The 2010 Spring Training Best Rotation Debate – Giant Season in Store for San Francisco

February 26, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Loyal Homer and Babe Ruthless.

If pitching rotations were two players deep, this debate would start and stop with the Seattle Mariners. The addition of Cy Young award winner Cliff Lee and the ability to resign an already proven Felix Hernandez makes the Mariners tough in any short series.

The problem with the Mariners rotation is that it drops off so severely after those two guys up front. And while the media (and Babe Ruthless) will donate a lot of time to trumpeting the greatness of the Yankees and the Red Sox, the best rotation in baseball right now as Spring Training is about to start is a sleeping Giant in the City by the Bay.

Most rotations in the major leagues have at least two solid starters. Good rotations require depth and two solid top rotation starters. The Giants have both, and are very dangerous as a result.

The Giants rotation as of right now is:

  1. Tim Lincecum
  2. Matt Cain
  3. Barry Zito
  4. Jonathan Sanchez
  5. Madison Bumgarner

We all know how great Tim Lincecum is. He is a two-time Cy Young award winner, and an ERA of three or over seems like a bad season to him. After a 2.62 ERA in 2008 (where he won a Cy Young award) he lowered it to 2.48 last season in his second award winning campaign. He also added four complete games, further proving his elite pitching status. But, I do not need to devote many pixels to proving Lincecum is an elite pitcher. We all know that.

Part of the reason I believe the Giants’ pitching staff is poised to breakout out is because of the development shown by young Matt Cain. Cain has gotten progressively better in each major league campaign, culminating in an outstanding 2009 season where he finished with a sub-three ERA (2.89, to be exact), and allowed just 70 earned runs throughout his 33 starts and 217-plus innings. Cain is not a strikeout pitcher, which makes him even more impressive. Lincecum will blow the ball right by hitters. Cain will induce ground balls and be efficient with pitches, adding another four complete games last season.

Now we start to uncover the depth of the Giants pitching staff. Barry Zito was supposed to be an anchor pitcher for the staff when the Giants shelled out record cash for him two long seasons ago. Zito, too, is a former Cy Young award winner. But, injuries forced changes in his mechanics. He has not thrown 200 innings since 2006. So, why is he such an important part of this pitching staff? Because something happened late last season with Barry Zito. Whatever mechanical inconsistencies he was suffered suddenly became resolved. Zito posted a 1.93 ERA in August, and finished the second half of the season with 2.83 ERA. Now the Giants rotation is not just top heavy… now a former Cy Young winner returning to form is good enough to fill the three spot in the rotation. Scary.

Young Jonathan Sanchez, the fourth starter in the Giants rotation, does not seem to be that important when skimming the stats. He did record a career best 4.24 ERA last season, but he grew in other ways, too. First, he threw a no-hitter. As good as Lincecum is, he does not have a no-hitter. After beginning the 2009 season with a 4.69 ERA, Sanchez posted a 3.83 after the break. That is excellent for a fourth starter. More, he had a 2.61 ERA in August. Sanchez has shown tremendous growth and the capacity to be a steady contributor in the rotation.

The fifth spot in the rotation is generally interchangeable. That is the case in San Francisco, at least for now. But, a young prospect named Madison Bumgarner is showing some promise. He only made one start last season, so the 1.80 ERA is not really a stat worth anything at this point. But, Bumgarner struck out 10 in that game. While some are concerned about a sudden drop in velocity from Bumgarner at the end of last season, throwing a fastball between 88-90 miles per hour did not seem to have any negative impact on his performance. In fact, the Giants coaching staff is not alarmed at all, and Bumgarner will have the opportunity to round out an already impressive pitching staff for the Giants as they enter 2010.

Certainly it is hard to predict how well the Giants will do this season. Who knows how good the bullpen will be, the defense behind this complete pitching staff, or the team’s hitting. One thing is for sure, the team that welcomed the major’s best staff to Spring Training last week was the San Francisco Giants.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 Spring Training Best Rotation Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The 2010 Spring Training Best Rotation Debate – The Yanks are Armed and Dangerous

February 26, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Sports Geek and Loyal Homer.

