing pre-game and post-game reports). Fair enough.
#1 technical issue I would like to change: I honestly have no idea how many people read this blog; I host the blog myself and have struggled to get the WordPress engine to work properly. Thus it is out of date and a lot of plug-ins that would allow for simple things like counters and tracking are unavailable to me. If anyone has a good WordPress hosting solution i’d be all ears.
I do know that I get nearly 100% of the traffic to the site via clicks from Mark Zuckerman’s blog, where i’m listed in his blog-roll and readers get to see when I have new content. I’d like to get represented on the other major media outlet blogs at the Washington Post and Washington Times. That would really help my readership too.
Thanks for reading!