Oakland - a team that is absolutely awful and now one of the worst franchises in the league - kicked the Texans' asses today, in what was a truly spectacular display of ineptitude.
So the Texans' dreams of having their first winning season (and, incidentally, the first in Houston since 1993) are over. They can, however, beat the Bears next week and equal last year's record. That would really be great, considering that they started off the season 0-4, but nowhere near what everyone was hoping for this year.
So now we wait for the draft, where we hope for a really awesome DB or Brian Orakpo/Michael Johnson to fall to the Texans or that they are able to acquire Julius Peppers/Asomugha or something. Maybe. Orakpo/Johnson/Peppers opposite Mario would probably, I think, do the most to improve the defense, but any improvement on the defensive side would do a lot for the Texans right now.
Anyways, I've been playing Fallout 3 for the last week, and it's really awesome. Like every other Bethesda game I've played since Daggerfall, however, it's buggy as shit. I have no idea why they get away with that. It was excusable back in the 90s - we didn't have any expectations for video games - or with Morrowind , when a fully 3D RPG was entirely new. But Oblivion was exactly the same - terrible pathfinding, characters with scripts that lead them to jump off of buildings, awful clipping issues, and a game engine that can't properly animate running people. Still, the game is a lot of fun, even if it has all those problems. Kinda like the Texans, I suppose.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Sunday, December 14, 2008
What'd I tell ya'll?
Schaub: 23/39, 284 yds, 1 TD
Andre Johnson: 11 receptions, 208 yds, 1 TD
Slaton: 24 carries, 100 yds
And Haynesworth's knee was taken out by Duane Brown's butt. Awesome.
Houston Texans: 13
Bud Adams' Shitfuckers: 12
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
FUCK THE TITANS
Just making that point clear - fuck them to hell. Fuck em. Goddamn I hate those motherfuckers. And their goddamn hick-ass fans. Fuck all of them. Fuck that thug Haynesworth. Fuck that drunk Kerry Collins. Fuck that miserable son of a bitch Bud Adams. Fuck every one of them. Even Jeff Fisher - fuck him, too.
The Texans rolled out over 500 yards of offense against the (admittedly awful) Green Bay defense. They've got a chance this weekend, and Las Vegas is setting the odds at -3 Titans.
As a reminder, if you are a Houstonian, and you are a Titans fan, you can go fuck yourself, too. You're worse than the Cowboys fans who hang around the city. Y'all can both go ream each other up your collective asses.
The Texans rolled out over 500 yards of offense against the (admittedly awful) Green Bay defense. They've got a chance this weekend, and Las Vegas is setting the odds at -3 Titans.
As a reminder, if you are a Houstonian, and you are a Titans fan, you can go fuck yourself, too. You're worse than the Cowboys fans who hang around the city. Y'all can both go ream each other up your collective asses.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Final exams suck hard. Particularly in classes where this is your first and only exam. Because there is no midterm, there's no way to evaluate yourself during the course, nor is there any way to predict what the fuck the instructor wants on the exam. Christ, I hate this shit. Just give me a paper to write. Add that to the fact that we get no dead-time this year, and everything sucks to hell.
For my metaphysics class, I do have a term paper due Monday. We had presentations yesterday, allowing us to share our ideas with the class and professor, gaining valuable input. I like this idea, and I wish we did this sort of thing in our other smaller classes.
Anyways, I'm writing about personal identity and modal questions. My point is that we use modal questions to evaluate personal identity questions all the time ("What if I were disembodied?" for example), but we rarely connect personal identity with modal theories. And I think much of the conflict in modal theories comes from an inability to agree on what the essential characteristics of personhood are. Were we able to definitively answer personal identity questions, we'd likely be able to answer most modal questions about trans-world identity. So I hope that by combining modal and identity theories, I can come up with a better answer to both questions.
It's interesting stuff (to me, at least), but I have so much bullshit to plow through over the next few days - Russian exam, Stalin exam, Labor Econ exam. Fuck.
For my metaphysics class, I do have a term paper due Monday. We had presentations yesterday, allowing us to share our ideas with the class and professor, gaining valuable input. I like this idea, and I wish we did this sort of thing in our other smaller classes.
Anyways, I'm writing about personal identity and modal questions. My point is that we use modal questions to evaluate personal identity questions all the time ("What if I were disembodied?" for example), but we rarely connect personal identity with modal theories. And I think much of the conflict in modal theories comes from an inability to agree on what the essential characteristics of personhood are. Were we able to definitively answer personal identity questions, we'd likely be able to answer most modal questions about trans-world identity. So I hope that by combining modal and identity theories, I can come up with a better answer to both questions.
It's interesting stuff (to me, at least), but I have so much bullshit to plow through over the next few days - Russian exam, Stalin exam, Labor Econ exam. Fuck.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Heart and crap like that
I've got a presentation and paper due tomorrow morning for metaphysics. Unfortunately, I have neither any work done, nor a firm grasp on what I want to discuss. I'm going to be doing something on personal identity, but I'm not sure what I'll be discussing with it. Maybe I'll just critique physicalist interpretations of the mind.
Anyways, I watched the Texans game. It cam right down to the wire, but Kris Brown pulled out the win. It was a good win that showcased how powerful the Texans' offense really is: they were -3 on turnovers, but they still won the fucking game. Awesome.
A few days ago, it occurred to me that for the first time in seven years, I really think of the Texans as "my" team - I care about their wins and losses in a way that I never did before. Previously, we all knew that they sucked and there was little that would change. Now there's clear evidence of improvement. Moreover, I just really like this team.
It comes down to heart. This team really has it in a way that no other Texan team has ever had. And I say that as a guy who routinely ridicules writers who throw around terms like "heart" and "clutch." But this team works well together, and it's clear that they are pushing one another to succeed. The biggest part of their recent success (by which I mean the past two seasons) has been improved personnel, but the fact that the Texans just aren't giving up on the field means a hell of a lot.
Anyways, I watched the Texans game. It cam right down to the wire, but Kris Brown pulled out the win. It was a good win that showcased how powerful the Texans' offense really is: they were -3 on turnovers, but they still won the fucking game. Awesome.
A few days ago, it occurred to me that for the first time in seven years, I really think of the Texans as "my" team - I care about their wins and losses in a way that I never did before. Previously, we all knew that they sucked and there was little that would change. Now there's clear evidence of improvement. Moreover, I just really like this team.
It comes down to heart. This team really has it in a way that no other Texan team has ever had. And I say that as a guy who routinely ridicules writers who throw around terms like "heart" and "clutch." But this team works well together, and it's clear that they are pushing one another to succeed. The biggest part of their recent success (by which I mean the past two seasons) has been improved personnel, but the fact that the Texans just aren't giving up on the field means a hell of a lot.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Vote for Chester, Jacoby and David, you stupid fucks
The NFL is, once again, doing that "My Super Ad" thing, where fans vote on a player's story to be featured in an ad during the Super Bowl. You might remember Ephraim Salaam's winning ad from last year, the ballad of Chester Pitts.
Anyways, the AFC voting is up. And most of the videos aren't very good. Part of the problem is that several are from guys like Brady Quinn and Darren McFadden - high profile players. The cool thing about last year's ad was that it was about a guy who - if you're not a Texans fan - you haven't heard of. It's a neat story about the NFL's "working class" - the players who make up the vast majority of rosters in the NFL.
Three of the five AFC South videos are from Texans: Chester Pitts, Jacoby Jones, and David Anderson. Pitts tells a story about confusing Carson Palmer and his brother (it's not that great, actually, but it's a Texan's story, dammit). Jacoby talks about his mom and punt returns. David Anderson recalls his string dance. I'm rather fond of Anderson's story - mostly because that highlight cracks me up every time I see it. But probably the best one is from Joe Zelenka, long snapper for the Jaguars.
Actually, there are four long snappers with videos submitted. That's crazy. But they're good subjects for the concept - few fans know who is the long snapper on their own team (Pittman won't fight the suspension, by the way, which seems like a mistake. On the other hand, he probably could use the time off. His snaps have been awful lately.), so a story about a long snapper's rise to the NFL is going to be new. More to the point, I think we can better empathize with guys like Zelenka, Anderson, and Jones (hell, even Pitts. Offensive linemen are usually so low-key that there's not that much difference between them and the LS). They're like us. They just really want to play in the NFL (though, obviously the NFL minimum salary doesn't hurt, either).
Anyways, here's hoping that the Texans can get another ad in the Superbowl. It's probably the closest they'll come in a while.
Anyways, the AFC voting is up. And most of the videos aren't very good. Part of the problem is that several are from guys like Brady Quinn and Darren McFadden - high profile players. The cool thing about last year's ad was that it was about a guy who - if you're not a Texans fan - you haven't heard of. It's a neat story about the NFL's "working class" - the players who make up the vast majority of rosters in the NFL.
Three of the five AFC South videos are from Texans: Chester Pitts, Jacoby Jones, and David Anderson. Pitts tells a story about confusing Carson Palmer and his brother (it's not that great, actually, but it's a Texan's story, dammit). Jacoby talks about his mom and punt returns. David Anderson recalls his string dance. I'm rather fond of Anderson's story - mostly because that highlight cracks me up every time I see it. But probably the best one is from Joe Zelenka, long snapper for the Jaguars.
Actually, there are four long snappers with videos submitted. That's crazy. But they're good subjects for the concept - few fans know who is the long snapper on their own team (Pittman won't fight the suspension, by the way, which seems like a mistake. On the other hand, he probably could use the time off. His snaps have been awful lately.), so a story about a long snapper's rise to the NFL is going to be new. More to the point, I think we can better empathize with guys like Zelenka, Anderson, and Jones (hell, even Pitts. Offensive linemen are usually so low-key that there's not that much difference between them and the LS). They're like us. They just really want to play in the NFL (though, obviously the NFL minimum salary doesn't hurt, either).
Anyways, here's hoping that the Texans can get another ad in the Superbowl. It's probably the closest they'll come in a while.
New title card
to reflect new-found optimism. Plus, I got tired of looking at a reminder of the Texans' spectacular failures. Let's look their best beatdown of another team.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Whatever
Amazing. Truly amazing.
Wait... no it's not. This is the Stros we're talking about! Of course they make terrible personnel decisions - it's their raison d'etre.
I can understand not offering Brocail arbitration - if he declined arbitration, it would have been unlikely that anyone else would have paid for him, anyways. And Wade was apparently able to get Brocail to accept a $750,000 pay cut.
But Wolf seemed like such an obvious candidate for arbitration. He was unlikely to accept, and (even if he did accept) he wasn't going to get paid that much extra, anyways. So you could at least get an extra draft pick out of it.
Hampton was signed. Cool.
Wait... no it's not. This is the Stros we're talking about! Of course they make terrible personnel decisions - it's their raison d'etre.
I can understand not offering Brocail arbitration - if he declined arbitration, it would have been unlikely that anyone else would have paid for him, anyways. And Wade was apparently able to get Brocail to accept a $750,000 pay cut.
But Wolf seemed like such an obvious candidate for arbitration. He was unlikely to accept, and (even if he did accept) he wasn't going to get paid that much extra, anyways. So you could at least get an extra draft pick out of it.
Hampton was signed. Cool.
What the fuck ever happened to the study period?
This is the last week of classes for the semester, and once again I wonder: what the fuck happened to all the time students used to get for studying? When my parents were in college, they got a week off to prepare. When my sister was in college, the same. Last year, we got three days. This year, we get no days (thanks, Gustav!). That's bullshit. I demand the same meaningless preparation time that my predecessors received.
Not to get overly optimistic or anything...
...but what's the likelihood that the Texans could finish with a winning record for the 2008 season? I mean, granted, the Jags' defense is not nearly what it was last year, but I think there is some chance of it, at least. In fact, I'd say the chances of the Texans once again breaking even is fairly good, as well.
They play Sunday at Green Bay. The Packers have been awful lately, and they seem to be in the same category as the Texans - good offense, terrible defense. Unfortunately for the Texans, the game will be away from Houston and probably in harsh weather. Schaub will be back, though. It's definitely a winnable game.
The next week, they play the shitfuckers at home. Now, the Titans are obviously a far superior team to the Texans, but maybe they'll get lucky.
After that, it's smooth sailing: @Oakland (if the Texans can't beat the Raiders, they're fucked anyways) and vs Chicago. So it comes down to this: if the Texans can beat Green Bay, they have an off chance at a winning season. If they can pull off the upset against Tennessee, then I'd say it's a virtual lock.
That I'm even entertaining this idea would have been crazy two weeks ago. But - for whatever reason - the offense was clicking last night and the defense really stepped up.
Oh, and Chester Pitts' pre-game huddle pep-talk further cemented him as my favorite Texan. If I could pick athletes to actually hang out with, the list would look something like this:
1) Pitts - dude plays the Oboe. We could jam and shit.
2) Berkman - loves Jesus and football; seems like a nice guy.
3) Battier / T-Mac
They play Sunday at Green Bay. The Packers have been awful lately, and they seem to be in the same category as the Texans - good offense, terrible defense. Unfortunately for the Texans, the game will be away from Houston and probably in harsh weather. Schaub will be back, though. It's definitely a winnable game.
The next week, they play the shitfuckers at home. Now, the Titans are obviously a far superior team to the Texans, but maybe they'll get lucky.
After that, it's smooth sailing: @Oakland (if the Texans can't beat the Raiders, they're fucked anyways) and vs Chicago. So it comes down to this: if the Texans can beat Green Bay, they have an off chance at a winning season. If they can pull off the upset against Tennessee, then I'd say it's a virtual lock.
That I'm even entertaining this idea would have been crazy two weeks ago. But - for whatever reason - the offense was clicking last night and the defense really stepped up.
Oh, and Chester Pitts' pre-game huddle pep-talk further cemented him as my favorite Texan. If I could pick athletes to actually hang out with, the list would look something like this:
1) Pitts - dude plays the Oboe. We could jam and shit.
2) Berkman - loves Jesus and football; seems like a nice guy.
3) Battier / T-Mac
Sunday, November 30, 2008
It's (almost) Battle Fuckin' Red Day, Baby!
For the first time since 1994 or something, there will be a Monday night game in Houston. And, unfortunately, I've got a paper to write. I'll still get to watch the game, though, so I'm not bitching.
You know, despite what the Chronicle, ESPN, the NFL, and Madden 2009 seem to think, the Jacksonville-Houston game is not a rivalry. You should hate a rival. I hate the Cowboys. I hate the sister-fuckers. I don't hate the Jags. It's just that we only face Dallas in the preseason (of course, we've faced them twice in the regular season: 29-10 you motherfuckers) and the Titans have historically kicked the Texans' asses. But Jacksonville and Houston are roughly on the same level, so that's apparently a rivalry.
Here's what I think happened: Bob McNair and the NFL were talking about who would be the Texans' rivals. Dallas was a natural, as was Tennessee. But we needed a rival whom we could consistently beat. You know how your first car isn't a Cadillac (unless it's thirty years old)? Well, just as suburban children throughout America get starter cars (mine was my mom's 1994 Honda Accord. I loved that thing.), the Texans got a starter rival - the Jags. The Jags aren't sexy - they're not going to help the Texans get dates with the cool girls - but they're reliable and don't cost much. And, eventually, the Texans will move up to bigger rivals. But, in the meantime, the Jaguars will get them to school and teach them the fundamentals of driving: keep your hands at 10-and-2, don't ride the brake, and establish the run.
Oh, and I missed the first half of the Spurs-Rockets game, but the second half was pretty sweet. Luther Head (Luther motherfucking Head!) carried the team. And BATTIER IS BACK! Oh, be still my heart! Rockets apparently lost to Denver tonight, but things are always good when Shane Battier is back in the lineup.
You know, despite what the Chronicle, ESPN, the NFL, and Madden 2009 seem to think, the Jacksonville-Houston game is not a rivalry. You should hate a rival. I hate the Cowboys. I hate the sister-fuckers. I don't hate the Jags. It's just that we only face Dallas in the preseason (of course, we've faced them twice in the regular season: 29-10 you motherfuckers) and the Titans have historically kicked the Texans' asses. But Jacksonville and Houston are roughly on the same level, so that's apparently a rivalry.
Here's what I think happened: Bob McNair and the NFL were talking about who would be the Texans' rivals. Dallas was a natural, as was Tennessee. But we needed a rival whom we could consistently beat. You know how your first car isn't a Cadillac (unless it's thirty years old)? Well, just as suburban children throughout America get starter cars (mine was my mom's 1994 Honda Accord. I loved that thing.), the Texans got a starter rival - the Jags. The Jags aren't sexy - they're not going to help the Texans get dates with the cool girls - but they're reliable and don't cost much. And, eventually, the Texans will move up to bigger rivals. But, in the meantime, the Jaguars will get them to school and teach them the fundamentals of driving: keep your hands at 10-and-2, don't ride the brake, and establish the run.
Oh, and I missed the first half of the Spurs-Rockets game, but the second half was pretty sweet. Luther Head (Luther motherfucking Head!) carried the team. And BATTIER IS BACK! Oh, be still my heart! Rockets apparently lost to Denver tonight, but things are always good when Shane Battier is back in the lineup.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Maybe we should learn something from this.
It was really quite astounding that the Texans won on Sunday. At least, I know I was astounded - stupefied, even. And, after the game, Kubiak gave the hypothetical game ball to the defense.