The New York Yankees are preparing to do something they have not done since the turn of the millennium – defend a World Series Championship. This year the Bronx Bombers enter spring training with a rotation that not only brought them an MLB leading 103 wins last season but also their elusive 27th World Series title. With a 28th championship in mind, the Yankees set sights on being the first team to win back to back World Series championships since, well, the Yankees. The Yankees were successful last year in large part because they returned to the strategy that made them the most dominant team of the late 1990s – power pitching. Today’s debate is about which team enters Spring Training with the best rotation, and the front runners are the defending champion New York Yankees.

Probably the best reason to like the Yanks’ chances of repeating, or even three-peating, is the fact that their top three spots in the rotation are comprised of the same solid core that helped them to win the championship in 2009. The top three guys – C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, and Andy Pettitte – are returning to anchor the rotation this season. The best part is they do not really bring any major baggage, either. Instead, the Yankees are able to add to a winning design rather than attempt to overhaul the system.

Last season questions existed about Sabathia’s ability to perform in the Big Apple. Similarly, many critics wondered if the former Toronto Blue Jays starter A.J. Burnett could fly solo without his mentor Roy Halladay. And still many others questioned if an aging Pettitte could stay healthy or stay out of the media (in the wake of the performance enhancing drugs scandal of last summer) long enough to be an asset to the Yankees. These questions are not questions anymore, especially after these three aces pitched for a collective 46 win and 540 strikeouts. What makes their stats even more impressive is that they accomplished this in the hitter friendly launching pad that is the new Yankee Stadium. All three guys showed up in a big way last season, and they are primed to repeat if not exceed their performance this season.

But the Yankees did not sit on their laurels in the offseason. Instead they were able to improve upon their already dominant pitching with the re-addition of Javier Vazquez. Vazquez, who was 15-10 for the Atlanta Braves last season with a sub-three ERA, returns to the Yanks after a six year absence. He was traded away in January of 2005 as part of the Randy Johnson acquisition after his emphatic collapse against the Red Sox during the 2004 ALCS. Since that time he has matured into an even better, more dependable pitcher. Last season he finished fourth in the NL Cy Young voting. To have a guy who almost won the Cy Young award as your fourth starter says a lot about the talent the Yankees rotation will field in 2010.

The fifth spot in the rotation is really the only one up for grabs at the moment, and even that proves to be a blessing rather than a curse. Pitching Coach Jeff Eiland has stated that he is excited about the competition heating up for the final starter vacancy. Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes appear to be the front runners for the starting gig. Both hurlers have experienced some degree of success as a starter, and maybe more importantly these guys have big game and playoff experience – which is something a lot of clubs cannot say about their ffifth starter. But Chamberlain and Hughes are not the only options. Alfredo Aceves, Chad Gaudin, and Sergio Mitre are all in the mix. Depending on how things go in the Grapefruit League, anyone of these guys could toe the rubber in the Bronx regularly next season.

This brings me to another point: The 2010 Yankees have something that many other teams cannot claim – depth. If guys need a rest or a stint on the DL, the Yankees will not have to settle for treading water until their stud returns. With the depth the Yankees have they can keep chasing the pennant, a feat in itself in the ultra-competitive American League East. The Yanks can simply call on one of their talented pitchers and give their other star the break they need. The Yankees’ stable is full of talent that is hungry for an opportunity to shine. Guys like Alfredo Aceves display a ton of immediate potential and are just waiting for their big break. Last season Aceves went 10-1 through 84 innings. To put that into perspective, Phil Hughes had a record of 8-3 through two more innings. This pitching staff is deep and talented, and the competition brings out the best in everyone.

Other teams may offer one or two dominant pitchers that might have better stuff (the Phillies’ addition of Roy Halladay and San Francisco’s stud Tim Lincecum come to mind), but they do not have the same quality running top to bottom throughout the rotation. As we saw in the 2009 World Series having one unstoppable pitcher – Cliff Lee – will only take a team so far. Even with the three man rotation used in the playoffs, teams still need a strong and balanced rotation. The only team that really rivals the Yankees’ rotation in terms of overall talent is – if dare write it – is the Boston Red Sox. But, despite the addition of John Lackey, the Red Sox still have a shaky back end of the rotation. The 2009 version of Dice-K was nowhere near the form the Red Sox were used to seeing in 2008 (4-6 with a 5.76 ERA in 2009). Tim Wakefield’s success over the past four years has been as shaky as his knuckleball. Similarly, Clay Buchholz, with his career 4.91 ERA and 12-14 record, has not proven himself to be the pitcher the Red Sox can depend on to shore up an unstable rotation. So, even that good staff does not compare with the Yankees 2010 rotation headed into Spring Training.

