Rick Snider makes a classic bad move...

...by writing an article that I can tear into. It's good, cause today I had a few to choose from after a weekend of very little. I was getting worried, but today I came across about 3 articles I can, shall we say, dissect for your pleasure. Let's start with my boy Rickey, or Ricky, (I'm not sure if he prefers '-ey' or just 'y'). He's a columnist for the Washington Examiner and has some strong opinions on the hiring of Mike Shanahan. As usual his words in italics, mine in regular typeface. Here we go:

Snyder makes another classic bad move by hiring Shanahan

Make no bones about it people, Dan Snyder gets beat on by the Washington media pretty regularly. In fact, it's become such a habit I think they've pretty much forgotten all about the Nationals. Not really a surprise I guess.

Mike Shanahan is a classic move by Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder. And, a typically bad one.

I guess Rick is not going to bother to list his other bad moves. Maybe he assumes people in Washington already know the list like:
- trading draft picks for older players
- Joe Gibbs (in retrospect)
- Steve Spurrier
- charging fans for tailgating
- baning signs made by fans

A headline-grabbing hire is great for selling season tickets, corporate sponsorships and jerseys. A $35 million contract validates the owner's reputation of overpaying for past performance. Someone with titles won elsewhere whose resume overshadows Snyder's poor stewardship once more lends hope to the Burgundy Revolution.

K this whole myth about selling season tickets with a coaching hire is unfounded. I mean, almost every NFL team sells out every home game, there's only 8 a year barring the playoffs. The only team who didn't is arguably the worst team in the league and located in the most economically depressed city in the country, the Lions. So he didn't get Shanahan just to sell tickets. Jersey's? Seriously? A lot of people running around with Bill Walsh jersey's in San Fran? Or Lovie Smith jersey's in Chicago?
Shanahan has won 3 Super Bowls (one as an offensive coordinator). He doesn't seem like a terrible choice. Maybe he's overpaid, I don't really know what an NFL coach is worth money-wise, but Rick is yet to give a solid reason why it's a bad deal.

But is Shanahan the right choice?

Did you not read your last paragraph. That's the point of the whole article.

The former Denver Broncos coach himself is 11 years from winning two straight titles. It has been a long time since both sides tasted success.

Well he brings up that it has been a while since Shanahan won a title, a valid point, maybe the game has passed him by and he doesn't know how to win in today's NFL...

So long they may have forgotten the feel of that silver trophy in their hands.

...or that. Though I'm sure the Broncos would let him hold one of the trophy's he won in the 90's if he's really forgotten.

But Snyder should have waited for a full field of candidates rather than impatiently bidding on the leader. Bill Cowher finally came sniffing around only to receive a cold reception from Snyder, who was tired of courting the former Pittsburgh coach. Between Cowher and Shanahan, I take Cowher.
If Jon Gruden could have been swayed, he's the choice. If Tennessee had been stupid enough to part with Jeff Fisher, I'd knock down anyone in the way to get him.

Apparently Rick would have hired some sort of Cerberus with the heads of Cowher/Gruden/Fisher. I can't imagine what that would have cost, but the corporate sponsorship opportunities would have been endless.

It's hard to dismiss the pick. But predecessors Marty Schottenheimer, Steve Spurrier and Joe Gibbs seemed superb choices at the time. All left mission unaccomplished. Why will Shanahan be any different?

Why would ANYONE be any different? I have no idea what Shanahan's plans are for the future of the Redskins are, but I'm scared of them thanks to Rick Snider. I'm talking Glen Beck scared...
Case Closed!

Another person forgets last year...

Bob Klapisch on Fox Sports makes the same mistake as our good friend Jeff Pearlman in this article: Bay is nice, but not what Mets need.

In the meantime, the Mets are getting an infusion of power that will take pressure off David Wright. The third baseman, once a 30-home run threat, hit only 10 HRs last season, and just five at Citi Field. Bay will be a welcome antidote to the power deficit, although he’s more likely to hit 25 home runs at cavernous Citi than the 36 he slugged with the Red Sox.

Did everyone in New York suffer a concussion last year and forget about Wright's condition? Again from Wikipedia:

In a season where many other Mets' players have already been injured, the injury bug finally caught up to Wright on August 15. Wright suffered a concussion when he was hit in the head with a 94 mph fastball by San Francisco Giants pitcher Matt Cain.
On August 16, he left the hospital, diagnosed with post-concussion symptoms. He was then placed on the disabled list for the first time in his career...

How do people keep ignoring this as if Wright is just some washed up bum? I mean, any amount of research would remind the writer about this. I guess New York is so tough that even a concussion isn't an excuse for an off year.
Case Closed!

Raw is Bret

So I guess after mentioning it I should react to Bret Hart's appearance on Raw. First and foremost, crowd seemed into it to me. I dislike judging crowd reaction from T.V. Too many things can effect how you see and hear the crowd to make a good determination. (Pumped in sound, editing both sound and video) But the crowd was responding well and stayed with the segments. The Bret and Shawn opener was obviously disappointing. Them just shaking hands, I guess, was a way to focus on Vince vs. Brett according to wrestlingobserver.com. Also it made it look like Bret really was trying to patch things up and move on. That makes Vince's sucker kick a little more dastardly.
The whole night left me wanting more, which is the point. They have 3 months till WM, so no need to rush anything. Also the recap of Bret's career was really well done.
On a slightly different angle, having two wrestling shows to switch between on a Monday night must have brought back a lot of memories for wrestling fans, it'll be interesting to see how strong the ratings are and if Monday's can hold two wrestling shows at a time again. If they're going to start, now would be the time with Monday Night Football being over.

