Manny Ramirez: 50 game suspension. It probably no longer should be, but it was a stunner. Why are we surprised by anybody admitting to, or getting caught in, the steroid scandal.
Still, somehow it seemed like Ramirez was clean. Sure he was self-centered in Boston. Yes, he has been a little goofy in L.A., but it still seemed like was clean. Yes, he was playing at a high level into his late 30s, but there was no dramatic spike in his numbers. He has been consistently producing 30-40 home runs for ten years. He did not suddenly go from 20 home runs to 55, 60 and beyond.
Now, once again we don't know. Manny is still a great hitter and probably would have been one of the best in baseball over the past ten years even if he hit 25-30 homers a year. The problem is how do we know?
With each suspension, admission or indictment we are left to wonder whether anything we have seen over the last 10-15 years was real. Sure, the games were legitimate and the best team won, but were the scores and numbers real?
Worse yet, I think we are becoming immune to it. When I heard the story, I found myself calculating the time frame of his return. July? Perfect, just like last year when he came in from Boston. The Dodgers just acquired their slugger for the second half without making a trade or giving up a thing. They actually save $7 million (Manny's lost salary during the suspension). What a deal! All they have to do is hang around first place until July then let Manny kick start their second half.
I tried to snap back and be mad about it. I am. Manny cheated the fans, and the game. I let my son dress up as Manny for Halloween last year and now I have to explain to him why Manny does not get to play for 2 months. Still, when he returns I am not going to tell him to boo Manny or not root for the Dodgers. We will go on. Baseball will go on.
Sadly however, this scandal is going to be with us for twenty more years. Yes, the number of players flunking drug tests will dwindle (you really have to be a knucklehead to get caught now, sorry Manny), but the stars of this era will become eligible for the Hall of Fame. Do Clemens, Bonds, Ramirez and Palmeiro get in? They were the greatest of their era, albeit a tainted era, but do they deserve to sit in baseball immortality next to Ruth, Dimaggio, Jackie Robinson and Cy Young? The debate will go on and remind us of this scandal.
What I hope the Hall Fame voters do is disregard the whole group. No plaques for Barry, A-Rod, Clemens or Manny. No weekend in Cooperstown for McGwire and Sosa and let's not even get started on Rafael Palmeiro.
Instead of voting these guys in, how about the Hall voters take a new look at some of the stars they have left out. Perhaps their achievements look a little better in light of what we have seen. Can the Hall now find a place for Bert Blyleven, Tommy John and Jim Katt (all pitchers who won over 280 games)? What about the Cubs great Ron Santo? Isn't Bill Buckner and his 2700 career hits worth a look? Perhaps the perspective we should gain from the steroid era is a better appreciation of some of the players who came before even if they did not reach the so called "magic numbers" of 500 homers, 3000 hits, or 300 wins.
Part of what makes baseball great is its history. Baseball can best honor its past and move forward into the future by exiling the phonies and honoring the real greats of the game.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Sunday, May 3, 2009
The Passing of a Quarterback
Former Congressman, HUD Secretary and GOP vice presidential nominee and Buffalo Bills quarterback Jack Kemp died on Saturday.
There are a lot of "what if" scenarios in political history and I wonder how things might be different if Jack Kemp had won the Republican nomination over George H.W. Bush in 1988 or if the Dole-Kemp ticket won in 1996 leading to Jack Kemp being the GOP nominee in 2000 (remember Dole was already in his med-seventies in 1996). We will never know.
Jack Kemp was a different type of Republican and it is a shame the party did not follow him to a greater extent. He was a self described "bleeding heart" conservative. He was not one who tried to be a lighter, less expensive version of the Democrats. Instead he advocated conservative solutions to the problems of poverty and education. A Republican talking about poverty and education...what a concept.
For too long Republicans have ceded the landscape of poverty and education to the Democrats and allowed the media to portray the party as uncaring, indifferent or uninterested. Jack Kemp tried to change that. He advocated policies to create jobs and economic growth in the inner cities, recognizing that the best thing the government could do was create the environment for growth and change, then allow the smart people to do it. If you are familiar with some of the work that Magic Johnson's company has done in the inner cities with movie theatres and shopping centers, you have seen what Jack Kemp envisioned. It was an idea known as enterprise zones.
