Pujols Pulls Through

By Val Thompson

With one swing of the bat last night, Albert Pujols cemented himself as the best hitter of the 21st Century. With one swing he showed why he is on a plateau above all the others. Great hitters compile great numbers during the regular season. There are several great hitters in the major leagues. But Pujols is the greatest because he can perform when his team absolutely needs him most.

The Cardinals were done. Their season was all but over. All but Albert. Facing one of the most dominating closers in the game, when nothing other than a home run would suffice, Pujols delivered. He trotted around the bases calmly, with his chin held high. Nothing ecstatic. No jumping around or pumping fists. It was as though he completely expected to hit that ball 450 feet.

Pujols is carrying this offense in the postseason just as he did during the regular season. In the playoffs, he's batting .429 with two home runs. He's getting on base 50% of the time. During the regular season, he led the Cardinals in every major offensive category. And most of the minor ones, too. He played the most games, got the most hits, scored the most runs, hit the most doubles and home runs, drove in the most runs, got the most walks. He even stole the most bases.

Several other players in the league are a dominant figure on their team in a similar way. But Pujols separated himself by showing he can deliver on a large stage, with the season hanging in the balance and in the face of 40,000 screaming Astros fans. Notice the postseason numbers for some of his notable contemporaries:

Alex Rodriguez: the MVP candidate got just two hits in 15 postseason at-bats after batting .321 during the regular season. He led the team (along with Derek Jeter) with five strikeouts in the four-game American League Division Series loss to the Angels. He stranded three runners and went 0-4 in the Yankees' final game of the postseason.

Vladimir Guererro: The career .324 hitter batted just .184 in the postseason. He got seven hits in ten games, all singles. He drove in one run. In the American League Championship Series, he went 1-for-20.

Andrew Jones: He had a strong postseason in many respects, hitting .471 with five RBI in four games. But in the Braves' elimination game (the same situation the Cardinals faced last night), look at how Jones performed in his several chances to put his team on top. In the top of the ninth, he grounded into a double play. He struck out swinging with two runners on in the 11th. He walked in the 14th. He flied out in the 15th. He reached on an error in the 18th. That's five plate appearances in which he could have put his team on top of the Astros. Five plate appearances, no hits. The major league home run champ hit 51 during the regular season. But he couldn't do it to keep his team's hopes alive facing elimination.

David Ortiz: He is the toughest to take a jab at. He put up very Pujols-like numbers and performed fairly well in the Red Sox' elimination game. Ortiz hit .333 in the series loss to the White Sox. Facing elimination, he put the Red Sox on the board with the home run in the 4th inning of Game 3. But in his two remaining at-bats that game, he flied out to end the 5th with two runners on and struck out swining in the 7th with the Red Sox trailing by one run. He was on deck when Edgar Renteria grounded out to second to end the game. If Ortiz had been hitting after Eckstein, maybe it's a different story.

The NFP

By Greg Kelminson

The NBA has finally achieved all its objectives. The league has obviously mastered any salary cap issues, ridded all violence from the league, and has purged its reputation that drugs are rampant in the NBA. Yes, it was only a matter time before the league addressed the most ubiquitous and pressing issue the league has ever faced: a mandatory dress code.

The NBA has turned into the National Fashion Police (NFP). Business casual attire is required during league or team activity. Players must wear a collared or turtle neck shirt. Khakis, jeans, or dress pants are required as well. I don’t want to see Dirk Nowitzki dressing up in an attempt to look nice. Did you see what he wore during his Dallas Mavericks conference introducing him as their top pick? In case you forgot here is a link: http://www.njsportspromotions.com/NowitzkiUltrarookie.jpg. I’d much rather see him in this attire: http://www.deansplanet.com/encounters_dirk-nowinski.html. I am unsure what the NBA thinks this new requirement is going to accomplish? Will people who wish to emulate Allen Iverson wear blazers instead of gold chains? I understand the NBA has a reputation to uphold, but the clothing is not the thing causing harm to its reputation. It is people like Shawn Kemp the NBA needs to be worried about.

Shawn Kemp has been in and out of rehab for drugs. His weight had ballooned almost as much as the number of illegitimate kids he has. Players like Damon Stoudamire and Rasheed Wallace have been caught using marijuana. Fellow star, Carmelo Anthony has also been ticketed for possession. The NBA needs to deal with the problem head on. It needs stricter standards and penalties for drug offenders. Charles Oakley claims 60% of the league uses marijuana and calls the enforcement by the NBA “a joke”.

