I enjoyed this...maybe you will, too.
Make Sure to Invite These Guys to Your Draft
by Brent Louie
It’s that time of year. Kids are getting ready to go back to school, SportsCenter is dominated by baseball, golf and Lance Armstrong, and the last of the summer blockbusters are being released. Fantasy football season is quickly approaching, and that means it’s time to start thinking about getting your league together. As you prepare to start sending out the invites, make sure you consider the following types of people.
The Freak – If you are reading this article, you probably fall into this category. You can try to deny it, but it’s better to embrace it. You start prepping for the draft in late April. You stay up till 1 a.m. watching Monday Night Football to make sure that your 115-58 point lead stands up against your opponent’s TE. The first thing you do when you come to work is check the internet to see if there are any hot pickups on the waiver wire. You then check the internet every 15 minutes thereafter to make sure you are caught up on the latest news. You are likely the commissioner of your league, and you go into a mini-depression after Week 16 of the regular season.
The Rookie – This person has never played fantasy football before, yet will win in three out of every four leagues. They often draft a well-known QB like Tom Brady or Peyton Manning in the first round and then their favorite team (defense) in the second round. They never dominate the league, yet always sneak into the playoffs. Without fail, the backup RB they drafted in the 13th round becomes a fantasy stud in the playoffs. They were put on earth as punishment to “The Freaks.” We hate them, but know that for fantasy football to survive and grow “The Rookies” must exist.
The Thief – This is the guy that is constantly trying to make his team better at the expense of unsuspecting teams. He thinks that three WRs he picked up off the waiver wire add up to a WR1. Last year he offered you Chad Pennington and Deion Branch for Drew Brees. You countered with Mason Crosby for Adrian Peterson in efforts to help him understand he’s an idiot. He’s consistent, though, and can’t take a hint. He’s like the guy at the bar that knows that if he asks enough girls out, one will eventually say “yes.” We hate this guy even more than we hate “The Rookie.”
The Loyalist – This person cares immensely about one particular NFL team. They typically show up to the draft wearing an oversized jersey of the team they love. The jersey will have a monogram of one of the following: 1) their favorite player that retired six years ago 2) their last name 3) a pet nickname such as “Wild Child” or “# 1 Fin Fan.” They are usually horrible to watch football with if their team is losing. They will do everything they can to fill their roster with players from their favorite team. “The Loyalist” in one of my leagues last year selected Willie Freaking Parker with the No. 1 overall pick. They think of themselves as purists since they refuse to root against their own team. We like these people because they pick with their heart. We love these people when we get to watch their reaction as we draft a player they are targeting a pick or two before their turn.
The Oblivious One – He shows up to on draft night with a fantasy football magazine in hand that he picked up on the way to the draft. During the draft, he will attempt to select at least three players that have already been taken, including players that are on his roster. He will never read a fantasy football article. “The Oblivious One” in my league is named Carl King. I feel 100 percent confident that he will never visit a fantasy football site, so it doesn’t matter at all that I called him by name. By Week 3 he will have forgotten his username and password to the fantasy football website. For the last 10 years they have consistently added $50 to the pot, and have never seen a cent back. We love this guy.
The Wife - This one is a rarity. In most serious leagues they are banned. They have three criteria for picking players: 1) the color of the player’s uniform 2) whether or not they think the player is cute 3) whether or not they have seen them in a Campbell’s soup commercial (Donovan McNabb) or read about them in People Magazine (Tom Brady). We feel neutral to this person, unless they are your wife, then you love them.
When sending out invitations, make sure you get a good mix of people. It’s necessary for the health of your league. Imagine a league that consisted entirely of “Freaks”. No one would ever dominate the league, and we all would lose tons of sleep. A league of “Oblivious Ones” would all forget their passwords before the end of the season. There wouldn’t be a way to find out who won the league, and no one would know what to do with the pot. So remember that getting a good mix of people is what makes fantasy football special. Make sure you get variety of individuals for your league, except for “The Thief” … because everyone hates “The Thief.”
***
Me: I definitely fall into "The Freak" category. No doubt about that.
Kevin: Hmmm...I'd say a cross between the "Oblivious One" (due to your indifference about fantasy football) and "The Loyalist" (Michael Vick, Michael Vick, Michael Vick...Vince Young, Vince Young...).
Adam: Not sure how much you read up on fantasy stuff, but you are extremely knowledgeable, so I would say you're mostly like "The Freak". Although there are always a couple of trades that come my way each year that makes me think you're a little like "The Thief", haha =).
Grace and Stacey: The Wives. Duh.