Kemp recognized that education mattered and was a ticket out of poverty. What he did not recognize was the establishment view that continued to chase good money with bad. Still, there were things that could and should be done to improve our schools, and if the school was beyond repair, allow parents a way to get their kids out of the failing school and into a better one.
Unfortunately the Republican Party never nominated Jack Kemp for President and his national roles were as subordinates to traditional and long time Republican establishment figures (Bush and Dole). The party lost out on an opportunity and America missed out on a great debate. Wouldn't it have been something to see Jack Kemp and Bill Clinton or Al Gore debate liberal, big government orthodoxy versus individual empowerment?
There is much talk about how to "rebrand" the Republican Party as though it were a soft drink that simply needs a new ad campaign. What it needs is what Jack Kemp tried to do: engagement in issues that for too long have only been the hallowed grounds of the Democrats. It is a shame that he will not be here to lead the offense down the field.
There are a lot of "what if" scenarios in political history and I wonder how things might be different if Jack Kemp had won the Republican nomination over George H.W. Bush in 1988 or if the Dole-Kemp ticket won in 1996 leading to Jack Kemp being the GOP nominee in 2000 (remember Dole was already in his med-seventies in 1996). We will never know.
Jack Kemp was a different type of Republican and it is a shame the party did not follow him to a greater extent. He was a self described "bleeding heart" conservative. He was not one who tried to be a lighter, less expensive version of the Democrats. Instead he advocated conservative solutions to the problems of poverty and education. A Republican talking about poverty and education...what a concept.
For too long Republicans have ceded the landscape of poverty and education to the Democrats and allowed the media to portray the party as uncaring, indifferent or uninterested. Jack Kemp tried to change that. He advocated policies to create jobs and economic growth in the inner cities, recognizing that the best thing the government could do was create the environment for growth and change, then allow the smart people to do it. If you are familiar with some of the work that Magic Johnson's company has done in the inner cities with movie theatres and shopping centers, you have seen what Jack Kemp envisioned. It was an idea known as enterprise zones.
Kemp recognized that education mattered and was a ticket out of poverty. What he did not recognize was the establishment view that continued to chase good money with bad. Still, there were things that could and should be done to improve our schools, and if the school was beyond repair, allow parents a way to get their kids out of the failing school and into a better one.
Unfortunately the Republican Party never nominated Jack Kemp for President and his national roles were as subordinates to traditional and long time Republican establishment figures (Bush and Dole). The party lost out on an opportunity and America missed out on a great debate. Wouldn't it have been something to see Jack Kemp and Bill Clinton or Al Gore debate liberal, big government orthodoxy versus individual empowerment?
There is much talk about how to "rebrand" the Republican Party as though it were a soft drink that simply needs a new ad campaign. What it needs is what Jack Kemp tried to do: engagement in issues that for too long have only been the hallowed grounds of the Democrats. It is a shame that he will not be here to lead the offense down the field.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
The Greatest
There are many debates in sports and politics. Who was the greatest player of all time? The greatest President. Baseball is a sport that, due to the incredible lack of any significant rule changes, lends itself well to debates about different eras.
There is one category about which there can be no debate: greatest announcer ever. It is the Dodgers' Vin Scully, hands down.
Vin is in his 60th season with the Dodgers. To put that in perspective, he started announcing for the Dodgers during the Truman Administration. The Dodgers did not even play in Los Angeles when he started (rumor has it they played in Brooklyn). I won't even try to count how many teams have come into Major League baseball since Vin started calling games. I do know that the Washington Senators and Montreal Expos came and went. Division play started, the designated hitter, the wild card, and ESPN have all come into existence since Scully started.
But longevity alone does not make Scully great. Listening to him announce a game is like having a very nice gentleman sitting in your living room describing the action to you. It is conversational, and very pleasant conversation at that. He doesn't scream or cheer for the home team. He is not a wacky character who you tune in to see what outrageous thing he will say next. Vin Scully just calls the game.
For many of us his voice is the soundtrack of our life. As a kid I grew up with "Garvey-Lopes-Russell and Cey". In college there was Fernandomania ("if you have a sombrero, throw it to the sky"). Also, the simple call on Kirk Gibson's memorable 1988 World Series homerun "she is gone!". Now my sons get to listen to Vin Scully announce Dodger games with me, as I did with my Dad.
There have been tough moments. I remember him announcing the death of his broadcast partner and Dodger great Don Drysdale. As always, he was eloquent in discussing the death of Angels' pitcher Nick Adenhart a few weeks back.
