But No Kandy Apples.

So I’m driving down the road last night sometime after late dusk.  It’s not completely dark.  I’m not on a highway, but on a pretty well-traveled thoroughfare.  Suddenly the car behind me puts their high beams on.  Not a flash, the signature move of all assholes, but they were just driving with their high beams on–right behind me.  The light hit my rear view mirror and went directly into the center of my eyeball.  I was furious.  So, I’m wrestling with the rear view, trying to flip it into that less reflective position and then the high beams go off.  Then, back on.  As someone who spends a good portion of time judging other people’s driving, I’m not sure I ever encountered a more frustrating scenario.  Finally, the mongoloid banged a left and I was free of their reign of terror.  Of course, when I went to re-adjust my rear view, it fell off the windshield and rattled around in my cup holder.  Great times.  

Q:  When I was kid I had a friend who would eat dog biscuits.  It was kind of like his party trick.  I was thinking about him the other day.  Do you think he made it?  Milque Bones, Boston, MA.

A:  I assume you mean IN LIFE and not as someone who eats dog biscuits professionally–as an adult.  I’m sure they’re doing just fine.  They probably haven’t even had the urge to eat a dog treat in years.  I’ve never sampled dog food, which is a bit surprising considering my extensive exposure to it, but then isn’t surprising considering I rarely sample anything.  My junior year of college my roommate and I housed a dog illegally in our apartment for a few months.  In our cupboard we had a package of really fancy dog cookies.  They were decorated, looked like real cookies, etc.  One day they were just gone, and I’m fairly sure the dog didn’t eat them.  Someone rummaging through our place for snacks CRUSHED them, and they probably never knew.  One time I gave my dog a Frosty Paws (dog ice cream) and I almost licked the lid out of habit.  GAH.  And, there always is a chance I have eaten a dog dessert without knowing, but I try to eat things made for humans.  I’m not typing this with a bowl of Snausages sitting next to me.  As for your friend, I think dog food has really come a long way.  I’m thinking no lingering effects.  You can eat dog biscuits and go on to lead a RELATIVELY normal life.  

Q: Please rate the following carnival foods: Sno-Cone, Cotton Candy, Corn Dog and Funnel Cake.  Carny Landsferd, Aston, PA.

A:  It is carnival season.  A bit of surprising news:  I’ve never really gotten into The Corn Dog.  In fact, I’m not sure I’ve ever had one.  I guess I would like them, but it’s a bit of an unsettling VISUAL for me.  The only thing I really eat off a stick would be dessert pops.  Your basic Dove Bar, a Firecracker Popsicle–things of that nature.  I’m just such a traditionalist with my dog intake.  I like my bun, etc.  So, I’m going to have to abstain from rating Corn Dogs.  In last place, I’d put cotton candy.  It’s OK, but maybe too much sugar at this point in my life?  I don’t get quite the same satisfaction when the stuff crystallizes in my mouth?  Is that a valid point?  I like Sno-Cones a little more, because Sno-Cones know they are ghetto.  From the cheap paper cup, to the huge bottles of “syrup,” this a low-rent operation.  Eating a Sno-Cone is a roller coaster of emotion.  It looks so good for the 1st four seconds.  Then all the syrup drains and you’re basically eating plain ice for 5 minutes, but then it’s pure glory when you can CHUG the syrup at the end.  It’s nutritious.  Kids today are probably too fancy for Sno-Cones, they want water ice.  The funnel cake really dominates everything on this list, though.  It’s fried.  AND, it’s topped with sugar.  When you eat something and the paper plate it was sitting on has all but disintegrated beneath it?  That’s your Winner!

Q: Is it more dangerous to navigate a busy highway at rush hour or a parking lot of a Super Wawa at lunchtime?  Hamilton Shortie, Newark, DE.

A:  I’m going to amend your question, because if we’re talking rush hour–it’s not even close.  Stop and go traffic is a walk in the park compared to Wawa.  How about driving in Connecticut on I-95 with traffic flowing vs. Wawa?  Connecticut, by any reasonable measure or observation, the home to the worst drivers in America.  People come over from India and are a little unsettled by some of these moves.  In terms of chance you’ll get into any type of accident the Wawa parking lot is going to win.  I avoid the Wawa from 11:30-1:30 if I can, because it’s just too trying of an experience.  There are gas lines, food lines, checkout lines–it’s just lines.  I wonder how they staff Wawa, because during the lunch rush they need about 11 people at the deli, but what do they do for the rest of their shift?  Anyway, Wawa parking lots are also oddly designed.  You have the ILLUSION of plenty of room, but there is always someone pulling out, in, cutting across–nightmare.  There are stop signs, but no one pays any attention.  But is any of that really dangerous?  I think the highway is more dangerous, but the Wawa is more likely to have you taking snapshots of your bumper with your iPhone.  

Q: Do you ever have a correction dinner?  Like one day you are out and maybe you order a burger or something and it’s pretty awful so the next day you have the exact same thing to rectify that experience?  Charl Broiled II, Chicago, IL.

A:  That’s an interesting concept.  I’ll have the same dinner two days in a row on a fairly regular basis, but I’m not sure that I’ve ever had this particular motivation.  Sometimes I just remember a dish is very good, so I make it again.  Haven’t had Mac N’ Cheese for a while, have extra supplies left over–BOOM.  I can see this happening, though.  I’m picturing a cook out.  You are PRIMED for the occasion and then your host breaks out the frozen Bubba Burger patties and that part of your brain that produces joy just dies ON THE SPOT.  Maybe they don’t have your favorite kind of rolls?  Maybe the center of your hot dog is “chilly?”  A lot of things can go wrong at a cookout.  Maybe the Bubba Burger was just enough inspiration for you to go out and get some fresh ground beef for the next night.  I can tell you one thing I will do that is similar to this.  If I go to a restaurant and maybe they have small portions, or I am at a dinner event and it’s all odd little finger foods or something and you can’t sit down and properly FEED yourself?  You can bet your ass that I will bury myself in dinner the next day.  Two days in a row with small dinners is borderline starvation.  

Q:  What would you make of an adult who said their favorite book was “The Cat in the Hat?”  Are they being intentionally cute?  Have they never read a novel?  What the hell?  Sam Eyem, Whoville, FL.

A:  I love looking at lists of people’s favorite books.  Will they list all the Twilight books or just say, “The Twilight Series?”  Will they leave out one of the Harry Potter books?  How can you make these tough decisions.  Every book is part of a series now.  A Jack Kingslover Mystery #36, or Sloane Peterson Romance #412.  Anyway, if someone said their absolute favorite book was The Cat in the Hat, I might have to conclude that they aren’t the biggest reader.  It’s perfectly OK to like the Cat in the Hat, but for it to be your favorite book?  Something isn’t quite adding up there.  That’d be a bit like saying your favorite food was some delectable offering from Gerber.  It is a clever thing to say, though, if you haven’t read a lot of books, because it will throw the person asking the question off guard.  A more standard answer, “To Kill A Mockingbird,” or something along those lines could lead to follow-up questions.  EXPOSE YOU.  What if they ask about something that isn’t in the movie?  No one is going to be like, “Oh, The Cat in the Hat….what’s your favorite part?  Tell me about the symbolism.”  The conversation is pretty much over from the get-go.  Dr. Seuss–moving on.  I’d rate a Seuss fan above a Twilight fan, though.  OK, you don’t read, but maybe you like good movies–or something.  

Q:  I have a theory that the downfall of society can be traced to the vending machines in the entrance ways to grocery stores.  When America was really thriving, you could get yourself a real prize, now it’s just crap.  Helen Ahandbasket, West Chester, PA.

A:  Nothing quite matches the disappointment of getting the wrong thing out of a vending machine.  You want that Phillies helmet SO badly, but no, PADRES again.  It’s a great life lesson.  Do kids even care about this stuff any more?  Do they look up from their video games long enough to even notice the vending machine?  In my opinion the holy trinity of vending machine toys are: the Super Ball, the Plastic Helmet, and the Fake Tattoo.  That’s the elite merchandise.  I haven’t checked out the machines lately. Can you no longer get super balls?  The last thing I remember seeing on a regular basis were Pokemon stickers.  Is that from this century?  What does it cost for a sticker now–$2?  When I was a kid I was keenly aware of the machines.  I wanted ALL the baseball helmets.  I needed them for THINGS.  If you gave a kid a mini-helmet right now he might flip you off.  That’s my first guess.  I think several problems can be illustrated through the vending machines including the following: We are no longer easily amused and more importantly, we can’t even get cheap sh*t cheap any more.  I’m not sure I’m ready for a world where you can’t placate your dipsh*t kid for the ride home with a quarter.  That used to be a bargain.  Now you probably have to buy them a new app to keep them from choking you out with your seat belt.  

Say Goodbye to The Office (Finally?)

