Alex Rodriguez: A-Roid and A-Fraud

Ok so as a baseball fan why am I not surprised that an entire leak with regards to a 2003 MLB drug test has Alex Rodriguez's name in it? I find it really amazing how this sports news all comes together sometimes almost simultaneously. First, Joe Torre's new book about his time with the Yankees and managing Alex Rodriguez. Now a new report by SI unearths a 2003 survey test in which 104 MLB players failed the drug test including Alex Rodriguez. Wasn't it only a matter of time before another big star in the game confessed to being a part of the rampant performance enhancing drug (PED) culture. Actually, it was funny to see the staged interview between longtime baseball writer Peter Gammons of ESPN and Rodriguez on television today. Rodriguez, dressed as a young looking schoolboy with his starched collar and blue sweater never  actually uttered the words he took "steroids," "anabolic," or "HGH." Instead he substituted them for "substances," "experimenting," and "young, stupid, and naive" to gain the sympathy of viewers. Sure he apologized briefly, but it was so emotionally absent and phony that only a real sucker would fall for what he was trying to sell. Instead, he relied heavily on not being educated enough on the substances he was taking and did not know the stuff he was taking would result in failing a league wide drug test. So why in the world would a world- class athlete, playing one of the most difficult sports known to mankind, not know what he is putting in his body? Rodriguez, like many great players, is obsessive about his work outs on the field and in the weight room. Also these players do enjoy the game along with the fame and fortune so playing every day is a mindset many have. In this case, many players do look for something that can lessen the aches and pains of a 162 game regular season schedule. Why would he not be asking his nutritionist or the team doctor as to exactly what was going inside him? So when I am pretty sure the man is lying about not knowing the substances he was using, why should I believe he only took steroids in his 3 seasons with the Texas Rangers? I do not. 

Now he has some people believing he only took PEDs for 3 seasons due to the pressure of performing everyday. He adds to the excruciating Texas summer heat, which took a toll on him to go out everyday and play for a club that never made the playoffs in the 3 seasons he was with the team. By the way, the drugs Rodriguez was taking were lean muscle builders and recovery enhancers and they certainly seemed to help him play in all but one regular season game for the club in 3 seasons. He also hit 52, 57, and 47 home runs which were some of his highest career so far. And if he thought going to play in Texas was full of pressure, then what drugs did he start taking in 2004 to alleviate the pressure of a more populous and more media intensified city of New York? Rodriguez uses the excuse that he was around the culture at the time with many grey areas in terms of what was legal or illegal. Well, here is a real mind-bending thought. If you didn't feel it was illegal, why were all these players not injecting or swallowing pills in the middle of the clubhouse for their peers and the media to see? However, at the same time, it was dumb enough for the MLB to not even have a drug policy with regards to illegal drugs within the country.

What I think really happened with this "exclusive interview" was that his agent, the much maligned Scott Boras, is that he set up the interview and told Gammons exactly what he would be and would not be permitted to ask the ballplayer. All in all, Rodriguez's statements were kind of a combination of Jason Giambi and Andy Pettite's confessions coupled with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens' constant denials of PED use in front of the media and federal courts. It is interesting to note this leak comes right before the start of spring training, much less 6 years after the fact. From the outside looking in, spectators will never know the real truth behind what the owners, players, trainers, and MLB officials have done and will continue to do to produce the most amount of revenue for everyone involved (see: Commissioner Selig 17.5 million salary). Look, in some cases I think PEDs did little for some players, provided a significant boost for others, and only inflated the numbers of already established MLB stars. I think it is also wrong to not realize the temptation out there for players to be able to extend their career or even improve their statistics so much so that it could be the difference between a $5 million contract and a $25 million contract based on performance.  

A great example of a player having a great season in a contract year is Gary Matthews Jr., a longtime journeyman outfielder who turned a PED 2006 season with the Texas Rangers intoa 5 year, $50 million with the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim the following offseason. Prior to that Matthews had been with 7 different teams since breaking into the major leagues in 1999. In the 2007 and 2008 seasons, his batting average has slumped down to his more common averages of .250 and .242, which was way down from his career high .316 with the Rangers in 2006. He also hit a career high 19 HRs and 79 RBIs in 2006 as well. At around the same time when the Angels acquired him for the 2007 season, Matthews Jr. was reported as being connected to a steroid and HGH ring that included bodybuilders, college athletes, NFL and MLB players. Matthews Jr. denied his involvement but his name was found on the infamous Mitchell report. These numbers in his last two seasons are more indicative of the kind of player Gary Matthews Jr. is since his career batting average is a middle-of the-road .259. His 2006 season was much of an aberration to put it lightly due to heavy drug use. Seems to me Rangers owner Tom Hicks would have no problem assembling an entire 40 man roster full of steroid studded pitchers and batters. And his first choice I am sure would be Alex Rodriguez, the 250 million dollar man he signed back in 2001.

