Premature Calculation

The pre-season college football rankings were released today.  On August 7th.  Over three weeks before the first real games are even played.  Are they really necessary in today's game?

I've always had issues with ranking teams so early.  After all, how is anyone supposed to gauge how 18- and 19-year olds are going to perform on college football's biggest stages?  In fact, pre-season poll numbers may only serve to prop up some teams that really aren't that good.  After all, if a #2 team survives a lackluster opener, how far would they really fall?  They're the #2 team, after all, even if the lower-ranked teams behind them might be better teams.

But more to the point, these rankings never seemed less relevant.  In past seasons, before the era of the Bowl Championship Series, pre-season rankings were the only way to gauge title contenders.  An early-season loss by a top-ranked team meant not only a tumble in the standings but a short-circuit to national title hopes.

But with the advent of the BCS came changes; most notably, the first actual BCS ranking wasn't released until late October.  That meant that all the prior poll results didn't explicitly count -- they merely factored into the ranking that determined the BCS score.  Even so, poll position was a key component of the BCS ranking.

While the BCS was an improvement over choosing a national champion by vote, it had its flaws and detractors.  That ultimately led to the creation of the College Football Playoff and the committee that makes the selections.  That CFP Committee uses strength-of-schedule as one of the key factors in determining their ranks.  In fact, there is very little reliance on polls, but rather how a team has been playing.  The end result is that an early-season loss carries much less penalty than a loss in November.

So if the Playoff Committee doesn't go by the polls, and the first ranking don't even come out until mid-season, then what exactly is the value of a pre-season poll?  I suppose fans need something to argue about until the real games begin.

Maybe Stanton Can Pitch?

This is my "I know it, you know it,
but what am I supposed to say?" face

With the non-waiver trade deadline approaching, baseball insiders have flooded us with impending trade rumors.  Some haven't panned out, but as an actual trade gets closer, the information becomes more reliable.  So it was with a grain of salt that I read the Yankees were making a push for Zach Britton, the Orioles closer.

A closer?  Did I miss the season-ending injury to Aroldis Chapman? No, okay, so another setup man?  Are the Yankees such a perfect machine that the only part that needed tinkering was to improve their bullpen from the left side?

Brian Cashman spent the off-season by trading for Giancarlo Stanton, to upgrade their already outstanding right-handed power-hitting and stacked outfield.  In other words, nice, but decidedly unnecessary.

Instead, the Yanks went to war with a rotation of Luis Severino, Masahiro Tanaka, CC Sabathia, Sonny Gray and Jordan Montgomery.  As we know, Montgomery was quickly injured, and his replacements pitched about as well as Sonny Gray.  With Tanaka on the DL for a stretch, Yankee starters were stretched thin.  Enter... Britton?

After the game, news of the deal reached the manager's office.  A bemused Aaron Boone had this to say of his club's most recent acquisition:

"Any time you can add to a strength, cover up a weakness or whatever, when you can add good players to your team, obviously that's a good thing."

Or, roughly translated, "Whatever this was, even though it doesn't actually address a need we have, it's not a bad thing.  Besides, I'm not going to sit here and second-guess my boss."

Meanwhile, the team with the best record in baseball and an already formidable starting rotation added another piece: the Red Sox traded for former Yankee Nate Eovaldi.  Now, I won't sit here and tell you that Eovaldi is that much better than Gray, since neither one has excelled in pinstripes.  Nor do I think that Eovaldi makes the Red Sox much better, though how much better can you be than on pace for 111 wins?

Acquiring Britton does not preclude the Yankees from getting that missing starter.  And a Britton-fortified bullpen is a better bullpen than it was yesterday.  But I don't think that this trade alone helps the Yankees catch Boston.  We'll see what the future holds in New York.

Mach-ado About Nothing

I have a lot of respect for Ken Rosenthal, even for his choice in neckties.  But like so many baseball beat writers these days (or for any sport, really) the prime directive is to publish.  Whether or not it makes any sense doesn't seem to matter.  Much of what is said or written will be quickly forgotten if the information doesn't pan out.

