I have to admit, I missed most of yesterday's games. The Chargers' loss was simply too painful. If I watch the Superbowl (let's face it, no one is watching the Pro Bowl next week), it'll probably be for the commercials. I am done with football for now. After living through horrendous seasons, I can definitely say that losing to the Jets is probably the most painful loss in recent Chargers history. Ugh.
Okay, onto baseball (normally, I'd say basketball, but since the Kobe rape trial, I've "divorced" the Lakers, and have no attachments to any team), to carry my interest and hopes. Now, while the Padres didn't do well last year, they were the hottest team in the Majors at the end of the season. Recently, Gaslampball, a blog covering the Padres, offered their descriptions of the Padres starting players.
I beg to differ. . .somewhat. Here are my views of the Padres starting position players:
Catcher - Nick Hundley - A good defensive catcher, iffy offensively, but has shown promise. All in all, a solid starting catcher.
First Base - Adrian Gonzalez - Good to great player with great defense and pretty good offense (which would probably be better outside of Petco). Perenial all-star.
Second Base - David Eckstein - he's not the all-star he used to be, but is still pesky, still works hard, and is a good influence on the kids. Jerry Hairston will see time at this position too.
Third Base - Chase Headley - Getting out of left field is a major plus, as he was a horrible outfielder. He can probably spend more time in batting cage. But he's an upgrade over Kouzmanoff. Headley had a higher OBP, SLG, and batting average, if I'm not mistaken. While Kouz hit more home runs, Headley had more doubles. Plus, Kouz led the league in hitting into double plays.
Shortstop - Everth Cabrera - the kid flies on the basepaths, plays good defense, and has shown surprising hitting ability. If he progresses, we're set at shortstop until he gets too expensive.
Left Field - Kyle Blanks - For a guy the size of a tight end - scratch that, Blanks is actually BIGGER THAN ANTONIO GATES - he moves amazingly well, and unlike Headley, can actually play the outfield. I just hope his injury wasn't caused by all the running. Anyway, we don't know how good the kid is, but he hits for enormous power. A true wait and see.
Center Field - Tony Gywnn, Jr. - he didn't hit too badly last year, and is the kind of slap hitter that the Padres need. We'll see if he can maintain it. On the plus side, he could platoon with Scott Hairston, who's a bit more proven. Wait and see.
Right Field - Will Venable - Venable plays good defense, and hit surprisingly well last year. I say surprisingly because he hit better than he did in the minors. Hairston can provide insurance at this position too.
Overall, the Padres are a "don't know" kind of a team. They could surprise everyone and have a 2008 Tampa Bay Devil Rays kind of season, or a look like the Padres last year. Likely, we're looking at a 70-75 win season. I love the Kouzmanoff for Hairston trade, as I see Headley being an upgrade at third. My gut says that Cabrera, Headley and Blanks play better than they did last year, and that Venable and Gywnn play worse.
Showing posts with label Chargers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chargers. Show all posts
Monday, January 25, 2010
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
About that Massachusetts Race and the Chargers. . .
I need to rant a little bit today, so forgive me. . .hey, wait, that's what this blog is for. Anyway, let's get this over with.
Massachusetts Senatorial Special Election: So today in Massachusetts, the voters are voting on Ted Kennedy's replacement (Massachusetts law allows the Governor to appoint an interim Senator until a Special Election can be held). And lo and behold, the Democrat, Martha Coakley (the current Attorney General) might just lose to Republican State Senator Scott Brown.
Now this is big news for two reasons: first, Massachusetts is a liberal state; and second, attorneys general are elected statewide, and state senators are not. In other words, Coakley was a known commodity to Massachusetts voters, whereas Brown was only known to a small group of them. Now, while I'm sure that Bogart has some other ideas, let me state why this is happening from my perspective:
1) Coakley is a bad candidate - Even though she was the AG, from what I can tell, Coakley has been a terrible candidate. She hasn't worked for it since the primary. Voters can tell when they're being ignored and that's dumb. A good campaign is like a good college football team - there's no such thing as overkill. Since Sunday, Brown has made 66 campaign stops, and Coakley 19. Are you kidding me?
2) National Dems are repeating past mistakes: Coakley is the classic "Law and Order" Democrat - the current AG and a former DA, she's more conservative than Kennedy was, and hasn't differentiated herself from Brown. But, you see, that's why she won the primary - the voters and the National Dems backed her because they thought she was going to win because she was a more conservative Democrat. And quite frankly, that's insane. Some strategic voting is okay, but as Truman used to say - when given the choice between a Republican and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, the voters will choose the real thing.
Moreover, the Dems are forgetting that in a special election, turnout is key. And the only way to turn out Democrats is to excite the base. Moderates are great, but they don't excite anyone. With the insanity of the health care reform bill, Coakley would be in a stronger place if she went Alan Grayson/Howard Dean.
Anyway, here's my point - the Democratic Party needs to understand that its base is the same size, if not larger, than the GOP base. Expanding to the independents is good, but having the base with you is equally important. The most successful Democrats are always presumed to be more liberal than they actually are. So, stop being afraid to be liberal.
The Chargers choke again -
As a Chargers fan, last Sunday's game was painful. Without question, the Chargers choked - and choked big time. Ten penalties, three missed field goals, a dumb interception, the Chargers just didn't play up to their ability. I blame Norv Turner - but at the same time, the offensive line and the defensive line are not what they should have been. The D-line is excusable from a coaching standpoint (although A.J. Smith better do something to upgrade the D-line), but the offensive line play has been atrocious for years. Yes, LT isn't the player he used to be, but he hasn't had any holes to go through.