Tonight is the last episode of The Office.  In its second year without Steve Carell, the show (never the most watched) has become an afterthought.  But when things end, people always take notice and tend to reflect on the good times.  Personally, I still enjoy an occasional episode of the show, but I acknowledge that it is a shell of its former self.  When the series debuted, with the famous “Diversity Day,” episode, it wasn’t like anything we’d seen on American television.  Forget that it was an almost carbon copy of the British episode.  This was way before anyone in the States gave a bleep about British TV.  The overwhelming feeling I had when I watched the show at the beginning was it made me uncomfortable.  You wanted to look away, or turn the channel at some of the jokes, but it certainly produced a reaction.  Of course, it eventually become cool to watch The Office, precisely for that reason.  It wasn’t your typical sitcom.  

But nine years can really dull your edge.  Especially when the inherent drama has all been resolved.  Jim and Pam are together.  Michael is off in Colorado.  Even Creed is becoming more normal.  There’s no question that The Office overstayed its welcome, almost every successful show does, but the question is, how long is too long?  How long is not long enough?  This fall, we’ll see the return of Arrested Development–a show that many people would say ended far too early.  But you could debate that, considering the show never got passable ratings.  

So, I’m going to try to figure out the perfect number of years.  A sampling…

TWO YEARS–TOO SHORT.  Example:  Party Down.  

Party Down was an amazing show.  Too bad it only lasted two seasons and a robust 20 episodes.  Part of the problem?  It was on Starz.  The show may still be on the air if it had started on HBO, but its cancellation has allowed Adam Scott to move on to Parks & Rec, Jane Lynch to Glee, and Lizzy Caplan to any number of things.  More proof that it ended to early?  A movie version is allegedly being written.  

FIVE YEARS–TOO SHORT.  Example: The Wire.  

The Wire churned out sixty episodes.  Which isn’t a ton, but if you consider that each episode was usually a solid hour, you’re talking about the viewing equivalent of about 150 episodes of a sitcom.  What The Wire was able to do was to keep introducing new characters and story lines.  For the most part, any episode of The Wire could have been the last one for your favorite character.  While some people might say that they’d happily watch 12 seasons of The Wire, I think they got it almost right.  

NINE YEARS– TOO LONG.  Example: Seinfeld.  

I guess you know a series went on to long when they produce a finale like Seinfeld.  Does anyone like this finale?  It has some value, but to me it was always like they just ran out of ideas.  I will still watch a Seinfeld in syndication–unless it’s the finale.  It’s not a terrible episode, but you just feel like a show that good should have ended better.  Or at least it should have ended sooner.  

TEN YEARS–TOO LONG.  Example: Two and a Half Men.

Can I admit that I watched and (kind of) liked this show in the beginning?  I might lose the last of my seven readers with that statement.  I don’t know, when the show started Charlie Sheen was less crazy, the kid was chubbier–it wasn’t bad.  But Two and a Half Men has violated a major rule.  You can’t change the cast.  As soon as you replace a character–TOO LONG.  There are plenty of examples:  Three’s Company, Fresh Prince, Roseanne.  It just tells the audience, “We’re milking this.”  

As I go through a list of shows, it seems like many died in that 8-10 year range and most were past their prime.  The Cosby Show?  Was Theo even in the last season?  Was Cockroach?  It may have been all Olivia.  I just watched the 1st season of Cheers (Great), but that went on for 11 seasons.  NO.  Are you a Friends man?  10 years.  Too long.  

So, my conclusion is this.  The perfect length for a TV show is six or seven years.  I guess I’ll decide after Mad Men season 7 next year.  Oh my god, there are only about 20 Mad Men left.  The horror.  

Level of Correctness.

I’ve never really gotten into cold pizza.  It’s just so…cold.  The toppings don’t look right.  I know that many people love it, though.  I admit it confuses me.  I wonder how much of the appeal is borne out of laziness.  Everyone knows you cannot microwave a piece of pizza, so to actually warm it back up—it takes several minutes.  Is this love of cold pizza just a love of being able to eat something instantly?  Is cold pizza a different meal for a different time of the day?  If cold pizza is so fantastic, why don’t places sell it that way?  You know, pickup or delivery, hot or cold?  I think these cold pizza people might be lying to themselves a little bit.  Just a thought before we delve into the mailbag. 

Q: All signs point to the new Great Gatsby movie being awful.  The question is why can’t they make this book into a solid film? West Egg, Hartford, CT.

A:  It’s my understanding that the first version of Great Gatsby to hit the screen (sometime in the 40s) was decent.  I’m sure it would be unwatchable today, but perhaps that first adaptation was the best.  The one most people know, the one you sit through in English class when the teacher got tired of discussing the book, stars old Bobby Redford and comes out flat.  It’s not terrible, but when you are making a movie out of what is widely regarded as one of the best novels ever written, the bar is set awfully high.  I think this is part of the problem. The expectations are just too high, especially since almost no movies really live up to their books regardless of how good the book happens to be.  The other problem might be that the movies tend to focus on the wrong things.  The parties, or the relationship between Gatsby and Daisy.  The Great Gatsby isn’t a love story and I think some people want the movie to be.  The version that opened last week looks almost comically superficial.  They’re showing it in 3D, and it’s pretty clear the story works best in two dimensions. 

Q: What do you think about people who get militant about meat temperature?  Is well-done something to get angry about?  Is it really? Red Center, Omaha, NE.

A: Probably not.  I read the occasional article on cooking and one question that comes up time and time again is, HOW DO I COOK THIS STEAK?  The answer is always the same.  Sear-Roast.  And, that is fine advice, but the advice is always for a medium-rare steak—at the most.  This is what we’ve all deemed to be the correct temperature, but I don’t think it needs to come with so much judgment.  When you read these tips for cooking it will often include something like, “feel free to leave the steak in the oven longer IF YOU WANT TO RUIN IT.”  And, I think that’s the angst you are talking about.  I guess chefs and amateur cooks get OFFENDED when an ingredient isn’t treated properly.  I feel this way on occasion, but it’s mostly when I have to eat the dish.  If you want to make something well-done, or f’ing raw for yourself—go right ahead.  If you are cooking for others, you should at least make an attempt to be aware of their temperature preferences.  I can say, that if I was a guest, I’d rather slog through something that was overdone than something that was raw.  If I come over and you set down a pork chop in front of me that’s pink and mushy in the center—I MAY VOMIT.  Sorry.  Guess I like my pork “ruined.” 

Q: Do you think parents get nervous when their kids give them a present, thinking, “oh my god, what is this going to be and I’ll probably end up having to wear it.”  Mack Aroni, Denver, CO.

A:  Well, I’m not a parent, but I think I can take a reasonable stab at this just through my observations.  I can say with certainty that parents (especially Moms) like getting SOMETHING from their children, because when presented with the opportunity or the need to make a comment, they can chime in with, “Oh, MY Frederick got me the cutest…” and then you just fill in the blank with whatever.  I overheard a couple of these conversations on Mother’s Day.  You don’t want to be the mother that didn’t get anything.  That might say something about YOU as a mother and not about your unappreciative kid.  But in terms of the actual present?  My guess is that parents would always prefer something they can display.  When you are five years old and you come home with a mess of construction paper, or a pasta wreath, or one of those drawings where the sun takes up 84% of the page, your parents can just throw that on a wall somewhere.  Most parents will proudly show this type of thing off, and even insinuate on occasion that their kid is MAYBE not completely terrible at art (he is)?  But, if your mother had to wear that pasta around her neck?  Or your drawing was stenciled onto a T-shirt?  I’m thinking we’re talking about a drastic decline in enthusiasm.  You probably have to be an adult to start getting decent adult gifts for your parents.  Otherwise, it’s “I’m getting Dad this Harry Potter Lanyard!”  Well, Dad’s not going to like that unless it’s sticking out of the ignition of a new car.  

Q:  What do you think is worse, striking out to end a game, or giving up a home run to end the game?  Kenny Wahlkoff, Pittsburgh, PA.

A:  Here’s how I’ll answer.  I assume at some point in my life that I struck out to end a baseball game.  Even though I was Rod Carew like with my contact skills, I bet it happened.  More than once.  The thing is, I don’t remember it happening.  It didn’t leave an impression on me.  I remember the home runs I gave up and none of them were of the walk-off variety, so if that had been the case they would probably be seared into my brain.  I’m approaching this with a Little League mentality, but I think how we look at things in baseball is shaped by our younger years.  From the moment they remove the tee, people start striking out ALL THE TIME.  But, the home run becomes a mythical achievement.  Since most six and seven year old kids can’t go YARD, when someone finally does hit a home run, it is a HUGE DEAL.  That awestruck reaction to a home run sticks with you for your whole life.  The sight of a home run can still cause professional athletes to act like children.  So, because of the joy the home run causes for the offensive team, the gloom it causes for the other team is proportional.  The other thing about home runs?  People always let you know about them.  I heard what’s his face took you DEEP yesterday?  Yeah, yeah, yeah–you’ll be hearing that for the rest of your life.  

Q:  I was driving by a XXX video store the other day and I was pondering to myself, how the hell are these stores still in business in the internet age? P. Eeepshow, Carlsbad, CA.