Now, the defense "forced" five turnovers. But, as I recall, none of the fumbles (there were three of them) were really caused by the Texans - they just happened because the Browns are shit and the Texans kind of stumbled into the situation. Well, maybe the one caused by Jacques Reeves (!) was really caused by the Texans. But, other than that one and the interceptions (capped off by a truly heads-up play from Weaver), the Texans defense wasn't really any better than in any other week. Mario was fantastic, as always; Dunta returned the starting lineup and was very good; DeMeco continued to be one of the finest MLBs in the league. But, overall, it just didn't seem like the Texans had really improved. They're still a bad team with a shitty defense.
Now, Joe Posnanski wrote about the even worse Chiefs defense. They have created only six (SIX!) sacks all season. Wow. But what's more, it appears that they have been pursuing the Texans' draft strategy over the past six years:
In 2002, with the sixth pick in the draft, the Chiefs took defensive tackle Ryan Sims. In 2004, with their first pick (a second-rounder), they took defensive tackle Junior Siavii. In 2005, with their first pick, they took linebacker Derrick Johnson — and were absolutely thrilled he was available. In 2006, with their first pick, they took defensive end Tamba Hali and talked constantly about his never-stopping motor. This year, with the fifth pick overall, they took defensive tackle Glenn Dorsey.
Of course, the Texans haven't made the same terrible organizational choices that the Chiefs have. The Texans would never have let Jared Allen (that asshole) go (of course, the Texans really haven't had the chance yet to lose a starter to free agency. But they've invested in Mario Williams and DeMeco Ryans and Dunta and Andre Johnson, so it's clear the McNair would have been willing to invest in a player like Allen, had he been in that position).
But the point is this: the Texans have devoted four of their last five 1st round draft picks to the defense. Two of those have been unquestioned successes (Mario, Dunta). One is a good player, but still developing (Okoye), and one is largely a failure (T. Johnson). Obviously, the Texans haven't invested quite as much into their defensive line as the Chiefs have, but it's getting there. I know that the writers at DGDB&D want Brian Orakpo or Michael Johnson in 2009, and I'm inclined to agree (Christ, can you imagine Mario with a legit threat opposite him on the D-Line? That would scare the shit out of every QB in the league!). If Orakpo/Johnson develop into the DE's they seem to be, and if Amobi and Okam improve, that would be one truly fearsome line. Damn.
Anyways, be glad you're not a Chiefs/Rams/Lions/Raiders fan, Texans fan. Things could be a hell of a lot worse. The Texans suck big, old, hairy donkey nuts, but Bob McNair, Kubiak, and Rick Smith know what they're doing (but fire Richard Smith. That fucker needs to go immediately.).
Now, the defense "forced" five turnovers. But, as I recall, none of the fumbles (there were three of them) were really caused by the Texans - they just happened because the Browns are shit and the Texans kind of stumbled into the situation. Well, maybe the one caused by Jacques Reeves (!) was really caused by the Texans. But, other than that one and the interceptions (capped off by a truly heads-up play from Weaver), the Texans defense wasn't really any better than in any other week. Mario was fantastic, as always; Dunta returned the starting lineup and was very good; DeMeco continued to be one of the finest MLBs in the league. But, overall, it just didn't seem like the Texans had really improved. They're still a bad team with a shitty defense.
Now, Joe Posnanski wrote about the even worse Chiefs defense. They have created only six (SIX!) sacks all season. Wow. But what's more, it appears that they have been pursuing the Texans' draft strategy over the past six years:
In 2002, with the sixth pick in the draft, the Chiefs took defensive tackle Ryan Sims. In 2004, with their first pick (a second-rounder), they took defensive tackle Junior Siavii. In 2005, with their first pick, they took linebacker Derrick Johnson — and were absolutely thrilled he was available. In 2006, with their first pick, they took defensive end Tamba Hali and talked constantly about his never-stopping motor. This year, with the fifth pick overall, they took defensive tackle Glenn Dorsey.
Of course, the Texans haven't made the same terrible organizational choices that the Chiefs have. The Texans would never have let Jared Allen (that asshole) go (of course, the Texans really haven't had the chance yet to lose a starter to free agency. But they've invested in Mario Williams and DeMeco Ryans and Dunta and Andre Johnson, so it's clear the McNair would have been willing to invest in a player like Allen, had he been in that position).
But the point is this: the Texans have devoted four of their last five 1st round draft picks to the defense. Two of those have been unquestioned successes (Mario, Dunta). One is a good player, but still developing (Okoye), and one is largely a failure (T. Johnson). Obviously, the Texans haven't invested quite as much into their defensive line as the Chiefs have, but it's getting there. I know that the writers at DGDB&D want Brian Orakpo or Michael Johnson in 2009, and I'm inclined to agree (Christ, can you imagine Mario with a legit threat opposite him on the D-Line? That would scare the shit out of every QB in the league!). If Orakpo/Johnson develop into the DE's they seem to be, and if Amobi and Okam improve, that would be one truly fearsome line. Damn.
Anyways, be glad you're not a Chiefs/Rams/Lions/Raiders fan, Texans fan. Things could be a hell of a lot worse. The Texans suck big, old, hairy donkey nuts, but Bob McNair, Kubiak, and Rick Smith know what they're doing (but fire Richard Smith. That fucker needs to go immediately.).
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Good times on the internet.
MLBtraderumors.com is usually a great place to get your daily intake of bullshit. A few days ago, Justice wrote something about how Wigginton and Valverde were likely to be traded. From the comments section, tomahawk368 writes:
It must not be a whole lot of fun to be an Astros fan. Your GM keeps trading away all your good players. The most obvious problem with the Astros is the pen. So instead of trading one of your many great hitters for some 7th ant 8th inning help, you trade your closer. Good luck Astros fans.
What?
It must not be a whole lot of fun to be an Astros fan.
Nope. Haven't made the playoffs since 2005. Our farm system is the worst in the league. And Drayton isn't going to spend like the Yankees or Red Sox or Cubs to make us really competitive. So Ed Wade will have to cobble together something.
Your GM keeps trading away all your good players.
Ummm.... no. Ed Wade has, in his time here, mostly just traded away what little we had in the farm system for Tejada. His one trade involving a star player was Lidge. I wouldn't consider that "trading away all (our) good players."
The most obvious problem with the Astros is the pen. So instead of trading one of your many great hitters for some 7th ant 8th inning help, you trade your closer.
What? The Stros' bullpen was their strongest part. Ed Wade constructed an outstanding corps or relievers out of Valverde, Brocail, castoffs from other clubs, and the dregs of the Astros' minor league pitching system. For relatively little, the Astros had one of the best bullpens last season.
And since when did the Astros have "many great hitters"? This isn't 2001, you know. We don't have a strong farm system churning out great middle relievers and journeyman hitters. We've got a system that has shat out Hunter Pence and nothing else. Outside of Carlos Lee, Lance Berkman, and Ty Wigginton, the Astros didn't have a good offense last season.
Seriously, it's amazing that this dude hasn't killed himself yet. The world is an astoundingly dangerous place, and one would expect someone that stupid to have, by now, choked on a corkscrew or something.
It must not be a whole lot of fun to be an Astros fan. Your GM keeps trading away all your good players. The most obvious problem with the Astros is the pen. So instead of trading one of your many great hitters for some 7th ant 8th inning help, you trade your closer. Good luck Astros fans.
What?
It must not be a whole lot of fun to be an Astros fan.
Nope. Haven't made the playoffs since 2005. Our farm system is the worst in the league. And Drayton isn't going to spend like the Yankees or Red Sox or Cubs to make us really competitive. So Ed Wade will have to cobble together something.
Your GM keeps trading away all your good players.
Ummm.... no. Ed Wade has, in his time here, mostly just traded away what little we had in the farm system for Tejada. His one trade involving a star player was Lidge. I wouldn't consider that "trading away all (our) good players."
The most obvious problem with the Astros is the pen. So instead of trading one of your many great hitters for some 7th ant 8th inning help, you trade your closer.
What? The Stros' bullpen was their strongest part. Ed Wade constructed an outstanding corps or relievers out of Valverde, Brocail, castoffs from other clubs, and the dregs of the Astros' minor league pitching system. For relatively little, the Astros had one of the best bullpens last season.
And since when did the Astros have "many great hitters"? This isn't 2001, you know. We don't have a strong farm system churning out great middle relievers and journeyman hitters. We've got a system that has shat out Hunter Pence and nothing else. Outside of Carlos Lee, Lance Berkman, and Ty Wigginton, the Astros didn't have a good offense last season.
Seriously, it's amazing that this dude hasn't killed himself yet. The world is an astoundingly dangerous place, and one would expect someone that stupid to have, by now, choked on a corkscrew or something.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
T-Mac and Soccer
Sometimes, you watch Tracy McGrady and you get a feeling for the sublime. The guy is just so awesome when he's on. Tonight, he was only on the court for thirty minutes, but his performance in the fourth quarter was beautiful. Of course, it would have been more beautiful had he made some more of those shots, but the feeling was there, know what I'm sayin'?
T-Mac is an injured old man. Of course, he's only nine years my senior, so it's odd to think of him as an old man, but he's been in the league longer than I've had arm hair. The resident Jazz fan over at the Dream Shake says McGrady has no heart. But T-Mac has heart. It takes heart to play through minor injuries. The problem is that T-Mac isn't 22 anymore. He's 29 with a bad shoulder, bad back, and bad knee. Time and a decade of professional play have worn down his abilities. Only time will tell us if he can get back on track this season. We would've won tonight's game had Yao been playing. But I'm glad that the trainers are treating Yao with a delicate touch. The same should be true of McGrady.
Oh, and Brent Barry just looks awful out there. He missed wide open shots all night, and I wonder (as did JVG) if he's playing hurt, too.
I watched about ten minutes of the USA-Guatamala soccer match on TV. I played plenty of soccer as a kid, but I don't think I ever really grasped the strategy of it (I still don't). I always played defense, and my primary thoughts on defense (much as my primary thoughts on defense in every other sport) always revolved around getting the ball back. I never really thought about scoring after that. Just give that to the more athletic dude.
Anyways, I was watching this, and I was struck by the strangeness of this sport. Maybe it's just because football and basketball tend to rely upon such tight ball control (heh ... ball control), but the sort of activity that soccer involves is kind of nervewracking. Watching this, you see much more isolated activity. Spacing is generally measured in yards (or, I suppose, meters) rather than feet, as with basketball. And individual players seem to have much less control over where and how the ball is advanced. It just seems, from my inexperienced vantage point, to be a more uncontrolled activity. I kept expecting, at any moment, for someone to come in and take the ball away. But any time a defender got close, the ball was virtually immediately passed. But these long, uncontrolled passes (again, because players are so spaced out) often result in turnovers. But turnovers were so common, and penetration to the goal so infrequent, that there was little cost to any individual turnover. Contrast this again to basketball, where turnovers can often be guaranteed points (of course, when scores are routinely in the triple digits, individual turnovers begin to lose a lot of meaning).
Now, imagine if you were to cut the field (or the pitch, as they put it) in half. You'd create a much more interesting game, I'd think. Passes would have to be more controlled, turnovers would be less frequent but more costly, and players would be much more closely spaced. Of course, you'd have to cut the number of players significantly to avoid injury, but I think the pace of the game would increase significantly.
But I guess that's why they have indoor soccer. And nobody watches that shit.
T-Mac is an injured old man. Of course, he's only nine years my senior, so it's odd to think of him as an old man, but he's been in the league longer than I've had arm hair. The resident Jazz fan over at the Dream Shake says McGrady has no heart. But T-Mac has heart. It takes heart to play through minor injuries. The problem is that T-Mac isn't 22 anymore. He's 29 with a bad shoulder, bad back, and bad knee. Time and a decade of professional play have worn down his abilities. Only time will tell us if he can get back on track this season. We would've won tonight's game had Yao been playing. But I'm glad that the trainers are treating Yao with a delicate touch. The same should be true of McGrady.
Oh, and Brent Barry just looks awful out there. He missed wide open shots all night, and I wonder (as did JVG) if he's playing hurt, too.
I watched about ten minutes of the USA-Guatamala soccer match on TV. I played plenty of soccer as a kid, but I don't think I ever really grasped the strategy of it (I still don't). I always played defense, and my primary thoughts on defense (much as my primary thoughts on defense in every other sport) always revolved around getting the ball back. I never really thought about scoring after that. Just give that to the more athletic dude.
Anyways, I was watching this, and I was struck by the strangeness of this sport. Maybe it's just because football and basketball tend to rely upon such tight ball control (heh ... ball control), but the sort of activity that soccer involves is kind of nervewracking. Watching this, you see much more isolated activity. Spacing is generally measured in yards (or, I suppose, meters) rather than feet, as with basketball. And individual players seem to have much less control over where and how the ball is advanced. It just seems, from my inexperienced vantage point, to be a more uncontrolled activity. I kept expecting, at any moment, for someone to come in and take the ball away. But any time a defender got close, the ball was virtually immediately passed. But these long, uncontrolled passes (again, because players are so spaced out) often result in turnovers. But turnovers were so common, and penetration to the goal so infrequent, that there was little cost to any individual turnover. Contrast this again to basketball, where turnovers can often be guaranteed points (of course, when scores are routinely in the triple digits, individual turnovers begin to lose a lot of meaning).
Now, imagine if you were to cut the field (or the pitch, as they put it) in half. You'd create a much more interesting game, I'd think. Passes would have to be more controlled, turnovers would be less frequent but more costly, and players would be much more closely spaced. Of course, you'd have to cut the number of players significantly to avoid injury, but I think the pace of the game would increase significantly.
But I guess that's why they have indoor soccer. And nobody watches that shit.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Wonderful
I just got back from a debate tournament in Shreveport yesterday (I was just judging, unfortunately, but Tulane did fairly well for just our 2nd tournament in the last twenty years). Apparently, the Rockets got their asses kicked on Friday, but handed out some whoopass to the Hornets Saturday. Good deal. Why does everyone think the Hornets are so awesome, anyways?
On the other hand, the Texans gave out another lesson in choking to their fans today (I didn't see it, fortunately; I was in the car at the time).
You know, I got into a discussion (argument) with a Titans fan not long ago about the Adams-Oilers legacy. I was saving this for the next Shitfuckers-Texans game, but I'll go ahead and write it down. I hear two typical arguments from those toothless fucks up north:
1. Houston was just as responsible as Adams. (Traitorous Houstonians might even blame Bob Lanier or Drayton)
There are a few obvious problems with this. First, you're essentially transfering agency from Adams to Houston, and that's idiotic. Nobody can truly force us to do anything. We choose what we do. And Adams chose to move the team.
The city of Houston correctly surmised that Adams was full of shit. He had attempted to move the team to Jacksonville in 1986, and that was only stopped by remodeling the Dome. Taking out the massive scoreboard cost more (inflation adjusted) than building the whole Dome did in 1964. We're still paying for that today. Bottom line: Adams lied to all of us when he said that the Dome modifications would keep the team in Houston.
Now, Adams had a legit beef with his lease situation. He was essentially paying Drayton to play in the Astrodome. But his response was stupid. Instead of proposing a semi-reasonable stadium, he came up with the extravagant Bud Dome. As a refresher, the Bud Dome would have been a downtown stadium with an adjustable indoor roof. Bud intended the stadium to be used by the Rockets, who would lower the roof to create a more intimant atmosphere.
The problem was that Les Alexander didn't lend his support to the idea. And rightfully so - it was an awful one. But Bud continued to pressure the city to accept the proposal, even while he repeatedly moved the planned location around. In short, the Bud Dome was never more than a dream, and an expensive one at that.
So when Bob Lanier told Bud to shove it, he was just seeing through Bud's bullshit.
2. It's Bud's legacy and Bud's team, not Houston's.
Yeah, it's legally Bud's team. No one is arguing that. No one ever argued that.
But we have to view sports franchises as cultural monuments. There would be something wrong with moving the Liberty Bell from Philly. There would be something wrong with moving Greek frescoes to England (and, indeed, that's why there are so many lawsuits about it). Yes, these are private entities, but the name, records, uniforms, etc. are cultural elements that belong to the region in which they gained their meaning.
Frankly, I don't give a shit about the Titans. They're just another shitty franchise in a shitty city (just like Jacksonville or Carolina). But the pre-1997 Oilers were ours. And they should be here. It's unfortunate that, unlike Cleveland, Houstonians' efforts to preserve the Oiler name (the one good thing Tom DeLay ever did) never came through.
Anyways, that's beating a dead horse at this point.
After yesterday's loss to Indy, however, I think DC Richard Smith really will be losing his job. I've mentioned my support for the idea of hiring the (likely) soon-to-be-fired Wade Phillips as DC. The shift to a 3-4 scheme would take time, but I imagine that the Texans players can make the adjustment. Or, if they can't, I imagine that GM Rick Smith, Gary Kubiak, and whomever they interview for the job can tell. I think Amobi Okoye would fit better as a 3-4 DE, anyways.
On the other hand, the Texans gave out another lesson in choking to their fans today (I didn't see it, fortunately; I was in the car at the time).
You know, I got into a discussion (argument) with a Titans fan not long ago about the Adams-Oilers legacy. I was saving this for the next Shitfuckers-Texans game, but I'll go ahead and write it down. I hear two typical arguments from those toothless fucks up north:
1. Houston was just as responsible as Adams. (Traitorous Houstonians might even blame Bob Lanier or Drayton)
There are a few obvious problems with this. First, you're essentially transfering agency from Adams to Houston, and that's idiotic. Nobody can truly force us to do anything. We choose what we do. And Adams chose to move the team.
The city of Houston correctly surmised that Adams was full of shit. He had attempted to move the team to Jacksonville in 1986, and that was only stopped by remodeling the Dome. Taking out the massive scoreboard cost more (inflation adjusted) than building the whole Dome did in 1964. We're still paying for that today. Bottom line: Adams lied to all of us when he said that the Dome modifications would keep the team in Houston.