To wit: apparently Rosenthal, the MLB Network Insider, thinks that the Yankees are stepping up their interest in Manny Machado.  Now, don't get me wrong: Machado is the top target at the trade deadline, an All-Star who's having a career season going into his walk year.  But the Yankees?  Why?

Anyone watching the Yankees play this season knows a few things: they hit a lot of homers.  They score a lot of runs.  They have a lockdown bullpen.  They have suspect starting pitching.  So as the Yankees look to shore up the team heading towards the deadline, they are looking at a shortstop?

I thought the trade for Giancarlo Stanton was somewhat nonsensical, trading for a player you already had to "improve" an area of overwhelming team strength.  That they gave up barely nothing to get him certainly mitigated most doubts.  But somehow I think the price tag for a superstar in your own division will be higher in the thick of a pennant race.

But even if you could get Machado for a reasonable price, WHY WOULD YOU?  At short, they have Didi Gregorious, a player so loveably likable that even a slump for the entire month of May didn't diminish his appeal.  In the unlikely event that Machado would agree to move back to third base (something he said he's unwilling to do) the Yanks have one of the leading candidates for Rookie of the Year, Miguel Andújar.    

Meanwhile, once you move past Cy Young candidate Luis Severino, the Yankees rotation looks shaky at best.  Masahiro Tanaka has been good but is injury-prone, while we wait for C.C. Sabathia to show his age.  Though it seems like Sonny Gray is trying to pitch his way out of pinstripes, he still takes the ball every 5 days.  As does Domingo German, a serviceable but unreliable youngster.  But by all means, let's go send a bunch of top-level prospects to fill the hole we don't have at short or third.

Again, no offense to Ken.  Maybe he did hear that the Yankees were interested.  Maybe the Yankees are just trying to drive up the price for some other team.  Either way, I don't foresee Manny Machado in Yankee pinstripes any time soon.

Another LeBron Sweepstakes

No, the NBA Finals aren't over yet -- at least, not technically -- but the rampant speculation over where LeBron James might go next has gotten hotter just as the Cavaliers have gone cold.  Las Vegas oddsmakers, meanwhile, can't be bothered to wait out the inevitable.  BetDSI created an odds list of LeBron's potential landing spot for next season:

The Lakers have long been rumored as LeBron's preferred landing spot, and in recent days, those rumors even have him teaming up with Paul George.  But if you're LeBron James, do you really want to compete with Magic, Kareem, Kobe, Shaq, and all the ghosts of Lakers Past?  And it's not like bringing a lone championship to L.A. will be big news.

Like the Lakers, the 76ers also have some young stars, a strong enough supporting cast to give them the second-best odds.  But with the Philadelphia front-office suddenly in disarray, does LeBron really want to cast his lot with this organization?

I'll skip over the Heat, because, the Heat?  Been there, done that.  And besides, the next team on the list is why I'm here.

HEY LeBRON -- SIGN WITH THE KNICKS!

Long considered the Mecca of basketball, even as bad as the Knicks have been, New York is still New York.  No, LeBron probably won't increase his Q score or pick up any more endorsements than he already has, past arguments about the benefits of starring on Broadway.  But to win in New York is like nothing else.  LeBron should have a conversation with Mark Messier about what it's like when you become The Savior and bring a championship to a starving New York fan base.  Winning a title in Cleveland?  Whoopee.

And unlike with the Lakers, who will LeBron be competing against?  Clyde Frazier?  All the rings Patrick Ewing never won?  The field is wide open.

The Knicks just don't have New York to offer, though.  David Fizdale, reportedly a James' favorite from their days in Miami, is now the head coach.  Kristaps Porzingis, recovering from surgery but expected back in 2019, can be LeBron's All-Star sidekick.  Add a top-10 draft pick this summer to an improved Tim Hardaway, Jr. and the Knicks core, starring LeBron James, is suddenly competitive in the East.

LeBron copped out the first time by running off to South Beach to form a super team.  He won a couple of rings there but realized winning that way just wasn't fulfilling.  He satisfied his critics and thrilled his hometown fans by returning to Cleveland and bringing them a title.

But basketball's biggest reclamation project lies in the heart of New York City.  Madison Square Garden is in dire need of gentrification, and the basketball equivalent of Bob the Builder may be looking for a new job.