A:  The old “drive by” question, huh?  The short answer to this question is people are a bit pervy.  For the long answer, I may have approach things a bit more delicately.  I’m no XXX video store regular.  I don’t have the courage.  I remember back in the day when regular video stores had the adult rooms and I would always be SO CURIOUS, but I never went in them–even after I was of age.  You get the feeling that you are going to walk out with your bit of TASTEFUL porn and all of a sudden your grandmother is going to be sitting there knitting you a new Christmas stocking–or something.  That wouldn’t happen, but that’s how it makes you feel, plus the looks from other customers.  At an XXX store you don’t have that concern, no one is in there picking up Toy Story 3 (At least not the animated version), but you could always run into someone YOU KNOW, which would be devastating for both of you.  I think I’m dancing around things here.  Bottom line, XXX video stores usually sell MORE than just videos.  There is a market for these items and there is a group of the population who doesn’t associate any stigma with strolling into the Pleasure Hut, or whatever locale it was you had in mind.  I imagine some of these places have regulars, foster a real sense of community. Can’t get that online.  It’d be like having a happy hour over Skype.  

Q:  Why don’t professional golfers have their swing coaches caddy for them.  Wouldn’t they be better at giving advice, or making a small correction during a round?  Hank Hainee,  El Paso, TX.

A:  There are a few players, among the lesser known golfers, that use their coaches as their caddy.  I just read this morning, that Casey Wittenberg, who played with Tiger this weekend has his swing coach ON THE BAG.  It does make a certain bit of sense, but golf is such a delicate game.  You are so sensitive out there.  It’s tough to make changes mid-round, and you probably don’t really want to be thinking about your swing when you are trying to shoot a score.  Like the old, grumpy, tour pros with the homemade swings like to say, “We’re playing golf, not GOLF SWING.”  There are other stumbling blocks as well, though.  Most guys have multiple students, so who would you caddy for?  Sorry, Tiger, gotta go loop it for Justin Rose today–he’s hitting it left of the world.  And, let’s not forget the monumental egos that these coaches have on tour.  They probably (definitely) consider themselves above the caddy profession.  You also don’t want to tie yourself too closely to one player’s fortunes.  It’s all well and good until your prize student “Goes Duval,” and then all of a sudden you are coaching and caddying for the guy who can’t keep his ball on the property let alone on the fairway.  

Q:  Do you think the Phillies should sell high on Kyle Kendrick right now, and if he keeps this up, what kind of contract is he going to get in the off-season?  Is Kendrick a 100 million dollar pitcher?  Will he out-earn Tim Lincecum?  Are we still on Earth?  Boris Scott, Tampa, FL.

A:  He’s going to get more money than Lincecum.  That can definitely happen.  Kendrick is 4-1 with a 2.47 ERA and has been one of the brightest spots for the Phillies this year.  He has vastly out-performed any ceiling that I would have put on his career.  Kendrick is the original Happ, the original Worley.  In 2007, Kendrick won 10 games and people got excited.  While Happ and Worley have gone on to have their struggles, Kendrick has rebounded over the last year from his own extended bout with mediocrity.  What he has going for him is that he’s still just 28, and the league will always be starved for pitching.  Should the Phillies trade him?  Probably.  If it gets to that point.  After a decent road trip, the Phillies are still bouncing around on the fringes of wild-card contention.  They’ve got a lot of issues, but it’s still too early to put them squarely out of it.  I think that’s where they are headed, but for now, Kendrick has to keep pitching and keep winning.  If they sell off pieces, Kendrick would be a logical choice, because part of the appeal of having Kendrick is having him at a cheap rate.  Can the Phillies even afford to sign him after the season if this keeps up?  Is that where the Halladay money would be best spent?  Probably not, but I can say that if this was three or four years ago Kendrick might already have his extension.  What would KK bring on the open market?  I’m not sure he can keep this up, but assuming he ends up with an ERA around 3.00 and stays healthy–he’s in for a big pay day.  The market will cool slightly because of a lack of track record, but again–he’ll be 29.  You could give him 5 years without going too deep into his thirties.  He won’t get 100 million, though.  Kendrick doesn’t have the raw stuff to support that total, but 5/70 might be on the table.  I can’t believe I wrote that.  But, we’re in a world where 34-year old Kyle Lohse was a bargain at 3/33.  Trade him tomorrow.  

Oh My God Are They Frickin’ Terrible.

In the short term, Roy Halladay’s latest DL stint may help the Phillies.  That is how bad things have gotten.  Cloyd, Morgan, the pitcher the Phillies call up will likely perform like a bottom of the rotation starter.  This means, they could at least keep you in the game, something Halladay failed to do in four of his seven starts.  And, things were only getting worse.  The last two times out, the game was over by the 3rd inning.  That wears on a team’s psyche.  That it is the former ace getting hammered probably makes things all the more uncomfortable.  At least the other 24 guys won’t have to watch Halladay get rocked any longer.  It’s something no one wants to see.

The 2012 season fell apart with a Halladay trip to the DL.  The offense was just good enough last year to win some games and solid pitching through May had the Phillies over .500 at the start of June.  But then Halladay went to the DL, the Phillies went in a prolonged slump and didn’t bottom out until they were 14 games under .500.  This DL trip won’t cause that kind of damage, but the Phillies could be looking at a similar record come the All-Star Break.

Somehow, even with the addition of Ryan Howard, Chase Utley and Michael Young–the Phillies offense has gotten worse.  A good bit worse, actually, as they average 3.5 runs a game and rank near the bottom in almost every offensive category.  How did this happen?  Well, Utley’s solid start hasn’t offset Ruiz’s career year from 2012.  Ryan Howard has been good for only 1 of 5 weeks.  Michael Young is hitting for no power, which magnifies the loss of Hunter Pence and Shane Victorino.  Between CF, the corner OF spots and catcher, the Phillies have been historically bad offensively.  Roy Halladay has nothing to do with that.

The problem for the Phillies is that while the offense will likely get a little bit better, it’s certainly not going to be good enough to win games on their own and it won’t be enough to cover for a rotation with two AAA guys in the 4 and 5 spots.  Throw in the still pitiful middle relief and the Phillies have no formula to win.  They can’t out-hit you, and it’s much harder for them to out-pitch you than it used to be.

Yes, the Phillies have gotten off to some average starts during their playoff streak and of course last year (when they were an identical 14-18), but they arrived at 14-18 in a different manner this season.  There is a different look about them, and they’ve done it against mostly inferior opposition.  Good teams have completely handled the Phillies to this point and as they embark on a stretch where they’ll face SF, Arizona, Washington, Atlanta, etc., you have to believe that their current win pace, as troubling as it is, might not even be sustainable.  This team could easily tumble to 10, 12 games under .500 in the next six weeks.

The question is, if they get there, what will be the course of action and do the Phillies have the proper personnel in place to carry out a plan that could re-shape this team?  Without a quick turnaround, the Phillies will have to break their commitment to the status quo.  One of the first posts I ever wrote about the Phillies talked about how I hoped fans liked this group of players, because they were stuck with them.  That has certainly turned out to be the case as Ruben Amaro has shown only minimal amounts of creativity as he tries to escape the burden of his own contracts.

To execute a reversal of fortune, the Phillies are going to have to shed a lot of payroll.  I don’t think they can pull of a trade like Boston did with LA, but you see how that salary dump has been a reset button for that franchise.  The Phillies look like they have had the Roy Halladay decision made for them.  That’s 20 million dollars of relief.  Chase Utley to an AL contender?  That’s 15 million more.  Carlos Ruiz?  Five million.  Could you move 50% of Cliff Lee’s deal?  I think Ryan Howard’s contract is the only one that you are truly stuck with.  You probably hold onto Hamels because of his age, but other than that, if the Phils become sellers they must really sell.  S

Strip it down and find someone else to rebuild it, because Ruben Amaro has proven already that he’s not the right guy to spend 160 million dollars.  The Phillies need a player development guy and someone with a better feel for putting a team together.

Oh, He’s Probably Just Nosing Through the Trash.

Chris Kelly, one half of the rap duo Kriss Kross, passed away yesterday and it has a lot of people of my generation reminiscing about their music and their influence on style.  Kriss Kross was known for wearing their clothing, a lot of overalls and jerseys, backwards.  Tons of kids copied this move.  Did I ever wear my clothes backwards?  Absolutely not.  I was not cool enough.  I was less aware of pop music than any kid in America.  I never had a WALK or DISC man.  I didn’t watch MTV.  I didn’t care at all when “Eagle” 106 FM changed their format to jazz(?).  I had to endure my friends talking about bands, albums, etc. and I would just sit there and have NO IDEA what they were talking about.  This, of course, was better than actually trying to participate in the conversation, which would inevitably lead to me embarrassing myself quite thoroughly.  The moral of all this, of course, is that the children of the 90s lost one of their cultural icons AND I was a very strange child.  Onto a strange mailbag…

Q:  What’s a more ideal roommate situation?  Someone you don’t really know who is quiet and clean, or living with one of your best friends who is a slob and a general train wreck?  Tank Franklin, Pittsburgh, PA.