Now, Adams had a legit beef with his lease situation. He was essentially paying Drayton to play in the Astrodome. But his response was stupid. Instead of proposing a semi-reasonable stadium, he came up with the extravagant Bud Dome. As a refresher, the Bud Dome would have been a downtown stadium with an adjustable indoor roof. Bud intended the stadium to be used by the Rockets, who would lower the roof to create a more intimant atmosphere.
The problem was that Les Alexander didn't lend his support to the idea. And rightfully so - it was an awful one. But Bud continued to pressure the city to accept the proposal, even while he repeatedly moved the planned location around. In short, the Bud Dome was never more than a dream, and an expensive one at that.
So when Bob Lanier told Bud to shove it, he was just seeing through Bud's bullshit.
2. It's Bud's legacy and Bud's team, not Houston's.
Yeah, it's legally Bud's team. No one is arguing that. No one ever argued that.
But we have to view sports franchises as cultural monuments. There would be something wrong with moving the Liberty Bell from Philly. There would be something wrong with moving Greek frescoes to England (and, indeed, that's why there are so many lawsuits about it). Yes, these are private entities, but the name, records, uniforms, etc. are cultural elements that belong to the region in which they gained their meaning.
Frankly, I don't give a shit about the Titans. They're just another shitty franchise in a shitty city (just like Jacksonville or Carolina). But the pre-1997 Oilers were ours. And they should be here. It's unfortunate that, unlike Cleveland, Houstonians' efforts to preserve the Oiler name (the one good thing Tom DeLay ever did) never came through.
Anyways, that's beating a dead horse at this point.
After yesterday's loss to Indy, however, I think DC Richard Smith really will be losing his job. I've mentioned my support for the idea of hiring the (likely) soon-to-be-fired Wade Phillips as DC. The shift to a 3-4 scheme would take time, but I imagine that the Texans players can make the adjustment. Or, if they can't, I imagine that GM Rick Smith, Gary Kubiak, and whomever they interview for the job can tell. I think Amobi Okoye would fit better as a 3-4 DE, anyways.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
T-Mac Wakes Up
By the time the game was heading into the half last night, Tracy McGrady had begun to show some signs of life. But the fight that broke out between Rafer and Matt Barnes seemed to fire the guy up. He got 27 points last night on 11-18, finally breaking out of his slump.
Artest continues to struggle to find his place in the offense. Just from my (admittedly amateurish) look at it, it seems like he just isn't moving when he's off the ball. Given that he seemed to understand Adelman's offense when he was in Sacramento, it seems odd that he is struggling so hard. Artest needs to drive to the basket, not settle for long shots.
Yao imitated vintage Hakeem at one point. Down at the baseline, Yao fakes the spin and pump fakes, drawing Shaq away from him. Then he launches a beautiful hook shot into the basket for the three-point-play. It was the dream shake again, and it was magnificent. Of course, Yao does this relatively often. He doesn't have Hakeem's moves, but he is surprisingly agile for a center, particularly one who is 7'6".
If Yao was imitating Hakeem the Dream, then Aaron Brooks continued his impersonation of Kenny the Jet. Brooks is on fire - he's shooting beautifully, passing like a dream, and creating movement and shots for his teammates. I have the feeling that he'll stay with the second unit for the time being, because he is essentially instant offense coming off the bench. I remember reading that a coach said something just "clicked" for Brooks in practice one day, and it definitely seems like it.
See, now, what did I tell you? The Lakers game was to be expected. The Rockets looked awesome last night, so everyone needs to chill the fuck out.
Oh, and I'd like to point out that Steve Nash is a little bitch who needs to get used to getting killed on the hard screen. If he doesn't like it, he should stay off the court instead of getting his teammates to push Alston around. There will undoubtedly be suspensions handed out today, but I wouldn't doubt it if Nash is left alone. Reason: he's white.
Artest continues to struggle to find his place in the offense. Just from my (admittedly amateurish) look at it, it seems like he just isn't moving when he's off the ball. Given that he seemed to understand Adelman's offense when he was in Sacramento, it seems odd that he is struggling so hard. Artest needs to drive to the basket, not settle for long shots.
Yao imitated vintage Hakeem at one point. Down at the baseline, Yao fakes the spin and pump fakes, drawing Shaq away from him. Then he launches a beautiful hook shot into the basket for the three-point-play. It was the dream shake again, and it was magnificent. Of course, Yao does this relatively often. He doesn't have Hakeem's moves, but he is surprisingly agile for a center, particularly one who is 7'6".
If Yao was imitating Hakeem the Dream, then Aaron Brooks continued his impersonation of Kenny the Jet. Brooks is on fire - he's shooting beautifully, passing like a dream, and creating movement and shots for his teammates. I have the feeling that he'll stay with the second unit for the time being, because he is essentially instant offense coming off the bench. I remember reading that a coach said something just "clicked" for Brooks in practice one day, and it definitely seems like it.
See, now, what did I tell you? The Lakers game was to be expected. The Rockets looked awesome last night, so everyone needs to chill the fuck out.
Oh, and I'd like to point out that Steve Nash is a little bitch who needs to get used to getting killed on the hard screen. If he doesn't like it, he should stay off the court instead of getting his teammates to push Alston around. There will undoubtedly be suspensions handed out today, but I wouldn't doubt it if Nash is left alone. Reason: he's white.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Turns out that Shane Battier is Black
Who knew? I always thought that he was the team's token white guy (granted, a token white guy who is probably the best perimeter defender in the NBA and is one of the league's best role-players, but token nonetheless).
Obama's candidacy (and subsequent election), as well as Shane Battier highlights how fucked up our views on race are. Both Obama and Battier are as white as they are black. Why are they "black," then, in the public's eye?
But issues like these should show us that not only does race not matter, it's entirely a social construction. Yes, there are people with dark skin and people with light skin, but these categories are not made up of real criteria. There is no such thing as a "pure" people - no people simply appeared on this earth, interacting with no one else. Every ethnicity has "interacted" (read: sexed up) with many other ethnicities, and each ethnicity emerged from others. It seems wrong to subscribe to this racial notion, particularly when all racial groups are "tainted" with one another. These categories, if they exist at all, do not exist in the fashion that racists believe them to, nor do they exist as publicly believed. They are simply creations of the mind, an attempt to categorize the world and order it for ourselves. And the quicker we do away with such notions, the easier it will be to move beyond humanity's shameful history on the subject.
EDIT:
Oh, and the comments on the linked article make me ashamed to be from Houston. That's just horrible. Whenever anyone mentions that Obama's election was, in fact, a big deal partially because the man is black (or at least identifies himself as black; see the above screed), people freak the fuck out. Idiotic.
And Shane Battier has a blog! And it's in Chinese (my roommate informs me that, in China, Battier has a massive shoe deal and appears in numerous commercials. This is amazing to me. The Chinese apparently love the dude - just as Houston does - and he is very popular over there. Cool). I frankly wouldn't doubt it if Battier could speak Chinese - he seems like a pretty smart dude.
Obama's candidacy (and subsequent election), as well as Shane Battier highlights how fucked up our views on race are. Both Obama and Battier are as white as they are black. Why are they "black," then, in the public's eye?
But issues like these should show us that not only does race not matter, it's entirely a social construction. Yes, there are people with dark skin and people with light skin, but these categories are not made up of real criteria. There is no such thing as a "pure" people - no people simply appeared on this earth, interacting with no one else. Every ethnicity has "interacted" (read: sexed up) with many other ethnicities, and each ethnicity emerged from others. It seems wrong to subscribe to this racial notion, particularly when all racial groups are "tainted" with one another. These categories, if they exist at all, do not exist in the fashion that racists believe them to, nor do they exist as publicly believed. They are simply creations of the mind, an attempt to categorize the world and order it for ourselves. And the quicker we do away with such notions, the easier it will be to move beyond humanity's shameful history on the subject.
EDIT:
Oh, and the comments on the linked article make me ashamed to be from Houston. That's just horrible. Whenever anyone mentions that Obama's election was, in fact, a big deal partially because the man is black (or at least identifies himself as black; see the above screed), people freak the fuck out. Idiotic.
And Shane Battier has a blog! And it's in Chinese (my roommate informs me that, in China, Battier has a massive shoe deal and appears in numerous commercials. This is amazing to me. The Chinese apparently love the dude - just as Houston does - and he is very popular over there. Cool). I frankly wouldn't doubt it if Battier could speak Chinese - he seems like a pretty smart dude.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Houston sports fans leave something to be desired
I like to lurk over at ClutchFans.net during games (too many people there, though, so if I have anything interesting to say, I say it at the Dream Shake). I love the reactions people have during a poor stretch of play in a game:
"Fire Daryl Moron" (Are you kidding me? The dude is the best GM in the league. He's drafted incredibly well out of the 2nd round, gotten us good talent with poor draft positions, and acquired such players as Artest and Scola. Daryl Morey is not the problem, and he's smarter than you.)
"Trade T-Mac" (He's the heart of the offense. He's hurt right now and isn't playing well. He'll do better as the season moves along.)
"Trade Yao" (Yao - when in good form - is the best center in the Western Conference. He might be the best in the league.)
etc.
A line of truth from "larsv8":
Cluthfans.net: where personel decisions are made after every play.
Oh and Ron Artest just drew 3 fouls in about 8 seconds. First two came off of Kobe, and the next was (I think) off of Vujacic. It's hilarious watching him defend people WHILE PLAY IS STOPPED. The dude is just tenacious, and it's fun to watch him.
--------------------------------
I've turned the game off. It's a Lakers blowout and I really don't want to listen to the LA homers chuckle for the last three minutes.
But read the game thread at Clutch Fans. I can't believe the shit coming out of people's mouths. No, I can. I've lived in Houston for virtually my whole life, so I know how our fans act. Maybe it has been the decades of beatdowns issued our way, but we automatically assume that our teams are a bunch of bums. In a way, it's a good thing - might as well not reward shitty teams with our love. But it gets tiresome when it comes two weeks into the season.
Yes, I have my doubts about this team: injuries are an issue, T-Mac is not the scorer he once was, and Yao seems prone to freak accidents. But I have faith in Rick Adelman and Daryl Morey to put together and run the best team they can. They did that last year. Without a third star, they were able to win 55 games. Now they have a third star.
T-Mac looks spent out there. It doesn't help that he is being ferociously defended, but he just can't get into the lane. Yao seems tired (most of the time, anyways). Artest's offense is too reliant on his outside shot. But these problems will be corrected as the season moves on.
The first quarter of this game was all Houston's. But the Lakers beat them down the stretch. Basketball is a game of growth rates, and the Rockets just burned themselves out in the first quarter. That's probably because they've been on a very hectic schedule for the first few weeks, so I have faith that this will change.
And I have faith that those who are giving up on the Rockets now will change, too. The players will adjust to Adelman's system, just as they adjusted to every system that their high-school, college, and other professional coaches threw at them. And when that happens for a whole game (just as it happened for the first quarter tonight), it will be a thing of beauty. And the Rockets will reel off a few dozen wins, and everyone will be content. Stop letting every bad possession freak you out, Houston.
"Fire Daryl Moron" (Are you kidding me? The dude is the best GM in the league. He's drafted incredibly well out of the 2nd round, gotten us good talent with poor draft positions, and acquired such players as Artest and Scola. Daryl Morey is not the problem, and he's smarter than you.)
"Trade T-Mac" (He's the heart of the offense. He's hurt right now and isn't playing well. He'll do better as the season moves along.)
"Trade Yao" (Yao - when in good form - is the best center in the Western Conference. He might be the best in the league.)
etc.
A line of truth from "larsv8":
Cluthfans.net: where personel decisions are made after every play.
Oh and Ron Artest just drew 3 fouls in about 8 seconds. First two came off of Kobe, and the next was (I think) off of Vujacic. It's hilarious watching him defend people WHILE PLAY IS STOPPED. The dude is just tenacious, and it's fun to watch him.
--------------------------------
I've turned the game off. It's a Lakers blowout and I really don't want to listen to the LA homers chuckle for the last three minutes.
But read the game thread at Clutch Fans. I can't believe the shit coming out of people's mouths. No, I can. I've lived in Houston for virtually my whole life, so I know how our fans act. Maybe it has been the decades of beatdowns issued our way, but we automatically assume that our teams are a bunch of bums. In a way, it's a good thing - might as well not reward shitty teams with our love. But it gets tiresome when it comes two weeks into the season.
Yes, I have my doubts about this team: injuries are an issue, T-Mac is not the scorer he once was, and Yao seems prone to freak accidents. But I have faith in Rick Adelman and Daryl Morey to put together and run the best team they can. They did that last year. Without a third star, they were able to win 55 games. Now they have a third star.
T-Mac looks spent out there. It doesn't help that he is being ferociously defended, but he just can't get into the lane. Yao seems tired (most of the time, anyways). Artest's offense is too reliant on his outside shot. But these problems will be corrected as the season moves on.
The first quarter of this game was all Houston's. But the Lakers beat them down the stretch. Basketball is a game of growth rates, and the Rockets just burned themselves out in the first quarter. That's probably because they've been on a very hectic schedule for the first few weeks, so I have faith that this will change.
And I have faith that those who are giving up on the Rockets now will change, too. The players will adjust to Adelman's system, just as they adjusted to every system that their high-school, college, and other professional coaches threw at them. And when that happens for a whole game (just as it happened for the first quarter tonight), it will be a thing of beauty. And the Rockets will reel off a few dozen wins, and everyone will be content. Stop letting every bad possession freak you out, Houston.
41-13
Fuck it. This team sucks so fucking hard. If we get lucky, we MIGHT defeat Cleveland, Oakland, and Jacksonville, but I fucking doubt it. Tell Kris Brown to shank his kicks from now on - we need better picks. Or, better yet, just keep Richard Smith as DC. We'll get good draft picks every year.
I need a team to follow that doesn't kick me in the balls every week and whom I'll only have to root against every four years. Possible teams: Saints (I live here, so it's a lot easier to watch them than the Texans), Redskins (why not?), Giants (they hate the Cowboys, and I have friends who are Giants fans), Bears (two words: Matt Forte).
Really, I don't know what the Texans can do. They can grab a good safety in the draft (we HAVE good CBs in Dunta and Fred Benett, but Smith prefers Faggins and Jacques Reeves) and dramatically improve, but they could just as easily take a Travis Johnson as a Mario Williams.
You know who I would like to see in a Texans uniform? Graham Harrell. That would be sweet. And who knows? Maybe the Texans will get a chance to draft a decent QB in the 2nd round. The problem is that both Sage and Schaub are awful about the turnovers, and that is killing the offense (the offense has really come together this year, but it could be better). It would be cool to see a real starter run the offense.
I need a team to follow that doesn't kick me in the balls every week and whom I'll only have to root against every four years. Possible teams: Saints (I live here, so it's a lot easier to watch them than the Texans), Redskins (why not?), Giants (they hate the Cowboys, and I have friends who are Giants fans), Bears (two words: Matt Forte).
Really, I don't know what the Texans can do. They can grab a good safety in the draft (we HAVE good CBs in Dunta and Fred Benett, but Smith prefers Faggins and Jacques Reeves) and dramatically improve, but they could just as easily take a Travis Johnson as a Mario Williams.
You know who I would like to see in a Texans uniform? Graham Harrell. That would be sweet. And who knows? Maybe the Texans will get a chance to draft a decent QB in the 2nd round. The problem is that both Sage and Schaub are awful about the turnovers, and that is killing the offense (the offense has really come together this year, but it could be better). It would be cool to see a real starter run the offense.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Why Houston is better than your crappy city.
Here's an interesting discussion of property rights and Houston. Personally, I don't agree with the author's belief that governments have no right to meddle with individual property decisions. Frankly, governments should have the right to make reasonable limitations on personal use of property - so long as those limitations correct for problems of externalities, injustice, etc.
But his point that land-zoning advocates are in this for primarily ideological reasons is spot on. It seems to me that what little debate there is on this subject tends to be less about what is economically advantageous, but about what satisfies our beliefs about what a city should be.
And Houston, as I have said before, flies in the face of what a city should be, or at least the modern conception of how a city should function. The problem is that zoning advocates don't see that Houston is still developing as an urban environment - we are roughly where New York was in the late 19th century. And it will be some time until the costs of further sprawl (transportation, infrastructure, and preferences) outweigh the benefits of more suburbs. Gradually, as the marginal cost of more low-density development increases, Houston will begin to "fill in." Once that process is complete - say, in another twenty-five years - the Bayou City will be truly monstrous in size.
The way I see it, zoning accomplishes the same project - high density urban development - in less time, but at a higher cost. To some cities, I imagine that this is an acceptable tradeoff, particularly for those that will not be able to grow as large or as fast as Houston. But Houston, because it is naturally a hub for immigration (has been since my great-grandfather's family came through Galveston from France), and is naturally (or unnaturally, depending on how you view the channel) a port, has greater potential for growth. More to the point, other cities might view that dynamism and decide to grow less - knowing that overall growth in the US is undetermined by their individual growth rates, and they will not be able to attract the jobs that Houston does - by instituting zoning regulations. Zoning isn't necessarily a bad thing, and it can be a rational choice. Now, we have to see that Houston's lack of zoning regulations has come at a price, but it's one that people are (on the whole) willing to bare.
Now, the author is wrong in assuming that bad things have not come from a lack of zoning. Of course, that depends on how you view the strip clubs, liquor joints, and sex shops that exist throughout the city. I think they contribute to the beautiful culture of Houston, so I don't think it's so bad. But others do think that our lack of regulation has allowed unsavory businesses to flourish. Of course, they flourish because there is a demand for booze, dildos, and naked women, so one can chalk that up to efficient land use.