Can we fix it?  

Yes we can!

Aaron Boone's First Test

With an embarrassment of riches at his disposal, Aaron Boone was handed the reins for the 2018 New York Yankees.  As a first year manager, most expected Boone to go through some growing pains during his on-the-job training.  That's what Spring Training is for, after all.

Yet not three weeks into the young season, Boone's Yankees find themselves where they didn't think they'd be: at .500, 8-8, looking up in the standings at both the Red Sox (not surprisingly) and Blue Jays (unexpectedly).  George Steinbrenner is long gone, so there won't be any bombastic declarations emanating from the Bronx.  Boone's job is safe.  But that's not to say there isn't danger lurking.

Contributing to the Yanks' subpar start are the struggles of Giancarlo Stanton.  Adding the reigning NL MVP to the their already formidable lineup made the Yankees a popular choice for the World Series.  But Stanton has underperformed even the rest of his teammates.  He has been uncharacteristically bad in his first 16 games in the Bronx, batting just .197 while striking out 29 times, the most in the AL.

After last night's loss to the lowly Marlins, Boone was asked about Stanton.  The new manager expressed confidence in his scuffling slugger:

"He’ll get rolling here and eventually the league will pay for some of his early struggles."

But then Boone continued, saying that he'd consider dropping Stanton down in the lineup:

"I might flirt with splitting different guys up and stuff, but not moving him down too far.  Because he’s one at-bat away from getting locked back in, and then the last thing you want is him hitting down in the order and getting pitched around."

I'd argue that the last thing you want is to tell your $235 million MVP that you don't trust him to hit in the 3-hole right now.  This isn't some nervous rookie, a slumping Aaron Judge circa 2016, that you can move down to ease up the pressure.  By virtue of his résumé, and his contract, Stanton has no place to hide.  Batting him 5th or 6th won't likely change anything, except maybe make him press harder.  Imagine getting dropped in the lineup and still not hitting.  Yankee Stadium fans will be booing him before he steps into the box.

Playing with the lineup, shaking up the bullpen -- these are all rookie manager moves.  Veteran managers understand that the baseball season is long, and most times, these things work themselves out.  A former player like Boone should know that.  And he probably does, which makes the possibility of him dropping Stanton in the lineup all the more puzzling.

One last thing before I go.  Not that the stakes are as high, but the last time a manager decided to move a struggling slugger down in the lineup, it didn't work out well.  It's safe to say that the relationship between Joe Torre and Alex Rodriguez never recovered from that October move.  Making matters worse, it certainly didn't help that night.  Something Boone might want to keep in mind.

Tim Tebow Is Sorta Right

With each season's selections for the College Football Playoff comes the inevitable controversy surrounding those picks.  While the CFP committee chooses the four teams that they feel are the best in the country, there are always schools -- and fans of those schools -- who feel they were unjustly left out.

Much of the discussion this season centered around Alabama and Ohio State.  In the end, the committee chose the one-loss Crimson Tide over the two-loss Buckeyes, even though Ohio State was the Big Ten champion and Alabama didn't even win their division.  Ironically, Ohio State benefited from the same type of decision when they were picked to compete in last year's playoffs ahead of the Big Ten champ Penn State.

But somewhat lost in the shuffle was the University of Central Florida.  The UCF Knights finished the regular season unbeaten -- 12-0! -- but were only ranked 10th by the playoff committee.  After a win in the Peach Bowl over 7th-ranked Auburn, the cries of injustice grew louder.  So loud, in fact, that they reached the delicate ears of Tim Tebow.  Tebow's response?

"There’s no question UCF [was overlooked].  But you need to go tell their president and athletic director to play a couple big-time teams in the regular season. You ask any analyst before they played Auburn and it would be really hard to justify them being in the top four with our eyes."

Tim has a point... the point being, an undefeated team that didn't beat anyone worth beating is not all that special.  More to the point, though: of the four teams that made the playoffs, which one would UCF beat?

Back in November, UCF gave up 42 points and over 600 yards in a win over USF.  What do you suppose Baker Mayfield and his Oklahoma offense would do against the Knight's defense?