~Mikey D
Dear Dave,
My how things have turned around in a year! Just this time last year we were fighting with Kansas City to stay out of the bottom spot in the division (and we came so close to winning that battle, too), and now we're two games up in the AL Central. First place!!! And with Carlos Guillen coming back, and maybe Bonderman and Zumaya in the bullpen soon, things are looking rosy.
Except they're not. At least not for me. Now I consider this team a World Series caliber ballclub, despite what many experts might say. We have two dominate front of the rotation guys in Verlander and Jackson and a bullpen full of hard throwers that are really coming together. In October, that's what wins! And our defense has been solid all year too, led by All-Stars Curtis Granderson and Brandon Inge.
So what's the problem? It's the offense, Dave. Yes, Miguel Cabrera is doing just fine. Yes, Brandon Inge has given us more than enough "pop" from third base with his homerun outburst. And Granderson has 20+ homers out of the leadoff spot...but after that? Nothing. Literally nothing. We can't get anything going, Dave! Besides the occasional long bomb, we cannot manufacture runs, and this is a problem.
Let me throw some numbers at you:
~3.65. No, that's not our team ERA. That's the average amount of runs we've scored in July per game. I don't need to tell you, but I will anyway- that's not good.
~40%. That's the percentage of games in July (8 out of 20) that we've scored only 1 or 2 runs in a game. This statistic not only shows we're not scoring runs, but we're doing it at an alarmingly consistent rate.
~0. The number of games we've won when scoring only 1 or 2 runs in a game. You are asking our pitchers to be superhuman, and Armando Gallarga and Luke French are not superhuman.
~3.38. Our average margin of victory. So? Even when we win, we're not blowing out teams. Closers gets saves when they hold a game that's difference in score is three or less runs. We are constantly having to hold and save our leads...we don't have the comfortable wins.
~54. The number of times I saw Edwin Jackson shake his head left to right in disbelief last Sunday against the Yankees after he went 7+ innings (out-pitching Joba) allowing a measly two runs...only to get the loss. Apparently I'm not the only one frustrated.
I write you this letter now because on Friday is July 31st- the MLB trading deadline. I know our payroll is still high, and I know we don't have much in the farm system, but from what I hear, you are one hell of a GM. I trust you and I trust your skills, and I'm hoping you can work some magic for our ballclub. Find that spark for us, Dave. Get us that hitter (and hopefully not Troy Glaus or Milton Bradley, like I've heard rumored...) that will get our offense going and carry us into October.
~Mikey D
P.S.~ Did you see last night's game against Texas where we only scored two fucking runs? Yea, me too...
I am over painting.
I am over paying for painting supplies.
But, I am almost done. I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. Here's what I've painted so far:
~Our old apartment (2 Bedrooms, Bathroom, Hallway, and one gigantic Living Room)
~3 Bedrooms
~Basement
~Dining Room
~Living Room
~Hallway
~Bathroom
~4 Closets
~Pantry
I only have the upstairs hallway, upstairs bathroom, and kitchen left, but those are all relatively small areas that I am not really dreading. We do need to do some painting on the outside of our house (it's still ugly to look at...I think I cringe every time I look at our house from the outside), but perhaps that might be time to call in the professional painters (unless Kevin you want to do it...I know how much you loved painting that one summer...I'll let you listen to top-40 radio over and over again too!). Perhaps I still have more to do that I originally thought, but still, the majority of it is done.
So here's my list of the top 5 things I hate about painting:
1. Taping. Ugggh such a pain in the ass. I hate it. The tape is 4 or 5 dollars a roll (it's fucking tape...) and when you have to tape a big room, it's very time consuming.
2. Edging. It always seems I need to do more coats of paint around the edges than anywhere else. Why is that? Perhaps God knows I hate edging, so he's getting a good laugh by torturing me by making me do it more. Thanks, God.
3. Cleaning Brushes. Paint brushes suck to clean. I hate it when water ricochets off the paint brush and gets onto other things. It's just a mess. And I never feel like the brush is fully clean.
4. Moving the Furniture. You have three options: 1) Move the furniture out of the room before you paint, 2) Cover the furniture while you paint, 3) Do nothing and get paint all over your furniture. I choose the first because I hate bumping into furniture while I paint and covering it is just as much a pain as moving it. Still, moving a bookshelf or a desk where you have to clear everything off is annoying- and then you have to move it all back!
5. Spackling. Little nail holes, old curtain rod bracket holes, or Adam's butt hole (haha)- they all need spackling before you paint. And I don't mind the spackling so much as the sanding after it's all dried. The dust always makes me sneeze and makes a mess on the floor- which I then have to vacuum. Spackling fixes the hole, but it makes more work for me!