Massachusetts Senatorial Special Election: So today in Massachusetts, the voters are voting on Ted Kennedy's replacement (Massachusetts law allows the Governor to appoint an interim Senator until a Special Election can be held). And lo and behold, the Democrat, Martha Coakley (the current Attorney General) might just lose to Republican State Senator Scott Brown.
Now this is big news for two reasons: first, Massachusetts is a liberal state; and second, attorneys general are elected statewide, and state senators are not. In other words, Coakley was a known commodity to Massachusetts voters, whereas Brown was only known to a small group of them. Now, while I'm sure that Bogart has some other ideas, let me state why this is happening from my perspective:
1) Coakley is a bad candidate - Even though she was the AG, from what I can tell, Coakley has been a terrible candidate. She hasn't worked for it since the primary. Voters can tell when they're being ignored and that's dumb. A good campaign is like a good college football team - there's no such thing as overkill. Since Sunday, Brown has made 66 campaign stops, and Coakley 19. Are you kidding me?
2) National Dems are repeating past mistakes: Coakley is the classic "Law and Order" Democrat - the current AG and a former DA, she's more conservative than Kennedy was, and hasn't differentiated herself from Brown. But, you see, that's why she won the primary - the voters and the National Dems backed her because they thought she was going to win because she was a more conservative Democrat. And quite frankly, that's insane. Some strategic voting is okay, but as Truman used to say - when given the choice between a Republican and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, the voters will choose the real thing.
Moreover, the Dems are forgetting that in a special election, turnout is key. And the only way to turn out Democrats is to excite the base. Moderates are great, but they don't excite anyone. With the insanity of the health care reform bill, Coakley would be in a stronger place if she went Alan Grayson/Howard Dean.
Anyway, here's my point - the Democratic Party needs to understand that its base is the same size, if not larger, than the GOP base. Expanding to the independents is good, but having the base with you is equally important. The most successful Democrats are always presumed to be more liberal than they actually are. So, stop being afraid to be liberal.
The Chargers choke again -
As a Chargers fan, last Sunday's game was painful. Without question, the Chargers choked - and choked big time. Ten penalties, three missed field goals, a dumb interception, the Chargers just didn't play up to their ability. I blame Norv Turner - but at the same time, the offensive line and the defensive line are not what they should have been. The D-line is excusable from a coaching standpoint (although A.J. Smith better do something to upgrade the D-line), but the offensive line play has been atrocious for years. Yes, LT isn't the player he used to be, but he hasn't had any holes to go through.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
The Conservative Media Bias
While Bogart in Towne guffaws at the title, I thought I'd rant a bit about the media biases, specifically when it comes to state/local politics. Last Friday, I was listening to the "Editor's Roundtable" on KPBS - which, as you can imagine, was a group of local news editors from San Diego. At the roundtable, San Diego's budget was discussed, and more specifically, how the Mayor and the City Council were ducking the main issue - that the City's taxes are so low that it can't provide the services the people want or need.
One of the editors complained about the lack of honesty by these politicians and the consensus was that the Mayor should level with the people of San Diego. All valid points to be sure, but they forget one thing - if the Mayor did that, another politician would claim he/she has a better way and undercut the Mayor. And the media would either praise this new politician, or not tell their readers the truth - that the new politician is lying to them.
For the past 30 years, I've seen the dismantling of the "California Dream" based on this very tactic. California has gone from having the best infrastructure in the U.S. to the worst, from the best education system to one of the worst, from rainy day funds to structural deficits. Why? Because politicians tell the public that they can cut taxes and maintain spending, or make only cuts to government waste. No one calls them on it. There are Republicans who spent their entire career in Sacramento voting against every budget the State produced. No one says anything. Budget tricks are hailed, and honesty is punished.
Moreover, outside of sports stadiums, the local media takes pleasure in pointing out the failures of local projects. Little wonder the interest and money for these projects is dwindling.
The one thing that makes me optimistic is the internet as a medium. Unlike TV, the internet is a collaborative process. If you hate what I'm writing, you can comment, and I'll comment back. But its going to take a long time before the internet outpaces TV. I just hope we can last that long.
One of the editors complained about the lack of honesty by these politicians and the consensus was that the Mayor should level with the people of San Diego. All valid points to be sure, but they forget one thing - if the Mayor did that, another politician would claim he/she has a better way and undercut the Mayor. And the media would either praise this new politician, or not tell their readers the truth - that the new politician is lying to them.
For the past 30 years, I've seen the dismantling of the "California Dream" based on this very tactic. California has gone from having the best infrastructure in the U.S. to the worst, from the best education system to one of the worst, from rainy day funds to structural deficits. Why? Because politicians tell the public that they can cut taxes and maintain spending, or make only cuts to government waste. No one calls them on it. There are Republicans who spent their entire career in Sacramento voting against every budget the State produced. No one says anything. Budget tricks are hailed, and honesty is punished.
Moreover, outside of sports stadiums, the local media takes pleasure in pointing out the failures of local projects. Little wonder the interest and money for these projects is dwindling.
The one thing that makes me optimistic is the internet as a medium. Unlike TV, the internet is a collaborative process. If you hate what I'm writing, you can comment, and I'll comment back. But its going to take a long time before the internet outpaces TV. I just hope we can last that long.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)