A:  I guess it depends on how much of a neat freak you are and whether or not you want to be watched in your sleep.  It’s tempting to go with the quiet roommate, because silence really can be golden and cleanliness is nice too, because nothing is worse than opening your door and getting laid out by the stench coming from your kitchen.  What’s in the sink?  I DON’T KNOW.  But, here’s the thing with those quiet roommates you don’t know so well–do you ever really know what they’re up to?   Sure, they aren’t making any noise, but they could be up all night photo-shopping themselves into your family album.  NOT NORMAL.  So, I think if you have the chance you should always try to live with a friend.  It can be dicey, but most friendships can survive a roommate situation.  It’s not like going in halves on a Blockbuster Video franchise.  I lived with friends throughout college and I was the messiest of the group, but none of us really cleaned the common area with much vigor.  There were times when I’d get up, sit down in front of the TV to play some Grand Theft Auto, my feet would sink into a puddle of keg juice and I’d want to LOSE MY MIND.  But you get over it pretty quickly, because the day before you probably did something UNSPEAKABLE in the bathroom–or whatever.  Just the cost of doing business.  

Q:  If a television station suddenly wanted to make a sitcom about your life, or based on your oeuvre, if you will, would you want to play yourself in said sitcom ala Seinfeld, or would you take the Larry David route and turn the role over to a mutt like Jason Alexander?  Elaine Benes, Baltimore, MD.

A:  I really don’t have any desire to see myself on television, but if you are the real STAR, you don’t have a choice right?  Larry David, whether he’s really George or not, wasn’t the main character.  They didn’t hire, oh I don’t know, PAUL REISER, to do Seinfeld’s comedy, right?  That wouldn’t make sense.  An important part of comedy is delivery.  Seinfeld’s jokes need to be delivered by Seinfeld.  First, because he’s the best one to deliver them, but also because if he’s behind the show he’s going to want to make sure the product is how he wants it to be.  If you are asking me to put myself in a position where I am famous and funny enough to have my own TV show then you can bet your ass I’d stumble in front of the camera every week.  I’d probably have the wardrobe department fired every week for, “PUTTING ME IN THAT SHIRT,” but I’d give it a shot.  

Q:  If it were guaranteed to be friendly and docile and never attack you in any way, would you rather have a monkey, a tiger or a bear as a pet?  A real pet, not just in a cage outside.  Dr. Dewey Little, Boise, ID.

A:  I wouldn’t want a monkey–NO OFFENSE, Mr. Chimpanzee.  Monkeys are too similar to humans with their mannerisms.  Can you imagine sitting on the couch watching TV, maybe picking a rogue shard of Tostito out your teeth, maybe fiddlin’ with the iPad and you look over and your monkey is DOING THE EXACT SAME THING.  I’d sh*t myself.  I couldn’t handle that.  For a proper pet/owner relationship to occur you have to maintain some of the time-honored guidelines.  There’s hanging out with your pet and then there’s sitting there with your monkey with nothing to say.  Awkward.  So, that leaves us with Tiger and Bear.  I was about to say that a bear would be way too big, but I’m seeing here that Tigers can hit 650 lbs.  That kitty condo would take up a lot of space in the living room.  I’m not even going to get into the litter box scenario.  You’d have to fill the entire East Wing with kitty litter.  But I just can’t get past how cool it’d be to have a tiger in the house.  Just relaxing, basking in the sun, scaring away the occasional mouse?  I’ll go tiger.  

Q: Do you ever wonder what curiosity did to the dog?  Fran C. Feast, Humble, TX.

A: Wow, a lot of pet questions this week.  Are dogs curious?  The dog doesn’t destroy the trash can because he was CURIOUS about what was inside the can, he did it because there was a paper towel in there with a drop of bacon fat on it and they wanted to EAT THAT TOWEL.  I’ve seen dogs that are “curious” about why you aren’t paying them attention, but again, I’m not really sure that counts.  I think dogs are mostly content with their lives and so they are fine sitting on the floor next to you and don’t feel the need to see if they can jump up on top of the bookcase just because it’s there.  I think we need to get rid of this saying all together, because from my experience curiosity doesn’t kill the cat.  It may drive you to a mental institution, but the cat is going to come out just fine.  Standard cat behavior is them eyeing up some impossible jump, wondering if they can make it, attempting said jump, landing awkwardly (knocking over everything), one millisecond of self-awareness as they steady themselves and then they just saunter off–FULLY ALIVE.  Meanwhile, you surround the scene in crime scene tape while you sweep up the shards of glass, spilled drink–whatever.  

Q: Since it’s allergy season, what do you think about people who sneeze and it comes out as “achoo?” Is achoo a word?  I find it all very annoying.  Pet Dander, Coatesville, PA.

A:  Achoo is a word.  As I write it there my spell check is perfectly comfortable.  No issues.  A sneeze is a very personalized thing, much like a laugh.  And you can drive people crazy with both.  When it comes to sneezes, I prefer to let nature take its course.  Just release.  Don’t try to hold it in, don’t do any necessary muzzling–cover your mouth of course, but don’t be ashamed.  Don’t conform to what society thinks your sneeze should sound like.  I think some people modify their sneeze just to better set themselves up for the “bless you.”  They want that attention.  HEY, sneezing over here.  So, maybe they exaggerate it, I’m sure you’ve heard the unnecessary syllable at the end of a sneeze?  Also annoying.  As far as the “achoo” people go?  I guess they must live out their lives like a children’s book.  Achoo is one of those words that is a close approximation of a sound.  So, in these people’s minds maybe that’s what a sneeze is supposed to sound like?  They read Suzie Suffers from Sniffles at age 4 and it made a HUGE IMPRESSION?  They probably think all dog barks sound like “woof,” and horses go “nay,” etc. etc.  I agree, this is an annoying habit, the abbreviated, “choo,” sneeze being even worse.  

Q:  Let’s say we ended the war on drugs.  Not that we won it, we just gave up.  All of a sudden the government was like, you know what?  WHATEVER.  Do what you want.  Are there any drugs out there you’d be tempted to try?  Drugs Delaney, Pawtucket, RI.

A:  Oh yeah, PASS ME THE BLOW.  I don’t know.  I’m not in a real experimental phase in my life right now.  I’m not sure that I ever was.  I don’t want to be addicted to anything, with the possible exception of sugar, so I can say honestly I have no interest in any of the harder drugs.  CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.  No thanks.  Drug intake would be a stumbling block for me.  Even if it was around I wouldn’t want to smoke anything, or snort anything.  I don’t even like swallowing pills.  Maybe this is why about all I ever do is drink some beers.  Drinking is SO EASY.  So natural.  The only chance you’d have of getting me to do anything would be marijuana in some type of edible form.  I don’t want to take massive bong rips, but if there were no consequences I might try a laced dessert.  MAYBE.  But, like I said, I’m not really feeling too experimental.  And, I spent plenty of time observing stoned people in college.  It didn’t look like I was missing out on a whole lot.  I get my food cravings naturally.  

Jason Collins came out yesterday as the first active, openly gay athlete in the four major American professional sports.  I’ve been watching the reaction from the periphery.  At one time Collins’ homosexuality would have made me uncomfortable, but I now I find myself cringing at some of the reactions.  For anyone who is thinking, “This is 2013, what’s the big deal,” all you have to do is check out the comments section of any of these articles on Collins and you’ll find plenty of people voicing an opinion that doesn’t feel worthy of the 21st century.  Not only that, the tangents come quickly, and before we know it, Collins being gay has something to do with President Obama.  So, it’s pretty evident that while the majority of the reaction to the announcement has been positive, this is still a big deal, and it took a tremendous amount of courage from Collins to make his sexuality public.  

What’s encouraging is that Collins felt comfortable enough to discuss his homosexuality while still being an active player.  It’s true that Collins has spent his NBA career as a role player, and there is no guarantee he’ll be on a roster next season, but that’s hardly the point.  The point is that we’ve brought homosexuality into the locker room.  It’s perhaps the place most synonymous with the American idea of masculinity, and because of that, it’s perhaps the last place where a gay athlete would feel comfortable being out as a homosexual.  

As I said, I spent my younger years with some lamentable ideas in my mind.  My homophobia was the passive, casual kind that probably does some of the most damage.  I wasn’t actively bullying, or spewing hateful diatribes on a regular basis, but if I encountered someone who I perceived to be gay, or homosexuality was brought up in any way other than an off the cuff remark, you would have been able to see my discomfort.  So, where did these feelings come from?  

I wasn’t from a religious family.  My feelings about homosexuality had nothing to do with faith.  I can’t really palm off my thoughts as being a product of my upbringing, either.  I remember my sister being wholly unimpressed with some of my thoughts or jokes on the subject when we were growing up and we were raised the same way by the same parents.  So, if I’m trying to trace these feelings, I might end up settling on my immersion in the sports culture.  Playing team sports from an early age, being part of several locker rooms in my formative years–these things certainly helped mold my mind.  

