And We're Back...

Its been awhile, so hopefully people still read this occasionally. 

Baseball postseason awards are coming out, and Seattle's Felix Hernandez won the American League Cy Young Award.  He led the AL (or was top 2 or 3) in most pitching categories.  He did have a 13-12 record.  He also had a 2.27 ERA and the Mariners had a record of 61-101.  Simply put:  the Mariners were bad (Pittsburgh Pirate bad), and Felix Hernandez was good (Cy Young good).

To help illustrate how bad they were, Ichiro Suzuki was on base 249 times with an OBP of .359.  It was a little low by his standards, but usually a player getting on base that many times in a season will score at least 100 times that season.  He only scored 74 times-- His Mariner teammates left him stranded about 70% of the time.

Hernandez' stellar numbers should have led to more wins, but the bad Mariner offense (and relief pitching) did not help him.  He won the Cy Young by a large margin, but old crusty baseball writers can't get past the W-L record.

I can understand the argument of pressure affecting a pitcher, and how a pitcher on a bad team can avoid a lot of attention - pitching without the bright spotlight on him.  However, arguing that W-L record is the primary stat of a pitcher's quality is antiquated and really useless.  And some antiquated writers decided to make this argument. 

Despite the Win being based on the hitting of teammates, relief pitching and sometimes just luck, Murray Chass can't accept this.  He talked with the Tribune's resident crusty baseball man Phil Rogers here.  Phil felt intimidated by all those bully numbers Geeks and their facts and arguments.  Murray Chass' own thoughts are here.

Here's a song for King Felix.  Both articles after the video.  Thanks for stopping by again.



Setting The Record Straight
by Murray Chass
Nov. 21, 2010

(Under the The Minority Speaks header.  3 sections down)

 
Phil Rogers of the Chicago Tribune voted for Price because, he said, Hernandez’s 13 wins didn’t merit the award and Price was a dominant pitcher in his own right.
Speaking of the one-sided outcome of the vote, Rogers added, “I wonder how much of it was bullying on the Internet. There were a lot of columns written in September saying no one should be stupid enough not to vote for Felix. Maybe that’s what happened, but I hope not.”

All those Internet bullies-- forcing long time sports writers to read their columns and intimidate them into voting for Hernandez.  Who will protect these delicate, feeble minded writers from all these organized facts and stats and opinions?



Bob Elliott of the Toronto Sun noted that the difference between the leaders in wins last year was three (Zack Greene 16, Hernandez 19) and this year was eight (Hernandez 13, Sabathia 21.)
“I asked a bunch of players on both teams I saw the last weekend of the season and it came out 9-1 or 10-1 for CC,” Elliott said.

Wait, how have I not read this scientific poll before?  I mean, there's a bunch.  or 10.  or eleven.  or Bob Elliott pulled numbers out of his ass.  There's no real way to know for sure.  But if the CC-Feliz ratio is that overwhelming and there's no representation of the question asked or who he talked to, and apparently no written record of the results, then it must be fact.  


All right, that was fun.  Like stretching before a run. Hopefully I won't be sore tomorrow-- On to article 2 (I apologize for the length).

THE DARK SIDE TO OVERTAKE CY YOUNG AWARD

By Murray Chass

November 17, 2010

 The standard for wins by an American League pitcher was lowered to 16 last year. It is about to be lowered even further – to 13. That’s the number of games Felix Hernandez won this past season, and I expect he will be announced Thursday as the A.L. Cy Young award winner. 

Here's his thesis:  the main way to judge pitchers is by wins.  And the numbers are getting too low for him to feel comfortable.  Hopefully he'll acknowledge other stats then completely disregard them...


The Seattle right-hander had the league’s lowest earned run average, 2.27; the lowest opposing batting average, .212; the most innings pitched, 249 1/3, and missed by two of having the most strikeouts (232). What he didn’t have was wins. When he won his last start of the season, he finished above .500 at 13-12.

To Clarify- Categories Hernandez led the league in or was top 2:
ERA
Opponents BA
Innings Pitched
Strikeouts

Category (singular) that he didn't lead:
Wins

So obviously, there's absolutely no argument to be made for Hernandez.  Unless you pay attention to the stats the he had the most control over...

The development, I believe, is directly related to the growing influence of the new-fangled statistics which readers of this site know I have no use for, a fact that sends stats-freak denizens of the blogosphere into a stats-freak frenzy.

You just listed the stats-- apparently ERA, OBA, Innings pitched and strikeouts are "new-fangled statistics."  You know, the ones those Ivy league math nerds created using supercomputers, auditoriums full of servers, confusing algorithms, thick glasses, and stacks upon stacks of punch cards.  That or they're stats that can be figured out by a sixth grader with a solar calculator and a piece of scrap paper.


“Look out, he’s at it again” the cry will go out, as if a carrier of the black plague were loose in the land. And a flood of e-mail messages will pour in to my inbox calling me vile names (they are only the best educated and articulate of responders) and telling me I don’t know what I’m talking about.

Don't forget snarky jackasses on poorly maintained, seldom updated blogs.


Besides his otherwise impressive statistics, the best argument Hernandez has going for him is his lack of run support. Elias Sports Bureau says the Mariners’ 3.06 runs per Hernandez start was the A.L.’s lowest. The Mariners say in Hernandez’s 12 losses, the team scored a total of seven runs while he was in the game.


It is a good case. That whole "worst run support in the AL" thing might be a factor in wins.  And the 7 runs in 12 losses-- that's tough to win games.  If, being generous, those runs were spread out across 7 games, that's five games he didn't have a chance to win because his team didn't score.  Congratulations, you've successfully argued the Win is a bad stat for Cy Young.  A pitcher can marred by a terrible team.  Nice debating.  Please stop writing. 

I accept that those figures represent terrible run support and would make it difficult for any pitcher to win. But not impossible. I have long believed that good pitchers find a way to win. 

C'mon!  You just proved at least 5 of his starts were impossible to win.  7 other starts probably would've required shutouts.  How can you find a way to win if your team doesn't score runs?  

Two Examples: 

Steve Carlton compiled a 27-10 record in 1972 for a Phillies team that otherwise had a 32-87 record. Carlton led the league with a 1.97 e.r.a., 30 complete games, 310 strikeouts and 346 1/3 innings pitched.

Murry Dickson was a 20-game winner for one of the most inept teams in history, the 1951 Pirates, whose 64-90 record belied their level of talent. The only reason they didn’t finish last was Dickson’s 20 wins.

Both Carlton and Dickson had more run support than Hernandez, but both found ways to win in spite of the teams they played for.

So, all Hernandez has to do is go back in time (when closers didn't exist), complete thirty games and throw a little less than 2 season's worth of innings to get the win total you require?  And you make the point that both Carlton and Dickson had more run support.  You think, possibly, that their teams scoring more runs led to more victories.  I don't have exact numbers at hand, but I do believe that the team that scores more runs than the other team usually wins.  I will double check that, but I'd say this is true 100% of the time.  Also, that would be more runs than 7 runs in 12 games.  Thanks for arguing against yourself.