In the end we may see that the Yankees rotation does not live up to the expectations I have set for them. But that is not what this debate is about. This debate is about which team has the best rotation as we move toward the start of the regular season, and that certainly looks like the New York Yankees.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 Spring Training Best Rotation Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

The 2010 Spring Training Best Rotation Debate – Braves Have A Chance Every Night

February 26, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Sports Geek and Babe Ruthless.

As Spring draws closer we can anticipate warmer weather, conversations about Spring break, and the beginning of baseball season. All of the teams are now in the beginning stages of Spring training. I am definitely excited, and what is even more exciting for me is that the Atlanta Braves have gotten back to the formula that served them so well during their run of 14 consecutive division championships. They have put together a strong pitching staff from top to bottom, but it is their starting rotation that is going to win them a lot of games.

I believe the Braves are one of the few teams that can say that they have four guys who have a solid case to be the opening day starter. While it is hard to determine if they have a bonafide ace at this point, it is quite easy to say they have multiple players with the potential to be that ace by the end of the season.

Jair Jurrjens is one of the guys that I think may end up being the ace of the staff. He had a fine season in 2009, winning 14 games with an ERA of 2.61. If he had any type of run support he would have won close to 20 games and merited some Cy Young consideration. The one thing that concerns me about Jurrjens is the fact that he experienced some shoulder stiffness over the Winter. He had an MRI last week that revealed no structural damage. But as a fan, when I hear something like that, the first names that enter my mind are Tommy John and Dr. James Andrews. Keep in mind he did throw 215 innings last season.

Another young future ace the Braves have is Tommy Hanson. Braves fans have been hearing about Hanson for some time. He did not disappoint once he was called up to the big leagues shortly before midseason. He posted an 11-4 record with an ERA under three. The young fireballer has quickly become a favorite in Atlanta and his future is tremendously bright.

Two grizzled veterans make up the next two starting spots with Tim Hudson and Derek Lowe. Huddy, as he is referred to by teammates, is over a year removed from the aforementioned Tommy John surgery. But he showed the Braves enough in his return at the end of last season to reward him with a three-year contract. Hudson is the real wild card of this rotation, and this team. If he recaptures the form of his pre-surgery days, this team will make a strong run at the postseason.

Derek Lowe is coming off a down year, and those struggles led to his name being mentioned quite often in trade rumors during the offseason. But, despite the overall frustration by fans, he still managed to win 15 games.

Holding down the fifth slot in the rotation is Kenshin Kawakami. He was an extreme point of frustration for Loyal Homer at times last season, but as the season progressed he showed improvement. I believe part of the reason for his on-field improvement was the fact that he began to adjust to life in the USA after coming over from Japan. He ended up with an ERA under four. If he duplicates that as a fifth starter, the Braves will be more than pleased. What is sure to provide a big help to Kawakami is the addition of fellow countrymen Takashi Saito. With someone else to lean on, it will only add to Kawakami’s confidence.

Those five guys all have varying degrees of potential. If they stay healthy, I believe they have the best FIVE man rotation in the league.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The 2010 Spring Training Best Rotation Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Olympic Medal Quantity Versus Quality Debate – The Gold Standard

February 26, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer.

The Olympics continue to amaze me. As I am writing this, the medals for the Women’s Hockey Tournament are being awarded and the range of emotions among the women on the podium could not be more extreme.

Winning the bronze medal in this event was Team Finland, who earned their medal in a very exciting overtime thriller, defeating Sweden by a score of 3-2. This marks the first time in 12 years that the Finnish team will have won a medal in women’s hockey. Now, as they stand on the podium to receive their bronze medals, each one looks as though they just won the gold. It does not matter that they failed to win the entire tournament.

In the gold medal match, the two teams which were clear favorites throughout the entire tournament, Canada and the United States, faced off in a very intense battle where the Canadian team defeated the American’s by a score of 2-0, clinching gold for their nation.

For their efforts, the United States women have earned a silver medal. Yet, if you were to judge by the looks on their faces, you would think they had failed to even qualify for the games. The disappointment and heartbreak, despite having earned silver for themselves and their country, could not be more evident on their crestfallen faces.

