The power of Blog compels me

This is absurd. Yesterday, I made my first post in 17 days, and now, here I am making a second entry in a single 12 hour period. What's more, after just lamenting about how I do not wish for my blog to be stuck with the sports schtick, I find myself on the cusp of what will inevitably be the first in a long line of sports related rants. By the time March Madness and spring training get here this journal could become unbearable.

Last night I learned that the Chicago Cubs made what is likely to be the last transaction of any serious import this offseason. This is the one that all we Cub fans have waited the entire free agent season for. Hendry & Co. spurned Nomar, made no attempt at Damon, got outbidded on Furcal, and got outmaneuvered in the trade heavy winter meetings. Sure, they got Juan Pierre, but they missed out on acquiring other perfect fits such as Luis Castillo and Milton Bradley. Some have said that Castillo was unnecessary since the Cubs resigned Todd Walker. But if that's the case, why then, are they reportedly trying to move him out of the Northside? And while Milton Bradley has had his issues, the only single plus remaining that I can see in Dusty Baker is player relations. If ever there was a man Bradley could play for, it is Dusty.

But at last, the front office has been redeemed. I see the finish line and I understand the master plan. The Cubs have shown me the answer, and its name is Jacque Jones. Hoo-friggin'-rah!

You see, the Cubs have decided to not try to improve but to just appear as though they have tried to do so. That really is the only explanation. Why else would the Cubs complain about Nomar's injury in 2005 and think of what could have been, only to not resign him nor replace his bat in the lineup? Why else would the Cubs spend more money on the bullpen for 2 relievers than they have on all other FA's combined? Why else would the Cubs not bring back a fan favorite right fielder and replace him with an identical model? Compare Burnitz' numbers with those of Jacque Jones: a batting avg. of .255 compared to .249, 24 HR's to 23, 87 RBI's to 73, an OBP of .322 to .319.

There are, however, a few differences between Burny and Jacque. The first being age. This April Jacque and Burnitz will turn 31 and 37 respectively. Of course that just allows the Cubs to overpay him for a multiyear contract as opposed to a single season deal with Burnitz. Their second disparity is in basestealing. Jones had 13 steals in 17 attempts last season versus 5 steals in 9 attempts for Burnitz. This, nevertheless, is irrelevant because Jones' 13 steals in Minnesota rounds down to about 5 in the Cubs' idle running game. The third difference is in their defense. Jacque Jones along with Torii Hunter and Shannon Stewart made up possibly the best defensive outfield in baseball. But Burny is no slouch himself. He's always had a terrific arm and in his first year at Wrigley, he handled the carroms in the right field corner like he had played there his entire career. So by the time you factor in the adjustment period for Jacque to adapt from turf to grass and from a tarp covered wall to an ivy covered brick blockade the defensive exchange will have amounted to a push.

Naturally, the last discrepancy between the two players is the largest and is what it all comes down to...money. Of course one would expect that the Cubs are saving money by substituting with Jones, or at the very least are paying the same. But anyone that would expect this has a characteristic not possessed by the Chicago Cubs' front office: the need to make sense. Actually, Jacques Jones made $5 million last year and was denied salary arbitration by the Minnesota Twins. Conversely, Burnitz made $4.5 million with the Cubs in 2005 and will likely receive a paycut wherever he lands. While the financial details of Jacque Jones' new 3 year contract have not been released, I would put money on every cent that I'm off that it is worth more than $5 million per year and that he winds up outearning Burnitz by at least $2 million next season.

But now that the Cubs have replaced Burny's production (albeit at a greater cost), all they have to do is find a way to recover Nomar's presence. There are rumors of trade talks with Baltimore for Miggy Tejada, but that is all they are, rumors. Somehow I doubt the Orioles will dump their disgruntled star for Jerry Hairston the way the Cubs did theirs just a year ago. Which gives me an idea...do you think Sosa could play short?

No theme blog and a must-see movie

When I first set up this blog I had every intention of creating a new entry at least twice a week. I should have known better than to expect such results from myself, as I am, with all due respect to Keith, the biggest procrastinator I have ever known and likely will ever meet. The thing is, I really like the idea of having a blog. I have dedicated a lot of time to thinking about topics for sharing but have not made myself sit and type them. It was only after seeing that Keith (Keith of all people) has a blog AND that he already has 2 entries (as opposed to my 1) that I became motivated enough to return to blogging. To Keith, I, as I'm sure are all my faithful readers, am truly grateful.