He then goes on to quote people saying that pitchers find ways to win.  But then offers no evidence besides those quotes.

Well, welcome back readers.  I'll try not to be so bad in updating.  And David Haugh needs to get mocked soon. 

 

More FireDavidHaugh.com Stuff

Miraculously, David Haugh just had an article posted about the Bears optimism this year being crap and based on nothing.  It might be a 2 foot putt, but after reading Dan Pompei recently it actually needed to be said by a Trib writer.

But since I'm all about snarkiness and cutting people down, we're going back to his last two columns (I'll get to Dan Pompei's sunshine & cotton candy article a little later).  Since I'm in a football and Bears mood, I'll start with his article on hazing.  Haugh says that every profession in America has a way of hazing.  That it builds trust and whatnot. 

About Dez Bryant and Roy Williams' shoulder pads: I don't really care.  If players have fun with traditions then there's no harm.  But there is no greater meaning as Haugh says.  There's some nice contradiction of his own words in the article too. 

Well, here's some new Arcade Fire.  Article after the song.  And I'll try to get caught up over the weekend.
 


NFL rookie initiation a harmless throwback
Bryant's defiance of tradition a display of arrogance
By David Haugh 
July 28, 2010 


When Shannon Sharpe told rookie Broncos teammate Desmond Clark back in 1999 that he wanted a fried chicken breast with his Popeye's order, a thigh or leg just wouldn't do.

One day when Clark returned from his regular lunch run for Sharpe without the right assortment of chicken, Sharpe went to pieces.

"He didn't eat any of the food I brought back because he said I pissed him off getting the wrong thing and there'd be repercussions," the Bears tight end recalled. "I didn't make the mistake again. I knew when you're willing to do those things for veterans, they're more willing to accept you as their teammate. So that's what I did."

Players use their experience and position within a team to pick on the rookies.  Okay, it's football and professional sports and grown men acting like children.  I can accept that.  But remember Shannon Sharpe's actions for later...


Clark didn't like it and it didn't matter. Every NFL rookie goes through a similar rite of passage that begins at training camp and often lasts through their first season intended to remind them where they stand — and it's no longer on a college campus. Every Bears rookie who reports Thursday to Bourbonnais will undergo similarly harmless exercises in initiation that 99 percent of the time aren't hazardous enough to one's mental health to be called hazing.

That 1% should should be a problem for you.  So a new guy, possibly with more talent, is coming into camp and the veterans are establishing dominance. 

The whole "where they stand" thing-- isn't that going to be obvious when everyone they play against is bigger, faster, stronger, fitter, happier, more productive than any competition they've played against?


It's how egos are shrunk, teams are shaped and character is built.
"That's what football is all about; you humble yourself for the next guy and in return he does the same for you," Clark said. "You learn that you need that guy and he needs you."

I thought that was accomplished by playing.  Not by fetching a guy's lunch. 

"How egos are shrunk"?  Until next year, when they throw hissy fits over people getting them their fried fast food orders.  (See first line of story).


Nobody's advocating taping guys to goalposts or piercing body parts against someone's will or anything stupid and borderline criminal. But with due respect to other former college football players who write columns in town, these days most tasks merely require rookies to fetch meals or carry shoulder pads and sing their alma mater's fight song.

Feel free to say Rick Telander's name.  Just because its a harmless tradition doesn't make it any less dumb.


Every profession in America has its own method of establishing a pecking order and making clear where the new guys fit in that hierarchy. This is football's.

I was not hazed when I started my job.  Actually I wasn't hazed at any of the jobs I've ever had.  There is a hierarchy in football:  its called a depth chart.  There's also other ways to show pecking orders:  like All-pro selections and championships and work ethic.  I think don't think Dez Bryant really cares where Roy Williams thinks he is in the pecking order.


Silly or not, the custom has become so accepted it only creates attention when somebody objects — like Cowboys prima donna Dez Bryant did the other day. Bryant sparked a debate because he refused to carry teammate Roy Williams' shoulder pads after practice, a show of defiance that everybody later tried to downplay. Bryant claimed he knew nothing about the equipment-carrying practice that probably dates back to the leather-helmet days.

Seriously?  Roy Williams is someone who demands that much respect?  Since when has he been a sympathetic character?


"I didn't know nothing about no tradition," Bryant told Dallas media.

Sure, and that's Cowboys owner Jerry Jones' real nose too. Anybody who has played college football at the level Bryant played it had to be aware of his sport's version of an apprentice program. Generations of stars have started out taking orders from players who had the edge in seniority, if not talent.

Don't teams have coaches and things?  How does carrying shoulder pads teach anything about being an NFL wide receiver?

Doug Buffone recalled being a Bears rookie linebacker in 1966 buying coffee for veterans such as Joe Fortunato and Dick Butkus and bringing whatever they wanted wherever they wanted it. Buffone always viewed those duties as a form of bonding more than bullying and saw his share of Bears rookie hot shots, including Walter Payton, accept the NFL reality without complaint.

"It was never bad, demeaning things but they'd let you know you were a rookie and that meant keep your mouth shut, do your job and go out and play," said Buffone, the WSCR-AM analyst who played in 186 games for the Bears. "It was never personal. It's about paying your dues."

I'm not sure how this made Doug Buffone a better player.  I also know that they were on a lot of bad teams.


The price remains the same for stars and subs. Brian Urlacher spent his first training camp in Platteville, Wis., lugging Barry Minter's shoulder pads back and forth.

"We had a long walk back (too) … it's a pain in the ass, but you do it," Urlacher told the Tribune's Vaughn McClure. "You're opening up the floodgates if you start acting like (Bryant). Vets don't like that."

Ah, Barry Minter.  Those were the days.  And Vets don't like a lot of things.  See: Olin Kreutz v. veteran Fred Miller.

Jerry Azumah chuckled recalling the way he used to run errands for vets Tom Carter and Walt Harris and later enjoyed returning the favor bossing Charles Tillman around during Tillman's initial exposure to the NFL in 2003.

"Peanut took it like a man because he knew nobody's an exception to the rule," said Azumah, a Comcast SportsNet analyst. "You do the dirty work, earn acceptance and move on."

I'll wait while you Google Tom Carter...

Alright, so there's really no earthly reason He or Walt "Beat By 10 Yards In The Highlight Shown On ESPN" Harris should be bossing anyone around.

And Jerry Azumah had a few good years, but pretty much sucked.  Yeah, I've got nothing clever for that.

More than other sports, football schemes rely upon trusting teammates. Bears defensive players talk about trust more than marriage counselors because the Cover-2 depends on it. So does the relationship between quarterbacks and receivers, guards and tackles, linebackers and defensive ends, et al.