This wide range in emotion serves to underscore the idea of expectation versus accomplishment. Each Olympian enters competition with their own unique set of expectations, which help determine their ultimate goals within the games. As Loyal Homer points out, simply being able to participate is reward enough for many athletes who make it to the Olympic Games. For others, though, it is about winning the gold.

Ultimately, the question of whether it is better to win a large number of medals regardless of what color they are, or to win fewer medals that are only gold, is a question of personal opinion. While every Olympian would obviously HOPE to win gold, there is a very large percentage of athletes who simply draw value from an opportunity to stand on the podium.

It should be pointed out that we are not discussing a large percentage of athletes within the context of this debate. Instead, we are evaluating degrees of greatness among those select few who have proven that they are better than the average competitor, even within Olympic ranks. Whether they win a great deal of medals of varying color, or they win a smaller handful of only gold, they have proven they are better than the “normal” Olympic athlete. For this class of athlete, simply being there is NOT good enough, because they rightfully believe they are the best in the world. They came to win, and so their expectations are naturally much higher. It is for that reason that I am awarding the verdict to Babe Ruthless.

The United States’ women’s hockey team is an example of this group. Undeniably one of the best teams in the world, they had their hearts set on nothing short of the gold medal. As Babe Ruthless discusses, this caliber of athlete strives only to win. Failure to achieve anything but the best result is a disappointment. I would not go so far as to call them “losers” (because there truly is no shame in winning silver or bronze… a fact brought up by Loyal Homer). But, nonetheless, they failed to achieve their ultimate goal.

Along with the expectations of each participant, their opportunity must also be considered in balance.

Whether on a national or an individual level, it is an outstanding accomplishment to claim the most decoration from the games. However, that number is not a fair measure by which athletes (or nations) can be compared. Using national medal count as an example, China and the United States sent the most athletes to the 2008 Summer Games. Not surprisingly, the top two nations in total medal count were China and the United States. I do not mean to diminish the value of winning the most medals, but that is a category which is affected a great deal by opportunity.

Not everyone has the opportunity to compete in 15 different Olympic events within their career. Some may only compete for one or two. What everyone DOES have, though, is the opportunity to win gold medal within each competition they participate. THAT is the standard by which everyone can be measured equally. Apolo Ohno has participated in multiple events over three different Olympic Games. Eric Heiden, on the other hand, only competed in ONE Olympic Games. It stands to reason that Ohno would have more medals than Heiden because he ha greater opportunity than Heiden to win medals. Heiden, however, won Gold EVERY SINGLE TIME he set foot on Olympic ice. That is an accomplishment that Ohno had the opportunity to do, but was not able to meet.

Once again, both Ohno and Heiden deserve recognition as being among the greatest Olympians in American history. However, in the question of which is greater at the Olympics – quality of medals or quantity – it is quality that wins the gold!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Olympic Quantity Versus Quality Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Olympic Medal Quantity Versus Quality Debate – Evaluating Olympic Greatness

February 25, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Babe Ruthless and Loyal Homer.

Apolo Anton Ohno made American history during the 2010 Olympic Games. After winning Bronze in the 1000m Short Track Speed Skating event, Ohno was able to drape his SEVENTH career Olympic medal around his neck, making him the most decorated American to have ever competed in the Winter Olympics.

With that Bronze, Ohno’s Olympic trophy case now holds:

Gold – 500m (2002) and 1500m (2006)

Silver – 1000m (2002) and 1500m (2010)

Bronze – 1000M (2006 and 2010) and 5000m Relay (2006)

Ohno’s career has definitely earned him a place in American history as one of the greatest Olympians of all time, and he may not be done yet!

Another member of that fraternity of “all-time greats” is Eric Heiden, the ‘Man of Gold’, who during the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid pulled off one of the most remarkable feats in Olympic history, winning Gold in every one of the five Speed Skating Events of that Olympics – 500m, 1000m, 1500m, 5000m, and 10,000m. It is a feat still unparalleled in the Winter Olympics 30 years later.

While Heiden went five-for-five in claiming Gold Medals during the 1980 Olympics, Ohno (who only has two Gold Medals in his Olympic career) actually has more TOTAL medals to his credit. It is because of that difference that I am asking my esteemed colleagues at The Sports Debates to compare the accomplishments of Ohno and Heiden against each other to determine which is the better performance. – As an individual athlete at the Olympics, is it better to win more total medals, but of varying rank, or to win fewer medals, but every one is Gold?