Overall, I like the lack of zoning. And it's not as if land is freely used throughout the greater Houston area - numerous deed agreements exist throughout our city. But those agreements come from "natural" market interaction, not forced upon us by non-market agents.
Give Houston another few decades, and it will be the cultural equal of Los Angeles or Chicago (that is if it isn't their equal already; it just might be). It will just have liquor stores and strip clubs in more convenient locations. And that's pretty sweet.
But his point that land-zoning advocates are in this for primarily ideological reasons is spot on. It seems to me that what little debate there is on this subject tends to be less about what is economically advantageous, but about what satisfies our beliefs about what a city should be.
And Houston, as I have said before, flies in the face of what a city should be, or at least the modern conception of how a city should function. The problem is that zoning advocates don't see that Houston is still developing as an urban environment - we are roughly where New York was in the late 19th century. And it will be some time until the costs of further sprawl (transportation, infrastructure, and preferences) outweigh the benefits of more suburbs. Gradually, as the marginal cost of more low-density development increases, Houston will begin to "fill in." Once that process is complete - say, in another twenty-five years - the Bayou City will be truly monstrous in size.
The way I see it, zoning accomplishes the same project - high density urban development - in less time, but at a higher cost. To some cities, I imagine that this is an acceptable tradeoff, particularly for those that will not be able to grow as large or as fast as Houston. But Houston, because it is naturally a hub for immigration (has been since my great-grandfather's family came through Galveston from France), and is naturally (or unnaturally, depending on how you view the channel) a port, has greater potential for growth. More to the point, other cities might view that dynamism and decide to grow less - knowing that overall growth in the US is undetermined by their individual growth rates, and they will not be able to attract the jobs that Houston does - by instituting zoning regulations. Zoning isn't necessarily a bad thing, and it can be a rational choice. Now, we have to see that Houston's lack of zoning regulations has come at a price, but it's one that people are (on the whole) willing to bare.
Now, the author is wrong in assuming that bad things have not come from a lack of zoning. Of course, that depends on how you view the strip clubs, liquor joints, and sex shops that exist throughout the city. I think they contribute to the beautiful culture of Houston, so I don't think it's so bad. But others do think that our lack of regulation has allowed unsavory businesses to flourish. Of course, they flourish because there is a demand for booze, dildos, and naked women, so one can chalk that up to efficient land use.
Overall, I like the lack of zoning. And it's not as if land is freely used throughout the greater Houston area - numerous deed agreements exist throughout our city. But those agreements come from "natural" market interaction, not forced upon us by non-market agents.
Give Houston another few decades, and it will be the cultural equal of Los Angeles or Chicago (that is if it isn't their equal already; it just might be). It will just have liquor stores and strip clubs in more convenient locations. And that's pretty sweet.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Live by T-Mac, Die by T-Mac
I watched the Rockets-Blazers game last night, and very little looked good. The defense wasn't great, Ron Artest (while coming through in the clutch for Houston with a final-second stripped ball from Brandon Roy) didn't shoot well, and (worst of all) Yao continues to seem tired out there. T-Mac, however, seemed to remember that he is not Ray Allen but Tracy McGrady, and so stopped settling for outside jump shots. He drove his way to the basket, scoring in the paint. That's what Ron Artest needs to do - the guy is so big and so strong that I wonder why he settles for the 3-point shot when he can easily get down low.
But while Yao struggled throughout the night, he came through in the final seconds of overtime, hitting a clutch fade-away jumper and getting the foul. He makes his freethrow, and the Rockets are up by 1. But there is still 0.8 seconds on the clock.
So Portland inbounds the ball. Brandon Roy (in such a simple play that I can't believe the Rockets fucked this up) runs back to 3-point territory, takes the inbound and fires, making the shot and winning the game. If you watch the replay, you can see T-Mac hesitating for just one freakin split moment, allowing Roy to get separation and fire before Tracy can get in his face. T-Mac just blew his coverage, plain and simple.
Interestingly, this game brings up that whole "don't let the ref decide the game" thing. I hear that a lot, but I've always doubted its truth. It seems to me that the foul call on Yao was legit. If that was a foul in the first four quarters, it was a foul in the closing moments of overtime, and I think referees should make that call. It's usually anti-climactic to end a game on a free throw, but fouls should be called consistently.
But while Yao struggled throughout the night, he came through in the final seconds of overtime, hitting a clutch fade-away jumper and getting the foul. He makes his freethrow, and the Rockets are up by 1. But there is still 0.8 seconds on the clock.
So Portland inbounds the ball. Brandon Roy (in such a simple play that I can't believe the Rockets fucked this up) runs back to 3-point territory, takes the inbound and fires, making the shot and winning the game. If you watch the replay, you can see T-Mac hesitating for just one freakin split moment, allowing Roy to get separation and fire before Tracy can get in his face. T-Mac just blew his coverage, plain and simple.
Interestingly, this game brings up that whole "don't let the ref decide the game" thing. I hear that a lot, but I've always doubted its truth. It seems to me that the foul call on Yao was legit. If that was a foul in the first four quarters, it was a foul in the closing moments of overtime, and I think referees should make that call. It's usually anti-climactic to end a game on a free throw, but fouls should be called consistently.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
This is why we can't have nice things
Environmental economics is one of my favorite subjects. It's a spectacularly relevant area these days, and it's frustrating that environmental groups seem to mistrust economists.
This article talks about some problems with wind power and salmon. Now, I tend to hear the sort of pseudo-environmentalist objection (Turbines kill birds! Dams kill fish!) coming out of a lot of mouths these days - not just from non-environmentalists attempting to execute a sort of fifth-column action but from misinformed environmentalists, as well (I don't really consider myself an "environmentalist" - the environment's only value is in its use to us, but that value must be carefully managed via governmental and economic decisions).
First, let's understand that modern wind turbines won't kill many birds (we'll start with birds because they're a more common objection). They move way too slow to do anything to a bird. Birds might, of course, set up their nests inside the tower, but various solutions to that have been found. Additionally, all wind-producing areas require farm proposals to avoid migration and nesting areas. Few birds are going to get trapped in these things.
But even if they did get trapped in wind turbines, we have to look at this on balance. A few birds killed by a wind farm is nothing compared to the sort of devastation that mining operations will do to its nesting ground. How do they mine for coal these days? They blow the tops off of fucking mountains! Imagine what that does to any birds (or deer, cute little bunny rabbits, squirrels, centipedes, mosquitoes, rare species of plants, fungi, caterpillars, butterflies, and everything else) in proximity to the blast. Seriously, it would take some pretty violent wind farms to destroy as many birds as coal mining operations do.
I imagine the same is true of fish. First, as the article implies, the problem can be solved by infrastructural investment. Second, even if this problem cannot be solved (unlikely), then I'm willing to bet that wind power still won't kill as many salmon as the pollution from coal-fired power plants and runoff from any mining (not sure if they have coal in Oregon, but it's possible). Even if they don't have mining operations in Oregon, it would be wrong to privilege their environment over another.
We have to look at these issues economically, carefully weighing our options and taking the most profitable actions. Texas has been great about this - it has lead the way on wind policy, implementing a market system that encourages environmental protection. As time goes on, this thinking will only become more important, and it will be vitally necessary that voters understand such reasoning.
This article talks about some problems with wind power and salmon. Now, I tend to hear the sort of pseudo-environmentalist objection (Turbines kill birds! Dams kill fish!) coming out of a lot of mouths these days - not just from non-environmentalists attempting to execute a sort of fifth-column action but from misinformed environmentalists, as well (I don't really consider myself an "environmentalist" - the environment's only value is in its use to us, but that value must be carefully managed via governmental and economic decisions).
First, let's understand that modern wind turbines won't kill many birds (we'll start with birds because they're a more common objection). They move way too slow to do anything to a bird. Birds might, of course, set up their nests inside the tower, but various solutions to that have been found. Additionally, all wind-producing areas require farm proposals to avoid migration and nesting areas. Few birds are going to get trapped in these things.
But even if they did get trapped in wind turbines, we have to look at this on balance. A few birds killed by a wind farm is nothing compared to the sort of devastation that mining operations will do to its nesting ground. How do they mine for coal these days? They blow the tops off of fucking mountains! Imagine what that does to any birds (or deer, cute little bunny rabbits, squirrels, centipedes, mosquitoes, rare species of plants, fungi, caterpillars, butterflies, and everything else) in proximity to the blast. Seriously, it would take some pretty violent wind farms to destroy as many birds as coal mining operations do.
I imagine the same is true of fish. First, as the article implies, the problem can be solved by infrastructural investment. Second, even if this problem cannot be solved (unlikely), then I'm willing to bet that wind power still won't kill as many salmon as the pollution from coal-fired power plants and runoff from any mining (not sure if they have coal in Oregon, but it's possible). Even if they don't have mining operations in Oregon, it would be wrong to privilege their environment over another.
We have to look at these issues economically, carefully weighing our options and taking the most profitable actions. Texas has been great about this - it has lead the way on wind policy, implementing a market system that encourages environmental protection. As time goes on, this thinking will only become more important, and it will be vitally necessary that voters understand such reasoning.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Fuckin Protestants
Typical. They break with the Mother Church for what? To throw explosives at people? Yeah, well they'll be fucking surprised when they die and find themselves in purgatory. With the rest of us.
Oh, and God continues to throw shit at the City of Houston. As a Catholic, I have no problem with the concept of a god who curses us - it's what God does. Seriously though, if I were some dumb fuck from Chicago or Boston, I'd think my city is cursed in virtue of some previous karmic violation. But we in Houston know that it's just a bad break. Hopefully Xavier Adibi proves to be kickass.
Oh, and God continues to throw shit at the City of Houston. As a Catholic, I have no problem with the concept of a god who curses us - it's what God does. Seriously though, if I were some dumb fuck from Chicago or Boston, I'd think my city is cursed in virtue of some previous karmic violation. But we in Houston know that it's just a bad break. Hopefully Xavier Adibi proves to be kickass.
Ahh... Award Season
So the Astros' various beat writers are going to give out their awards. Who they got? Berkman wins an award for being awesome. Pence wins an award for being an alright dude. Valverde gets an award for Oswalt having a shit year. Wesley Wright gets an award for being the only rookie on the team. Jose Cruz gets an award for being Cheo. And Neil Hohlfield gets an award for being dead. Awesome!
Oh, and Rafer Alston gonna choke a bitch:
Oh, and Rafer Alston gonna choke a bitch:
If it ain't one thing...
For the first time since 1994, the United States will be an undivided government. The House of Representatives, the Senate, and the Presidency will all be in Democratic control.
This is not a good thing. I say that as a Democrat - this is a terrible, risky thing. I don't believe in "bipartisanship" as a goal unto itself, but I realize that bipartisanship forces different regions to listen to one another. And that's an important part of the American system. With so much power vested in the hands of one party (even one so dysfunctional as the Democratic party), we risk losing critical voices within the political process. Given that parties seem incapable of self-critique, this loss hurts us a great deal.
The celebration surrounding last night's election results bothers me a great deal, as well. Granted, supporters always celebrate their candidate's victory, but this seems like actual devotion to Obama. That's dangerous. Nobody should be devoted to a politician - devote yourself to ideals, not people.
Obama can make a fine president. But I fear that the Democratic party has abandoned the sort of militant liberalism that Clinton - for all of his faults - pursued overseas. I worry that the Obama administration will be unwilling to engage in another Yugoslavia if the situation presented itself. How will he address Darfur? How will he deal with a militantly theocratic Iran? How will he help the Iraqi and Afghani peoples? If Obama (and, more specifically, the Democratic party) is unwilling to use military force, then we will face a long four years.
On another note, I was surprised to see that some 44% of Texans voted for Obama. Cool.
This is not a good thing. I say that as a Democrat - this is a terrible, risky thing. I don't believe in "bipartisanship" as a goal unto itself, but I realize that bipartisanship forces different regions to listen to one another. And that's an important part of the American system. With so much power vested in the hands of one party (even one so dysfunctional as the Democratic party), we risk losing critical voices within the political process. Given that parties seem incapable of self-critique, this loss hurts us a great deal.
The celebration surrounding last night's election results bothers me a great deal, as well. Granted, supporters always celebrate their candidate's victory, but this seems like actual devotion to Obama. That's dangerous. Nobody should be devoted to a politician - devote yourself to ideals, not people.
Obama can make a fine president. But I fear that the Democratic party has abandoned the sort of militant liberalism that Clinton - for all of his faults - pursued overseas. I worry that the Obama administration will be unwilling to engage in another Yugoslavia if the situation presented itself. How will he address Darfur? How will he deal with a militantly theocratic Iran? How will he help the Iraqi and Afghani peoples? If Obama (and, more specifically, the Democratic party) is unwilling to use military force, then we will face a long four years.
On another note, I was surprised to see that some 44% of Texans voted for Obama. Cool.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Remember what I said about maybe going 6-10?
Yeah, well that probably won't happen. They might not win another game this season. Thanks, Jared Allen.
I listened to the radio broadcast yesterday (thanks, internet! I love it when you suck at streaming!), so I didn't see the hit. I looked at the highlights this morning, and I saw the hit, and I tell you what, Allen should be fucking suspended immediately. Schaub had long since completed his pass. Allen had already fallen, but got back up to complete the hit. And his shoulder comes into direct contact with Matt's knee. And now he has a torn MCL and will probably be out for the season. Fuck.
Disgusting. And I think the NFL often does too much to protect the QB. But they need to watch out for this crap.
So Rosenfail will be taking the snaps, now. Jesus. What a shit-tastic season this is turning out to be.
I listened to the radio broadcast yesterday (thanks, internet! I love it when you suck at streaming!), so I didn't see the hit. I looked at the highlights this morning, and I saw the hit, and I tell you what, Allen should be fucking suspended immediately. Schaub had long since completed his pass. Allen had already fallen, but got back up to complete the hit. And his shoulder comes into direct contact with Matt's knee. And now he has a torn MCL and will probably be out for the season. Fuck.
Disgusting. And I think the NFL often does too much to protect the QB. But they need to watch out for this crap.
So Rosenfail will be taking the snaps, now. Jesus. What a shit-tastic season this is turning out to be.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Well...at least we'll get a good draft pick
Today was the game of the Texans' season. If they could win this one, then the last three games weren't a fluke.
So, of course, the Texans fucked it up. I don't know how they were only down by a TD when the game ended, because the whole game had the feeling of a blowout. Maybe it was that Adrian Peterson scored in the opening minutes of the game, or maybe it was that the QBs (Schaub was injured in the 1st half and was finally pulled after he made several terrible plays) kept committing turnovers, but the game felt like a 35-7 loss, not 28-21. So if they keep playing like this, what's their record going to be?
11/9 vs. Baltimore - LOSS. Their defense will kill us. What offense they have will play the Texans' defense like a well-tuned two-bit whore.
11/16 @ Indy - LOSS. They'll be going in with a two-game losing streak. The Colts suck this year, but not as much as the Texans. Plus, we're the Reds to their Oswalt.
11/23 @ Cleveland - WIN. Hey, they can handle this one. Maybe.
12/1 vs. Jacksonville - WIN. God, I hope so. It'll be Monday night, and I think God owes the people of Houston this much. Who am I kidding? He'll break all of our hearts in front of a national audience. LOSS.
12/7 @ Green Bay - LOSS. After the way the Packers dismantled the Colts? We're going to get killed.
12/14 vs Hicks - I'd give my left nut and whatever cash I have on me for the Texans to break up the sister-fuckers' perfect season. But it won't happen. LOSS.
12/21 @ Oakland - WIN. If not, well, shit.
12/28 vs Bears - LOSS. Gotta go out with a bang. And Forte and the Bears are just better than the Texans.
Final Record: 5-11. Fuckin wonderful.
So, of course, the Texans fucked it up. I don't know how they were only down by a TD when the game ended, because the whole game had the feeling of a blowout. Maybe it was that Adrian Peterson scored in the opening minutes of the game, or maybe it was that the QBs (Schaub was injured in the 1st half and was finally pulled after he made several terrible plays) kept committing turnovers, but the game felt like a 35-7 loss, not 28-21. So if they keep playing like this, what's their record going to be?
11/9 vs. Baltimore - LOSS. Their defense will kill us. What offense they have will play the Texans' defense like a well-tuned two-bit whore.
11/16 @ Indy - LOSS. They'll be going in with a two-game losing streak. The Colts suck this year, but not as much as the Texans. Plus, we're the Reds to their Oswalt.
11/23 @ Cleveland - WIN. Hey, they can handle this one. Maybe.
12/1 vs. Jacksonville - WIN. God, I hope so. It'll be Monday night, and I think God owes the people of Houston this much. Who am I kidding? He'll break all of our hearts in front of a national audience. LOSS.
12/7 @ Green Bay - LOSS. After the way the Packers dismantled the Colts? We're going to get killed.
12/14 vs Hicks - I'd give my left nut and whatever cash I have on me for the Texans to break up the sister-fuckers' perfect season. But it won't happen. LOSS.
12/21 @ Oakland - WIN. If not, well, shit.
12/28 vs Bears - LOSS. Gotta go out with a bang. And Forte and the Bears are just better than the Texans.
Final Record: 5-11. Fuckin wonderful.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
College football sucks
There, I said it. I used to think the NCAA provided something that the NFL did not, and they do, but it's not something that should be provided.