So when Lance Briggs makes a play, its because he carried somebody's pads to the lockerroom during his rookie year.  Its not because he worked hard and practiced and got a lot of in-game experience.  Good to know.

That process has to start building somewhere. Usually it starts at training camp, except for the rare rookie who still is hung up on his college highlights.

"When you say you're not going to be part of that process, you're basically saying, 'Screw the things that usually work, this is how it's going to work for me,' " said Clark, who hosts an Internet talk show at voiceofamerica.com. "Then when you struggle — and everybody struggles — who do you turn to? You may want to turn to those teammates, but you won't have them."

So Dez Clark would've been a worse tight end if Shannon Sharpe would've eaten the chicken?  If I understand Clark correctly-- If you need help and support of your teammates your rookie year they'll only help you if you were they're obedient PA's.  Otherwise you're screwed.  Its basically building capital with the veterans for help later, not the romantic "paying your dues."  If you fight the tradition, your teammates will make sure you fail.  Classy.  Unless I misinterpreted that.

Back before the NFL draft the Dolphins crossed the line when they asked Bryant if his mom was a prostitute. Turns out some team really should have asked Bryant if he would sublimate his ego to carry the shoulder pads of a veteran teammate during training camp.

Maybe next year that question can be added to the Wonderlic test.

That isn't hazing-- that's just stupid recruiting.  And you can't worry about sublimating egos in a story that starts with Sharpe's demanding of a chicken breast.  That's the opposite of sublimating your ego.  You're just saying sublimate your ego til your second year, then you can establish dominance over the fresh fish. 

The whole thing is selfish and not a team building exercise.  It seems like its just creating capital with veterans so they don't team up against you.  If the players like it, then fine.  Otherwise, losing this crap wouldn't make much of a difference for a professional team.

D. Wade & The Pips

The NBA free agent parts have settled and Miami had a championship celebration to show off Dwayne Wade's new back-up ensemble.  There's a fantastic article by Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo! sports recapping everything that happened.   That's the article that's critical of anyone; here's the soft, spongy, cotton candy laced part: a week ago, Dan Le Batard of Miami Herald wrote an article so glowing and in awe that you thought Wade, James & Bosh were heroes victoriously returning from the battlefield.  I'll parse that in a little bit.

In the meantime, David Haugh is back from vacation and is weighing in on the Bulls.  He wrote his latest article on the premise that..... The Bulls would have been better if they had signed the big three as opposed to the players they ended up with.  Here's a simple analysis of the article, "a-duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh."   I usually put more thought into comments like that, but Haugh didn't really put much thought into this article.  There's also the fact he previously wrote that Chicago would be fine without James.  There's was also the article about James being impressed about the pluck the Bulls showed in the playoffs.  And then the Bulls failed with the signings.  Its really inconsistent... but that's another blog post (stay tuned loyal reader).

But here's the love letter.  And here's some Jon Spencer Blues Explosion.  Thoughts after the song...




LeBron James: Loved, hated, misunderstood
LeBron James' decision to join the Heat has been ripped from coast to coast (except in Miami). Here's why it was both rational and gutsy.


BY DAN LEBATARD
July 11, 2010

Maybe you didn't hear it above the poison and passion. Maybe you couldn't see it amid the fame and flashbulbs. Maybe the ego excess and general overindulgence made clarity impossible no matter how many hundreds of TV hours of droning dissection were devoted to the cause. But both LeBron James and Dwyane Wade said something interesting and identical when trying to explain the decision they made in joining forces with the Miami Heat. They both volunteered, out of nowhere, that the choice they made was not at all emotional.

That is interesting.  Wait, because....

Head over heart, in other words. That's not often where sports reside. James and Wade were being clinical, practical, reasoned. But every hostility that engulfed James after his choice was the opposite of that -- not only soaked in emotion but overwhelmed by it. Hatred. Fury. Envy. And name-calling from coast to coast. One NBA coach referred to James as a ``fraud.'' Cleveland's crazed owner called him a coward traitor in a raging public letter.

There was a lot of emotion involved.  It was an odd decision, after Lebron's marketing, the King James image, the giant banner of him arms spread open, and his path pointed towards being the greatest player ever: now a backup singer to Dwayne Wade in Miami.


These are visceral reflexes, and reflexes are rarely logical. One is not thinking clearly when setting fire to an expensive jersey, but the first word in ``fanatical'' is always ``fan,'' and fanatical is not a logical state of mind. So James went from one of the country's most beloved athletes to one of its most reviled in a single hour of flatulent television, a fall from grace faster than that of Tiger Woods, and for a crime I'm having some difficulty identifying.

Fun Fact: "fan" is short for "fanatical."  But the PR, the way it was handled, embarrassing Cleveland for an hour, having teams come to him and having a one hour special in which he decides not to be the focus anymore-- that's a fall from grace they might teach in future marketing classes.   It'd rival the success of the satellite phone, the Pontiac Aztec and Crystal Pepsi.

You also don't have to be guilty of a crime for people to stop liking you-- the whole "fanatical" part is a big part of sports.  Players play heroes; players play heals.  It's your emotional investment in your team and the sport:  kind of the whole point of cheering.

ANALYZE THE ANGER
Sports are emotional. So too are its fans. It is part of what makes both so fun. But, because of that, what has happened to James outside of South Florida doesn't seem any kind of reasonable. The volume of the anger, and the intensity of it, doesn't fit at all with the actual choice he made. You can be put off by the way he made it, even though no amount of humility and contrition would have soothed the crushed people of Cleveland, but let's examine just his action, if that is even possible given the storm of noise that swirls in the reaction. Actions echo and endure more than words, right?

There was a lot of anger.  But the action of public embarrassment and bad tv and ego trips are actions, right? 


Here, unemotionally, is the choice James made:
He chose to take less money. He chose to sacrifice being the singular star of his team in order to share the stage -- and in a city that belonged to another star, no less. He chose to admit to all that he needed to lean on a friend for help. He chose to go from the easy and forever love of little Cleveland to unholy criticism that would wildfire-spread from the burning jerseys in his hometown to a smoldering that would engulf our entire sports nation. He chose to go from hero to villain. Chose it. Think about that. He chose to go from love to hate. And he chose to subjugate his enormous ego in the name of team. In other words, he put winning above all else -- above money, adoration, even home.

Actually, not that much less money.  There's no state income tax in Florida and, from what I've heard, he ends up only giving up about $.5 million a year.  The number may be wrong, but its still not as a big of a salary cut as Le Batard suggests.

I guess it is a sacrifice to give up being the star-- that's why people are mad.  He actually sacrificed the Lebron brand name (at least temporarily) to go play in Miami.

The leaning on a friend thing-- that equates to him not thinking he could be the centerpiece of the winner.  With weird cognitive dissonance, he had an ego trip show to have the pressure taken off him. 