~Mikey D
Can you name the team that regularly plays (or played) in the following stadiums/arenas/fields? 1/2 point extra if you can give the name of the stadium/arena/field.
4. 
5. The stadium is gone and the team has relocated...if you're a Field of Dreams fan, this picture should be somewhat familiar. What team used to play here?
6.You get two pictures! This one is tricky...
7. This man took his act from the old stadium to the new...The stadium is tough to identify the team by, so hopefully the guy helps...
8. 
9. 
10. *sniffle*
Answers in the comment section.
~Mikey D
We have our 8 for the upcoming season! Here's is the upcoming draft order as chosen out of a hat by Grace:
1. Kevin
2. Stacey
3. Mark (Grace's Friend)
4. Grace
5. Mike
6. Amber
7. Brian
8. Adam
Of all the years we've been playing, the draft order seems to matter the least this year. Usually there's a consensus number one guy, or at least the top 4 or 5 are pretty well considered better than the rest (remember when LT, Larry Johnson, and Shaun Alexander were the cream of the crop?). Now? I've read fantasy articles where Turner was touted as the best...or AP....or Jones-Drew...there's just so much up in the air. And then even after those guys...who's the 4th or 5th best back? You see Chris Johnson's name...or Steve Slaton...or Frank Gore...or DeAngelo Williams...or Steven Jackson. Then there's the usual suspects, like Portis, LT, and Westbrook...the veteran fantasy studs.
Just interesting. You can do mock drafts on Yahoo now (8, 10, or 12 team leagues), and in an 8-team league I've see the 8th pick end up with Steven Jackson and LT. Can you imagine that in another year? The depth at RB (or the uncertainty, however you want to look at it) is crazy. Some good guys out there that you can get in probably the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or even 5th rounds this year. That should make for a fun draft.
Anyway, looking forward to it (August 25th...8:30...). Kevin, you are officially on the clock!
~Mikey D
I'm having a bit of an internal debate right now...I can't decide if this "opportunity" that seems to have presented itself is, well, morally right? Maybe you guys can help.
So for the past week or so I have been playing cards online again. Last year I doubled my money in a matter of weeks, and with some of the extra downtime I have now, I thought I would give it another shot and see what happened. Well after about a week I made a grand total of .80 (hey, at least it's a profit, right?) and had been beaten countless times by ridiculously bad beats. Frustrated (I swear I must have been beaten on the river at least 5 times at table tournaments after making the right call/read...I know, I'm venting right now), I just decided to call it quits. Leave with what I came in with, right? Right.
So to make a withdrawal is rather simple. You enter the amount of money you want back, and they send you a check or they will transfer it to your checking account. And they don't charge a fee, which is great. So in a few days I should have all my money back...and 80 extra cents. Woo!
What's interesting about the site though is that you can't deposit money from your checking account. In order to deposit money, you have to have a credit card...like an American Express card, which I used.
Now I have a "Blue" American Express card which is big on the "cash back" rewards. The more I spend, the more I get back in rewards. Currently I get 1% back on all my everyday purchases (gas, grocery, drugstore) and .5% on everything else. Not much, but hey, better than nothing. There is an incentive to spend more, however, that would increase my rewards. Once I spend $6500, I get 5% back on my everyday purchases, and 1.25% on everything else (it resets every year though...it's not like I earn 5% for the rest of my life once I reach the goal of $6500).
So back to the poker. To make a deposit, I used my American Express card, which was charged...and pushed me closer to my $6500 limit. And then I withdrew the money through my checking account, and will pay off my credit card balance with the withdrawal. Do you see where I'm going with this???
Theoretically I could deposit $6500 into my poker account using my American Express card, reach my reward limit, withdraw the funds from my poker account, and pay off my balance. I would reach my new reward threshold, AND I would have actually made .5% of my $6500 charge back ($32.50) in rewards. I would be making money by doing nothing by shifting funds in a circle!
But...while taking advantage of this apparent loophole, I feel dishonest. I feel like I'm stealing, even though technically I am well within my rights to deposit and withdrawal money. Now I know the poker site would say that if I'm depositing money into their site, I should probably play with some if it...but there are no restrictions or rules saying I have to. Again, I'm not doing anything that isn't against my legal right.
So what would you do? 5% back on my grocery and gas bills for the rest of the year sounds nice. But is it morally wrong?
~Mikey D
You have to give it to ESPN and their baseball writers/analysts. They are pretty top-notch at what they do (especially compared to the NFL "analysts"...Keyshawn Johnson? Really???). If you ever listen to them, watch them on TV, or read their writing, they know their stuff and are well-respected in baseball.