I can thank team sports for many things–friendships, and character building, and the list goes on, but I think a lot of people’s fears and misunderstandings about homosexuality take root in these locker rooms.  Again, we’re talking about the pinnacle of American male-ness–the professional athlete.  Every kid in these locker rooms wants to step into those shoes some day.  That’s the goal and in an attempt to carry that out, the kids emulate the professionals.  They copy them on the field, but also adopt the mentality.  

For so long, the belief was that a gay teammate wouldn’t function within the locker room.  It’d be a sign of weakness.  It’d ruin the dynamic.  And if that was true of the professional locker room, it was true of the middle school one as well.  The small step to make was that being gay was a hindrance to becoming a professional athlete.  So, the natural stance for a thirteen year old to take is the polar opposite.  If being gay is a detriment, then I’m going to be as far away from that as possible.  And, unfortunately, that manifests itself in homophobia.  

I carried these thoughts with me through my decidedly non-professional sporting career, and it took me growing up and thinking more independently to realize how foolish and close-minded my opinions were.  It’s a shame that we can form opinions when we are so young, so impressionable, and so immature, because by the time you grow up, and open your eyes a little bit you realize that you’ve developed a lot of habits that are hard to break.  

I probably have a long way to go.  I still say things I shouldn’t say, and I still tolerate the type of passive homophobia that I possessed myself.  When I hear a college kid saying something I might have said a decade ago, I just stay quiet, and hope they will eventually see the light like I did.  Maybe I should speak up and try to do my part to break the cycle.  

That’s what Jason Collins can hopefully help accomplish with his announcement.  The only way homosexuality will ever be a non-issue in locker rooms is if it’s a non-issue in professional locker rooms.  If we can break the association of masculinity and heterosexuality at the highest level, perhaps it has a chance to trickle down to these kids who were like me, just trying to fit into the mold of doing what I thought I was supposed to do.  

With the 1st Pick in the 2013 Draft, Andy Reid Selects Doritos, Frito Lay University.

In twenty years the NFL Draft may start the night after the Super Bowl.  They’ll then do five picks a night until the season starts, all covered by 4-hr specials on the NFL Network.  People would watch the hell out of that.  Don’t think any different.  The NFL Network might be the only TV station that survives.  As it is now, the NFL has stretched their draft to three days, putting the 1st round in the coveted Thursday Night time slot, where it’ll square off against Seinfeld.  Most draft experts are on their fourth, fifth, seventh version of their mock draft.  It makes you wonder, why did I bother reading the 1st six?  I don’t go in much for the revised versions.  I like to do things right the first time.  Last year, I correctly pegged 3 of the first 4 picks.  So, I’ll let that speak for itself.  The format seemed to work last year too, so I’m not going to change it up.  The First Round…drink it in.

#1 Kansas City Chiefs:  Eric Fisher, OT Central Michigan

Why Kansas City Sucks:  They think Andy Reid is an upgrade, but more than that KC was awful last year, has big holes on the defensive front and could use an OT to protect Alex Smith and make room for Jamaal Charles.

Why Fisher: It always baffles me that a guy can be the consensus #1 pick (Joeckel) and then suddenly be supplanted by a player like Fisher after they stop playing ACTUAL GAMES.  But, there’s no way Andy Reid is going to take a guy who everyone had pegged as #1 back in October.  He’s dying to trade down, but if he doesn’t, I’ll say Fisher.

#2 Jacksonville Jaguars: Dion Jordan, DE Oregon

Why Jacksonville Sucks:  They play in Florida, Blaine Gabbert is stunting the growth of Chad Henne and they rang up a league low 20 sacks last year.  20!  That’s incredibly bad.

Why Jordan:  I suppose Jordan is the most talented pass rusher in the draft, though you wonder how a guy who is going to be drafted on potential and “tools” could have only compiled 14.5 sacks in three years against college competition.  But, there’s not a QB to take, so Jacksonville takes a shot on Jordan.

#3 Oakland Raiders: Sharrif Floyd, DT Florida

Why Oakland Sucks:  Their punter is their best player, they think Matt Flynn is an upgrade, and they have gaping holes on defense.

Why Floyd:  I’d take Dee Milliner, because they could use a corner and can’t afford the pick to be a bust, but the need at DT seems even more pressing.  For a long time Richard Seymour was all Oakland had, now he’s gone, Tommy Kelly is gone and Floyd certainly feels like a Raider, doesn’t he?

#4 Philadelphia Eagles: Dee Milliner, CB Alabama

Why Philadelphia Sucks:  Reid fatigue, possibly the worst secondary ever assembled, and an offense that has looked a lot better on paper than on the field the last few seasons.

Why Milliner:  The team needs a cornerback.  Let me rephrase that, they need a cornerback who can cover.  They could use an OT to provide insurance for Jason Peters, they need an interior defensive lineman, but with a safe-looking, instant starter sitting there at a need position, how do you say no?

#5 Detroit Lions: Luke Joeckel, OT Texas A&M

Why Detroit Sucks:  Megatron can’t play all 22 positions, they give up tons of points, Jim Schwartz’s effectiveness has to be wearing off.

Why Joeckel:  The Lions have plenty of needs, but given the chance to take one of the draft’s best players, they won’t be able to ignore Joeckel.  If Joeckel (or Fisher) falls to five, the Lions would be smart to trade down a few spots and try to grab Chance Warmack.

#6 Cleveland Browns: Chance Warmack, OG Alabama

Why Cleveland Sucks:  Short, baseball player QB, and a suspect defense.  Also, Cleveland may be cursed.

Why Warmack:  The Browns have bigger needs on defense, but I’d take the guy most people expect to be a plug and play 10-year starter.  Solidify the offensive line, see if you really have something in Weeden and Richardson.  Spoiler Alert: Weeden isn’t going to cut it, but at least you’ll know.

#7 Arizona Cardinals:  Lane Johnson, OT Oklahoma

Why Arizona Sucks: They trade for players like Kevin Kolb and Carson Palmer.  Their offensive line is terrible and they can’t properly utilize Larry Fitzgerald.

Why Johnson:  A total no-brainer, the Cardinals could use 4 (5?) new starters on the OL and if one of the three big tackles is available–they’ll go to Arizona.  The question is, will the Cardinals have to trade up to get a tackle?  This is why you don’t accidentally start the season 4-0, it kills you in April.

#8 Buffalo Bills:  Jonathan Cooper, OG North Carolina

Why Buffalo Sucks:  They play a “home” game in Toronto, they acquired Kevin Kolb, the curse of Don Beebe.

Why Cooper:  I refuse to believe that Doug Marrone is going to take Ryan Nassib or any other QB this high.  That’d be a total reach, and show no creativity.  Even though we’re talking about the Bills, I think they shore up the offensive line and try to get a QB later, which will lead to them taking another QB in the 1st round in 2014.

#9 New York Jets: Ezekiel Ansah, DE/OLB BYU

Why New York Sucks:  Sanchez, Rex Ryan ain’t the genius he’s cracked up to be and Sanchez.

Why Ansah:  The Jets need to build back up their defensive identity after trading away Revis Island.  Ansah could provide the Jets with a much needed pass rush and would seem to be an ideal project for Rex Ryan if he can drag himself out of the local Payless.

#10 Tennessee Titans: Star Lotulelei, DT, Utah

Why Tennessee Sucks:  Eddie George Retired, they couldn’t lure Peyton and a lack of impact players on defense.

Why Lotulelei:  Chris Johnson wants an offensive lineman, but I think Tennesee would have to trade up to get one of the premier guards or tackles.  With some of the defensive talent falling, they end up with Star, who some have as a top-5 talent.

#11 San Diego Chargers: Barkevious Mingo, OLB LSU

Why San Diego Sucks:  Coaching, can’t protect Philip Rivers, weather in San Diego too distracting?

Why Mingo:  The Chargers need a pass rushing linebacker.  The offense should have enough weapons to score points if they can keep Rivers upright.  A trade up for an OT for San Diego is super trendy in the mocks right now.

#12 Miami Dolphins: Xavier Rhodes, CB FSU

Why Miami Sucks:  A complete black hole of skill players, they wear turquoise, the curse of Ace Ventura.

Why Rhodes:  The Dolphins have had an aggressive off-season and have gotten young Tannehill some help.  Mike Wallace, Bradon Gibson, Dustin Keller…it’s time to focus on defense where they are in dire need of a corner.  Rhodes looks like the consensus #2 off the board.  Done.

#13 New York Jets: Geno Smith, QB West Virginia

Why New York Sucks:  I think we touched on this–Sanchez.

Why Smith:  I think you can take a QB at #13 and he doesn’t immediately have to save the franchise.  But, the Jets need another option and they don’t look like a team that wants to wait it out and get a franchise QB by being awful for a few more years.  Smith is worth a shot.

#14 Carolina Panthers:  Kenny Vaccaro, S Texas

Why Carolina Sucks:  Cam Newton didn’t progress, Steve Smith is getting old, fans probably want to draft players from Duke.