He put aside being Jordan, Chamberlain, Bryant to be Lamar Odom, Robert Horry or other role players.  He put winning above everything else.  He confused being on a winner with being a winner.  When the great epic tales are written, they are about the hero and not the sidekick.  He might have "sacrificed" and that's whats disappointing as a sports fanatical. 


And that's a bad thing? Doesn't America usually love that kind of rah-rah sacrifice in sports? Don't those ideals usually get transformed into Hoosiers instead of Hatred? Given his standing, the reigning two-time MVP in his prime at 25, it is only a decision that is without precedent in the history of American sports. If people wouldn't laugh you out of the room because he is making $110 million for bouncing a basketball, you could make the argument that what James did, if indeed he was aware of the backlash it would cause, was damn near noble and brave. Pioneers rarely get to be popular while in the middle of the pioneering. Real leadership always risks unpopularity.

The Hoosiers story is one of the underdog-- not the gifted athlete not achieving greatness.  Actually, in the story you're envisioning, the Hoosiers beat Wade, Lebron and the Heat.

And the backlash for calling it noble and brave is because its a stupid idea.  Its not brave to hedge your bets and try to lower the risk of losing. It might be smart if you want a championship and play with your superstar friends, but its definitely not brave or noble.

EGO PLUS TV
That ain't going to feel any kind of good. And we're going to want the giant to apologize or empathize or feel some sort of connection with his worshippers. But, sorry, ego is a big part of what makes the giant the giant, and bloated television fed that insatiable beast for months. And, besides, he isn't sorry. The giant has told you, in words and now in deeds, that all he craves is winning. Maybe, if he's at all aware or compassionate or empathetic, he'll regret the way he presented this decision one day. But he clearly doesn't regret the decision itself.

Well, maybe winning and putting on a public spectacle.  Once again, he values being on a winner than being the reason the team wins.  If he really craved winning, he would've put up more of a fight against the Celtics.


Alright.... this is starting to get too long and my comments are starting to seem repetitive.  And there's a lot of writing about how great the trio is.  Time to skip some paragraphs and go to lighting round mode:

VIEW IN ORLANDO
The Orlando Magic general manager, like a lot of people in the sport, criticized James. Said he thought James was more of a competitor than that. Taking the easy way out. That's how this is being viewed elsewhere.

Well, he did wear #23.  You'd think he'd want to be the best. He was the King, as you were just pointing out. 

RAW REACTION
We forget that this kind of instinct is greedy and not easily controlled, no matter how superhuman its owner. Jordan, patron saint for winning, punched teammate Steve Kerr in the face. Bryant made a big public mess in demanding a trade. They did this emotionally when frustrated.

Jordan's competitiveness and intensity did go overboard, but taken on the court he did win 6 championships.  Bryant, because he demanded the trade, ended up forcing the Lakers' management to get better players around him. His competitiveness and intensity got him 2 more championships after that.


LEBRON VS. KOBE
So, of course, he was called names. Bryant would have had the courage to go it alone, it was argued, even though when Bryant really went it alone he kept losing very fast in the playoffs and begged for a trade and made a public mess trying to get out of his situation to, um, be with better teammates. That was the same Bryant, incidentally, who was only in that position to begin with because he couldn't co-exist with Shaquille O'Neal and preferred to go it alone.

Kobe was still the undisputed leader of the team. No one was arguing that better players aren't needed to win-- you just don't do the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" move and join the players you should be showing you can beat.  Is Lebron better than Wade and Bosh- yes. Its just joining them on Wade's turf isn't the competitiveness fanaticals usually crave.

Thanks for hanging in this long.  I'll be back with a short David Haugh piece soon.  Enjoy.

Lebron Push Back

Following the Lebron The Decision the other day, most the columns ripped Lebron's decision and the manner in which he announced it.  Adrian Wojnarowski of Fox Sports, Jason Whitlock for Fox Sports, and Scott Rabb on Esquire.com all wrote piercing critiques of the decision, the production, the situation, the man and all other definitives. 

In the days following that, like the tide rolling back out to the ocean, the opposite sentiment comes out.  Dan Le Batard of the Miami Herald wrote a sugar-coated, chocolate-topped, high fructose corn syrup injected, nut covered, cherry topped puff piece love letter to Lebron James.  Lacy Banks of the Suntimes boldly came out and had the controversial thought: Lebron within his rights to leave Ohio.  Others compared the situation to slavery-- apparently there is a way to compare free agents leaving to make millions of dollars to slavery.  It is a well founded argument that isn't lazily injected with unfounded inflammatory language.

So I'm going to work on the Lacy Banks column first then Dan Le Batard tomorrow (cliffhanger!).  So enjoy some odd thoughts and a flimsy column and Akron/Family.  Article after the video.




LeBron within his rights to leave Ohio
By Lacy J Banks
July 13, 2010


Where would America be if not for free agency?

Not playing for the Yankees.

Free agency is the bedrock of America's capitalistic enterprise.

That and mergers, sales, loans, capital and lying to Congress.

Thanks to ''The Decision'' former Cleveland Cavaliers superstar LeBron James made last week to sign with the Miami Heat, the spotlight on free agency has been intensified.

Well, yeah- when the greatest free agent opportunity in sports history happens, people tend to pay attention.  So much that teams were dumping salary for the last 2-3 years just to have a small chance to sign players.

Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert, who also owns Quicken Loans Inc., made a fool of himself when he viciously criticized James for joining another team to enhance his chance of winning a championship ring. But James simply was exercising a right enjoyed by 99.9 percent of America's work force.

Yes, Dan Gilbert's letter made a fool of him, but it was just a reaction to losing.  Gilbert is a sore loser. 

And who's the .1% or Americans that can't leave a job of their own will?  That's like 20 or 30 million people-- that's more of a story.  Are you counting children in that percentage or the unemployed or those in a coma?  Or is that just a lazy use of the 99.9%?  I would've gone with 110%-- cause its that American.


This includes Gilbert. No city is granted inherent ownership of any worker. Sure, James was born in nearby Akron, Ohio, and he called the Cavaliers his hometown team.

Bold thesis.  Hopefully it can be supported.

But once a worker wants to change jobs, that is his right to do so as an American. After all, Gilbert, a multimillionaire, was not born in Cleveland. He was born in Detroit and still lives in Michigan. But he never concentrated his business investments solely in Detroit or more needy Flint.

Well, for 99.9% of Americans apparently.  It is their right.  Unless they're worried about being uninsured while they're looking for another job.  But changing jobs isn't really the argument people are making....

And speaking of rights as Americans-- its Dan Gilbert's right to write an angry letter and make a fool of himself.

Rather, while Gilbert's Quicken Loans Inc. is headquartered in Detroit, he owns companies outside of the city. And nobody in Michigan ever accused Gilbert of ''cowardly betrayal,'' as he did James.