Tulane lines up for its now annual asskicking from the LSU Tigers tonight. The season started off fairly well - Alabama beat the Green Wave only via two punt/kick return touchdowns (I don't remember which). But the season has gone terribly for Tulane, losing to Army homecoming weekend and getting blown out by Rice (to be fair, Rice is very good this year, but still). LSU is essentially on the bubble for a BCS bowl game (unlikely, but possible). Neither has seen the season go as hoped.
And, frankly, no one outside of Tulane alumni and the student body gives a shit about the LSU-Tulane "rivalry." It's a rivalry that hasn't been relavent since the Truman administration. This used to be a playing-out of Louisiana's two cultural hearts - New Orleans and everywhere else. It used to have the same significance as UC vs. Stanford - a rivalry between the state's premier public and private institutions.
But in the intervening years, Tulane left the SEC, falling into the hellhole that is non-BCS football. They mustered two great seasons when Tommy Bowden coached, but sucked after he left for Clemson (Of course, it didn't help that Tulane passed over OC Rich Rodriguez for the HC position). And that summarizes why the worse schools can't compete or even get better - as soon as they get better, the head coach and AD will leave for greener pastures. Organizational stability and success allow for a school to build a winning program, and smaller schools are largely unable to create any of those things.
It remains to be seen whether Bob Toledo can build a winning program at Tulane. I doubt it. Alumni won't allow Tulane to go to Divison I-AA, and the NCAA isn't structured to allow for more competitive schools (the easiest way to facilitate this, of course, would be to further decrease the number of scholarships offered).
Oh, and FanHouse has a pretty sweet picture of a Texans fan's jersey:
Some Texans fans like Dallas as their NFC team.
Those people are called "traitors."
Some Texans fans loathe the Cowboys.
These people are called "the citizens of Houston."
Can't have it both ways folks - either like Dallas or like Houston. Can't do both.
Tulane lines up for its now annual asskicking from the LSU Tigers tonight. The season started off fairly well - Alabama beat the Green Wave only via two punt/kick return touchdowns (I don't remember which). But the season has gone terribly for Tulane, losing to Army homecoming weekend and getting blown out by Rice (to be fair, Rice is very good this year, but still). LSU is essentially on the bubble for a BCS bowl game (unlikely, but possible). Neither has seen the season go as hoped.
And, frankly, no one outside of Tulane alumni and the student body gives a shit about the LSU-Tulane "rivalry." It's a rivalry that hasn't been relavent since the Truman administration. This used to be a playing-out of Louisiana's two cultural hearts - New Orleans and everywhere else. It used to have the same significance as UC vs. Stanford - a rivalry between the state's premier public and private institutions.
But in the intervening years, Tulane left the SEC, falling into the hellhole that is non-BCS football. They mustered two great seasons when Tommy Bowden coached, but sucked after he left for Clemson (Of course, it didn't help that Tulane passed over OC Rich Rodriguez for the HC position). And that summarizes why the worse schools can't compete or even get better - as soon as they get better, the head coach and AD will leave for greener pastures. Organizational stability and success allow for a school to build a winning program, and smaller schools are largely unable to create any of those things.
It remains to be seen whether Bob Toledo can build a winning program at Tulane. I doubt it. Alumni won't allow Tulane to go to Divison I-AA, and the NCAA isn't structured to allow for more competitive schools (the easiest way to facilitate this, of course, would be to further decrease the number of scholarships offered).
Oh, and FanHouse has a pretty sweet picture of a Texans fan's jersey:
Some Texans fans like Dallas as their NFC team.
Those people are called "traitors."
Some Texans fans loathe the Cowboys.
These people are called "the citizens of Houston."
Can't have it both ways folks - either like Dallas or like Houston. Can't do both.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Charles Barkley is a funny man
Maybe it's because I love a good internet troll (incidently, this is why I usually understand that Justice is just being an asshole - doesn't mean I like his troll-fu, because it's terrible, but I understand the bastard), but this interview (you have to look for it) with Charles Barkley is freakin hilarious. And I don't think that the interviewers "get it" until about the time the Round Mound of Rebound insists that he was always in great shape during his Rockets years.
Great Parts:
(1) Calls Yao Ming a Communist
(2) Says Tracy McGrady probably wasn't able to get out of the first round of his softball tournament. He also would get hurt playing connect four.
(3) Calls out Rafer Alston for his streetball crap (this is a legitimate beef, actually, but Rafer doesn't do that too often anymore).
(4) Says the Rockets will finish 10th (but because it's the city of Houston, he'll bump them up to 9th).
(5) They're hurrible and turrible
Barkley's commentary last night was more serious: if the Rockets have T-Mac and Yao healthy, and if Artest doesn't fuck up, they'll be awesome. That's essentially the line that everyone has been parroting, but it's the truth. I honestly think that this crap with Artest is overblown - he clearly enjoys playing here (did you see how quickly he came to Yao's defense last night?) and the Rockets have given him a minder. He'll be fine. As I've said previously, injuries are unpredictable. They can sideline any team.
Great Parts:
(1) Calls Yao Ming a Communist
(2) Says Tracy McGrady probably wasn't able to get out of the first round of his softball tournament. He also would get hurt playing connect four.
(3) Calls out Rafer Alston for his streetball crap (this is a legitimate beef, actually, but Rafer doesn't do that too often anymore).
(4) Says the Rockets will finish 10th (but because it's the city of Houston, he'll bump them up to 9th).
(5) They're hurrible and turrible
Barkley's commentary last night was more serious: if the Rockets have T-Mac and Yao healthy, and if Artest doesn't fuck up, they'll be awesome. That's essentially the line that everyone has been parroting, but it's the truth. I honestly think that this crap with Artest is overblown - he clearly enjoys playing here (did you see how quickly he came to Yao's defense last night?) and the Rockets have given him a minder. He'll be fine. As I've said previously, injuries are unpredictable. They can sideline any team.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Hells Yeah! Eat Shit Dallas!
Not really a pretty win for the Rockets, but I suspect they'll take it. Defense was not "Best in the NBA" quality, but Artest was in Tru Warier form, instead of Crazy Pills form. However, he was called on a COMPLETELY BULLSHIT technical foul. He runs into the crowd of players forming around the site of a controversial call, attempting to pull Yao to the free-throw line. But first he touches Howard on the arm, sending the Dallas shittards into a frenzy. So he gets called with a technical for no fuckin reason but the fact that he's Ron Artest.
Everyone shot incredibly well from the line. Artest is actually fairly good at capitalizing on free-throws, so that's not entirely surprising, but T-Mac was 10-11. Yao has yet to miss a free throw shot thus far. Pretty cool.
What this game really highlited was how ridiculously deep this team is. During the fourth-quarter Rockets surge, neither Tracy nor Yao played. It was Artest and and the rest. And even whilst being matched up against the Dallas starters, they pushed Houston ahead. This team is so chock-full of great role-players, it's heart-warming.
As has been noted elsewhere (rather humorously in Free Darko's season "preview":
While watching Golden State struggle to get rebounds, Joey Dorsey wonders aloud why the team that already has Luis Scola, Carl Landry, and Chuck Hayes was the one that drafted him.
and in Basketball Prospectus' season preview for the Southwest Divison), we've got a lot of highly-skilled power forwards that we acquired for cheap. And while it's cool to be able to have Scola, Hayes, Landry, and now Dorsey at the position, one wonders what Morey could turn Hayes or Landry or Dorsey into. A truly solid point guard? A new knee for McGrady?
Still, it really illustrates how awesome Morey has been. He's drafted incredibly well out of the second round. And he's used those picks to either solidify an already awesome bench or add to the team's other weapons. I mean, he can't turn Joey Dorsey into Chris Paul, but he might be able to get something better than what we have.
On the other hand, Alston and Brooks are doing alright. In that same BP preview, you can take a look at the expected WARP values for all the Rockets. What's intriguing is that none of them project to be anything less than average. That's incredible, especially given the reputations of Alston and Head.
Anyways, an exciting win that showcases the Rockets' new scoring threats. This is going to be a great season.
Everyone shot incredibly well from the line. Artest is actually fairly good at capitalizing on free-throws, so that's not entirely surprising, but T-Mac was 10-11. Yao has yet to miss a free throw shot thus far. Pretty cool.
What this game really highlited was how ridiculously deep this team is. During the fourth-quarter Rockets surge, neither Tracy nor Yao played. It was Artest and and the rest. And even whilst being matched up against the Dallas starters, they pushed Houston ahead. This team is so chock-full of great role-players, it's heart-warming.
As has been noted elsewhere (rather humorously in Free Darko's season "preview":
While watching Golden State struggle to get rebounds, Joey Dorsey wonders aloud why the team that already has Luis Scola, Carl Landry, and Chuck Hayes was the one that drafted him.
and in Basketball Prospectus' season preview for the Southwest Divison), we've got a lot of highly-skilled power forwards that we acquired for cheap. And while it's cool to be able to have Scola, Hayes, Landry, and now Dorsey at the position, one wonders what Morey could turn Hayes or Landry or Dorsey into. A truly solid point guard? A new knee for McGrady?
Still, it really illustrates how awesome Morey has been. He's drafted incredibly well out of the second round. And he's used those picks to either solidify an already awesome bench or add to the team's other weapons. I mean, he can't turn Joey Dorsey into Chris Paul, but he might be able to get something better than what we have.
On the other hand, Alston and Brooks are doing alright. In that same BP preview, you can take a look at the expected WARP values for all the Rockets. What's intriguing is that none of them project to be anything less than average. That's incredible, especially given the reputations of Alston and Head.
Anyways, an exciting win that showcases the Rockets' new scoring threats. This is going to be a great season.
Sometimes I wonder why I pay attention to this crap
So I'm watching that Around the Horn crap, and Bill "What the hell is he talkin 'bout" Plaschke says that Lidge's season was the best by any closer he's ever seen. Now, I'm willing to believe that, because I doubt that Plaschke has seen much. He seems to just talk out of his ass.
But this wasn't even Lidge's best season. That was his second season in the league - 2004. He posted a WHIP of 0.919 and an ERA of 1.90. Now, he wasn't the full-time closer that year, so maybe we shouldn't count it. But this season wasn't that much different from his 2005 season - it just ended differently.
Still, what was the best single season for a closer? I think we can narrow this one down to three seasons: Eric Gagne's 2003 season, Billy Wagner's 1997 season (maybe 2003, too), and Mariano Rivera's 2008 season (again, maybe 2005 or 2001).
So what do we find when we look at the statistics (I'll be looking at WARP on this one; it's not perfect but it's pretty good)? Well, as I said, this wasn't Lidge's best season: 2004 was (9.0 vs. 6.3).
Gas Can's 1999 season was his best (though not by much: 8.1 in 1999 vs 8.0 in 2003). Mariano Rivera's 2008 season was his best ever (an incredible 10.3 wins above replacement) while Eric Gagne's 2003 season was obviously his best (10.1 WARP).
Now, I don't think WARP tells the whole story, but it does a damn fine job of it. And Lidge's "perfect season" is an impressive accomplishment. But Lidge wasn't even the best closer this season! Rivera blew only one save this year, right? What's the difference between that and Lidge's extra save? Rivera (and as much as I loathe the Yankees, he deserves props for this) possibly had the best season for a closer ever (again, this would require a lot more statistical analysis), but he's been overshadowed by Francisco Rodriguez and Brad Lidge. That's too bad.
Going to watch the Rockets-Mavs game. Fuck Dallas, baby!
But this wasn't even Lidge's best season. That was his second season in the league - 2004. He posted a WHIP of 0.919 and an ERA of 1.90. Now, he wasn't the full-time closer that year, so maybe we shouldn't count it. But this season wasn't that much different from his 2005 season - it just ended differently.
Still, what was the best single season for a closer? I think we can narrow this one down to three seasons: Eric Gagne's 2003 season, Billy Wagner's 1997 season (maybe 2003, too), and Mariano Rivera's 2008 season (again, maybe 2005 or 2001).
So what do we find when we look at the statistics (I'll be looking at WARP on this one; it's not perfect but it's pretty good)? Well, as I said, this wasn't Lidge's best season: 2004 was (9.0 vs. 6.3).
Gas Can's 1999 season was his best (though not by much: 8.1 in 1999 vs 8.0 in 2003). Mariano Rivera's 2008 season was his best ever (an incredible 10.3 wins above replacement) while Eric Gagne's 2003 season was obviously his best (10.1 WARP).
Now, I don't think WARP tells the whole story, but it does a damn fine job of it. And Lidge's "perfect season" is an impressive accomplishment. But Lidge wasn't even the best closer this season! Rivera blew only one save this year, right? What's the difference between that and Lidge's extra save? Rivera (and as much as I loathe the Yankees, he deserves props for this) possibly had the best season for a closer ever (again, this would require a lot more statistical analysis), but he's been overshadowed by Francisco Rodriguez and Brad Lidge. That's too bad.
Going to watch the Rockets-Mavs game. Fuck Dallas, baby!
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Anus-Clinchingly Awful
Holy shit, that looks painful. One of UH's receivers (and apparently one of the better ones) SNAPS HIS LEG ON IMPACT with some band carts. Ouch. I don't know what kind of damage that does to his career. Obviously, he's out for the season, but who knows how he'll do down the line?
Hey everybody, turns out we're pretty good
Daryl Morey is probably the best GM in the NBA. That's a bold statement for a guy who's still relatively new at this, but the man has shown he knows what he is doing. He inherited the Rockets' two big pieces - the Yao Ming - T-Mac tandem - and he has constructed a deep lineup of role-players around them. Shane Battier, Luis Scola, Carl Landry, and Brent Barry add secondary scoring threats and stellar defense to a team that already has two of the NBA's elite. The addition of Ron Artest has made (if everyone stays healthy come playoff time) the Rockets a true force in the Western Conference. Morey was instrumental in replacing Jeff Van Gundy (a great guy and a superb coach, but one whose defensive style added little to the Rockets) with the offensive-minded Rick Adelman. Adelman has constructed an efficient offense around our players, and his offensive philosophy will only further add to the Rockets' scoring threats.
Now, however, Morey is out of the picture. He can't really add anything to the team. Deke will probably be signed around the deadline for what will probably be one of his final seasons. But after that addition, there will be little that Morey can do.
It's up to Adelman to use the tools that Morey has given him. The Rockets are deep enough to exploit virtually any matchup their opponents throw at them, and Adelman's style will make sure that everyone gets time on the court. There won't be any dead weight on the bench. Like I said - efficient.
Of course, the Rockets have two major weaknesses. Both are really up to luck at this point - point guards and injuries.
They can't change anything at point guard. Steve Francis is here to stay. Rafer Alston is usually pretty bad, but he has moments of greatness. Aaron Brooks isn't terrible. But we don't know. Maybe Alston has a good season. Maybe Francis comes back from his injury and recaptures some of his youthful greatness. These are unknowns, and the Rockets can't do anything about them now.
Injuries can be protected against - making sure that Yao and T-Mac don't overextend themselves in the regular season. But it really comes down to luck. If we are unlucky, both injur themselves and are out for the season, leaving us with only Artest. If we are lucky, both stay healthy and are monsters in the playoffs. Again, there is nothing the Rockets can do about this - it's just luck of the draw.
But this should be a good season. This is their year to win it. I don't believe the Lakers are as good as everyone thinks they are. I think we can match up well against New Orleans. I think the Spurs don't have it in them, the Mavericks suck this year, and the Suns are a joke. The Jazz will falter. The Blazers will make the playoffs, but will fall victim to a much better team. My prediction for the Western Conference Championship - Hornets vs. Rockets. The Final will be between the Rockets and Celtics. The Rockets will win it all.
This team has the potential to exceed the greatness of the 1995 Rockets. And just like the Dream-Glide Rockets of more than a decade ago, the Yao-T-Mac-Tru Wariar Rockets of 2009 are doubted by the media. It's their year to win it.
Now, however, Morey is out of the picture. He can't really add anything to the team. Deke will probably be signed around the deadline for what will probably be one of his final seasons. But after that addition, there will be little that Morey can do.
It's up to Adelman to use the tools that Morey has given him. The Rockets are deep enough to exploit virtually any matchup their opponents throw at them, and Adelman's style will make sure that everyone gets time on the court. There won't be any dead weight on the bench. Like I said - efficient.
Of course, the Rockets have two major weaknesses. Both are really up to luck at this point - point guards and injuries.
They can't change anything at point guard. Steve Francis is here to stay. Rafer Alston is usually pretty bad, but he has moments of greatness. Aaron Brooks isn't terrible. But we don't know. Maybe Alston has a good season. Maybe Francis comes back from his injury and recaptures some of his youthful greatness. These are unknowns, and the Rockets can't do anything about them now.
Injuries can be protected against - making sure that Yao and T-Mac don't overextend themselves in the regular season. But it really comes down to luck. If we are unlucky, both injur themselves and are out for the season, leaving us with only Artest. If we are lucky, both stay healthy and are monsters in the playoffs. Again, there is nothing the Rockets can do about this - it's just luck of the draw.
But this should be a good season. This is their year to win it. I don't believe the Lakers are as good as everyone thinks they are. I think we can match up well against New Orleans. I think the Spurs don't have it in them, the Mavericks suck this year, and the Suns are a joke. The Jazz will falter. The Blazers will make the playoffs, but will fall victim to a much better team. My prediction for the Western Conference Championship - Hornets vs. Rockets. The Final will be between the Rockets and Celtics. The Rockets will win it all.
This team has the potential to exceed the greatness of the 1995 Rockets. And just like the Dream-Glide Rockets of more than a decade ago, the Yao-T-Mac-Tru Wariar Rockets of 2009 are doubted by the media. It's their year to win it.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Ugh. I'm sick as hell. Indigestion or something. Thrown up three times. Awful.