And while they occasionally write the article that criticizes a player or questions the moves made by a team, they rarely attack a player. When I say attack, basically I mean they refrain from saying a player sucks, and they refrain from saying why he sucks. Instead, they use terms like "his skills are limited", or "his bat speed has diminished", or "he's in the twilight of his career". You know, polite baseball talk.
But Keith Law! Sugarcoating? Nope, not from him! He wrote an article where he ripped some of the baseball moves that Kansas City has made recently, including a trade that brought them Yuniesky Betancourt over from the Mariners. I have never heard (or read) an ESPN writer rip a guy like this. Tell me how you really feel, Keith...
"On Friday, the Royals topped that move with an even worse one, trading for Yuniesky Betancourt, who might very well be the worst everyday player in the majors, and actually giving up something of value in Danny Cortes, a hard-throwing pitching prospect with command and makeup issues, and Derrick Saito, who projects at least as a lefty specialist if the Mariners choose to push him up the ladder.
Betancourt does nothing well on a baseball field. He can't hit and has lost bat speed since reaching the majors. He hacks at everything he sees, and even swings at pitches thrown to other hitters. He has next to no range at short. And he never hustles on anything -- not balls hit in his direction, not ground balls he might have a chance to beat out (well, before he let himself go physically). Other than all that, he's Honus Wagner."
Haha, he "even swings at pitches thrown to other hitters." Nice, Keith, nice. I'd love to hear a response from the Royals or better yet, Betancourt himself. Although they're both probably too busy being awful right now.....hiyo!!!!
~Mikey D
So I would say I'm the typical American "casual" soccer fan. Like the big matches, don't really care much about anything else. Because of this I admittedly don't have much of an understanding of the in's and the out's of the professional aspects of the game.
Lately in my ESPN ticker watching I'm seeing a lot of soccer news. I'm seeing guys being sold- like they were cattle- for HUGE amounts of money. I'm seeing guys that are being "loaned" from one team to another. I'm seeing American guys leave the U.S. team to play for European club teams. I found out that the U.S. soccer team has both an 'A' and a 'B' squad.
This is very confusing to me (I can picture Kevin right now going, "What's not to get?"). Isn't the U.S. in the middle of CONCACAF to try to qualify for the World Cup? Shouldn't all U.S. players be all-hands-on-deck to not only make sure we qualify, (although I'm sure there's little doubt after their recent performances in South Africa) but to also develop team chemistry by playing together? Or is soccer one of those sports where guys can go their separate ways for an extended period of time and then magically come back together and play like they haven't missed a beat? I guess I'm wondering how much of a factor team chemistry in teams' overall success.
And why do they allow 'A' and 'B' squads? To me there should be just one. You have one international roster, and if you need to substitute players because of injuries, performance, etc., than you do it. Sending out your 'B' squad against some small country because you know you'll win is just mean. I remember in high school Okemos' tennis team accidentally registered for two tournaments on the same day, and they ended up sending their JV team to one (the one we were in). I can remember the match still, because I was so excited to play Okemos' varsity team (they were really good), and I was just tremendously letdown having to play against their JV doubles team. It just didn't have as much meaning, even though I would have probably been slaughtered by the varsity team. I can kind of imagine it being the same in some sort of small way for those other countries as well.
Why don't they do trades in soccer with the big names? In American sports you hear all the time about the greedy owners and the greedy players. Can you imagine if the Cavaliers sold LeBron James to the Knicks for 100 million? That would never happen, and if it did, American sports fans (especially the ones in Cleveland), would talk about how greedy the owner was by fattening his pockets with the millions of dollars he made. So why is it a common occurrence in soccer? Are these players being sold from one league to another, where trades cannot happen? Is that what is going on with the loan of a player as well? I just need some clarification.
To wrap this up, perhaps all of these questions contribute to what's wrong with soccer's effort to become more popular here in the U.S.. It seems that players are on 394297 teams and they are constantly moving. There's European leagues, the MLS, the national team, youth teams, and different tournaments throughout the year...it's so much to keep track of. Couple that with teams selling and loaning players, guys from the MLS going to Europe and vice versa. It feels impossible to keep up with. With American sports, I know where guys are (the main ones). Albert Pujols is with the Cardinals, and he isn't going to be traded or sold...ever (at least not while he's in his prime). Then again, soccer is the world's game, so I suppose it does make sense to have guys bouncing from one continent to another.
Wow, a soccer post. Didn't know I had that in me =).
~Mike
Wow.
Just wow.
Last year was great, but this year was even better. That's right, I said it- even better.