Maybe he didn't leave anyone feeling like a jilted lover.  He also didn't have a fan base or an international sports image he had been building.

More than 99.9 percent of NBA players have been able to exercise their options when they became free agents.

I don't even know what this sentence means. I don't know what "exercise their options" means.  Enough with the 99.9%.  And to be fair, the NBA has a draft, so most players entering a league don't have a choice of where they go.  Where's that add into the 99.9% math?

America's constitution grants all its natives the free agency to be in charge of their own careers, their personal lives and property.

Fun fact:  The Bill of Rights has the whole life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness thing in it.  The Property was part of John Locke's thoughts.   And its not just natives, but all citizens. The Constitution didn't exactly account for everyone's free agency.  There was that whole 3/5ths thing. 

Using the NBA as another example, very few of its players play and spend an entire career in the cities of their births. One of those few exceptions is Hall of Fame guard Gail Goodrich. He was born in Los Angeles and played all but four of his 14-year career playing for his hometown Lakers.

Damn, you could have used the 99.9% number here. 

What do Barack Obama, Jerry Reinsdorf, Michael Jordan, Walter Payton, Oprah Winfrey, Billy Williams, Jonathan Toews, Patrick Kane, Mike Ditka, and the late Gwendolyn Brooks have in common? They are great Chicagoans born outside Chicago.

And if, say Michael Jordan, left in his prime-- would you as a fan be bothered?  Probably.  Would you write a column, letter or otherwise vent?  I'm guessing yes.

Wilt Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Karl Malone, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Hakeem Olajuwon, Bob Cousy, Charles Barkley, Serena and Venus Williams, Shaquille O'Neal and Elgin Baylor likewise used their free agency to earn their fame and fortunes playing for teams in cities far away from their birthplaces.

You might need to look up the definition of free agency.  Magic Johnson was drafted by L.A.  Larry Bird was drafted by Boston.  Serena & Venus don't even play for teams.  I don't understand your definition of free agency.  Or the point of any of this. 

Being born in Akron never restricted James from working anywhere else. The main thing James owes his hometown is greatness. And the greater he becomes, the more Akron can brag that it all started there.

You're right, it didn't.  And James could have at least not gone on a megahyped one hour ego fest and break his hometown's heart.  The problem is not his decision but how he went about it.  He abandoned Ohio on national tv.  Oh, and the Cavs no longer have the best player in their history-- a decent reason for the team owner's anger to build.  His letter was foolish, but no one needed to defend Lebron's right to free agency or to leave the Cavs.  99.9% of the people had that figured out and 99.91% can identify a ranting loon. 

Warning Level: Blackwatch Plaid

The Cubs are going for their fourth straight win-- which would be the longest winning streak in major league history.  I'll keep you updated as I write.

The King has spoken: Lebron is heading to Miami, so the basketball warning level is back down to "Blackwatch Plaid".  Your line-up will consist of Wade, Lebron, Bosh and... well, whatever they can get to get around the cap.  That means one mid-level exception player and league-minimum players.  Beasley is likely out so all three can sign.  Advice to teams playing the Heat: get the ball into the post and go after their center and Bosh.  It might be a defensive soft spot.

The man who's Nike ad campaign is/was "We Are All Witnesses" has gone from striking a Jesus pose on a gigantic billboard outside Quicken (Gund) Arena to being a sidekick to Dwyane Wade in Wade County, Florida.  Being a sidekick doesn't always help with your international brand -- Pippen didn't sell as many jerseys as Jordan.  The Heat are Wade's team, and, even if Lebron is MVP and they win the championship next year, it'll most likely still be seen as Dwyane Wade's team.  That might change, but Wade set this up and was in the forefront in the whole process.

Also, "The Decision" was an hour long special to announce James' Destination.  Lebron is a great basketball talent but he is as interesting as an inanimate carbon rod.  Really, just say "Miami" and then get Jay-Z to perform for an hour.  Is that too difficult of a special?

So here's some quotes from the KC Johnson article on the Tribune website.  Anyhow, quotes and snarkiness after the video.  Bienvenidos to Miami.  (Side Note: Congrats on the Emmy nominations Dexter)




LeBron James leaves Cavs for Heat
By K.C. Johnson
Chicago Tribune

The decision, made at exactly 8:27 p.m. Chicago time, creates a new Big Three in the NBA and validates Heat President Pat Riley's bold, grandiose plan to alter the balance of the Eastern Conference. It also rips the guts out of the Cavaliers franchise and its home city.

8:27pm.  That's 27 minutes too long to announce where you're going.  You really had nothing interesting to say, so there's really no reason to wait past 8:01.30 (give people a chance to tune in) to announce.  You're boring and wasting time. 

"This is very tough ... this fall I'm going to take my talents to South Beach and join the Miami Heat," James told interviewer Jim Gray. "It's going to give me the best opportunity to win and win for multiple  years. I want to be able to win championships and I feel I can compete down there."

You could win for awhile.  Although Wade might age pretty quickly (he does have a lot of minutes on his legs) and 3 players for $48+ million might create budget problems. 

Asked whether playing with Wade and Bosh was his plan all along, James said, "I can't say it was always in my plans because I never thought it was possible. But the things the Miami Heat franchise has done to be able to free up cap space and put themselves in position this summer to have all of us, it was hard to turn down."

So this last week was a waste of our time.  They got rid of every player they could--was it really not the plan going into July 1?


As for how he would explain his decision to fans in Cleveland, James said, "It's heartfelt for me. There were 20,000-plus fans who came out every night we played and they saw me grow from an 18-year-old kid to a 25-year-old man. I never wanted to leave Cleveland. My heart will always be around that area. But the greatest challenge was for me is to move on."

The greatest challenge actually is to get a winner in Cleveland.  Its been awhile. 

Shown a live shot on TV of Cavaliers fans burning his jersey, James said, "I hoped fans would understand and maybe they won't. I feel awful that I'm leaving, but I feel even worse that I wasn't able to bring a championship to that city. I hope my real fans will continue to support me, and I'll see you this fall."

So they're only your real fans if they're fully behind you breaking their hearts.  Just a way sports work- usually the cheering hierarchy is team-team's best player-team's grindiest player.  Don't ask your fans to be loyal to you when your own loyalty to them just went south.

If you really felt bad about not bringing a championship to that city, you could've done something about it.  Really, you were in the best position to do so.  I'm guessing you're more upset about not winning a championship for yourself.  Move on if you want, but don't say you feel awful when you're the one that could reward the fans. 

Good luck in Miami, because there's a lot more fans that will savor the schadenfreude for every game and playoff series you lose. 

And the Cubs are now down 3-2.