Why Vaccaro:  Safeties get very little love in the draft, but they sure are nice to have, aren’t they?  Cornerbacks are great until the middle of the field turns into a no-contact drill.  The Panthers could use a WR, but in a tough call, they should go the safer route with Vaccaro.

#15 New Orleans Saints: Jarvis Jones, OLB Georgia

Why New Orleans Sucks:  Bounties, they give up ungodly amounts of points, they stink on the road, and the offense lost a bit of that finishing touch?

Why Jones:  It’d be tempting to re-load with a receiver, but New Orleans has to play better defense–especially in their division.  Jones gives them a chance at getting a play maker, which they sorely lack.

#16 St. Louis Rams: Tavon Austin, WR West Virginia

Why St. Louis Sucks: Sam Bradford is a husk, no receiving options.  Just none.

Why Austin:  Would I get excited about a 5’9″, 170 lb WR?  Not particularly.  I’ve seen DeSean Jackson play.  I’m more of a Cordarrelle Patterson type guy, but it appears that Austin is the clear cut #1 WR so St. Louis has to take him.  They have no choice.

#17  Pittsburgh Steelers: Tyler Eifert, TE Notre Dame

Why Pittsburgh Sucks:  A sudden lack of skill players on offense, an aging defense and a QB who seems destined to hit 300 lbs before retirement.

Why Eifert:  The Steelers could use WR help or a running back, but they also need a TE.  It seems to be a fad position right now, and Eifert might provide the most help at this slot.  I expect the Steelers go offense early and try to find defensive value later on.

#18 Dallas Cowboys: Sheldon Richardson, DT Missouri

Why Dallas Sucks:  They have a noted amateur golfer playing QB, Jerry Jones can’t let go, their best player is their video board.

Why Richardson:  The Cowboys look to have more holes on the defensive side of the ball.  The consensus is, DT and safety are the two most glaring weaknesses.  With Vaccaro gone, the Cowboys land Richardson who is a top-15 talent.  Of course, one of these days Jerry is going to turn into Al Davis 2.0, and then we’ll have no idea what’s going to happen.

#19 New York Giants: Tank Carradine, DE Florida State

Why New York Sucks:  The defense cratered.  Is there more?  No, I think that’s it.  Awful defense.

Why Carradine:  The Giants seem like a best defensive player available type of team.  JPP wasn’t a real NEED pick when they took him, and DE probably still isn’t the most pressing concern, but taking the guy they like the most has worked for NY in the past.  From what I read, they like Carradine.

#20 Chicago Bears: Alec Ogletree, LB Georgia

Why Chicago Sucks: Jay Cutler is one of their best players, lost their identity at linebacker.  

Why Ogletree:  The Bears need linebackers and Ogletree has more versatility than other players available at the position.

#21 Cincinnati Bengals: Jonathan Cyprien, S Florida International

Why Cincinnati Sucks:  Ginger QB, weak secondary and they’re the Bungles.  You can’t escape that.  

Why Cyprien:  Just filling a need for the Bengals.  Cincinnati has some talent on offense and they look comfortable with Dalton, etc.  Pretty rare for this team to be picking in the bottom third of round 1 and having the luxury to go need or best player available.  

#22 St. Louis Rams: Eddie Lacy, RB Alabama

Why St. Louis Sucks:  Glaring lack of skill players, curse of Ricky Proehl.  

Why Lacy: It seems pretty certain that the Rams will take a WR with one of their early picks, but I think they should keep loading up on skill players.  Not a lot of high grades out there for running backs, but St. Louis needs help replacing Steven Jackson.  He’s been their whole offense.  

#23 Minnesota Vikings: Justin Hunter, WR Tennessee

Why Minnesota Sucks:  Christian Ponder?  The curse of Sam Steele?  AP can run for 2,000, but can’t throw for 4,000.

Why Hunter:  The Vikings lost Percy Harvin, who was their most versatile offensive weapon.  They brought in Greg Jennings, but they need to surround Ponder with as much skill as possible.  This way, they’ll figure out he’s terrible sooner rather than later.  

#24 Indianapolis Colts: Bjoern Werner, DE Florida State

Why Indianapolis Sucks:  Reggie Wayne is old, terrible defense, at the end of the day Andrew Luck still fails the face test.

Why Werner:  It might be tempting to surround Andrew Luck with more weapons, but the Colts need help on defense, and with the pass rush.  Werner, or another DE seems likely.  

#25 Minnesota Vikings: Manti Te’o, LB Notre Dame

Why Minnesota Sucks:  They seem to be the only team interested in Te’o in the 1st round.  

Why Te’o:  After getting some help at WR, Minnesota must address a need at LB.  Te’o's career, at least the first few weeks of it, will be fascinating.  Guy makes plays, but is he really too slow to be an NFL linebacker?

#26 Green Bay Packers: Datone Jones, DE UCLA

Why Green Bay Sucks: After the offense scores, the defense has to come onto the field.  No running game.  

Why Jones:  The Packers lost Jennings, but still have enough depth at WR to address defense in round one.  Jennings’ replacement, and maybe a RB project coming in the later rounds.  

#27 Houston Texans: DeAndre Hopkins, WR Clemson

Why Houston Sucks:  Kubiak sets the bar at 8-8, haven’t shown up in the biggest games.  

Why Hopkins:  The Texans need someone to play opposite Andre Johnson, and oh by the way, Johnson is going to turn 32 this summer.  They’ve about used up his prime.  

#28 Denver Broncos: Damontre Moore, DE Texas A&M

Why Denver Sucks: Still haven’t learned all of Peyton’s hand signals.  

Why Moore:  The defensive line seems to me the biggest need for Denver, who needs to put together a better defense while Peyton is still upright and functioning.  The departure of Elvis Dumervil leaves a pretty big hole.  

#29 New England Patriots: Desmond Trufant, CB Washington

Why New England Sucks:  Gronk’s bum arm, Gisele, terrible secondary.  

Why Trufant:  I’d be tempted to get Tom Brady a deep threat, but NE seems to pull their receivers from the scrap heap.  Maybe Terry Glenn is available?  Trufant gives them someone to pair with Talib to help anchor what’s been a shaky secondary.  

#30 Atlanta Falcons: D.J. Hayden, CB Houston

Why Atlanta Sucks: Julio Jones refuses to play corner, the curse of MC Hammer?

Why Hayden:  The Falcons are pretty set on offense.  Time to cover someone.  

#31 San Francisco 49ers: D.J. Fluker, OT Alabama

Why San Francisco Sucks: They’ve got the 2nd best Harbaugh

Why Fluker:  Fluker is an obvious 1st rounder that I didn’t find a spot for, so voila!  What team doesn’t need tackle depth? Gotta protect that Kaepernick.  

#32 Baltimore Ravens: Cordarrelle Patterson, WR Tennessee

Why Baltimore Sucks:  They’re getting old, no more Ray-Ray speeches OR Dances.

Why Patterson:  You give Flacco weapons, he wins Lombardi trophies.  Any questions?  

There you go, folks.  Can’t wait to see how I do.  What’s so exciting this year is that because there is no consensus 1st pick and because I’ve given the Eagles someone they definitely ARE NOT going to take–I actually have a chance to get ALL 32 of these wrong.  Which, I don’t have to tell you, would be thrilling and quite the accomplishment.  

Might Light Your Wrist, But That About It.

Been a while since I’ve posted something.  Last week was a very busy week, and with what was unfolding in Boston, it just didn’t seem like the time to be posting a mailbag.  Not that this blog is a news outlet, unless you consider mediocre gambling advice news, but I guess I wasn’t in the mood for the mailbag’s signature levity.  One of the things you hear in the aftermath of terrible events like the marathon bombing is that now we’ll see what Boston is really like–the city will show its true colors while emerging from this tragedy.  I don’t doubt there is truth in that statement.  Boston, as provincial as they come, will rally around itself.  It’s already been happening for days.  But I don’t need events like this one to be shown the heart of a city.  I am admittedly not a city person.  I can’t envision a scenario right now where I would ever live in an urban setting.  I judge cities through my brief trips, but more so by the people I meet and get to know.  The qualities that will eventually get Boston past what happened last week?  I’ve seen them all along.  So, as we get back to more normal posting here, my thoughts are with Boston and the people who have showed me what the city was really about.  