Anyways, I watched the Indy-Sister Fuckers game. I'm always surprised by how the MNF announcers fellate certain teams. Typically, the Colts are on the receiving end of that fellatio, but tonight Tennessee took their place.
They couldn't shut the fuck up about how much shit the Titans had to go through after the move from Houston. Yep, they didn't have a stadium ready. Yep, they didn't have practice facilities. I wonder where they could have had those things? Fuck Bud Adams. Fuck hick country. Bunch of inbred assholes.
Anyways, I watched the Indy-Sister Fuckers game. I'm always surprised by how the MNF announcers fellate certain teams. Typically, the Colts are on the receiving end of that fellatio, but tonight Tennessee took their place.
They couldn't shut the fuck up about how much shit the Titans had to go through after the move from Houston. Yep, they didn't have a stadium ready. Yep, they didn't have practice facilities. I wonder where they could have had those things? Fuck Bud Adams. Fuck hick country. Bunch of inbred assholes.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Texans get their first 3-game win streak ever.
And they get their largest margin of victory ever (29 pts), highest QB rating (145.0), highest completion percentage (86%), Dunta broke the franchise record for career interceptions (12), and Andre Johnson made 11 receptions for 143 yards. Jacoby Jones got his 2nd punt-return TD of the season (another franchise record). Damn. The Bengals made the Texans look good.
Granted, AJ was playing against the worst team in the AFC, but he continues to show that he's the best receiver in the conference, if not the NFL. I've read many commentators who have said he's a young Terrell Owens. I'd agree (he drops more passes than TO - though that's just my impression, so it's probably not true), plus he doesn't have Owens' psychological issues. But because he's not a prima-donna, AJ doesn't get the same national exposure. It's too bad.
Anyways, it was a good win. The defense looked good. The offense was awesome. Special teams were excellent. But it was just the Bengals. Next week, they go up against the hapless Vikings. It will be a real test, even if the Vikings are awful. Their awfulness is largely confined to their special teams and QB situation, however, so we'll see how bad they are against the Texans.
Granted, AJ was playing against the worst team in the AFC, but he continues to show that he's the best receiver in the conference, if not the NFL. I've read many commentators who have said he's a young Terrell Owens. I'd agree (he drops more passes than TO - though that's just my impression, so it's probably not true), plus he doesn't have Owens' psychological issues. But because he's not a prima-donna, AJ doesn't get the same national exposure. It's too bad.
Anyways, it was a good win. The defense looked good. The offense was awesome. Special teams were excellent. But it was just the Bengals. Next week, they go up against the hapless Vikings. It will be a real test, even if the Vikings are awful. Their awfulness is largely confined to their special teams and QB situation, however, so we'll see how bad they are against the Texans.
It sucks being a Texans fan
Not only do we root for a shitty team, we get fucked by the NFL. NOLA's CBS (and Fox, too) feels that bull riding brings better ratings than the Texans, so the only Texans game I've seen on TV is the tragic Indy loss.
And, this week (and for most of last week's) I can't find a stream on the internet. Fuckin sucks when two shitty teams play each other - nobody on the internet bothers to stream it.
So I've got to listen to Mark Vandemeer. Which could be worse, but it still sucks.
Maybe we won't lose this one (the Bengals have a good passing game, and our pass defense is awful, however). But the Bengals just went 3-and-out on the opening drive, and Jacoby Jones took the punt return in for the touchdown. Sweet.
And, this week (and for most of last week's) I can't find a stream on the internet. Fuckin sucks when two shitty teams play each other - nobody on the internet bothers to stream it.
So I've got to listen to Mark Vandemeer. Which could be worse, but it still sucks.
Maybe we won't lose this one (the Bengals have a good passing game, and our pass defense is awful, however). But the Bengals just went 3-and-out on the opening drive, and Jacoby Jones took the punt return in for the touchdown. Sweet.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Vidjagames and Such
I'm faced with something of a dillema: I want to get Fable 2 (I enjoyed the first Fable, despite the fact that it was nothing like what it was promised to be), but Fallout 3 is coming out in a week. Add to that the fact that NBA 2K9 is out, and I have three major games on the to-play list. NBA 2K9 can wait a while, but the other two are kind of a toss-up. I can buy both, of course, but then I'm liable to get absolutely nothing done between now and finals. Difficult choice.
Both Fable 2 and Fallout 3 are supposed to be really awesome RPGs. They don't make many of those any more - Black Isle is dead, BioWare is making RPGs that are more like adventure games, anyways, and only Bethesda is still making real, American-style role playing games.
I still think, eight years after the fact, that Baldur's Gate 2 was the greatest CRPG ever made. I still play the fucking thing. It's awesome. Never gets old, especially with all the mods available for it these days.
What's a shame is that no companies are making this type of game anymore. BioWare makes party-based games, but you have little control over your party and less over the story (don't get me wrong, Mass Effect is great, but I'd like to be able to, you know, pick whether or not I'm going to let the weird aliens tag along with me. I'd especially like to be able to take them with me when I'm on a mission. This "party of three" thing they pull with all of their games these days really pisses me off.) Their Dragon Age game might be cool, but it still seems like it will pull that same bullshit.
If I were making a new RPG, here's what I'd do:
1) Real time, but pausable. Baldur's Gate innovated this, so why do companies keep half-assing it a decade later?
2) Party-based. Lots of party-able NPC's available, and I get to take 5-6 of them with me. Again, this has been around since the 1980s, so why does everyone fuck this up?
3) LET ME FUCKING CONTROL MY PARTY MEMBERS! - Christ, I'm tired of seeing my party members run into my line of fire (I'm looking at you Fallouts 1 and 2). Just let me control the dumb bastards. Makes it more tactical, to boot.
3) Non-epic story. Games don't always have to be "save the world." I'd like to see storylines pursue slightly more down-to-earth goals, like save the country or whatever. This makes it easier to add sequels, too, since you didn't just wreak havic on your fantasy world.
4) Non-linear, lots of side-quests. I like to take my time. Let me. I paid $50+ for your fucking game, after all.
5) If you're going to pursue the moral angle, give me more than "good and bad." I'd like to see a legitimate difference between a Utilitarian world view and a nihlist one - all too often, games try to pigeonhole the player into pursuing only two paths. That sucks.
6) Elves with guns. Arcanum was cool.
See? It's simple. They should pay me to do this shit. I'd be pretty good.
Both Fable 2 and Fallout 3 are supposed to be really awesome RPGs. They don't make many of those any more - Black Isle is dead, BioWare is making RPGs that are more like adventure games, anyways, and only Bethesda is still making real, American-style role playing games.
I still think, eight years after the fact, that Baldur's Gate 2 was the greatest CRPG ever made. I still play the fucking thing. It's awesome. Never gets old, especially with all the mods available for it these days.
What's a shame is that no companies are making this type of game anymore. BioWare makes party-based games, but you have little control over your party and less over the story (don't get me wrong, Mass Effect is great, but I'd like to be able to, you know, pick whether or not I'm going to let the weird aliens tag along with me. I'd especially like to be able to take them with me when I'm on a mission. This "party of three" thing they pull with all of their games these days really pisses me off.) Their Dragon Age game might be cool, but it still seems like it will pull that same bullshit.
If I were making a new RPG, here's what I'd do:
1) Real time, but pausable. Baldur's Gate innovated this, so why do companies keep half-assing it a decade later?
2) Party-based. Lots of party-able NPC's available, and I get to take 5-6 of them with me. Again, this has been around since the 1980s, so why does everyone fuck this up?
3) LET ME FUCKING CONTROL MY PARTY MEMBERS! - Christ, I'm tired of seeing my party members run into my line of fire (I'm looking at you Fallouts 1 and 2). Just let me control the dumb bastards. Makes it more tactical, to boot.
3) Non-epic story. Games don't always have to be "save the world." I'd like to see storylines pursue slightly more down-to-earth goals, like save the country or whatever. This makes it easier to add sequels, too, since you didn't just wreak havic on your fantasy world.
4) Non-linear, lots of side-quests. I like to take my time. Let me. I paid $50+ for your fucking game, after all.
5) If you're going to pursue the moral angle, give me more than "good and bad." I'd like to see a legitimate difference between a Utilitarian world view and a nihlist one - all too often, games try to pigeonhole the player into pursuing only two paths. That sucks.
6) Elves with guns. Arcanum was cool.
See? It's simple. They should pay me to do this shit. I'd be pretty good.
Astros sign some dude from Taiwan
Apparently, the Astros' Asian scouting division is getting something done, and the Good Guys now include Chia-Jen Lo. He's 22 years old, and this would be his first professional gig. He tops out at 95 mph on his fastball and throws a curveball, according to BR Bullpen. So it seems like he's a reliever. I can't find anything else, stats-wise, about him. We also only paid $250,000 for him, beating out Boston's offer of $200,000. Cool.
Allison Footer - atypically chipper this week - douses fans' hopes for a Peavy trade:
Now it's time to step back into my glass-half-empty mode. Would that be enough for the Padres to deal Peavy to Houston? Maybe. But to deal those aforementioned pitchers sacrifices the future and overall health of the organization. Insiders are really excited about the '08 Draft class, and I believe that the team is on its way to rebuilding what has been lost over the last five years. But they need depth. They need to develop their own players. And getting rid of them -- all of them -- for Peavy, who has a ton of money coming to him over the next four years, may not be the best route to take.
This is the point I've been trying to make for the last week about this potential trade. Any trade will invariably hurt the Astros organization more than it helps the big-league club - particularly if it involves trading Spaz or Bogusevic or what little young pitching we have. As I posted over at the Crawfish Boxes (yes, I'm enough of an asshole to quote myself):
But from everything I’ve read, Wade blends both “traditional” evaluation and statistical evaluation, which should mean that given enough time, the Astros will improve. I know we Astros fans are eager to see immediate change (it’s why so many of us want to see Ben Sheets in an Astros uniform), but it’s going to take some time.
I've said it before: give the Astros a few seasons, and we will once again be a powerhouse. Just give it time, folks.
Allison Footer - atypically chipper this week - douses fans' hopes for a Peavy trade:
Now it's time to step back into my glass-half-empty mode. Would that be enough for the Padres to deal Peavy to Houston? Maybe. But to deal those aforementioned pitchers sacrifices the future and overall health of the organization. Insiders are really excited about the '08 Draft class, and I believe that the team is on its way to rebuilding what has been lost over the last five years. But they need depth. They need to develop their own players. And getting rid of them -- all of them -- for Peavy, who has a ton of money coming to him over the next four years, may not be the best route to take.
This is the point I've been trying to make for the last week about this potential trade. Any trade will invariably hurt the Astros organization more than it helps the big-league club - particularly if it involves trading Spaz or Bogusevic or what little young pitching we have. As I posted over at the Crawfish Boxes (yes, I'm enough of an asshole to quote myself):
But from everything I’ve read, Wade blends both “traditional” evaluation and statistical evaluation, which should mean that given enough time, the Astros will improve. I know we Astros fans are eager to see immediate change (it’s why so many of us want to see Ben Sheets in an Astros uniform), but it’s going to take some time.
I've said it before: give the Astros a few seasons, and we will once again be a powerhouse. Just give it time, folks.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Hey, remember Drew Sutton?
I mentioned him about two months ago, when I was attempting to show how Ed Wade could cut payroll significantly and blow up the roster. Well, turns out he's tearing up the Arizona Fall League: he's batting .636/1.125/1.761 in 10 games. Granted, that's a small sample size, but if he has a strong showing, the Astros' 2B situation is going to be very interesting. If Sutton hits well coming out of spring training, I'd hate to see Ed Wade treat Sutton like Purpura did with Pence - if he's good, put him in MLB games right away. Kazuo is going to go down at some point next season. Even if he doesn't get injured, Sutton should get the opportunity to compete for the starting spot. Really, I wouldn't mind just calling Sutton up and trading Matsui - if Sutton is a disaster we can still use Loretta.
After Bogusevic recovered from a slight hamstring tweaking, he's gone .357/.435/.792 in 8 games. Not destroying anything, but that's alright. If he has a strong showing this fall, he's probably going to give Bourn a run for his money during spring training, too.
After Bogusevic recovered from a slight hamstring tweaking, he's gone .357/.435/.792 in 8 games. Not destroying anything, but that's alright. If he has a strong showing this fall, he's probably going to give Bourn a run for his money during spring training, too.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Vince the Idiot
Da Good, Da Bad, and DeMeco has a pretty hilarious post up about Vince Young's most recent press conference. The best part:
"[Collins] and me, we talk all the time. All the time. For anything. Not just football but off the field things, business-wise, accounts. All kinds of stuff.'"
Why, just the other day, Kerry and Vince held court in the lockerroom regarding the current financial crisis, during which Vince opined that the largest problem is the lack of consumer confidence in the value of mortgage-backed securities. Vince advocated riding out the stock market fluctuations if you are still in at this point, though Kerry proposed that you should always have a stop-loss selling point in mind. Vince countered that, were someone still in, they likely passed a realistic stop-loss number a while ago.
Hah. As I've said previously, I think Vince Young can still be a good QB. His completion percentage rose last year (though he didn't get any increase in yards from it), and he might still be able to develop further. There's a pretty small window on that, however, I think it's doubtful he'll get the coaching he needs. That's not a knock on the Titans' coaching staff, it's just that the guy probably requires a very specialized touch.Monday, October 20, 2008
Just to make things absolutely clear:
Eat shit:
1) Boston / New England
2) Cowboys fans (and, by extension, Dallas)
3) Dallas (deserves its own)
4) Indianapolis
Houston wins (was WAY too close for comfort by the end, there, but a win is a win), Dallas loses, Boston loses. Great day. Now I don't really give a shit about what happens in the World Series, since I hate neither team, but I'd rather have the Phillies win. Having the Rays accomplish in 10 years what took the Astros 42 years is painful enough, but having them win a World Series would suck. Of course, those fucks in Arizona and Florida have titles, so fuck them. In any case, having the Yankees of the 21st Century lose some is pretty awesome, since we all hate those fucks in New England.
But the Cowboys lost to the fucking Rams. And the Colts got blown out. The only thing that would have made this better would have been if the Tennessee Sister-Fuckers had lost, too.
1) Boston / New England
2) Cowboys fans (and, by extension, Dallas)
3) Dallas (deserves its own)
4) Indianapolis
Houston wins (was WAY too close for comfort by the end, there, but a win is a win), Dallas loses, Boston loses. Great day. Now I don't really give a shit about what happens in the World Series, since I hate neither team, but I'd rather have the Phillies win. Having the Rays accomplish in 10 years what took the Astros 42 years is painful enough, but having them win a World Series would suck. Of course, those fucks in Arizona and Florida have titles, so fuck them. In any case, having the Yankees of the 21st Century lose some is pretty awesome, since we all hate those fucks in New England.
But the Cowboys lost to the fucking Rams. And the Colts got blown out. The only thing that would have made this better would have been if the Tennessee Sister-Fuckers had lost, too.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
I've been fucking around with Madden lately
I started a franchise game where I upped Slaton's stats slightly (79 -> 82) and traded Schaub and a 3rd round pick to the Titans for Vince Young. They were more than happy to take the trade and have someone other than an alcoholic with the shakes running the offense, and I was more than happy to see what virtual-Vince could do with some real receivers.
Thus far, I've been impressed. Obviously, video games are no way to evaluate players, but virtual Vince has added a fairly interesting dynamic to the Texans' offense. And with guys like Owen Daniels, Andre Davis, Kevin Walter, and (most importantly) our man Andre Johnson there to bail virtual-Vince out, it leads to interesting plays. The AI prefers to blitz virtual-Vince, but virtual-Vince is faster than the defense most of the time, which usually buys enough time for the receivers in the secondary to get open. My favorite play is using play action (Slaton is scary enough for most defenses to guard against his run, too), scrambling outside towards the line of scrimmage, and then throwing a long pass out to AJ or KW. Pretty cool.
Obviously, virtual-Vince isn't as mind-bogglingly stupid as real Vince. So he doesn't throw into coverage as often. But it's a fun experiment.
I think the real Vince Young might yet develop into a good QB. Unfortunately for him, he's been the victim of being rushed into the starting position and probably being retarded. It's really too bad that Bud Adams forced the Titans management to draft the poor bastard, because they have totally botched his development.
Thus far, I've been impressed. Obviously, video games are no way to evaluate players, but virtual Vince has added a fairly interesting dynamic to the Texans' offense. And with guys like Owen Daniels, Andre Davis, Kevin Walter, and (most importantly) our man Andre Johnson there to bail virtual-Vince out, it leads to interesting plays. The AI prefers to blitz virtual-Vince, but virtual-Vince is faster than the defense most of the time, which usually buys enough time for the receivers in the secondary to get open. My favorite play is using play action (Slaton is scary enough for most defenses to guard against his run, too), scrambling outside towards the line of scrimmage, and then throwing a long pass out to AJ or KW. Pretty cool.
Obviously, virtual-Vince isn't as mind-bogglingly stupid as real Vince. So he doesn't throw into coverage as often. But it's a fun experiment.
I think the real Vince Young might yet develop into a good QB. Unfortunately for him, he's been the victim of being rushed into the starting position and probably being retarded. It's really too bad that Bud Adams forced the Titans management to draft the poor bastard, because they have totally botched his development.
Hey, now I'm the hipster douche!
I was a communist before it was cool.
And then I dropped it right as it got "mainstream." Shit, I knew I was a trendsetter. Pretty soon, everyone is going to leave Communism and become Syndicalists, and then I'll drop that for neo-feudalism. It'll be great, I promise.