Warning Level: Moving Pictures

Lebronmania is nearing an end.  In less than 24 hours, the world will know the decision that could save your favorite basketball team or destroy it.  Because of this, I'm gonna raise the warning system from "Blackwatch Plaid" to the cover of Rush's seminal album "Moving Pictures." (Bonus points for anyone who knows what I'm talking about).  Oh, and the worst attempt to create a basketball player via Rachael Ray (thanks to Food Network Humor for posting this).  It gets bad and creepy quickly.


Now that we're at the proper warning level, we can move on to making fun of "The Decision."  I was thinking about making some Mt Sinai and Lebron coming down to speak joke and then some King James bible reference and then something about rumors about his mom that would let her play the roles of both Mother Mary and Mary Magdalene and then some bad resurrection analogy.  But I realized my religious knowledge wasn't enough to have it make sense. 

Then I could make a joke about the Bachelor or some reality show but everyone's doing that.  So I'm going to go with Lebron-brand entertainment:  idea one is a variety show involving Lebron and his business associates singing, dancing and telling wholesome family jokes.  It'll be a fun heart-warming affair for the whole family.  The other idea is Lebron announces his destination and then uses the remaining 55 minutes to sell the next can't-live-without kitchen appliance.  Ron Popeil has his "Set It And Forget It" rotisserie, Mr. T has his "Set It To Cook And You're Off The Hook" counter top oven, George Foreman has his grills, and The Magic Bullet speaks for itself.  What will Lebron's hot new cooking item be?  Tune in at 8pm to find out.


So, as a happy bonus for people who want to know my own bad sports thoughts, maybe I'll just give my thoughts on the Bulls next year without (or possibly with) Lebron. To keep you, the loyal reader, entertained and to honor Rush playing at both Summerfest and Northerly Island this past week and to point out that Lebron is in the limelight: Here's Limelight by Rush.


Bulls Outlook
By Me

The Bulls have cleared enough room for nearly enough for 2 max contracts.  One was just filled by Carlos Boozer.  If Lebron comes to Chicago, they are the favorite to win the East.  Boozer, Noah, Rose and Shooting-guard-to-be-named-later would be a formidable force.  Especially if they can play the defense that Tom Thibodeau helped coach with Boston.  Now, if Lebron goes elsewhere, the Bulls could sneak in a run.  They have a solid front court, an all-star point guard, Luol Deng (for what its worth), and will have money and a chance to sign a shooting guard like 45%+ 3-point shooter Anthony Morrow.  They won't be a runaway team, but they could put up a solid fight.  Or this is all Lebron rationalization and delusion rattling around my head.

Lebron and Miami: 
That's trouble.  3 All-stars and Michael Beasley.  There wouldn't be much around those 3, but they wouldn't need too much else.  If he doesn't want to be seen as Wade's sidekick and goes elsewhere, then Miami is beatable.  Bosh & Wade isn't streets ahead of Boozer & Rose.  That and Miami only has Beasley on their roster right now.  The big free agent announcement today doesn't make them the favorite.

New York Knicks:
They signed Stoudemire and have a coach who likes his teams to shoot as quickly as possible.  His teams never play defense, which could be their downfall. 

New Jersey Nets:
They have Jay Z and a rich Russian owner and are moving to Brooklyn in a few years: but they haven't made moves to make their team more attractive to free agents.  If Lebron does go there, they do have enough talent where they'll be a tough team to beat.  But it seems unlikely right now that he will.

LA Clippers:
With VDN as their head coach, its only a matter of time before Lebron sees the light and makes people realize that the Clippers are both a basketball team and a type of ship.

Cleveland Cavs:
If Lebron stays in place, then the Cavs will win 55+ games.  They haven't been able to get a solid second player to help him-- he'll be the the only act in town there.

Teams Not In The Lebron Derby:

Boston Celtics:
Team's stars are getting a year older and seemed tired in the finals.  They'd need help to be a threat.

Orlando Magic:
Dwight Howard is a force, but their shooters are getting older too and how much can you fear a team that targeted Chris Duhon as a free agent and signed him to a 4 year - $15 million contract.

When this is all settled, the Bulls will have already put themselves in a position to be in the top three in the East.  They'll have a chance to go to at least the finals- If they get Lebron I think they'll go to the finals.

Well, there's my bad sports thoughts.  Enjoy ripping them apart.  I do insist.

Major Basketball News. And I Make Fun Of The World Cup

Finally, the long wait is over: we now know that.... Vinny Del Negro is the next head coach of your Los Angeles Clippers!  Possession after possession of the team's best player not getting the ball, inbound plays that end with the center trying to create off the dribble from 5 steps above the key, and not having timeouts left at the end of the game are all West Coast Bound!  Congratulations, Clippers.  You're in for a treat.

Oh, Lebron James is announcing where he's going next year this Thursday at 8pm central time.  It will be part of an hour long special that, I'm guessing, will include pyrotechnics, dancing horses, Stuart Scott saying "Boo-yeah" to as many James highlights as possible, the Cleveland Tabernacle Choir, Patrick Kane, Lebron descending from the ceiling, and the finest in cross-promoting synergetic advertising ESPN/ABC/Disney can put together (Remember, Jimmy Kimmel Live-late night on your local ABC affiliate).

It is not known which team James will join or where the announcement will take place.  

I can only assume this means it will happen at James' underground lair as he will acquire the Batcave as part of his max contract.

I might be a little David Haugh intensive lately, and Jim O'Donnell was let go by the Suntimes, and I've missed Frank Deford, so I decided to be kind of lazy and make fun of soccer.  Bill Simmons did a Q&A on the World Cup trying to make a case that its soccer's coming out party.  Article after the new Wolf Parade song.  Enjoy.



Soccer is ready to capture our attention 
By Bill Simmons
July 1, 2010
Via ESPN.com 

Question No. 1: What's been the single best thing about the Cup so far?

I love the Cup because it stripped away all the things about professional sports that I've come to despise. No sideline reporters. No JumboTron. No TV timeouts. No onslaught of replays after every half-decent play. No gimmicky team names like the "Heat" or the "Thunder." (You know what the announcers call Germany? The Germans. I love this.)

So no things like being able to see the ball in the stadium, no replays to see how a play broke down.  And no team names.  Although Germany is kind of a well-known brand.  

No announcers breathlessly overhyping everything or saying crazy things to get noticed. 

GOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAL!!!!  That's a bit of overhype.  Although there are some announcers (Gus Johnson, Bill Rafferty) that get too carried away, so I agree with his point in theory.

The World Cup just bangs it out: Two cool national anthems, two 45-minute halves, a few minutes of extra time and usually we're done. Everything flies by. Everything means something.

(Hang onto this one for a later question).

Question No. 2: What's the second-best thing?