So let Allen Iverson be Allen Iverson. If you squash his individuality what incentive does he have to try and be a role model? The more one attempts to change a person is, the more angered and rebellious the player will become. Mr. Stern needs to focus on the bigger problems that are responsible for the poor reputation of the NBA, but it now seems as if Mr. Stern is in fact a big reason why the NBA’s reputation is lacking.

A Wie Bit of a Mistake

By Jake Brown

Michelle Wie made her much anticipated professional debut this weekend in the LPGA World Samsung Championship. This was the biggest story of the weekend in golf, even bigger than Annika Sorenstam coasting to yet another victory. The problem was that Wie didn’t just make the headlines for competing in her first tournament as a pro.

She made the biggest headlines for being disqualified from the tournament, and losing $53,126 in the process. She was disqualified for taking an illegal drop on the seventh hole Saturday, removing her ball from a bush and putting it three inches closer to the hole, according to Wie. She was then disqualified for signing an incorrect scorecard.

The problem wasn’t that she was disqualified necessarily, it was the way it happened. She wasn’t disqualified until Sunday after her final round, a full day and then some since she made the drop. Most of all, the person who reported the incident was a reporter for Sports Illustrated, not a LPGA official.

First of all, hasn’t the LPGA ever heard of a statute of limitations? I know this is something every other rules organization has heard of. I understand that the Rules of Golf are a big part of what makes the game so endearing, but come on. Disqualifying someone for an incident that happened a full day earlier is obscene. Also, no LPGA officials picked it up. If the officials didn’t notice it at the time, nothing should be done about it. That’s the just way the ball bounces.

Think of it this way. A baseball team wins the a game in extra innings thanks to a walk-off two-run homerun. The call is controversial and it looks like a fan interfered with the play, but the play stands as called, game over. MLB consults the replay the next day and sees it’s not a home run, so they reverse the call and award the game to the other team. Sounds crazy right? Exactly. This would never happen in any other game, that statute of limitations had run out.

The next thing is who reported the incident to the LPGA. It was a reporter for Sports Illustrated by the name of Michael Bamberger. So the way I see it, Michelle Wie was penalize because of her popularity. If she were some mediocre golfer who nobody cared about nobody would have even noticed and she would have never been disqualified.

Another thing, since when is it the reporters job to help make the news. I’ve been taught throughout my journalism education that reporters report the news, they do not make it. So who is this guy to take this issue to officials. He can write about it and say anything he wants to in print, but it is not his place to do the job of LPGA officials. Sure he was trying to do the right thing, but it’s not his job. Reporters can squawk about calls from the press box, but they cannot change them.

Lastly, the way the LPGA went about the situation is a joke. Besides the fact that they should have left well enough alone, admitted a mistake and told everyone the statute of limitations had run out, they handled the situation very poorly in my opinion.

They reviewed the tape and didn’t see anything conclusive. So after Wie had already signed her scorecard for the final round officials took her and her caddy out to the seventh hole to ask them about the incident. They then measured it off with a string, that’s right, a string. Pretty scientific I know. Seems like some sort of rinky-dink operation to me. Then they decided to disqualify her.

Wie made an amateurish mistake by not getting officials to help her, sure. But the way the LPGA handled the situation was a disgrace, and robbed this young lady of an excellent start to her career and a nice chunk of change. The Rules of Golf simply need some boundaries that make it clear you can’t be penalize for something that happened after two different scorecards were signed, that to me is a joke. Until then, one can only hope Wie has learned from her experience.

Angel's Not Robbed

By Val Thompson

Can we please put an end to all this talk about how A.J. Pierzynski and the "called third strike" controversy won Game 2 for the Chicago White Sox? Reporters, on-air personalities, and baseball players alike act as if the game was won when Pierzynski reached first base. Though filled with controversy, Pierzynski's "stealing" first base was not even the most significant play of the inning. It may not even be the most significant stolen base of the inning.

Everyone conveniently forgets the series of events that transpired after Pierzynski reached first base that allowed the White Sox to win. After all, a man on first with two outs, no matter how he got there, is still just a man on first with two outs. The two plays that followed are of considerable more importance than how Pierzynski got on first base.