Seriously though, anybody attempting to read Capital as a guide to what is going wrong in the current crisis is a fucking fool. That is some dense reading material, and anybody without at least some economics training is going to be lost.
Anyways, anyone looking for a slightly better evaluation of orthodox Marxism needs to read:
1) Marx's Revenge by Meghnad Desai
2) Beyond Marxism by Sidney Hook
Good discussions of the classic misinterpretations of Marx's work. I think Hook might be a little off, given that he thought Marx really had some sort of moral considerations, but he puts up a good argument. Desai is a relatively famous economist, and he shows where (particularly in Capital) Marx may have realized that Capitalism was not necessarily doomed to failure. On the other hand, the failure of Keynesianism and the victories of the neo-Classicals like Friedman might mean that Marx was right, after all. Keynes' work really fucked with what Marx thought was necessary, and Friedman's work shows that Capitalism really can't be "fixed."
The problem Marx presents is that he had such an ambivalent view towards Capitalism. He saw it, I suppose, as something similar to a walk in baseball - a good thing, but not the best thing. It made real surplus of wealth possible for the first time in human history, but it came at the cost of exploitation and inequality.
In any case, anybody who's turned off of Capitalism from this little spat in the economy needs to get a grip. But if they're looking for some sort of answer to the damn thing, don't look to the classical Communist parties. They're a bunch of tools.
And then I dropped it right as it got "mainstream." Shit, I knew I was a trendsetter. Pretty soon, everyone is going to leave Communism and become Syndicalists, and then I'll drop that for neo-feudalism. It'll be great, I promise.
Seriously though, anybody attempting to read Capital as a guide to what is going wrong in the current crisis is a fucking fool. That is some dense reading material, and anybody without at least some economics training is going to be lost.
Anyways, anyone looking for a slightly better evaluation of orthodox Marxism needs to read:
1) Marx's Revenge by Meghnad Desai
2) Beyond Marxism by Sidney Hook
Good discussions of the classic misinterpretations of Marx's work. I think Hook might be a little off, given that he thought Marx really had some sort of moral considerations, but he puts up a good argument. Desai is a relatively famous economist, and he shows where (particularly in Capital) Marx may have realized that Capitalism was not necessarily doomed to failure. On the other hand, the failure of Keynesianism and the victories of the neo-Classicals like Friedman might mean that Marx was right, after all. Keynes' work really fucked with what Marx thought was necessary, and Friedman's work shows that Capitalism really can't be "fixed."
The problem Marx presents is that he had such an ambivalent view towards Capitalism. He saw it, I suppose, as something similar to a walk in baseball - a good thing, but not the best thing. It made real surplus of wealth possible for the first time in human history, but it came at the cost of exploitation and inequality.
In any case, anybody who's turned off of Capitalism from this little spat in the economy needs to get a grip. But if they're looking for some sort of answer to the damn thing, don't look to the classical Communist parties. They're a bunch of tools.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
As usual, nobody knows what the hell they're talking about.
For the last week of so, the Jake Peavy rumors have been flying. And the Crawfish Boxes has a good post about the possible effects of such a trade.
Look, a trade for Peavy is pretty unlikely. As in, about 1000 to 1. But Peavy has stated that he'd really like to pitch in Houston. No doubt that the presence of Roy (with whom Peavy owns a hunting ranch in Michigan) is a big part of that.
While I think Wade could do worse than gathering Roy and Lance's hunting buddies into a team (remember how hard they were lobbying for Sheets?), the Astros really should be focusing on rebuilding. The only way I can see this working is if the Astros concoct some three-way trade for Peavy, which would be exceedingly difficult. If we were able to get rid of Tejada in such a trade, all the better. Otherwise, I have no clue as to how such a trade would happen.
Look, a trade for Peavy is pretty unlikely. As in, about 1000 to 1. But Peavy has stated that he'd really like to pitch in Houston. No doubt that the presence of Roy (with whom Peavy owns a hunting ranch in Michigan) is a big part of that.
While I think Wade could do worse than gathering Roy and Lance's hunting buddies into a team (remember how hard they were lobbying for Sheets?), the Astros really should be focusing on rebuilding. The only way I can see this working is if the Astros concoct some three-way trade for Peavy, which would be exceedingly difficult. If we were able to get rid of Tejada in such a trade, all the better. Otherwise, I have no clue as to how such a trade would happen.
A chronicle of everything wrong with my generation.
College life has exposed me to a larger cross-section of my generation. It's a really astounding thing. Maybe it's that Tulane is filled with a bunch of wealthy Yankee fucks, but the whole experience has been rather disturbing. It really makes me question the optimism with which I typically view the future.
And there is no better example of the douchebaggery of our youth than in the Tulane Hullabaloo. Let's take a look at this week's editorial page, shall we?
Let's start off with a piece on abortion. Now, I know the guy who wrote this, and Will's a great guy, but he's totally fucking off base on this.
Add to that the belief that unless we get a chance to dip a soul in water, the all-knowing and all-powerful God is forced to make that soul burn for an eternity of torture. If you believe that, you're definitely going to have problems with abortion, and it makes sense that you would want to prevent others who happen to have different beliefs from having a say in the matter.
Unfortunately for the pro-life folks, it seems a majority of America doesn't agree - otherwise we would have stopped debating Roe v. Wade and started shooting doctors a long time ago.
Seriously? First he mischaracterizes the views of billions of religious people, then he insinuates that pro-lifers want to shoot doctors. Look, man - if you're attempting to critically examine the abortion debate, then do it. But this crap only further hurts the situation.
Then he gives Don Marquis' famous argument against abortion and argues against it with the basic shit we learned in Professor Courtland's Ethics 103 class. I'll skewer this shit another time. But suffice it to say that I'm sure Will isn't ready to really look at the ontology of embryos and humans. And if he can't do that (nobody really can in 500 words), then maybe he should stop trying.
Then we have a pair of political pieces that offer nothing new and simply parrot their respective parties' lines. I never said that this generation was politically disaffected. Just stupid.
We have the "Campus Question:" What do you think about the recent increase in sexual assault on and near campus? Well, Hullabaloo staff, I'm sure everything thinks it's pretty shitty. Some of the answers given:
"It sucks!" (No shit, really?)
"I don't know. I think it's awful."
"I think it's something that obviously and absolutely needs to be prevented."
"I think it's scary."
How insightful!
And, finally, we have the coup-de-grace. A piece by our resident hipster douchebag. Honestly, you can't make this shit up. And I'm sorry to all of those who won't get to see the writer's awesome staff photo, because this shit really needs to be seen. He's got the ironic smirk, ironic mullet, and ironic v-neck. Christ, I hate this school.
Really, I love his characterization of himself and his hipster friends as "young intellectuals." Yeah fucking right. Schedule of the hipster douchebag:
1:00 - Wake up, snort coke
2:00 - Walk around the quad with my shirt off and wearing cowboy boots (I've seen him do this, it's awful).
3:00 - Snort coke
4:00 - study about something. Just kidding, look ironic
5:00 - repeat ad nauseum.
He's not an intellectual. Intellectuals come up with new ideas. Even the postmodernists had something new to say.
If my generation's Students for a Democratic Society, the classic student activist group, composed our own Port Huron Statement, it would begin: "we are people of this generation, bred in substantial comfort, housed now in universities and gentrified neighborhoods, looking quite indifferently to the world we inherit."
You're all a bunch of fucking Randians. That's the only explanation. How can someone grow up in this society and not be convinced that something is grossly wrong? How can you look at the absolute poverty of New Orleans and not think that there are major problems in our everyday lives? How can you experience the iniquities of modern society and not see that there are still real battles to be fought? How can you look at the world - a world where most people live without real political power - and say that you are indifferent? You are a bunch of spoiled children. Perpetual children, who will always be living off of mommy and daddy's estate.
They (or we, if I may be so bold to include myself among today's apathetic wunderkinds) would rather steal V-necks and lament the implications of post-modern ontology than bother with such trivial things. We have no counter-culture because we have no cause.
No. You don't know what "post-modern ontology" means. You just like the way it sounds when it comes out of your pie-hole.
Look, compared to the hipster douches of the world, the Egoists as likeable. This guy is just full of himself. He's no wunderkind. He's a kid with too much free time and no sense of personal responsibility.
He's not the equivalent of Abbie Hoffman. Hoffman stood for something, even though life was pretty good. He's the equivalent of the characters in the Great Gatsby. And the only way his little clique will ever produce their Fitzgerald will be when some of them wise the fuck up.
I'm reminded of the Oingo Boingo classic "Nothing Bad Ever Happens to Me." They are this generation's yuppies. But they don't produce anything. They're just a cancer, a parasite on society. The Marxist in me wants to line them up against a wall.
Jesus, I just feel sorry for my English-major friends. They have to deal with this shit every day. These dicks stay out of the philosophy and economics departments, for the most part.
And there is no better example of the douchebaggery of our youth than in the Tulane Hullabaloo. Let's take a look at this week's editorial page, shall we?
Let's start off with a piece on abortion. Now, I know the guy who wrote this, and Will's a great guy, but he's totally fucking off base on this.
Add to that the belief that unless we get a chance to dip a soul in water, the all-knowing and all-powerful God is forced to make that soul burn for an eternity of torture. If you believe that, you're definitely going to have problems with abortion, and it makes sense that you would want to prevent others who happen to have different beliefs from having a say in the matter.
Unfortunately for the pro-life folks, it seems a majority of America doesn't agree - otherwise we would have stopped debating Roe v. Wade and started shooting doctors a long time ago.
Seriously? First he mischaracterizes the views of billions of religious people, then he insinuates that pro-lifers want to shoot doctors. Look, man - if you're attempting to critically examine the abortion debate, then do it. But this crap only further hurts the situation.
Then he gives Don Marquis' famous argument against abortion and argues against it with the basic shit we learned in Professor Courtland's Ethics 103 class. I'll skewer this shit another time. But suffice it to say that I'm sure Will isn't ready to really look at the ontology of embryos and humans. And if he can't do that (nobody really can in 500 words), then maybe he should stop trying.
Then we have a pair of political pieces that offer nothing new and simply parrot their respective parties' lines. I never said that this generation was politically disaffected. Just stupid.
We have the "Campus Question:" What do you think about the recent increase in sexual assault on and near campus? Well, Hullabaloo staff, I'm sure everything thinks it's pretty shitty. Some of the answers given:
"It sucks!" (No shit, really?)
"I don't know. I think it's awful."
"I think it's something that obviously and absolutely needs to be prevented."
"I think it's scary."
How insightful!
And, finally, we have the coup-de-grace. A piece by our resident hipster douchebag. Honestly, you can't make this shit up. And I'm sorry to all of those who won't get to see the writer's awesome staff photo, because this shit really needs to be seen. He's got the ironic smirk, ironic mullet, and ironic v-neck. Christ, I hate this school.
Really, I love his characterization of himself and his hipster friends as "young intellectuals." Yeah fucking right. Schedule of the hipster douchebag:
1:00 - Wake up, snort coke
2:00 - Walk around the quad with my shirt off and wearing cowboy boots (I've seen him do this, it's awful).
3:00 - Snort coke
4:00 - study about something. Just kidding, look ironic
5:00 - repeat ad nauseum.
He's not an intellectual. Intellectuals come up with new ideas. Even the postmodernists had something new to say.
If my generation's Students for a Democratic Society, the classic student activist group, composed our own Port Huron Statement, it would begin: "we are people of this generation, bred in substantial comfort, housed now in universities and gentrified neighborhoods, looking quite indifferently to the world we inherit."
You're all a bunch of fucking Randians. That's the only explanation. How can someone grow up in this society and not be convinced that something is grossly wrong? How can you look at the absolute poverty of New Orleans and not think that there are major problems in our everyday lives? How can you experience the iniquities of modern society and not see that there are still real battles to be fought? How can you look at the world - a world where most people live without real political power - and say that you are indifferent? You are a bunch of spoiled children. Perpetual children, who will always be living off of mommy and daddy's estate.
They (or we, if I may be so bold to include myself among today's apathetic wunderkinds) would rather steal V-necks and lament the implications of post-modern ontology than bother with such trivial things. We have no counter-culture because we have no cause.
No. You don't know what "post-modern ontology" means. You just like the way it sounds when it comes out of your pie-hole.
Look, compared to the hipster douches of the world, the Egoists as likeable. This guy is just full of himself. He's no wunderkind. He's a kid with too much free time and no sense of personal responsibility.
He's not the equivalent of Abbie Hoffman. Hoffman stood for something, even though life was pretty good. He's the equivalent of the characters in the Great Gatsby. And the only way his little clique will ever produce their Fitzgerald will be when some of them wise the fuck up.
I'm reminded of the Oingo Boingo classic "Nothing Bad Ever Happens to Me." They are this generation's yuppies. But they don't produce anything. They're just a cancer, a parasite on society. The Marxist in me wants to line them up against a wall.
Jesus, I just feel sorry for my English-major friends. They have to deal with this shit every day. These dicks stay out of the philosophy and economics departments, for the most part.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Urge to kill rising
Fuck you, Bud. Goddamnit, you're the worst fucking thing since Pol Pot. And, I swear to God, if you play in Houston wearing the damn things, it'll be your head. Christ, the NFL better deny them their request. Fuck them.
This has gotten me thinking: if the opportunity to take back the Oilers legacy arose, would you take it? If Bud Adams died tomorrow, and whoever inherited/bought the team offered the Oiler name and records to Bob McNair, would we accept it?
My natural reaction is yes. I still think the "Texans" nickname is a stupid one, but it's one I've grown accustomed to. It would be nice to have the Campbell/Blanda/Moon etc. legacy back where it belongs. Actually, just having Campbell's records back would be cool. Moon is a drunk wife-beater. Campbell is an official Hero of Texas.
But I almost feel like that legacy is tainted goods. Those fucks in Tennessee tarnished it. And it kind of feels like accepting it and becoming the Oilers once again would somehow be a bitch thing to do. I don't know.
Whatev. That fucker better not show his jabba-the-hut face on the streets.
This has gotten me thinking: if the opportunity to take back the Oilers legacy arose, would you take it? If Bud Adams died tomorrow, and whoever inherited/bought the team offered the Oiler name and records to Bob McNair, would we accept it?
My natural reaction is yes. I still think the "Texans" nickname is a stupid one, but it's one I've grown accustomed to. It would be nice to have the Campbell/Blanda/Moon etc. legacy back where it belongs. Actually, just having Campbell's records back would be cool. Moon is a drunk wife-beater. Campbell is an official Hero of Texas.
But I almost feel like that legacy is tainted goods. Those fucks in Tennessee tarnished it. And it kind of feels like accepting it and becoming the Oilers once again would somehow be a bitch thing to do. I don't know.
Whatev. That fucker better not show his jabba-the-hut face on the streets.
Never seen anything like that before...
I'm sure I'm not the first (or second, or hundredth, or thousandth) person to point this out, but Obama's campaign is freakin creepy. Obama is the first political candidate (in my short lifetime, admittedly) whom I remember attaining legitimate status as a pop-culture icon. Growing up, I never saw people wear t-shirts with Clinton's face on them. I never saw Gore or Bush posters prominently featuring either's visage. What the hell is going on?
Is it just my generation? Is it just that people my age are predisposed towards this? I don't know, and it's a frightening thing.
Politicians should not have this sort of devotion attached to them. This is not simply a devotion to his ideas or ideology (he fails to articulate either, anyways), but a real idealization of the man. That's a troubling phenomenon, because it means that the likelihood of his supporters analyzing his policy decisions in the future is much less.
Politicians should be ugly. They should be uncool. They shouldn't have mainstream people hanging up their pictures.
I wouldn't compare this to a real cult of personality, because it's not even close. But Obama has become an actual icon, and I think that contributes to the weird ideas people associate with him - he'll fix all our problems, foreigners will love us, race relations will be solved, poverty will be gone. These expectations would not be associated with anyone else.
People just need to stop treating the guy like a movie star. It's disturbing.
Is it just my generation? Is it just that people my age are predisposed towards this? I don't know, and it's a frightening thing.
Politicians should not have this sort of devotion attached to them. This is not simply a devotion to his ideas or ideology (he fails to articulate either, anyways), but a real idealization of the man. That's a troubling phenomenon, because it means that the likelihood of his supporters analyzing his policy decisions in the future is much less.
Politicians should be ugly. They should be uncool. They shouldn't have mainstream people hanging up their pictures.
I wouldn't compare this to a real cult of personality, because it's not even close. But Obama has become an actual icon, and I think that contributes to the weird ideas people associate with him - he'll fix all our problems, foreigners will love us, race relations will be solved, poverty will be gone. These expectations would not be associated with anyone else.
People just need to stop treating the guy like a movie star. It's disturbing.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Who the fuck keeps giving Mike Winters a job?
He's the home plate umpire for tonight's NLCS game. Twice, he's called an inning-ending strike 3 on balls below the knee. Once on Russell Martin and another on Jeff Kent. The one on Kent was outside, too.
We've been through this shit with Winters before. It's kind of crazy that the MLB assigned him to umpire a playoff game. Christ, he's awful.
We've been through this shit with Winters before. It's kind of crazy that the MLB assigned him to umpire a playoff game. Christ, he's awful.
Why didn't Wade think of that?
"If we add a few players, we can contend," ace Roy Oswalt said. "I think we're about three players away from being real good. I'd say baseball players. Pitching is a spot to start at, for sure. Players."
Well, shit, Roy... that's fucking deep. We just need a few more players - baseball players, specifically - and the Astros will contend. I'm sorry that DeMeco Ryans won't be the Astros' starting third baseman next season, but I'm glad that the Wizard figured out our need for baseball players.