After 60 years he is a good as ever. Sure, there is an occasional name wrong, but he quickly corrects himself, usually with self-deprecating humor. Most importantly, he makes a 10-0 loss in September when the Dodgers have been eliminated from the pennant race three weeks earlier just as interesting to listen to as a late September game with the pennant on the line.
You can tune in in the middle of the game and it is as though he saw you walk in the room and catches you up. You have a question about a player and it is as though he heard you and answers it.
60 years at the mike for the Dodgers. There are few things, other than breathing, that people do for 60 years. There are even fewer things that people do just as well as ever after 60 years (let's face it, the breathing gets tougher). Vin Scully however is still the best , simply the greatest.
There is one category about which there can be no debate: greatest announcer ever. It is the Dodgers' Vin Scully, hands down.
Vin is in his 60th season with the Dodgers. To put that in perspective, he started announcing for the Dodgers during the Truman Administration. The Dodgers did not even play in Los Angeles when he started (rumor has it they played in Brooklyn). I won't even try to count how many teams have come into Major League baseball since Vin started calling games. I do know that the Washington Senators and Montreal Expos came and went. Division play started, the designated hitter, the wild card, and ESPN have all come into existence since Scully started.
But longevity alone does not make Scully great. Listening to him announce a game is like having a very nice gentleman sitting in your living room describing the action to you. It is conversational, and very pleasant conversation at that. He doesn't scream or cheer for the home team. He is not a wacky character who you tune in to see what outrageous thing he will say next. Vin Scully just calls the game.
For many of us his voice is the soundtrack of our life. As a kid I grew up with "Garvey-Lopes-Russell and Cey". In college there was Fernandomania ("if you have a sombrero, throw it to the sky"). Also, the simple call on Kirk Gibson's memorable 1988 World Series homerun "she is gone!". Now my sons get to listen to Vin Scully announce Dodger games with me, as I did with my Dad.
There have been tough moments. I remember him announcing the death of his broadcast partner and Dodger great Don Drysdale. As always, he was eloquent in discussing the death of Angels' pitcher Nick Adenhart a few weeks back.
After 60 years he is a good as ever. Sure, there is an occasional name wrong, but he quickly corrects himself, usually with self-deprecating humor. Most importantly, he makes a 10-0 loss in September when the Dodgers have been eliminated from the pennant race three weeks earlier just as interesting to listen to as a late September game with the pennant on the line.
You can tune in in the middle of the game and it is as though he saw you walk in the room and catches you up. You have a question about a player and it is as though he heard you and answers it.
60 years at the mike for the Dodgers. There are few things, other than breathing, that people do for 60 years. There are even fewer things that people do just as well as ever after 60 years (let's face it, the breathing gets tougher). Vin Scully however is still the best , simply the greatest.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
They just can't quit him
Many posts ago I wondered what the left would do without George W. Bush to kick around. For eight years they have had a foil, but the 2008 election has put the left solidly in charge of the federal government. It seems however, that the left just can't get over him.
All of this really goes back to the Florida recount in 2000. The left never accepted George W. Bush winning that election. Although recount after recount by their allies in the media ultimately showed that he did, the left still refused to accept that result. As close as it was, maybe that is understandable.
Then George Bush became a wartime President and the left hates the use of military force.
Then George Bush won again in 2004 and the left tried to spin stories of 'stolen" election in Ohio, even though the margin of victory was over 100,000 votes.
Happiness should have come in 2008 as the most liberal Democratic nominee in a generation won the White House. The left however seems to be signing the Rolling Stones' "I can't get no satisfaction..I try and I try...".
First President Obama embarked on a course of using the phrase "inherited this mess" at least ten times before we had finished our morning coffee. Politically, he needs to remind people that things were tough when he got there. I wonder however, if we combed through Lincoln's speeches in 1861 would we find him using the phrase "inherited this mess"? Different times call for different styles of "leadership", I suppose.
Then the President issued a series of high profile executive orders changing Bush policies. That is his prerogative, he won.
Finally, President Obama ignores the advice of his CIA Director (and several past Directors and intelligence leaders) and begins declassifying Bush era memos on interrogation techniques. Then he was against prosecution before he was for it. It is this element of the left's obsession with Bush that is the most dangerous.