Q: I think I saw this the other day.  A school bus driver, think off-duty, meaning no kids were on the bus.  He’s in a parking lot.  A woman is walking in the parking lot.  And, I think he “tried to holla,” if you will.  Can you hit on a woman while driving a school bus?  Would this be the best pick up ever?  Otto Mann, Springfield, IL

A:  School bus drivers really have a certain joie de vivre, don’t they?  I don’t know what school bus drivers are like now, but back in my day the ranks were populated with some real interesting folks.  Our district had one crazy old coot, Hank (?), who every kid wanted to have drive their bus.  I forget Hank’s exact routine, but he had a shtick. He was like Max Patkin–only at the wheel of big yellow.  But, it wasn’t all Hanks.  There were some real dicey characters too.  I remember one lady sold the kids sodas.  Sweet side business.  There was the notorious incident of the woman telling me that our grass needed cut–think I touched on that before.  The women were notorious bitches.  There, I said it, but moving on…can you pull a school bus up to a stranger and pick up said stranger?  I suppose anything is possible.  I’d really need to see video of this meeting to decipher what was going on–pick apart the film if you will.  Maybe this is what the guy is thinking.  By approaching the women WHILST in the bus, he conveys two main points.  First, I’M EMPLOYED.  Second, he’s apparently trusted, by someone, to drive kids around.  In today’s market that might qualify as a CATCH.  For all we know, a school bus could be the new puppy at the park.  These guys could be killing it with the ladies.  Just kidding, I imagine the conversation probably went something like: Bus Driver, “Heyyyy, haven’t seen you at this bus stop before…” Woman: (calls police).  

Q: Who do you think would do better on Jeopardy, football coaches or baseball managers?  Turd Ferguson, Hollywood, CA.

A: I’m afraid that would be a case by case type of thing.  I suppose I could speak in some generalities.  Football coaches probably have less time to do Jeopardy beneficial things like read books?  And, we always hear about the “smart” baseball managers.  Football coaches are called geniuses at the drop of a hat, but that’s a football description.  They are an offensive genius.  Or a defensive genius.  They may know NOTHING about EUROPE or POTENT POTABLES.  On the other hand, I think we talk about these brilliant baseball managers, because over the course of a long season we don’t have anything else to say.  Hey, did you know Tony LaRussa has a law degree?  NEVER QUESTION HIM.  And, that’s how Joe Maddon becomes Phil Jackson Jr, because he reads books and wears trendy glasses.  All classic signs of dominating on Jeopardy.  So, I guess if I have to take one, I’d take the baseball guys, because they are slightly less obsessed with their own sport?  It’s a real tough question.  How about my dream game of coaches jeopardy?  I think I’d want to see Phil Jackson vs. Tony LaRussa vs. Bill Belichick.  Those egos competing against Alex’s?  You wouldn’t be able to look away.  

Q:  Why do we need TVs at gas pumps and what are the long term social and ecological implications?  Pissed at the Pump, Phoenixville, PA.

A:  Believe it or not, I think this is going to be a short-lived phenomenon.  I think the people at the gas stations will soon realize that everyone’s phone is far more interesting to them than whatever they could show on TV.  It’s not even real TV, it’s bootleg, pre-packaged TV.  I can’t imagine anyone saying, “Oh, I’ve got to go to that gas station because they have TVs.”  Like I said, you can just look at your phone.  I always feel great about myself when I leave my phone in my car while I pump gas.  LOOK AT ME–completely independent from modern technology.  Of course, then I scurry back in there, PRAYING that someone has messaged me.  No messages?  But I was out there for an eternity.  Anyway, a TV, or some distraction is a nice feature for a urinal maybe, but what purpose do I think it serves at the gas stations?  DISTRACTION.  They’re thinking maybe this guy will lose focus for a second and accidentally fill up his whole tank.  Instead of “Give me $7 on pump four,”….BOOM–sixty dollars!  I think some people that can afford to fill up all the way, just don’t these days because of the psychological toll.  They put in $39 and fill up more often, just because they don’t want to see those meters run up over $50, $60 or $70.  The other day I was filling up and some old-timer asked me for directions to the Valley Forge Casino.  I said, “I’ve got a deck of cards in the car.  If you want to just give me your money and save the hassle–I’m game.”  But, he was insistent on going, probably a Wheel O’ Fortune slot man, so I have to tell him how to get there.  Next thing I know, my tank is full.  Ouch.  Anyway, distraction–that’s my final answer.  

Q:  If you could somehow research this accurately, what percentage of pets do you think like their owners?  I don’t want to get dark here, so I’m talking about people who take good care of their pets only.  And, let’s keep it to the major pets.  We all know that reptiles feel no emotion.  Brad LaDoodle, Augusta, ME

A:  I’m not sure what the MAJOR pets are.  Cats and Dogs?  This is an interesting question.  I think the results would be a bit like asking kids if they liked their parents.  It might all depend on when you catch them.  You take your typical, happy family and the kids will probably say they like their parents the majority of the time, but god forbid you catch little Bradley after he got his video game device taken away or after he was FORCED to continue with his piano lessons.  He’d probably give you some real COLORFUL language to describe his parents.  I could see the same thinking happening for pets.  What if your dog is at the tail-end of an six hour session in their crate while you galivant all over town?  If I ask your dog, “Thoughts on Becky?”  They might be all, “You mean the slut?”  I think the moral here is that the world would be a lot more entertaining if all pets biting senses of humor.  But really, pets are more like young children than aloof, awful, freak show teenagers.  They rely on their owners for a lot, so that builds up a ton of loyalty.  I’m going to say that 95% of dogs like their owners and I’m going to put the cat number at a bit lower, 91%, because some cats are notorious misanthropes and cannot be helped.  

Q:  Have you had a chance to try the new Entenmann’s Raspberry Crumb Minis?  I want to dip a toe, but I don’t want to be disappointed.  Minnie Danish, London, England.

A:  Funny.  What’s your next question, have I ever seen the Phillies bullpen blow a lead?  Of course I have tried the Entenmann’s Raspberry Crumb Mini Cake.  It’s in a very sporty package.  Caught my eye right away.  I don’t want to ruffle any feathers over at BIMBO bakeries, but I MIGHT have a few issues with Entenmann’s.  First, the pricing is getting a little out of control.  Let’s not pretend we’re some organic, boutique bakery on the Main Line.  Know your role, Entenmann’s.  You are a TAD ghetto.  A while back I was having a healthy impulse and I grabbed some Super Cinnys and a bottle of chocolate milk on a weekend morning.  Hit the self checkout, and the device is telling me the total is like, “$8.39.”  I actually thought I had scanned something twice.  But, no, those Super Cinnys are SUPER expensive.  It’s cut into my Entenmann’s habit a bit.  I’ve got to be honest.  And, the miniature danish was never their strong suit.  They’re just trading off the success of the larger products.  You see a small little package and you think you are getting a miniature Raspberry Danish TWIST–but alas, that is not the case.  Some of the same ingredients are there, but the composition is OFF.  Same scenario with the new Mini Crumbs.  Some good flavors, a possible step in the right direction, but still a sorry substitute for real thing.   Entenmann’s is just not a single serving size company.  You buy the whole crumb cake, and eat it in 2 days.  

Q:  Why do people insist on going through the NFL schedule game by game, before the draft, and trying to predict a team’s record?  John Raworski, Medford, NJ.

A:  People are starved for the NFL.  Can you believe it’s been about 10 weeks since the Super Bowl.  That’s a LIFETIME.  I actually think they should release the schedule earlier, because now we’re right up against the draft.  The draft makes the schedule release look like Spring Training.  It’s another benefit of the NFL’s short season.  No other sport could get away with something like this, but people can take the time to hand out 16 L’s or W’s.  Speaking of which, here’s the Eagles rundown:   

1. @ Washington–L
2. vs. San Diego–W
3. vs. Kansas City–W
4. @ Denver–L (ulz)
5. @ NYG–L
6. @ Tampa Bay–W
7. vs. Dallas–W
8. vs. NYG–L
9. @ Oakland–L
10. @ Gren Bay–L
11. vs. Washington–L
12. vs. Arizona–W
13. vs. Detroit–W
14. @ Minnesota–W
15. vs. Chicago–L
16. @ Dallas–W

So, 8-8.  Unless they draft Geno Smith.  And he actually plays.  In which case, 4-12.  Speaking of the Draft, I’m going to Mock it up this.  Andy Reid is going to mess it up.  I can feel it.

Out of His Depth.

Or, maybe the first question is, do the Phillies need to be saved?  Thirteen games is hardly a deep look into the season, but considering the 6-7 Phillies were supposed to take advantage of a soft early schedule, it certainly looks like the Phillies need a boost.  Or else they could be headed toward a repeat of 2012.  One of the reasons it’s tempting to project out the Phillies after so few games is because the team looks so familiar.  Same names, same manager, same problems.  Several of their early losses look like they were pulled from the 2012 files.  Could one player make that much of a difference?  Is Ruiz’s offense and his handling of the staff something that turns games in the Phillies favor?  With Chooch coming off a career year, it’s tempting to make those arguments.  

But, I think that argument ignores what the real problems were last year.  The Phillies season fell apart last year after Roy Halladay went on the DL (while Ruiz was having that career year).  On August 2nd, the last game Carlos Ruiz played before returning on September 9th, the Phillies were 47-58.  Ruiz had cooled to .335 at this point, but was still the team’s biggest offensive weapon.  When Ruiz came back, the Phillies were 67-71.  They’d gone 20-13 without Ruiz in the lineup and they’d close the season 14-10 with him back behind the plate.  The Phillies were a better team with Ruiz, and last year would have been much worse without some of his 1st half heroics, but his performance is not what causes the Phillies to win and lose in the big picture.