Well, shit, Roy... that's fucking deep. We just need a few more players - baseball players, specifically - and the Astros will contend. I'm sorry that DeMeco Ryans won't be the Astros' starting third baseman next season, but I'm glad that the Wizard figured out our need for baseball players.
Reason for some hope
I think that Drayton's seeming reluctance to sign any big FA pitchers this winter is going to be a little painful. So I'm going to list the minor leaguers from this year's draft (and any Latin signings) whose stats jump out at me.
1) Nathan Metroka - OF/DH, 21 y/o. I know I've talked about him before, but it bears mentioning again. He batted .327/.387/.531 in 33 games. He's in rookie ball with Greenville. Oh, and he was our 49th pick of the draft.
2) Phil Disher - 1B/DH, 23 y/o. Again, mentioned before. .304/.381/.536. Dude's hit 13 homers in 71 games, so that's good. What's impressive about both Disher and Metroka is that they're walking. It's not a lot of walks, but it's not like they're Tejada. Walking 6-8% of the time is pretty good.
3) David Flores- 3B, 21 y/o. 56 games, 11 homers, 17 doubles, going .266/.319/.495. He's also stolen five bases without getting caught.
4) Jack Shuck - CF, 21 y/o. .300/.385/.430 Undoubtedly has the coolest name in the Astros' draft class. And he's doing fairly well.
5) Daniel Meszaros - RP 21 y/0. In 26 innings, he's posted a 1.10 WHIP. What's cooler is that he's striking out better than two an inning in low A. Small sample size, I know, but it's pretty good.
6) Patrick Urckfitz - RP 19 y/0. Okay, this guy has the coolest name. Urckfitz - wow. Striking out better than one an inning in rookie ball.
7) Jose Santana - OF 19 y/o. He's Dominican. What's strange about this is he's a Dominican with a real batting eye. Look at this line: .289/.434/.330. He doesn't have any power, but that's pretty typical of young kids. In any case, he's walking almost 15% of the time. That's good.
8) Jacob Priday - OF/DH 22 y/o. Okay, his numbers aren't really there yet. He's only played 24 games in A ball, though. What I know is that he's an Adam Dunn clone (and Dunn's his "most similar player," according to him). He strikes out a lot, but walks enough and shows enough power that he might have a career. If he can walk more and improve his power, he'll be great. And we might see that next year, as the current class gets acquainted with wooden bats and develop further.
Have faith. The Stros farm system is improving. Give it time.
1) Nathan Metroka - OF/DH, 21 y/o. I know I've talked about him before, but it bears mentioning again. He batted .327/.387/.531 in 33 games. He's in rookie ball with Greenville. Oh, and he was our 49th pick of the draft.
2) Phil Disher - 1B/DH, 23 y/o. Again, mentioned before. .304/.381/.536. Dude's hit 13 homers in 71 games, so that's good. What's impressive about both Disher and Metroka is that they're walking. It's not a lot of walks, but it's not like they're Tejada. Walking 6-8% of the time is pretty good.
3) David Flores- 3B, 21 y/o. 56 games, 11 homers, 17 doubles, going .266/.319/.495. He's also stolen five bases without getting caught.
4) Jack Shuck - CF, 21 y/o. .300/.385/.430 Undoubtedly has the coolest name in the Astros' draft class. And he's doing fairly well.
5) Daniel Meszaros - RP 21 y/0. In 26 innings, he's posted a 1.10 WHIP. What's cooler is that he's striking out better than two an inning in low A. Small sample size, I know, but it's pretty good.
6) Patrick Urckfitz - RP 19 y/0. Okay, this guy has the coolest name. Urckfitz - wow. Striking out better than one an inning in rookie ball.
7) Jose Santana - OF 19 y/o. He's Dominican. What's strange about this is he's a Dominican with a real batting eye. Look at this line: .289/.434/.330. He doesn't have any power, but that's pretty typical of young kids. In any case, he's walking almost 15% of the time. That's good.
8) Jacob Priday - OF/DH 22 y/o. Okay, his numbers aren't really there yet. He's only played 24 games in A ball, though. What I know is that he's an Adam Dunn clone (and Dunn's his "most similar player," according to him). He strikes out a lot, but walks enough and shows enough power that he might have a career. If he can walk more and improve his power, he'll be great. And we might see that next year, as the current class gets acquainted with wooden bats and develop further.
Have faith. The Stros farm system is improving. Give it time.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Strange
I was perusing the Rays blog over at SBN, and I looked at the posts for tonight's game (oh, by the way - Crawford tied a record for most hits in a playoff game, going 5-5. He also had two steals and scored thrice. He's from here, you know).
Anyways, I think that the Rays blog might just be populated by /b/tards. That's just going by the avatars and references to fuckin furries. I'm not sure what to think about that. On the one hand, /b/tards make the internet go, but on the other, they are the human equivalent of gonorhea.
Anyways, I think that the Rays blog might just be populated by /b/tards. That's just going by the avatars and references to fuckin furries. I'm not sure what to think about that. On the one hand, /b/tards make the internet go, but on the other, they are the human equivalent of gonorhea.
Dickie J isn't from around here.
Justice apparently needs more hits to his blog, because he's gone back to his "troll my readers" strategy. This time: Why do Houston fans hate the Cowboys?
I have no idea where Justice comes from. I know he's a UT alumnus, but that doesn't mean much. So maybe he doesn't understand this basic fact - Houston hates Dallas. It's just the way of the world. We hate their city (bunch of stuck-up fucks), they hate our city (dirty, mosquito-infested swamp) - it's a nice little set-up we've got going. The only people who root for the Cowboys in Houston are either (A) not from here, or (B) a bunch of traitorous fucks who better not be rooting for any other Houston teams, because that's a bunch of bullshit.
Now, for years, that rivalry was centered around the Governor's Cup and all that bullshit. But a decade of combined Oiler playoff chokes, losing Oiler teams, no NFL team in the city, and finally a terrible expansion team have made an NFL rivalry something of a joke. Houston is, strangely enough, more interested in the Stros than the Texans. Of course, the Rangers suck, so nobody in Houston really cares how they do. The only sport where Houston and Dallas are on par is basketball, and I'm happy whenever the Rockets kick the Mavericks' asses (I'm also happy when they destroy the Spurs, but it's less cathartic. I'm rather fond of San Antonio).
So, if the Texans can't compete with the Cowboys (however, the Cowboys are VASTLY overrated every year), I'm happy to just see Dallas teams lose. And I'm happy that Romo will not be playing for a month (lighten up, Cowboys fans, he just broke his pinky; he'll be fine). And I hope that "America's Team" fucking crashes and burns.
Honestly, I don't know what the hell Justice is confused about. It's a pretty simple equation.
EDIT:
I'm particularly fond of comments like this:
I'm a Cowboy's fan and rooted for the Oilers and Texans, as long as they weren't playing Dallas.
No. No, you're not a Cowboys fan. You can't cheer both teams and be a fan. I don't cheer the Mavs or Spurs. I don't care that they are from Texas; it just doesn't work that way. The only time boundary lines can be crossed is with South-Central Texans picking a baseball or football team. Otherwise, you stay loyal to your region's sports team. That's just the way it works.
That would be a stupid attitude to have in real life, but fortunately, sports teams aren't real life. So we can enforce arbitrary cultural boundaries.
I have no idea where Justice comes from. I know he's a UT alumnus, but that doesn't mean much. So maybe he doesn't understand this basic fact - Houston hates Dallas. It's just the way of the world. We hate their city (bunch of stuck-up fucks), they hate our city (dirty, mosquito-infested swamp) - it's a nice little set-up we've got going. The only people who root for the Cowboys in Houston are either (A) not from here, or (B) a bunch of traitorous fucks who better not be rooting for any other Houston teams, because that's a bunch of bullshit.
Now, for years, that rivalry was centered around the Governor's Cup and all that bullshit. But a decade of combined Oiler playoff chokes, losing Oiler teams, no NFL team in the city, and finally a terrible expansion team have made an NFL rivalry something of a joke. Houston is, strangely enough, more interested in the Stros than the Texans. Of course, the Rangers suck, so nobody in Houston really cares how they do. The only sport where Houston and Dallas are on par is basketball, and I'm happy whenever the Rockets kick the Mavericks' asses (I'm also happy when they destroy the Spurs, but it's less cathartic. I'm rather fond of San Antonio).
So, if the Texans can't compete with the Cowboys (however, the Cowboys are VASTLY overrated every year), I'm happy to just see Dallas teams lose. And I'm happy that Romo will not be playing for a month (lighten up, Cowboys fans, he just broke his pinky; he'll be fine). And I hope that "America's Team" fucking crashes and burns.
Honestly, I don't know what the hell Justice is confused about. It's a pretty simple equation.
EDIT:
I'm particularly fond of comments like this:
I'm a Cowboy's fan and rooted for the Oilers and Texans, as long as they weren't playing Dallas.
No. No, you're not a Cowboys fan. You can't cheer both teams and be a fan. I don't cheer the Mavs or Spurs. I don't care that they are from Texas; it just doesn't work that way. The only time boundary lines can be crossed is with South-Central Texans picking a baseball or football team. Otherwise, you stay loyal to your region's sports team. That's just the way it works.
That would be a stupid attitude to have in real life, but fortunately, sports teams aren't real life. So we can enforce arbitrary cultural boundaries.
Monday, October 13, 2008
The Texans' two minute drill
I noticed, as have other people, that the Texans rely an awful lot on one play in their two-minute drill. In fact, it seems that virtually every drill features the play within the first three or four plays.
Yes, Texans fans, that play is their patented QB Sack. It wouldn't be a Texans last-minute-to-win-the-game drive without it. While the coaching staff seems to call this play less frequently after Mittens was released, and Houston was one of the worse teams in running the play last season, the Texans are still pretty awesome at getting their QB sacked when the game is on the line. I once feared that the improved O-line would cut down on the Texans' effectiveness in this regard, but (despite Duane Brown's excellence thus far) they have shown themselves to be amongst the league's elite. Congratulations, Texans. You earned it.
Yes, Texans fans, that play is their patented QB Sack. It wouldn't be a Texans last-minute-to-win-the-game drive without it. While the coaching staff seems to call this play less frequently after Mittens was released, and Houston was one of the worse teams in running the play last season, the Texans are still pretty awesome at getting their QB sacked when the game is on the line. I once feared that the improved O-line would cut down on the Texans' effectiveness in this regard, but (despite Duane Brown's excellence thus far) they have shown themselves to be amongst the league's elite. Congratulations, Texans. You earned it.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Texans Win! Texans Win! Texans WIN!
Oh happy day! God, I knew You were just jerking us all around when You had Eugene Wilson catch that interception and then fumble it away. I knew You were just kidding around when Ronnie Brown got another TD to put the Texans down 23-28 with only 1:45 left on the clock. I knew it was all in Your divine plan to have the whole game come down to a 4th-and-3 QB draw play.
Sitting here in NOLA, I was joining in with those Texans fans at Reliant booing Schaub. He threw two interceptions today, which really cost us. Maybe that was just post-Case-of-the-Shits jitters.
Still, there were people chanting "We want Rosenfels" at the game. What the fuck, people? Were ya'll in some sort of mass coma last Sunday? Did you not see the Rosen-copter? I understand that Schaub was throwing pretty fucking dangerously today, but Rosenfels is no better. In fact, he's signifcantly worse.
Well, at least the Texans won't go 0-fer the season. This one had me holding my breath to the very end, and I'll be happy when the play the hapless Lions next Sunday. Hopefully that game will be much more conducive to my nerves.
The Rockets were handed their first defeat of the pre-season last night. Pretty bullshit calls at the end of the game. In other news, T-Mac almost got into two fights, and Ron Artest kicked Paul Pierce's ass. Awesome.
EDIT:
Oh, and Ed Hochuli was the ref for the Texans game. One blown call (that facemasking call in New Orleans wasn't his fault, fuckers) and Guns' career goes down the shitter - reffing Texans - Dolphins games. Ouch.
Sitting here in NOLA, I was joining in with those Texans fans at Reliant booing Schaub. He threw two interceptions today, which really cost us. Maybe that was just post-Case-of-the-Shits jitters.
Still, there were people chanting "We want Rosenfels" at the game. What the fuck, people? Were ya'll in some sort of mass coma last Sunday? Did you not see the Rosen-copter? I understand that Schaub was throwing pretty fucking dangerously today, but Rosenfels is no better. In fact, he's signifcantly worse.
Well, at least the Texans won't go 0-fer the season. This one had me holding my breath to the very end, and I'll be happy when the play the hapless Lions next Sunday. Hopefully that game will be much more conducive to my nerves.
The Rockets were handed their first defeat of the pre-season last night. Pretty bullshit calls at the end of the game. In other news, T-Mac almost got into two fights, and Ron Artest kicked Paul Pierce's ass. Awesome.
EDIT:
Oh, and Ed Hochuli was the ref for the Texans game. One blown call (that facemasking call in New Orleans wasn't his fault, fuckers) and Guns' career goes down the shitter - reffing Texans - Dolphins games. Ouch.
Rays win, Longhorns win, Texans will probably lose.
That about sums it up. Glad to see Tampa Bay kick some ass, even if it took 11 innings. Also, Josh Beckett doesn't have a chin. The Longhorns benefited from some shitty officiating, but so did the Sooners. You'd think they'd have better refs for the Big 12's most important game of the year. Anyways, it's good to see Texas win, even if I'm not emotionally invested in them in the same way as Houston teams. Buncha hicks in Oklahoma should learn not to show up to these things.
The Texans face the Dolphins today. A couple weeks ago, this game seemed like a gimme, but it seems pretty clear now that the Dolphins are significantly better than anyone expected. They're no powerhouse, but they won't be pushovers, either. So the Texans will probably get their ass kicked.
The Texans face the Dolphins today. A couple weeks ago, this game seemed like a gimme, but it seems pretty clear now that the Dolphins are significantly better than anyone expected. They're no powerhouse, but they won't be pushovers, either. So the Texans will probably get their ass kicked.
Friday, October 10, 2008
The more I think about it, the more I like it.
I know that Drayton McLane and Ed Wade are going to take a lot of shit this offseason if they don't sign Ben Sheets (or some other ace pitcher). Drayton has indicated that they'll just stick with what they've got.
It's impossible to know someone's motivations. They way I see it, Ed Wade could have three reasons for not pursuing free agents this winter:
1) Money. It could be that Drayton is just unwilling to expand payroll. We're paying a lot of money to Tejada, Berkman, Lee, and Oswalt, and we're not getting that much out of it. Add to that a relatively large contract to Matsui, and we've got a club with a lot of money tied up in older players.
Now, I'm pretty sure that Drayton and Wade want to sign Valverde to a big contract. I'm not so sure that's a good idea - he's an injury risk and closers are highly overrated. I think his main value to the Astros would be as trade bait or as two draft picks in 2010. But clubs want "experienced" closers, and Valverde is as good as any other.
So Drayton could just be scrimping on payroll now to pay for other stuff down the line. That's not unreasonable.
2) Stupidity. Wade could be vastly overrating this team. He might think that this club really is an 87 win team, and that's just stupid. So he and Drayton might believe that, if they just go after some lesser-known talent, they can win big next year.
3) Wade is a freakin' genius. Or at least he pays attention. He might realize that this team really sucks, and that investing further will just be adding payroll to a team that might make it to 4th place in the NL Central next year.
So he might be looking for cheap contracts just to shore up the rotation and get the Astros through the season. They'll focus on the farm system for a while, and just hope for the best in the major league team.
I don't know. If they do go for a "rebuilding" route, it's going to be a shitty couple years. Only the wealthiest clubs (Yankees, Red Sox, etc.) can rebuild while remaining competitive in the big leagues. That's unfortunate for the rest of us. But remember that if we're patient, we can see another Astros dynasty. I'm pretty fucking tired of waiting for it, but I figure I can do it for another few years.
It's impossible to know someone's motivations. They way I see it, Ed Wade could have three reasons for not pursuing free agents this winter:
1) Money. It could be that Drayton is just unwilling to expand payroll. We're paying a lot of money to Tejada, Berkman, Lee, and Oswalt, and we're not getting that much out of it. Add to that a relatively large contract to Matsui, and we've got a club with a lot of money tied up in older players.
Now, I'm pretty sure that Drayton and Wade want to sign Valverde to a big contract. I'm not so sure that's a good idea - he's an injury risk and closers are highly overrated. I think his main value to the Astros would be as trade bait or as two draft picks in 2010. But clubs want "experienced" closers, and Valverde is as good as any other.
So Drayton could just be scrimping on payroll now to pay for other stuff down the line. That's not unreasonable.
2) Stupidity. Wade could be vastly overrating this team. He might think that this club really is an 87 win team, and that's just stupid. So he and Drayton might believe that, if they just go after some lesser-known talent, they can win big next year.
3) Wade is a freakin' genius. Or at least he pays attention. He might realize that this team really sucks, and that investing further will just be adding payroll to a team that might make it to 4th place in the NL Central next year.
So he might be looking for cheap contracts just to shore up the rotation and get the Astros through the season. They'll focus on the farm system for a while, and just hope for the best in the major league team.
I don't know. If they do go for a "rebuilding" route, it's going to be a shitty couple years. Only the wealthiest clubs (Yankees, Red Sox, etc.) can rebuild while remaining competitive in the big leagues. That's unfortunate for the rest of us. But remember that if we're patient, we can see another Astros dynasty. I'm pretty fucking tired of waiting for it, but I figure I can do it for another few years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