Now it looks like we will have the left engaged in investigations, "truth commissions" and efforts to continue to hammer away at George W. Bush for years to come. They just can't quit him.
One thing President Obama should think about during his next conference call with Moveon.Org (a name that is getting real ironic): all Presidents and their staffs leave someday. The business of running, and protecting, the country sometimes is a little unseemly. The Bush era "truth commissions" of today, might be the Obama era truth commissions of 2013 or 2017.
All of this really goes back to the Florida recount in 2000. The left never accepted George W. Bush winning that election. Although recount after recount by their allies in the media ultimately showed that he did, the left still refused to accept that result. As close as it was, maybe that is understandable.
Then George Bush became a wartime President and the left hates the use of military force.
Then George Bush won again in 2004 and the left tried to spin stories of 'stolen" election in Ohio, even though the margin of victory was over 100,000 votes.
Happiness should have come in 2008 as the most liberal Democratic nominee in a generation won the White House. The left however seems to be signing the Rolling Stones' "I can't get no satisfaction..I try and I try...".
First President Obama embarked on a course of using the phrase "inherited this mess" at least ten times before we had finished our morning coffee. Politically, he needs to remind people that things were tough when he got there. I wonder however, if we combed through Lincoln's speeches in 1861 would we find him using the phrase "inherited this mess"? Different times call for different styles of "leadership", I suppose.
Then the President issued a series of high profile executive orders changing Bush policies. That is his prerogative, he won.
Finally, President Obama ignores the advice of his CIA Director (and several past Directors and intelligence leaders) and begins declassifying Bush era memos on interrogation techniques. Then he was against prosecution before he was for it. It is this element of the left's obsession with Bush that is the most dangerous.
Now it looks like we will have the left engaged in investigations, "truth commissions" and efforts to continue to hammer away at George W. Bush for years to come. They just can't quit him.
One thing President Obama should think about during his next conference call with Moveon.Org (a name that is getting real ironic): all Presidents and their staffs leave someday. The business of running, and protecting, the country sometimes is a little unseemly. The Bush era "truth commissions" of today, might be the Obama era truth commissions of 2013 or 2017.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
We're Sorry
President Obama has been on a world tour in recent weeks. He seems to be apologizing to the world and promising a more humble America. While better relations with the rest of the world is not a bad thing, I think the President has been overdoing it. Any day now I expect him to give the following speech:
"My fellow citizens of the world. I come to you tonight on behalf of a more humble America. I mean, we are really humble right now. The stock market is way down. Nobody wants to buy the cars we make and my recent stimulus package means we are going to owe billions and billions more to the rest of the world.
Recently I have traveled the globe and acknowledged American arrogance and promised a new vision of international relations. I am going to be the listening President. Sure sometimes you rail against us and call us the Great Satan, but I want to understand why you think we are the great Satan and to make sure we are still delivering those relief supplies to your country in a timely fashion. Just because you call us names and burn our flag does not mean we should delay the billions in aid we provide every year.
But I digress. First I want to say to our great friend, Great Britain, I am sorry about the whole 1776 thing. It was arrogant for a group of men to think they simply had the right to end a relationship that had lasted for centuries, particularly over something like taxes. It certainly was not humble to declare independence. Who did we think we were?
To Great Britain, Germany and France I want to say I am sorry we intervened, twice in the last century, in your affairs. We should have let you settle your own differences. Sure it sort of seemed lopsided until we got involved, but what gave us the right to intervene other than some vague notion of preventing tyranny? I say no more. Next time you are on your own.
To North Korea I say, cool rocket. How about we just be friends?
To Iran I say, I understand that there are many peaceful uses for plutonium, let us know what you come up with. We respect you.
There are a few other things I would like to apologize for and acknowledge as arrogant.
First, The New York Yankees. 26 world championships? That is just overdoing it. Other teams should have a chance to win and my administration will look into ways to make that happen. Perhaps the Yankees will have to get four outs an inning.
Second, reality television. We are sorry we have asked the world to keep up with the Kardashians or have anything to do with Flava Flav's love life.
Finally, country music, especially those pro-America songs by Toby Keith and Brooks & Dunn. We have no right to impose our pride on everyone else.
I am sure there are more things we do wrong, but these are just a few. I pledge to the world that we will be a more humble nation. We will not try so hard to win at the next Olympics. An Argentinian just won the Masters, so we are making progress. The heavyweight champion is some Russian guy. As Americans, we don't want to stand out, we just want to be part of the crowd."