NFL Pro Bowl: Is It Really Worth To Play Anymore?

The NFL Pro Bowl was played in Hawaii yesterday with the NFC winning 30-21 at Hawaii stadium. I wonder how many people actually wanted to watch or listen to the game, besides myself, a few others, and people betting on the outcome of this exhibition game. I think All Star games in professional team sports has more than worn out their luster simply because the coaches, players, and league officials know the game means nothing. If anything, I think being named to an All Star roster is an honor a player would definitely take. Playing an actual game where big franchise players may accidentally get hurt is a threat that damages the games that really count in the regular season and playoffs. Even though the number of actual major injuries in All Star games may be minuscule, the threat can never be completely eradicated and it affects the level of game play on the field or on the court. Sure the winner in the Pro Bowl got $40,000 and the losing team received $20,000. Heck there are even boosters in contracts for players who make the All Star roster, yet I do not think their bonuses would be taken away if they did not play in the actual game. How many players actually want to play in the game besides first timers or rookies who made the team? It is the honor of being named an All Star that would be sufficient enough for me as a player and as a fan. Giving the Pro Bowlers a week to "prepare" for a game is an absolute joke because they probably spend more time in their secluded hotel with their teammates and family members than they do practicing for the game. The popularity of the Pro Bowl game seems to lessen each season because people would rather just meet and greet these players instead of watching some mundane FB draw to Le'Ron McClain up the middle for 3 yards. It really is a waste of time for all parties involved because the Super Bowl is the final game of the NFL season and no player wants to put pads on again and play in a meaningless game a few weeks or months following the conclusion of their team's season. Just name the Pro Bowlers and forget the game, but that will never happen because the NFL is always looking for a way to bring in one more game for revenue. Unfortunately it seems to get tougher with practically not selling out the game and forcing a potential TV blackout. Now next season, in an even more ingenious move by Goodell and company, the Pro Bowl will be played a week before the Super Bowl in Miami. So if Tom Brady recovers, leads the Patriots to the Super Bowl, and is named a Pro Bowler, do you honestly think he will play in a game that means nothing? These guys running the NFL, NBA, and MLB may have some sort of business plan I hope, but common sense is blatantly absent more time than not. 

Bonds' Legal Woes: A Long History of Much Ado About Nothing

Barry Bonds could face a series of fines and legal repercussions if his past finally catches up with him in 2009. Ironically his legal problems no longer have anything to do with baseball or his use of steroids, HGH, and any other designer drugs he used to mask the enhancements he was taking. It has to do with some of the foundations of this country's legal court system and it includes an indictment for perjury. The fact Bonds refused to tell the government the truth in regards to his steroids and HGH use is now a moot point. Bonds has buried himself in his own grave because he supposedly lied to a federal grand jury about being a user. The government no longer cares about whether or not Bonds did steroids but it comes down to the fact he perjured himself which poses a threat to the entire court system itself if he is found guilty. 

Another man in a similar boat but on a smaller scale is Rafael Palmeiro. Palmeiro testified in 2005 before Congress he never knowingly took steroids (but definitely took Viagra since he was a spokesman for the product) since he tested positive for a steroid in 2005. Palmeiro's positive test could be construed as perjury but the government is not pursing perjury charges on Palmeiro even though he was named in the December 07 Mitchell Report. Is this a case of just going after a sport's mega star just to show him who is boss and that lying to Washington is never all right? Maybe so. It is not like Bonds was the most liked ballplayer. Often he was dubbed a career loner and he never seemed to mind taking up his own large portion of the Giants clubhouse at the team's expense. Nevertheless, before the start of the 2000 season, Bonds was one of the best all around players in the MLB. He was a five tool guy whose only real limit in terms of talent was his outfield arm, which was still above average in his prime. Then he decided to follow in the steps of Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and even solid outfield leadoff hitter turned one-season slugger Brady Anderson. Using enhanced drugs turned this guys into one-dimensional ballplayers, but that one dimension helped change an entire state of a ballgame that more than made up for their compromising of their other skills.  