Tis the Season...

for column's about football playoff momentum and the Baseball Hall of Fame. Baseball Hall of Fame argument columns bore me (unless I agree with it). Football playoff momentum articles have been kept to a minimum from what I've seen, most of them actually agree that there is no such thing. I'm in that same boat so I can't really rip on them. Well at least the USA Today gave me this to work with:

The best team realistic money can buy, all for $80 million

Catchy title. I'm think of calling my next expense report at work: The Best Lunches that can be Bought with a Client for a Reasonable Amount in the Greater Bronson Area. Rolls off the tongue.

So the basic premise of the list/article:

We've managed to assemble a formidable roster for Team 2009, USA TODAY Sports Weekly's annual exercise of creating a 25-man roster of the best players in their actual roles. But sticking to a realistic and responsible payroll was more difficult than it has been in several years.
This is not an All-Star team, but a selection by USA TODAY baseball editors and reporters of a realistic roster, including 2009's best No. 1 starting pitcher, No. 2 starter, No. 3 starter, etc.; a bullpen with each role covered; a starting lineup; and a complete bench. Then, we pick a manger, hitting coach and pitching coach.

This is in depth, and long, very long.

The challenge was deciding where the difference in performance between higher- and lower-priced players was small enough to warrant going cheap.

Sounds like a fantasy baseball article to me.

Starting pitching had a major impact on our payroll, with the $8.352 million cost of our rotation more than tripling from our 2008 starting five. Still, we came away with the American League Cy Young Award winner, Zack Greinke, and the National League wins leader, Adam Wainwright. And, in the bullpen, we still found room for closer Mariano Rivera, the only member of our 11-man pitching staff who was picked last year.
Our offense has both MVPs in catcher Joe Mauer and first baseman Albert Pujols, and both batting champions in Mauer and shortstop Hanley Ramirez. Pujols and Ramirez are the only offensive players to return from Team 2008.
We have power, speed and lineup flexibility. It's a team that mirrors the major league trend away from lining up sluggers to bludgeon the opposition into submission.

Oh yeah, major league teams are always trying to get away from lining up sluggers to produce big offensive numbers. That's what makes the Nationals so successful. So lets see, you have Pujols, H-Ram, and Mauer. Yeah that's how you get away from big-time mashers, by having the best offensive players at their positions on your team. I mean they're incredible players who anyone would love to have, but it's not some new strategy you've stumbled upon. You did not pick them for "lineup flexibility" unless you plan on benching Pujols cause he only OPS's 1.500 again lefties instead of the 1.750 he hits against righties. (Yes I'm aware those are not the actual numbers.)

So the article goes on and picks people you'd pretty much expect. Whenever it's not the biggest name at the position Sladky explains that's it's a monetary pick. Lynne even gets in a shot at Jeter.

Shortstop
•Hanley Ramirez, Florida Marlins: The discussion sounded like the discussion surrounding this year's AL MVP.
Everyone wants to talk about shortstop Derek Jeter's season for the New York Yankees, but when all the statistics are spread out and we're reminded that we're talking about the best of 2009 and not a lifetime-achievement award, the sentiment gives way.
Ramirez won the batting title from the third spot in the lineup after proving in previous seasons he can be one of the game's top leadoff hitters.

Left field
•Carl Crawford, Tampa Bay Rays: Probably the most contested position in our starting lineup, and the supporters of Crawford finally prevailed, while admitting that we might not be able to afford his $8.25 million price tag.

What the heck is that? The whole POINT of the article is to pick a team you can afford. Picking a guy you can't afford misses that.

Ryan Braun of the Milwaukee Brewers was a close runner-up — and at a more affordable $745,000.

Gee...looks like you can actually afford Braun. Maybe you should of picked him instead.

Crawford's 60 stolen bases and .305 batting average fit nicely into our lineup

You don't say...

Right field
•Justin Upton, Arizona Diamondbacks: This was another difficult decision and, in the end, the one that allowed us to meet our payroll limits and still keep enough of the All-Stars we wanted.
The Seattle Mariners' Ichiro Suzuki emerged from our debate as the first choice but only barely over Upton and the Philadelphia Phillies' Jayson Werth.
But when all our first choices totaled $107 million, moving from Suzuki's $17 million to Upton's $412,000 was the immediate first move.

So here's my main exception with this article. They basically took their first pick in EVERY POSITION except for two of the highest paid players in the game, Suzuki and A-rod. 80 million is a good amount of money to work with. If they had say taken the Royals budget and made a team, then they might have something.

Not the most interesting concept I've ever read. About as bad as a blog where some guy spends an hour a day ripping sport articles. The pitching stuff is boring and adheres to the concept of #1 vs. #2 starters instead of just finding some inexpensive talent that fans may be overlooking which, you know, may have made for a interesting article. Oh well.

As the kids say, case closed!