Do we think that would make the world like us a little better?
"My fellow citizens of the world. I come to you tonight on behalf of a more humble America. I mean, we are really humble right now. The stock market is way down. Nobody wants to buy the cars we make and my recent stimulus package means we are going to owe billions and billions more to the rest of the world.
Recently I have traveled the globe and acknowledged American arrogance and promised a new vision of international relations. I am going to be the listening President. Sure sometimes you rail against us and call us the Great Satan, but I want to understand why you think we are the great Satan and to make sure we are still delivering those relief supplies to your country in a timely fashion. Just because you call us names and burn our flag does not mean we should delay the billions in aid we provide every year.
But I digress. First I want to say to our great friend, Great Britain, I am sorry about the whole 1776 thing. It was arrogant for a group of men to think they simply had the right to end a relationship that had lasted for centuries, particularly over something like taxes. It certainly was not humble to declare independence. Who did we think we were?
To Great Britain, Germany and France I want to say I am sorry we intervened, twice in the last century, in your affairs. We should have let you settle your own differences. Sure it sort of seemed lopsided until we got involved, but what gave us the right to intervene other than some vague notion of preventing tyranny? I say no more. Next time you are on your own.
To North Korea I say, cool rocket. How about we just be friends?
To Iran I say, I understand that there are many peaceful uses for plutonium, let us know what you come up with. We respect you.
There are a few other things I would like to apologize for and acknowledge as arrogant.
First, The New York Yankees. 26 world championships? That is just overdoing it. Other teams should have a chance to win and my administration will look into ways to make that happen. Perhaps the Yankees will have to get four outs an inning.
Second, reality television. We are sorry we have asked the world to keep up with the Kardashians or have anything to do with Flava Flav's love life.
Finally, country music, especially those pro-America songs by Toby Keith and Brooks & Dunn. We have no right to impose our pride on everyone else.
I am sure there are more things we do wrong, but these are just a few. I pledge to the world that we will be a more humble nation. We will not try so hard to win at the next Olympics. An Argentinian just won the Masters, so we are making progress. The heavyweight champion is some Russian guy. As Americans, we don't want to stand out, we just want to be part of the crowd."
Do we think that would make the world like us a little better?
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Just a game
This past week was baseball's opening week, yet there were painful reminders that it is just a game.
The one that received the most attention was the death of pitcher Nick Adenhart. Normally when you hear of an athlete out after midnight and an auto accident, we assume the worst of the athlete. In this case it appears to have been wrong place at the wrong time.
The other incident was the death of a fan at the Angeles home opener. This appears to have been the result of a fistfight. I am going to go out on a limb here and assume there was some alcohol involved.
In their own ways, both of these deaths remind us that it is just a game. Being a rising star cannot protect you from the cruel hand of fate. The results of Adenhart's pitching performance Thursday night are forever lost to the tragedy that followed. It was just a game, what happened later was painfully real for three families.
Every year we read stories of parents getting into fights at Little League games. In some cases there are charges filed, in some instances even worse results. It is just a game.
Fistfights in the stands have become a regular part of sports. In some ways they are even glorified. People dress up in team uniforms, paint their faces, have too much to drink and brawl. It is just a game.
Sports can be a great thing. It can bring families, communities and even countries together to watch an event. We see people do things physically that astound and amaze. We leave our troubles behind for a few hours.
In the end however, it is just a game.
The one that received the most attention was the death of pitcher Nick Adenhart. Normally when you hear of an athlete out after midnight and an auto accident, we assume the worst of the athlete. In this case it appears to have been wrong place at the wrong time.
The other incident was the death of a fan at the Angeles home opener. This appears to have been the result of a fistfight. I am going to go out on a limb here and assume there was some alcohol involved.
In their own ways, both of these deaths remind us that it is just a game. Being a rising star cannot protect you from the cruel hand of fate. The results of Adenhart's pitching performance Thursday night are forever lost to the tragedy that followed. It was just a game, what happened later was painfully real for three families.
Every year we read stories of parents getting into fights at Little League games. In some cases there are charges filed, in some instances even worse results. It is just a game.
Fistfights in the stands have become a regular part of sports. In some ways they are even glorified. People dress up in team uniforms, paint their faces, have too much to drink and brawl. It is just a game.