Ravi Ubha, an ESPN tennis columnist, has already put out his list of the greatest Wimbledon finals. He puts today's Federer-Roddick number three on the list, behind Borg-McEnroe at two (I'm too young to remember that one), and Nadal-Federer from last year at one. Now last year I wrote an entry about how last year's Wimbledon was not the greatest Wimbledon finals match ever (I liked number four on Ubha's list, Rafter-Ivanisevic). While both men played extremely well, I didn't like style of tennis they played. Wimbledon is about big serves and great net play...which we didn't see last year. I have no doubt in my mind Sampras would have eaten both men alive if he was playing in his prime. Last year was a testament to how weak the competition is on the men's side of tennis.
Today's final, however, was fantastic. I put it number two on my list of all-time great Wimbledon finals, ahead of last year's. Today was Wimbledon, grass court tennis at its finest.
Big serving? Roddick was broken once in five sets (the last game of the match) with a serve that topped 140+ miles per hour. Federer struggled returning it all day long. And Roddick struggled just as much. Federer came up with a career-high fifty aces. Fifty! It's what saved him today, and it's what guys like Sampras and Ivanisevic used to use as a weapon to win matches. When you only have three service games broken total in a combined 77 games...that's just amazing focus and great serving.
What made last year's finals so great was that both men were playing their best- which is why the match lasted as long as it did (that and they both refused to come to the net to end fucking points...thank you, Roddick, for doing that today). Today, the match, for a Wimbledon record 77 games, went very quickly. You'd think playing thirty games into the fifth set would have taken them into the darkness like last year's final. But when you play great grass-court tennis at its highest level, this is the result you get. Points don't last because they're already won- either off serves or winners (107 winners for Federer, 74 for Roddick). Last year's tennis was at a high-level, this year's was at the highest of levels. Both men had to be perfect and dominate on their service games, and they both were.
16-14 in the 5th set? To me, that says it all. What more could you say? What more could you want out of a tennis match?
Second best Wimbledon finals of all-time. I wish Andy could have won this one; it would have meant a lot to him. I used to not like him at all, but he's grown on me, now that he's curbed his attitude and is shutting up and playing tennis.
I'll be rooting for him in the U.S. Open.
~Mikey D
The Hangover
Review: Thumbs Middle
When someone says that a movie is going to be awesome, most of the time there's a letdown when you go to see it. When another person says that the movie is awesome, even after someone told them it was going to be awesome, you are setting yourself up for twice the letdown. So after all these great reviews about how awesome The Hangover was, I just had to see it.
Overall...eh. I think five years ago I would have found this freakin' hilarious, but I think I've been over-staturated in raunchy/silly comedies over the years. I would relate The Hangover to Old School in the type of comedy that it is, but just not as funny in my opinion (perhaps that's because Old School came first).
But don't get me wrong, it still had its funny moments. I laughed a lot, but not as much as I thought I would. It was also a raunchy movie at times...something I didn't particularly enjoy. Breast feeding and a fat guy getting head from an old lady (yes, they showed that...)? Sometimes you feel like the producers/writers were purposefully going out of their way to be over the top, which just cheapens the movie.
Anyway, the movie is worth a look for you to make your own opinions. Definitely a one-time viewing for me, though. And on a side note...a family that sat behind us brought their little daughter to it, maybe no more than five years old. How disturbing...and I wonder why my sixth grade kids I teach are having sex and cussing like sailors. Go figure.
Taken
Review: Thumbs Up
If you like 24, I don't know how you can't like this movie. Old government agent's daughter gets kidnapped and he goes on a kick-ass rampage to get her back. Sound familiar? It's not going to win any awards for script writing, that's for sure, and there are better car chase and fight scenes in other movies, but overall, not a bad movie.
It really was like watching Jack Bauer. Liam Neeson (the main character) literally killed every bad guy he came across. I mean, what more could you ask for? He was ruthless wherever he went, including shooting an ex-friend's wife to get information. Could you imagine me shooting Stacey to get information out of you, Adam??? I know, I could too (just kidding, just kidding...I'd totally just torture it out of you)!!! The movie even had terrible bad-guy gunfire, which is the mark of any good action show/movie (see GI-Joe and 24).
It's worth a watch on DVD. It was enjoyable, and gave me my post-24 fix for the summer.
~Mikey D
Admittedly, it's been a long while since I've been excited to go out and purchase a video game. But come July 7th, I will be truly excited.
The Bigs 2 is coming out!!! I absolutely loved the first, and from what I hear, they've only improved it...which means it will be completely awesome.
And watching the trailer (especially the end) only makes me want it more.
"That's not just a dinger, we gotta ding-donger!"
~Mikey D