Event number one: Pablo Ozuna steals second base. Consider this achievement. First of all, White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen had to gamble by removing one of his best postseason hitters with the game still tied. Then, Ozuna had to attempt a stolen base against a team that gunned down both Pierzynski and speedy Scott Podsednik in Game 1. Granted, it was Bengie Molina who threw out those two potential base stealers, and backup Josh Paul was behind the plate in the ninth. Guillen, obviously, knew that. And he knew he could exploit it.

Paul is taking a lot of flack for not tagging out Pierzynski on his way to first. Yet no one seems to care that he stood up slowly in the box and didn't even manage a throw to second as Ozuna easily swiped the base. He must have still been frustrated from the previous play. But does that give him permission to let the winning run move into scoring position without a fight? He gave Ozuna second base as easily as he "gave" Pierzynski first base.

Event number two: Crede hits a game-winning double: Consider how Escobar was looking on the mound. He had struck out five of the last seven batters he'd faced (including Pierzynski). He made Tadahito Iguchi look like he was swinging a bat for the first time in his life with an ugly strikeout in the eighth. He blew past Paul Konerko in three pitches. Yet, for some reason, Joe Crede had Escobar's number.

He doubled off Escobar in the seventh, and did it again in the ninth. Why is there no mention of Escobar throwing a cheese ball with an 0-2 count? How can Pierzynski be the hero and not Crede? Pierzynski said it best in an interview after the game. "Give Crede all the credit," he said. "I didn't do anything. I just struck out."

If Pierzynski had not swung at that pitch, it would have been ball four, and he would have reached first base anyway. Then, with all the controversy aside, Crede and Mark Buehrle would be the heroes of last night's game. They still should be.

I don't mean to take anything away from what Pierzynski did. His heads-up hustle extended the inning for the White Sox and made it possible for them to win the game without going into extra innings. But I do want to eliminate the argument that the umpire lost the game for the Angels. Instead, a mental breakdown lost the game for the Angels. Paul was too frustrated to try to make a play on Ozuna stealing second. Escobar was too frustrated to pitch something off the plate with an 0-2 count to Crede.

Arguing with the umpire is like arguing with the sun. The ump is baseball's absolute. The game is set up in such a way that whatever the umpire says happened, happened. It is the responsibility of baseball players to play the game within this framework. To stretch the analogy further, the movement of the sun allows for a day to exist. The outcome of that day is entirely up to us and in our control. Likewise, the umpire allows for a baseball game to exist. What players do with that game is entirely up to them. An ump's call is concrete and permanent, and it's up to baseball players to treat it as such and move on to the next play.

The Angels didn't move on. They let the call fester. And they let the winning run score. All on their own. I was pleased to see that Angels manager Mike Scioscia understands this. In his press conference following the game, after discussing the controversial play, he put all the blame on his team "playing bad". The bottom line, as with any baseball game, is the losing team didn't execute. The winning team did.

Nothing controversial about that.

Somber Series

By Val Thompson

Everyone keeps talking about the Anaheim Angels' flight itinerary as if it's the most important aspect of the American League Championship Series. All of a sudden, because the Angels were on a plane the last two nights, they enter with a huge disadvantage against the White Sox. It's true that Anaheim should be an underdog in the upcoming series, but it has nothing to do with jet lag.

On a list of several aspects that will affect the outcome of the ALCS, the Angels' travel exhaustion ranks near the bottom. After all, baseball teams are taking red-eye flights all season long. If you want to talk about doing something strange, talk about the White Sox not playing a game for three consecutive days. That happened only once all season, during the All-Star Break. The Angels have taken at least 40 flights prior to this suddenly exhausting four-hour flight to Chicago.

Exactly one month ago, the Angels beat the Red Sox in Boston in a game that ended at 10:23 p.m. They got on a plane, flew to Chicago, probably landed at about 3:00 a.m., went to a hotel and slept. They started a three-game series with the White Sox later that day, at 8:00 p.m. Remember what happened? The Angels swept Chicago, jet lag and all.

That scenario isn't much different, rest-wise, from what Anaheim is facing today. They've been at their hotel since 6:00 a.m. They don't need to be at the ballpark until 4:00 p.m. at the earliest. That's ten solid hours to get a good night's rest. All that alcohol should have them pretty much knocked out anyway.

These players are professional athletes that make a living travelling the country with little rest and performing at a high level. In baseball, more than any other sport, players are prepared to handle hectic travel plans.

This championship series will be decided, like all the others. First, by starting pitching. Second, by timely hitting. Exhaustion from a five-hour flight will have no effect whatsoever.