Sports can be a great thing. It can bring families, communities and even countries together to watch an event. We see people do things physically that astound and amaze. We leave our troubles behind for a few hours.
In the end however, it is just a game.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Fearless Predictions
The time has come to make the predictions for the 2009 season. Of course, by doing it here to be preserved in cyberspace forever, I won't be able to deny them come October. Still, I will forge ahead with my forecasts for the 2009 season.
National league West: The Dodgers. Arizona figures to make it tough and certainly has better pitching, but if their pitching is not what is expected, Arizona could fall fast. The Dodgers seem to have too much talent not to win. The starting rotation and closer spots could be questions, but scoring a lot of runs can paper over pitching problems and I think that is what the Dodgers will do.
National league Central: The Cubs. Who else is in this Division?
National league East: Phillies. It has become fashionable to pick the Mets here because of their rebuilt bullpen, but the world champion Phillies have done nothing to get worse and their core of Howard, Utley and Rollins is just too good. Mix in a legitimate ace like Cole Hamels and I think the Phillies win this division.
National league wild card: Arizona. Sorry New York, I am just not buying the Mets' revival.
American League West: The Angels. Oakland could pull a surprise here, but overall the Angels are still the most talented team in the division.
American League Central: Minnesota. This is a tough one. First, it is a challenge to remember who is in this division. Second, on paper the White Sox should be the best team, but age may be creeping up on them. The Twins have some early injury issues, but they always seem to find a way to be in the hunt in this division.
American league East: The Yankees. I think they have improved their rotation with Sabathia and Burnett and the offense will produce. Tampa Bay may experience some "sophomore jinx" and return to earth. Probably my most controversial thought is that I see Boston having an off year. Some of the Red Sox' core are facing injury and age concerns. I think the Sox end up third in this division.
American league wild card: Oakland. Just an odd hunch.
Who wins it all? With my heart I want to say Manny leads the Dodgers into the Fall Classic. With my head I think the Phillies pull out another National league Championship. In the American League I am going to go with the A's to pull off an improbable playoff run and make it to the World Series.
In a World Series with the nostalgia of the A's returning to their east coast roots in Philadelphia (lots of Connie Mack stories to be told in the buildup), the current occupants of the City of Brotherly Love knock them off in five games.
There it is. Fortunately there is an edit feature on this site, some mid season revisions may be possible. I also hope to know who else is in the National League Central by then.
National league West: The Dodgers. Arizona figures to make it tough and certainly has better pitching, but if their pitching is not what is expected, Arizona could fall fast. The Dodgers seem to have too much talent not to win. The starting rotation and closer spots could be questions, but scoring a lot of runs can paper over pitching problems and I think that is what the Dodgers will do.
National league Central: The Cubs. Who else is in this Division?
National league East: Phillies. It has become fashionable to pick the Mets here because of their rebuilt bullpen, but the world champion Phillies have done nothing to get worse and their core of Howard, Utley and Rollins is just too good. Mix in a legitimate ace like Cole Hamels and I think the Phillies win this division.
National league wild card: Arizona. Sorry New York, I am just not buying the Mets' revival.
American League West: The Angels. Oakland could pull a surprise here, but overall the Angels are still the most talented team in the division.
American League Central: Minnesota. This is a tough one. First, it is a challenge to remember who is in this division. Second, on paper the White Sox should be the best team, but age may be creeping up on them. The Twins have some early injury issues, but they always seem to find a way to be in the hunt in this division.
American league East: The Yankees. I think they have improved their rotation with Sabathia and Burnett and the offense will produce. Tampa Bay may experience some "sophomore jinx" and return to earth. Probably my most controversial thought is that I see Boston having an off year. Some of the Red Sox' core are facing injury and age concerns. I think the Sox end up third in this division.
American league wild card: Oakland. Just an odd hunch.
Who wins it all? With my heart I want to say Manny leads the Dodgers into the Fall Classic. With my head I think the Phillies pull out another National league Championship. In the American League I am going to go with the A's to pull off an improbable playoff run and make it to the World Series.
In a World Series with the nostalgia of the A's returning to their east coast roots in Philadelphia (lots of Connie Mack stories to be told in the buildup), the current occupants of the City of Brotherly Love knock them off in five games.
There it is. Fortunately there is an edit feature on this site, some mid season revisions may be possible. I also hope to know who else is in the National League Central by then.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)