I do not understand why fans and commentators make such as big deal about the dubbed "steroid era" of baseball. The attempt to gain an edge will exist forever and Bonds was not the only one taking steroids obviously. Each era of baseball has gone through and will continue to go through some type of trend or commonality to give it a sense of identity. Some will be positive and others will be negative. It does not bother me because I know how hard professional ballplayers work to get where they are and I respect that. What they want to risk with their bodies is not my business. However, for those who say steroids were not "illegal" in baseball are certainly in the wrong for two reasons. One, steroids are illegal drugs to take or sell in this country period. Two, if players did not know it was wrong to do, why were guys like Canseco and McGwire injecting each other behind shower curtains and not in the middle of the club house for all the media to see? To use Bonds as an example just because he is the biggest fish in a loaded pond is not entirely fair, but assuming he did commit perjury, have him serve his time and be done with it. I can think of many more important things the public officials in Washington D.C. could be doing besides getting involved with enhancement drugs in sports. isn't that what highly paid commissioners are for? Fans need to stop being naive and understand this stuff exists, just like amphetamines, spitballs, pine tar, corked bats, vaseline, and scuffed balls have come into play gradually since the game's beginnings in the late 1800s. 

Maybe LeBron James Read My Unknown Blog

One night after commenting on Kobe Bryant's latest scoring barrage, the Cleveland Cavaliers and LeBron James had blown out the vistiting Toronto Raptors led by James' 31 points. Closing my post, I said James would probably try to one-up Bryant for the sake of doing so just because both of them were playing in the popular arena in the same week. However, I did say he would have to settle for less than 61 points because he was playing on back to back nights and even if you are LeBron James it is still a physical and mental battle. Personally, I am not a fan of back to back games with travel but I understand not every regular season game cannot be separated by one day at a time, but that is a subject for my next post so I will digress. 

In my prior post I did say LeBron James is the best player in the NBA now and his future of being the undisputed king may only be challenged by guys like Dwyane Wade, Kevin Durant, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard or even a guy like O.J. Mayo in the several years to follow. Mind you I tried to make up a list of players in their early to mid 20s because the current crop of stars in the league will still remain for multiple seasons. On back to back nights LeBron James went out and posted a triple double against the Knicks, who thanks to the allure of their old arena and their coach's cockiness, are quickly becoming victims of stars wanting to single handedly embarrass them (Wade, Bryant and James). James exited with an even more impressive all around performance than Bryant's with 52 points 11 assists and 10 rebounds. He too shot over 50% from the floor and missed only 3 of his 19 free throw attempts while connecting on 2 from 7 from beyond the arc. Maybe back to backs aren't so bad after all.

 I caught a video from NBA.com of behind the scenes cameras showing footage and sound clips from various people during Bryant's 61 point game. How NBA figured he was going to have a big game and therefore had interviews ranging from Knicks general manager Don Walsh to random Laker fans in front of the arena was beyond me. As cameras followed Bryant off the court and through the tunnel, people of course were wanting to high five him and yell out his name. One man tried patting him on the head and in a confused stupor uttered the words, "You're better than Mike." Interesting to note the fan referred to Jordan by the name Mike as if he knew Jordan himself. Jordan needs no defenders, but in fact the reality is the fan was off base. His comment should have been saved for the Wednesday night game with LeBron in town. LeBron has already put up two 50 point games at the age of 24 at Madison Square joining Mr. Jordan in that category. James is the only man in the league with the potential to make such a statement true and he put it on display by making Bryant's Monday performance old news very quickly. Ever heard of forcing the ball out of a hot player's hands D'Antoni? Guess not.

Kobe Bryant's 61 points in 37 Minutes Against New York

The NBA is a superstar driven league. Why else are ticket packages sold by each team marketed by using the ad campaign, "Come see Kevin Garnett and the Celtics, LeBron and the Cavaliers, Dwyane Wade and the Miami Heat, or Kobe Bryant and the Los Angeles Lakers..." Of the big three team sports, basketball is the one sport that markets its product around individual players first and then the team. And of course when these star players go out on any given night and put up 40, 50, or 60 points individually, it becomes so obvious as to why the NBA uses this sales agenda. Kobe Bryant's 61 points against the Knicks on Monday confirmed a few things for a hoops aficianado (myself). 