Never during the CEO's reign of early-morning terror have I watched anything decent other than morning "SportsCenters" as I waited for 20 ounces of coffee to kick in. This month? I had the second half of every 4:30 a.m. PT game in Round 1, followed by the 7 a.m. game a little bit later. No offense, Hannah Storm and Josh Elliott, but it was nice to spend a few mornings watching a real sporting event instead of highlights of things that had happened eight hours before. For that reason alone, the 2010 World Cup will always be near and dear to my heart.

You know, there's soccer packages available through Directv.  You can watch soccer in the morning all the time.


Question No. 3: Why do we wait every four years to have the World Cup?

When I argued recently that the Cup should be every three years, readers flooded me with reasons it couldn't work: It's too expensive (apparently the Cup always loses money for whichever country gets it);

Wait, you want us to get excited for the World Cup when its a financial blackhole for the host country?

they'd have to do too much reconfiguring for smaller tournaments already in place (note: I don't get that argument; that's like saying you can't have the Oscars interfering with the SAG Awards or something); people like having it every four years because it's more meaningful that way (by that logic, you should have sex every four years, too); and most importantly, FIFA never wants to go head-to-head with the Summer Olympics.

So, instead of having smaller tournaments that might make money, you should push forward the World Cup to lose money?  Its like not having the Oscars every year because the Oscars are too damn expensive.  I don't get his argument here.

My counter for the last argument: Why not? So … we'd have MORE sports on? Wow, that sounds terrible! I'd hate to have all those exciting things to watch. And by the way, the Olympics should switch to every three years as well. I never understood the "No, it has to be every four years, that's the way they've always done it" argument. That's like saying "I'm not getting an HD plasma; I'm sticking with my old-school TV, that's the way I've always watched it." It's stupid. It's a loser's mentality.


Yeah, more sports.  Sports that end in a tie!  Didn't the U.S. team have a remarkable run and only win one game?  That's excitement.  And move the Olympics to every three years?  Awesome, Greece would've gone bankrupt sooner and London could be that much closer.

Question No. 4: How many times did you regret not ditching your family, ditching the NBA Finals, ditching the Celtics and flying 20 hours to South Africa for the World Cup?


Four times and four times only...

Wait, this World Cup is the greatest thing and you, as a reporter, didn't head over?

Question No. 6: Was it good or bad for the World Cup that Italy and France got bounced in the group stage?

Keeping USA, Spain, Germany, England, Italy and France around as long as possible makes me think about the Boston Tea Party, the War of 1812, Neville Chamberlain, Napoleon getting overthrown, multiple wars, Thomas Jefferson throwing his genitals around France like a boomerang, Benedict Arnold switching sides, all the times France surrendered or withdrew, and basically everything good and bad that's ever happened between those six countries. It's like having four solid weeks of AP History flashbacks.

So there's a French surrendering joke, that's always a fan favorite.  And I would've gone with Ben Franklin getting crazy and going all LiLo and/or Lady Gaga in France. What was the War of 1812 reference?  A war that was fought, had battles after it ended and ended up doing nothing but defining the US-Canadian Border?  Soccer flashed you back to a war with no point. 

Question No. 7: You haven't handled Boston's Game 7 loss to the Lakers very well. What was the snarkiest e-mail or text you sent to a Boston friend after hearing that Kobe was attending the USA-Ghana game?

It was a tie between "Since Kobe is attending this game, does this mean we're gonna get all the calls?" and "Kobe watched only six of the first 24 minutes but was still named MVP of his luxury suite."

Okay, some shots at Kobe.  He did at least go to the game...

Question No. 8: After a few legitimately horrendous World Cup officiating moments, as well as FIFA's bizarre refusal to incorporate instant replay haunting the Cup multiple times, do you feel better or worse about officiating and leadership in American professional sports?
 

I have slowly come to grips with the fact that officiating will probably be excruciating in whatever sport I happen to be watching. If it's better than "excruciating," it's a bonus. If it's better than "mediocre," you practically won the lottery. So the shaky officiating didn't change anything for me. FIFA's stance is that "we can't have instant replay in soccer, it's important that every FIFA-sanctioned game plays by the same rules, and we can't afford to have instant replay for every FIFA game, so instead, we won't have it at all, even though these World Cup games are 100 times more important than any other FIFA event."

So officiating always sucks, so that's okay.  At least he didn't include "The Human Element"- the euphemism for "Referees fucking things up."  And you don't want replay in soccer-- especially on plays that can easy be corrected-- like whether goals go in or not.  Yeah, there's some pics of replayable things here.

The next few questions don't have much to them...


Question No. 13: If you could change anything about soccer, what would it be?

I hate how teams milk leads in the last 15-20 minutes by faking injuries and taking forever to sub players. When that Ghana player had to be carried off on a stretcher at the tail end of the America game, then hopped off like nothing ever happened as soon as the stretcher was out of bounds, I thought that was appalling. Actually, it made me want to go to war with Ghana. I wanted to invade them. I'm not even kidding. That's another great thing about the World Cup: Name another sport in which you genuinely want to invade other countries when you lose.

So, going back to question one, where you loved the speed and straight forwardness of the World Cup-- now you say you hate teams milking leads and flopping and then miraculously recovering?  That sounds like the World Cup just banging things out.  Everything flies by. Everything means something.

Question No. 14: What's been the strangest thing about the 2010 World Cup?

To hear Germany described in such likable, underdoggy tones. Who would have thought these young upstarts would jell this fast? It's like the announcers were talking about the 2008 Tampa Bay Rays or something … if the Tampa Bay Rays had started two world wars and nearly brought down Europe.

You realize Germany hasn't started any wars in about 70 years, right?  I know they have a past but I think you can separate that from a soccer match.  Have some schnitzel and enjoy. (The Germans demand it).

Skipping to Q#19...

Question No. 19: Thanks to last year's Confederations Cup and Donovan's extra-time goal last weekend, do you think soccer is finally taking off in America?

Put it this way …

When I was in the third grade (1978), people thought soccer was taking off in America.

When I was a freshman in college (1988), people thought soccer was taking off in America.

When I was a barely employed wannabe sportswriter in Boston whose life revolved around the O.J. Simpson trial and partying every night (1994), people thought soccer was taking off in America.

When I was living in Boston with my fiancée and writing for ESPN.com (2002), people thought soccer was taking off in America.

I am 40 years old. I live in Los Angeles. My hair is turning silvery white. I have a wife, two kids, a mortgage and that same ESPN column. Guess what? People think soccer is taking off in America. Only this time … I agree with them.

We'll see how that works.  U.S. can build off the one historic win.


The Q#20 is one long winded answer defending his vision of the soccer revolution.  Its about the world getting smaller and sports being more accessible.

Being all cynical, I'm just going to say that until you can easily bet on the low-scoring/tie laden world of the World Cup, it won't be as popular as The Super Bowl or fantasy baseball or other fun betting.