If you believe in a stat like WAR, Ruiz was worth 4.5 wins to the team last year.  So, that would be the best case scenario for this season when he comes back.  Are the Phillies 4 wins out of a playoff spot?  

The Phillies have a couple of players off to fine offensive starts this year.  Chase Utley looks terrific, which is great to see, and Michael Young has had some huge games –performing better than I thought he would–so far.  Even the Mayberry/Nix platoon has put up respectable numbers.  So, why doesn’t the Phillies offense score more runs?  Why don’t they look better?  

The answer is the same as it’s been for the last several seasons.  The team doesn’t hit enough home runs to compensate for their lack of ability to get on base.   That’s the best way I can boil it down.  There are other issues.  They don’t hit left-handed pitching, they function poorly with runners in scoring position and in other “situational” moments, but the bottom line is, the Phillies have a home run hitting style lineup that doesn’t hit home runs.  In 2008, Utley/Howard/Werth and Burrell hit 138 homers.  In 2009, Utley/Howard/Werth and Ibanez hit 144 homers.  What’s the ideal 3-6 for this team?  Utley/Howard/Ruiz/Michael Young?  The upside on that group, even projecting a full season for Ruiz is probably about 95 home runs.  That’s a monumental loss of power.  

The Phillies have 12 homers in their first 13 games this year, numbers that are right in line with 2012.  With the team already in the midst of a five game mini-slump, where it looks like stringing together 4 straight singles is about the only way to score, it’s obvious things from an offensive standpoint aren’t going to change that much.  It’ll help to have Ruiz back, but he probably won’t hit .330.  He’ll be better than Kratz, who has been terrible, but it won’t be enough to transform the lineup.  Not with Ryan Howard struggling, with Revere’s microscopic OBP, and with Michael Young probably coming down a bit from the heights of .370.  

So, how does this team win games?  They have to win them how they were designed to win them–by pitching like crazy.  The Phillies that won the World Series had a dangerous combination of some guys who could get on-base and a 1 through 6 that could take you deep at any time.  They really have none of that now.  They were rebuilt, in a different mold, the 4-ace mold after 2009 and since then the Phillies have won when they’ve pitched–almost exclusively.  

In 2010, the Phillies bottomed out at 48-46 on July 21st.  Shortly after that they’d fire Milt Thompson and trade for Roy Oswalt. Over the last 68 games, the Phillies went 49-19.  To be fair, the offense did produce 4.89 runs a game over that closing stretch, which is pretty good by modern NL standards, but they were averaging 4.67 runs a game when they were 48-46.  In 2011 they won 102 games while scoring 4.4 runs on average.  

So, the point I’m getting at is that the Phillies aren’t as good as they were in 2008, because they don’t hit nearly as many home runs, but they’re not as good as they were in 2010 and 2011, because they don’t pitch nearly as well.  And this team is a lot more similar to the 2011 team in makeup than the 2008 team.  Carlos Ruiz can comeback and mercifully end the run of Eric Kratz, but he’s not going to save the Phillies.  To be saved, the Phillies will have to pitch better, get that ERA back among the league leaders, iron out middle relief.  Otherwise, it’s going to be ebbs and flows, good streaks like against New York and miserable ones like what started down in Miami.  

Last year, the Phillies proved that won’t add up to a playoff spot, so something will have to change this time around.  Running down the Nationals and the torrid Braves isn’t going to be easy.  

Ruined 36 Jim Nantz Angel Puns

Another great ending to the Masters.  I wonder if today, sitting around the well-pledged libraries of the clubhouse if the members are just congratulating themselves?  Someone takes a sip of Scotch, gazes lovingly at a life-sized oil painting of Bobby Jones and says, “We run the perfect golf tournament.”  It’d be hard to argue.  We’re on a run of years now with scintillating finishes and memorable shots and it’s all happened without Tiger Woods sliding into his 5th green jacket.  For a sport that seems to be reliant on individual star power, the Masters and Augusta National pull themselves above that level most years.

What I’ll take away from the event this year was the quality of the golf of the playoff.  My Masters’ playoff memories include Scott “Choke” Hoch, Len Mattiace making a thousand on 10, Ray Floyd splashing down on 11, Kenny Perry squandering his chance at history and of course, Bubba’s awful tee shot before, “THE HOOK.”  The Masters makes people choke.  Jason Day all but admitted it in his post-round comments.  The playoff is even worse.  Perhaps this is why a Masters sudden death playoff has never extended beyond two holes.  You either see something miraculous, or someone gives it away.

If you want to be picky, I suppose you could criticize the shots Scott and Angel Cabrera hit into 18 on the first playoff hole, but that would ignore the inherent difficulty of that shot.  And then Cabrera nearly holed his chip, Scott made a nervy 3-footer and they were off to the 10th.  Cabrera’s monster iron off the 10th tee was something from another era.  Thirty years ago professional golfers carried 2-irons to “get the ball in play,” and now they’re practically extinct.  Whatever souped up driving iron Cabrera hit in the playoff was something to behold.  Of course, his putt ended up teasing the edge like Oosthuizen’s last year, but there was no choke in Cabrera.  When the guy shows up–he’s there to stay.

And, Adam Scott has always been a great ball-striker.  He’s the kind of guy who would make a 2-handicap quit the game if they had to hit balls next to him on the range every day.  We’ve been hearing, “if the guy could ever make some putts,” for years.  Last year, when Scott gave away the Open Championship you had to wonder if the cumulative impact of his missed putts was starting to take hold on the rest of his game (Sergio-itis).  But, Scott found the putting stroke late Sunday and made two of the more memorable putts in Masters’ history, the first of which, I thought he had no chance to make.

I’ve always had Scott in the category of guys who I thought could eventually get a major (Hey, I picked him 3rd–not bad?).  It’s a group populated by guys like Dustin Johnson.  Eventually, these guys are just too good to not put it together for one week.  Greg Norman was the most snake bit player in the history of the majors and he gave away plenty too, but he still went out of his mind a couple of times and won the Open twice.  One of these days, Dustin will get so far out in front that he can’t blow it, or he’ll lip-in a crucial putt when he needs it, like Scott did on Sunday.  These guys are too talented to not win a major, where as players like Lee Westwood and Luke Donald–you wonder.

I’m sure it’s a relief for Scott this morning to be free of “the label.”  He’s been a guy who has been pigeon-holed his entire career.  First, he was the guy with Tiger’s swing–an automatic and unfair heir apparent.  Since then, he’s been replaced by an even younger group of Australian golfers and become the favorite of women who are stuck on the couch watching golf.  An honorable distinction, but I doubt something Scott aspired to.  Now, he’s a major champion.  He’s a guy that could have, should have won 2 of the last three majors.  It’ll be interesting to see where he takes it from here.

Some other things of note…

Disappointing Performance by the Top of the World:

Rory and Luke Donald were never factors, Tiger got lost in controversy and didn’t meet his own standards and I’m not sure if Phil Mickelson even played the event.  Did anyone see him?  It’s strange to me how someone like Mickelson can have a week like he did.  The guy has owned the course in the past.  You’re telling me Fred Couples (god that he is) can get around with relative ease for 3 of 4 rounds, can play in the last group Saturday and end up 13th at 53 years old and Phil someone with a (better?) set of similar skills and a decade younger finishes with 77-76-73?  I don’t get it.

Speaking of the Tiger Rules Controversy:

First, I don’t believe that Tiger intentionally took a bad drop.  He knows that every eye is on him and he would have never admitted to it in his interview after the round.  In fact, I wonder if as those words were coming out of Tiger’s mouth if he didn’t have an alarm go off in his subconscious saying, “OH Fudgesicle.”  I think he was flustered, or enraged by that terrible break and made one of the bigger bonehead moves you’ll ever see.  Joe LaCava failed miserably here too.  There’s really no question Tiger took a bad drop, the question is whether he should have been disqualified.  Prior to a rule change a couple of years ago, Tiger would have been out, but a new rules allows the DQ to be waived under “exceptional circumstances.”  That’s quite vague wording for a rule, but that’s golf’s style.  I don’t know that Tiger’s free pass falls in line with the spirit of the rule, but you can certainly shoe horn it in there.  Bottom line, he didn’t win anyway, and we’ll forget about it soon enough.

Closing Shot:

I think they’ve found a nice balance in the setup at Augusta.  I looked at scores on Friday and wondered how hard they could make the course if they wanted to…I’m quite certain with some moderate changes +10 would win.  But, the balance they seem to be at now is that we’re seeing less eagles and maybe fewer “runs,” but the course is still vulnerable to a hot back nine, you simply have to be playing near perfect golf to take advantage.  So, a guy like Scott who is closing well can still make the needed birdies, while someone like Brandt Snedeker, who is leaking oil, is quickly shuffled toward the back of the pack.  It may not be perfect, but it’s working for me.

That it for now–See you at Merion!