First, the NBA's reliance on individual greatness will never waver because let's face it, 19,000 people wanted to see the Knicks win, but they also wanted to see how one of the league's best players would fare as well. I don't think Knick fans were shelving out dough for a night out anxiously awaiting for Chris Duhon to explode offensively (though his offensive numbers are at a career high this season!). They wanted the Knicks to win the game, but I do not think a once a year appearance of the Lakers and their scoring guard drove fan interest away in the least bit. 

Second, Bryant's 61 point performance in New York to beat the Knicks 126-115 re-convinced me even though this guy maybe on the older side of 30 because he has logged so many minutes for 13 seasons, he is still not too old to be the most prolific scorer in the NBA. What I mean by prolific, since it could be interpreted in many ways, is the way in which he can score points in droves any time he gets in his accustomed "groove" as he likes to call it. In my opinion, LeBron James has quickly become the best overall player in the league hands down. The reason I say that is purely based on what the man has done to improve his game this season and it is obvious to me he has improved many facets of his game on the offensive and defensive end. Nevertheless, James still has much to learn at 24 and his offensive game is not as diversified as I am sure he would like it to be. Kobe Bryant remains the most prolific offensive threat in the league. Of course, he is a tremendous all around player, but his ability to score from all over the floor which makes him so impressive. Look at Bryant's box score on Monday night: 19-31 field goals, 20-20 at the free throw line, and 3-6 from 3 point land. Watch the highlights of his big night and take note of the number of ways in which he scored. A variety of isolation pull up jump shots from all over the floor, moving off the ball and cutting through the lane for layups and dunks, and throwing in shots at impossible angles that appeared un-makable. And he didn't miss one of his 20 free throw attempts. Sure there were a few cherry pick dunks, some favorable reputation calls, and a noticeable travel on a spin move on an elbow leaning jump shit, and he ignored Phil Jackson's suggestion to move the ball around more in the second half. For the most part he put on a display to remind people of what he was doing 2-5 seasons ago and what he can still do any night. James does not have the perimeter touch Bryant developed early in his career causing defenders to have to honor his outside game leaving them vulnerable to his ability to get to the basket as well. Couple that with his intelligence of the NBA game and its referees and Bryant has situated himself as one of the top scorers in NBA lore.

On a latter thought, why in the world would Mike D'Antoni allow one player who showed early intentions of being aggressive offensively torch his squad? Okay I know it is easy to sit and criticize how to stop Kobe Bryant every trip down and I know D'Antoni does not like defense (neither do I!), but at what point do you try mixing it up defensively to throw a different look at the guy? Stern allowed for zones a few years ago so why not try a mixture of zone and man? I think coaches, head coaches in particular like D'Antoni who have played and been around the NBA for decades have egos. And their egos take a precedent over their reluctance to change a game plan (whatever his defensive game plan was) because the coach turns his failure into a challenge therefore he sticks with it and continues to watch Bryant hit shots on any of the several wingmen (Al Harrington, Wilson Chandler, Quentin Richardson) he threw at Bryant. Get over your ego and try something different to offset the guy's aggressiveness. It may work and it may not but at least you tried a different wrinkle instead of letting the guy continue to have his way out there. He isn't Michael Jordan, but Bryant was putting on another Jordan-esque performance in his career on Monday night. If LeBron James is planning on a big night in the Big Apple he may have to settle for less than 61 points on Wednesday night because that will be one tough number to beat especially because he'll be playing back-to-back contests. 

 

NBA Refs: Fans Need To Lighten Up On The Game's Gatekeepers

The NBA has been hit with the Tim Donaghy scandal and it brought to attention the ever present potential of corruption and greed that exists within professional sports. Professional sports, and in particular the major team sports are run like large corporations and just because fans are paying money to watch their teams live does not diminish the potential for problems to arise. Fans seem to think they have this unwavering right to having 100% legitimacy of the entertainment they pay for, and they seem to forget the people bringing then this entertainment do not treat it as such. For the players, coaches, refs, and personnel people involved, this is their livelihood and the league (NBA, NFL, MLB) is their employer. Yes these are dream jobs and are extraordinarily fun and challenging, but first and foremost they remain a source of income. Therefore just like any other business or company, issues will arise and disgruntled employees will run aplenty. 