Bill Simmons: Welcome to bad sports thoughts and thanks for contradicting yourself several times in your Q & A

Lebron Waiting Game

All right, Lebron is waiting to announce where he goes...  there's nothing but crazy speculation and conjecture- which is always entertaining.  There was more bad David Haugh writing, and I'll try to get that in a future post.  

Until then, here's Stephen Colbert trying out for the New York Knicks and interviewing Mike D'antoni.  Enjoy the thoughts of playing in the world famous orange Knicks uniforms.  Enjoy the thought of being paid millions of dollars not to play (He's talk about Eddy Curry, before you Googled Knicks Salaries).  The NBA salary cap is so much fun.  Enjoy the two parts:

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Basketcase - Stephie's Knicks Hoop-De-Doo
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Fox News

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Basketcase - Stephie's Knicks Hoop-De-Doo Pt. 2
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Fox News

FireDavidHaugh: Summer Solstice Edition (Part III)

Dustin Byfuglien is no longer a Blackhawk; Kirk Heinrich appears to be a soon-to-be former Bulls (only days after they hire a coach that knows his first name); Lebron James looks like he's not returning to Cleveland (prepare for crazy Lebron signing day parade); the White Sox have won 9 in a row; and the Cubs heroically won a game.

Oh, and David Haugh decided to had more bad thoughts on sports.  He finds it hard to let go of Big Buff. Does the article analyze the trade?  Not really.  It proclaims Byfuglien an "X factor" and essentially Aaron Rowand's him.  If the Blackhawks don't win next year, he can be the elusive missing piece/silver bullet/what-if ex/proof of God's existence that lazy writers (Read: most Chicago sportswriters) will reference ad nauseum.

My favorite part is where Haugh claims to be the critical thinking writer brave enough to not kowtow to the all-mighty Blackhawks organization.  Seems to me he was talking about how the Blackhawks should be aped in the article titled Cubs, Sox Need To Emulate Hawks.  I was even kind enough to make fun of it here in Part I of this series.  (Note: this was only supposed to be a 2 part series, but Mr. Haugh- being relentless- gave me a late entry).  Other Blackhawks articles he wrote included: Date With Destiny: Hawks Hoist Stanley Cup and Celebration Shows Hawks Have Taken City By Storm.  Articles that promise hard hitting criticism.

So here it is with some Jason Schwartzman and his Coconut Records project (and more proof I can keep up the summer and weather themes).  Article after the song.

Hawks will miss Byfuglien's physical play

David HaughIn the Wake of the NewsJune 25, 2010
So who's the next popular Chicago pro athlete suddenly in need of a good realtor?

Derrek Lee? Bobby Jenks?
Always good to start with a rhetorical question.  I had a writing teacher in High School who hated starting papers like that.  With good reason-- its a lazy way to start a column.
The move came one day after the Blackhawks traded hockey cult hero Dustin Byfuglien and his $3 million salary along with Brent Sopel and Ben Eager to the Thrashers for two draft picks and three players whose names we aren't ready to learn how to spell just yet.
I think one of the players is a top prospect, scoring 40 some odd goals in the minors last year. Feel free to learn what the Hawks got before analyzing the trade.  It'd seem to be a sensible thing to do.  Or you can blather on about X factors and pointing out one game.  Let's see what he does...
When time passes, you should applaud the Hinrich deal for the way it improves the chances of landing LeBron James and Chris Bosh or any combination that makes the Bulls immediate Eastern Conference contenders. Hinrich saw his popularity wane since the Baby Bulls days but his professional approach and consistent effort playing defense always commanded respect and admiration.
I just like seeing sentences about James coming to the Bulls- it just makes me feel good.  Really no other reason to include this paragraph in my parsing.
Maybe seeing Hawks GM Stan Bowman pull off the Byfuglien deal inspired Forman. But Bowman did more than lighten his payroll. He lessened a championship hockey team.
Sketch idea:  Gar Forman is sitting on his couch reading the latest sports news on his laptop.  He sees Byfuglien is traded and picks up the phone.  "I just had an idea: if we traded someone it would be good!  Thanks Stan Bowman!".  Cut to Heinrich putting on Wizards hat.  End sketch.
Really?  Forman hasn't been trying to move Heinrich since at least the trade deadline.  And feel free to prove the "lessened championship hockey team," or at least support it.
Sorry, unlike many in town ready to applaud the Hawks out of habit, I had a harder time accepting the Byfuglien deal than the Hinrich move.
My favorite part again.  You just wrote an article praising the Hawks and saying they should be the model for Chicago sports teams.  YOU SITED THE FACT THE HAWKS WERE WILLING TO MAKE DIFFICULT DECISIONS AS PART OF WHY THEY'RE THE MODEL ORGANIZATION.  Not only are you wrong about you applauding the Hawks, you applauded the Hawks for exactly what they did with the trade.  
I have complimented Bowman practically for everything but his choice of ties in his first year on the job but, as tricky as this money morass is to navigate, trading Big Buff looks like a big mistake — short-term relief for long-time regret.
Same point: this is the difficult decision you've praised the Hawks for making.
As good as Kris Versteeg and Andrew Ladd are, I don't recall hearing as high of praise about them or any other supporting player. I don't recall any playoff teams worrying about devising specific game plans to counter any Hawk more than they did for Byfuglien. 
Didn't Vancouver focus on Buff one game and Toews ended up with a hat trick.  Remember, for most of the time, Byfuglien was playing with Kane and Toews.  They did kind of create some opportunities for him.
Why not start dealing with somebody who didn't have a playoff hat trick?
Another rhetorical question.  I'm assuming he's asking why you'd trade someone so good.  Answer: good players have more "value."  This "value" can get "value" in return in a trade.  The Hawks traded someone at what might be his highest value.  That's why not.
Byfuglien spent so much time with his backside in front of goalie's eyes that it's surprising the Hawks marketing department didn't consider selling advertising on his rear end.
Because marketing to one person seems like a bad campaign.  
What potential "X Factor'' does that now?  To steal a bit from the West Wing: no one knows.  That's why its called an "X factor."  
The Hawks held an advantage throughout the playoffs because they demonstrated an ability to play whatever style necessary. But with the head-hunting Eager and Sopel, the team's best shot-blocker, also on the way to Atlanta, the Hawks will have to prove again they can forsake finesse for force when needed the way they did in the playoffs thanks largely to Byfuglien.
Upset about Sopel leaving?  He's solid but not anything special.  His best skill was standing in front of pucks.  He can be replaced. The Hawks also had a lot of finesse.  
But Chicago can pack away those memories along with any "TEAM OF DUSTIN-Y,'' T-shirts that just became collector's items.

Um, weren't the shirts always collector's items?  I like to reminisce about bad puns too, but I don't carp on it.  Byfuglien is a good player, but, as you wrote in your last Hawks column, the salary cap is gonna get them.  And as you wrote previously, you think the Hawks excel in making tough decisions.  So what are you doing besides pandering to people who like Big Buff?