So while the Knights were impressive in beating Auburn, that same Tigers team was manhandled themselves by Georgia in the SEC title game.  In fact, the Bulldogs literally ran over the Tigers with 238 yards rushing.  And let's not forget the Georgia defense: they held Auburn to only 259 yards of offense compared to the 400+ yards the Tigers gained in the Peach Bowl.

Over in the other bracket sits Alabama.  I'll just let you digest what the Crimson Tide did to the former #1-ranked, defending champion Clemson. While their 24-6 throttling may have lacked a degree of excitement, the Tide's methodical offense and staunch defense left Clemson with only 188 yards of offense.

What about UCF beating Clemson, you say?  After all, Auburn had beaten both Alabama and Georgia -- the two teams that will play for the national title -- and UCF knocked off Auburn.  Transitive Property anyone?

But even if we agree that Clemson looked like the most vulnerable team among the final four, that doesn't mean UCF was ever in any position to overtake them in the rankings.  This Clemson team was at or near the top of the rankings for most of the season.  While that doesn't mean anything on the field of play, it means a lot when it comes to picking who belongs in the college football playoffs.

Maybe UCF puts a Power 5 team on their schedule next time.  Maybe they even beat them.  Until then, they'll have to settle for calling themselves the national champions.

Wide Margin for Error

To paraphrase Shakespeare, I've come to praise Brian Cashman, not to bury him.  Okay, maybe "praise" isn't quite accurate, but this post will be a lot nicer to him than what I usually have to say.

When I first learned of the Giancarlo Stanton trade, I'll admit I had mixed feelings.  On the one hand, the Yankees just added the reigning National League MVP and barely gave up anything in return.  What a deal!  On the other hand, the Yankees did inherit the bulk of Stanton's gargantuan contract, 10 years and $220 million dollars-worth of it.  So much for getting under that Luxury Tax cap.

The other thing that left me scratching my head about this trade is the fact that the Yanks already have their own Stanton on the roster: his name is Aaron Judge, and he also plays right field.  So now the Yankees have two linebacker-sized, right-handed hitting sluggers who play right field.  Will one of them be the DH?  I don't know if Stanton is quite ready to give up his glove yet.  

Not only that, the second best hitter on the Yanks was, before this trade, Gary Sanchez.  As you might remember, Sanchez is a catcher, meaning he can't play every day behind the plate.  So if you want Sanchez to become your DH on days that he's not catching, then one of your right fielders doesn't play.  Unless you move one of your right fielders out of position and into left field... but then Brett Gardner doesn't play... unless you move Gardner back to center field, which means that Aaron Hicks doesn't play.  See what I mean?!?

All these machinations aside, it's a net positive to have Giancarlo Stanton in the Yankees' lineup (position TBD).  Which brings me back to my original point: Brian Cashman made a nice trade.  In fact, of all the things that a GM does, making trades is the thing Cashman does best.  (In fact, it may be the only thing he does well.  But no burying here.)

But take a closer look at this trade: the Yankees, with nearly unlimited resources, were able to wait out the Marlins until they had no choice but to trade Stanton for pennies on the dollar.  And there were a lot of dollars; so many dollars that most MLB teams couldn't afford it.  Does it take savvy baseball acumen to pay the most money?  Do you think other teams, even those on Stanton's wish list, could have given up a better package in return for Stanton if they were willing to take on as much salary as the Yankees did?  I'd sure think so.

Being able to stretch the budget also allows Cashman to indulge in his worst capacity as a GM: signing free agents to terrible contracts.  What other teams in baseball, save maybe the Dodgers, could afford to sit Jacoby "The Albatross" Ellsbury for most of the season?  Or resign Aroldis Chapman for more money than any closer has ever been given, only to see him lose the closer role for a stretch.  Throw in the gaudy contracts handed to the pedestrian Chase Headley or the long-term yokes of C.C. Sabathia and Alex Rodriguez that had plagued the Yanks in the past, and you get a sense of just how much leeway Cashman really has. 

Yes, Cashman makes some nice trades.  But a lot of those trades are made to paper over the terrible signings that otherwise hold the Yankees back.  Just don't get me started on how he treats his managers...