And yes, illegalities occur just like they do in businesses everywhere in the world. Take the case of the stock market where the plebeians invest their thousands or even hundreds of thousands, but in reality the only people safe from the collapses of the stock market are the big whigs behind the scenes partaking in insider trading and withholding valuable information that keep their fortunes intact no matter the economic state. I realize it is news and obviously a big story when sports scandals are unearthed, but I do not take it as big as a surprise as the next person I presume. Gamblers exist still and so does the mafia. Just because they are not as prominent in the public eye does not mean they still exert some control in an out of sight out of mind fashion. It is pretty simple: Donaghy got himself in financial trouble and gambling debts. Donaghy surrounded himself with shady characters and surprisingly only sold "pivotal information" for $5,000 to $7,000 a contest, which was well below the debts he had amassed. Finally, Donaghy himself was betting on games with these same cast of characters. Would it be surprising if other NBA refs were involved? Absolutely not, but it also would not be a shock if none of them were connected to Donaghy as David Stern has tried to publicly assert. 

Whether he is telling the truth or not, there is no denying Stern has always taken pride in running the NBA along the lines of a corporate machine. NBA refs are thoroughly examined and background checked. They go through off-season clinics, ref summer league games, and go over every game they ref in the regular season and the playoffs. In my own opinion, the NBA is tops among the team sports with regards to its officials, with the MLB umpires trailing a distant second. However, I am sick of basketball fans complaining about NBA referees whenever I am at games, especially with the Donaghy case which is over 3 years old now. Officials have a major role of walking a fine line in terms of controlling a game, allowing teams to compete, and giving the fans their money's worth by watching the big-name players they came to see. I understand there is preferential treatment, but in reality no one player is above the game. The refs will give the benefit of the doubt to veteran players and the stars on the court. However, what they interpret as a foul will be a foul whether it is Kobe Bryant or Calvin Booth. On January 27, last Tuesday, the unthinkable happened. Kobe Bryant fouled out against the Charlotte Bobcats in Los Angeles at the Staples Center. And the game went on and eventually the Bobcats won the game. 

Personally I was glad to see this happen not only because of a personal bias against Bryant, who is a great player, but nevertheless it should serve as a reminder refs are still asserting themselves on the court. To foul Bryant out in a game in most people's opinion is absurd because he is the Lakers' start player, but where is the line drawn then? Why on the highest level of basketball would you constantly give a decided edge to big names against their opponents simply because fans are paying to see that guy play? Yes money talks, but in reality those fans really wanted to see the Lakers win. If they had won the game, Bryant's foul-out would not have been such a hot topic for so long after the game concluded. And wouldn't NBA refs, the best basketball officials in the world who take their job so seriously, be doing themselves and the game a disservice if they did not call the game as fairly as humanly possible. To foul Bryant out to most people is one thing, but the fact it was done in the Lakers' home court was probably construed as an abomination. I enjoyed it immensely because it proves these guys are going to try and make the right calls, despite the fact 99% of the calls they make are questioned. The fact is with all the millions of dollars involved, the fans, and the star appeal the NBA advertises, I have no doubt Stern had the team of three for that game (Steve Javie, Scott Wall, and Zach Zarba) go over that game carefully to make sure all 6 of those fouls on Bryant were legitimate. It just goes to show these guys are not afraid to make calls or foul out any player, no matter their strata in the league. 

On a personal note, it just seems right that the least the NBA could do is foul out Bryant once in a while, who did not serve any time for an "unproven" rape charge as it was settled out of court with no jail time. I am sure Jack Nicholson nearly wet himself he is so pathetically emotionally involved with the Lakers. Also I do not agree with players fouling out, or at the very least having only 6 personal fouls. Basketball is a much more physical game than people give it credit for, and it puts pressure on the players and the refs to delicately balance the way they play and call the game respectively. Why not allow 7 personal fouls or have no foul out and just insert a rule that puts the opposing team in the bonus once a players reaches 6 or 7 personal fouls? That way players can stay in but their fouls hurt the team by allowing for free throws. Lastly, one of the NBA's major refs was Mendy Rudolph who officiated in the late 40s through the mid 70s in the. Rudolph, like Donaghy gambled often and amassed debts from casinos and racetracks. However, when he was approached by a gambler/bookmaker to partake in a point-shaving and game-fixing scheme in the NBA to erase his debts Rudolph declined. He cited his love for the game and his job taking precedence over a vice that had led him into financial trouble on the side.