As I've said already, I truly have devoted myself to thinking of meaningful issues to address. However, I am having difficulty deciding on which to actually discuss. I could easily talk about sports till I'm (and sooner, you are) blue in the face, but my friend, Eddie, usually covers all the sports bases that would interest me. (Disclaimer: This by no means suggests that I will not rant about sports in future columns, just that I have no intention of my blog becoming sports-themed. Not that there's anything wrong with that, Eddie) By ruling out sports, that pretty much leaves poker as the biggest element of my life worth sharing. But talking poker bores me and if I worry about being labeled as a sports blog, I definitely would not want my blog to be type-cast as a poker column. Besides, I suspect that Keith will discuss all the poker that I, you, and anyone else would ever care to hear. I could decide to go ultra-cliche and have this become my personal diary where I recount my each day's remarkably uneventful events, which would inevitably circle back to poker and sports. That is unless you care to hear about my daily diet and bathroom tendencies. I don't know what this leaves but it is likely that I will share my opinion on any number of topics in the areas of current events, religion, sports, entertainment, and absolutely anything else that strikes my fancy.

At long last I arrive at today's topic. Quite likely you have not heard of the film, "Crash." It was released in May of this year to sparkling reviews but little in the way of public attention. I regret that I did not make it a big enough point to see it in theatres or to watch it when it was released to video. But a few weeks ago I saw the DVD on sale at a store and convinced my dad to purchase it. Not surprisingly he had never heard of it. What's worse, when he asked me to explain what it was about, I had no clue how to reply. I had seen a couple of trailers 6 months prior and all that I had ascertained was that it was racially themed. After watching the film I realized just how much of an understatement that was. The movie has literally no plot, only its theme, and it's all the better for it. In short, the premise behind "Crash" is to convey the impact that race has in our everyday lives. I will not attempt to interpret the film or to explain the story that it tells. I could try, but to do so would be an extreme injustice.

As you may have guessed though, I was deeply affected by "Crash" and have made it a personal goal to promote this movie. Clearly the marketing campaign upon its release was not effective in the slightest; a travesty Hollywood has not seen since the Terminator became the Governator. "Crash" is a movie that I feel people need to see. There is not a single message that will be universally translated to every viewer. But each person that sees it will take away something different. Most importantly, it will make people think. And the more they think the more likely they are to talk about it and share their thoughts. Perhaps the biggest message that the movie taught me was the need for communication, and no, I don't mean emails and cell phones. I refer to a need for people to openly discuss their thoughts and opinions and their emotions. Communication and understanding go hand-in-hand. The more open the lines of communication, the greater our understanding for each other. In all of history nearly every tragedy has been a direct result of misunderstanding between parties. So to communicate is to avert disaster.

Enough preaching from me. It is not my intent to dictate what you should take from "Crash." My hope is that anyone that reads this will watch this movie. You might love it. You might hate it. Heck, you might hate me for convincing you to watch it. All that I ask is that you do.

Be My Friend Again

Not having a profound topic to discuss in this, my inaugural blog entry, I decided to use the opportunity to formally apologize to my good friend, Keith.

Yesterday, I found myself in a sour mood. The mood was such that I did not want to speak to, or be in the company of, another living soul. (The only possible exception being my dog, Rufus. But since he lives with my parents, he was not readily available to comfort me). I get in these moods from time to time, but this one was truly unique. Not only did I not wish to speak to anyone else, but I was unable to talk to myself without being further upset. (Sidenote: Not being able to talk to myself may not seem like a big deal, but it is something I frequently do. It's not that I'm crazy (though maybe I am), it's that I routinely think aloud when I am alone). However, on this day the sound of my own voice only angered me more. So much so, that while I was listening to music, I refused to sing along with the lyrics, instead opting to hum loudly to the melody. (OK, maybe I need to investigate the "crazy" possibility a little more thoroughly :)

So there I sat at my computer, wildly humming to Coldplay and playing online poker*, when Keith IM'd me. And, of course, in my condition I had no intention of messaging back. So naturally, I ignored him. About 5 minutes later my cell phone rings. It's Keith calling. I don't answer. He leaves a voicemail, which I listen to. He starts by calling me a bum (ain't it the truth) and says he knows I'm ignoring him because he can see that I'm playing poker (Rookie move). The rest of the message is to invite me to dine with him and other friends (What a nice guy!). I don't call back (Not a nice guy). About 15 minutes after the first call, Keith calls again. And, wouldn't you know, again I don't answer. I spent the rest of the evening watching a couple of DVDs and wallowing in self pity.

I woke up this morning and began to reflect on my conduct. It was probably wrong of me to just ignore him like that, but at the time it felt like the right thing to do. Why should I share my misery with someone else? I'm a firm believer in the idea, "If you don't have anything good to say, then don't say anything at all." Well, I definitely had nothing good to say.

You'll all be glad to know that today I am back to my old self, or I would not be typing this. So if anyone talks to Keith, please tell him that. Thanks.




*(While true that losing at poker was probably a contributing factor to my antisocial state, I have endured many losing sessions without developing such an attitude. In fact, losing usually causes me to seek out my friends, not hide from them.)