For this debate, Loyal Homer will argue that Ohno’s total medal count is the superior accomplishment, while Babe Ruthless will argue that Heiden’s accomplishment of winning only Gold Medals is greater, despite the fact that he has fewer total medals draped around his neck.

This is a debate that raged even at the national level during the 2008 Summer Games. By the close of those Olympics, the United States had taken home the most total medals, winning 110 in all (36 Gold, 38 Silver, and 36 Bronze). However, it was China who dominated strictly in terms of Gold Medal performances, winning 15 more than the next closest nation (USA) with 51 total Golds. The Chinese, who subscribe to the Ricky-Bobby philosophy of “If you’re not first, you’re last”, argued that theirs was the best performance of the Beijing Games, despite falling 10 medals short of the American count overall.

Both Ohno and Heiden deserve recognition for having accomplished Herculean feats of athletic prowess, but TSD is not here to recognize both of them – that just wouldn’t be any fun! Instead, for the sheer pleasure of creating discord EVEN in moments of triumph, the debaters today are being forced to choose between the greater of two remarkable accomplishments.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Olympic Quantity Versus Quality Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Olympic Medal Quantity Versus Quality Debate – More is Better

February 25, 2010

Read the debate intro and the argument by Babe Ruthless.

The Olympics are slowly winding down, leaving Bleacher Fan to contemplate what else there is to watch on television once the closing ceremonies are over. Others, however, are glad to see the event come to a halt. But today is surely a debate that will entertain you, whether you consider yourself an Olympic aficionado or not. Bleacher Fan has posed an interesting question to us – Which is more important in Olympics? The QUALITY of the medals won by each country or individual, or the QUANTITY of those medals. Without hesitation, I say QUANTITY – Give me more!

As I began to write my argument, I had the local news on the TV in the background, and they were showing some highlights of Bobsledding along with the other events that took place yesterday. I continued writing, relatively uninterested in the topic, because I don’t consider those as being “marquis” events. But then the sports anchor said, “As we take a look at the overall medal count….”, and I found myself looking up at the TV and the medal count tracker. Through last night’s events, the United States had won 28 overall medals (7 gold, 9 silver, and 12 bronze) with Germany and Norway in second and third, respectively. Even though I’ve only followed a few of the events, seeing that our great country was leading in overall medals made me proud. The first thing I saw was not that we had seven gold medals, nine silver, or twelve bronze. It was the fact that the number ‘28’ was next to that American flag.

Obviously, every Olympic competitor wants to win gold. It is what you train for, making it the ultimate prize. But are you considered a failure if you don’t win the gold? Is there shame in taking home the silver or the bronze? No, there is not. I hate to put it this way for fear of disregarding the talent that some of the Olympians have – and I personally hate when people use this cliché – but some of those athletes are just thrilled to be there. Winning any medal, even if it is a silver or bronze, would be a huge accomplishment for them. The last time I checked, silver medalists still get to take their medals home and display as they see fit. The same goes for bronze medalists.

By winning medals in several different events, an Olympic competitor proves that they are a true Olympian. They are able to show their diversity and overall athletic ability, not to mention the fact that it is also more jewelry to take home!

During the closing ceremonies, what I am most looking forward to seeing is that the United State of America has won most overall medals. Yes, it will be nice to have the most gold medals also, but I want the most!! If that happens, we Americans will be able to claim that we “won” the 2010 Winter Olympics, and that is the overall goal of the country!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share

1 Comment | The Olympic Quantity Versus Quality Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Olympic Medal Quantity Versus Quality Debate – Second Place is the First Loser

February 25, 2010

Read the debate intro and the opposing argument from Loyal Homer

The age old debate over which is better – quality or quantity – is something about which I am very passionate, and it is at the forefront of media attention right now because of the Vancouver Olympics. Countries and athletes are engaging in high profile competitions which ultimately entitle them to bragging rights about who is the best in the world at a given sport, at least for another four years. Certainly there is a divided opinion about whether it is better to have a greater quality of Olympic medals or a greater quantity of Olympic medals. But I am here to tell you gold is the only medal that matters, because it is the only medal that actually signifies winning. 

In life, and especially in sports, there are winners and losers. In fact, anyone who engages in a competition and does not win is a loser by the very definition of the word. I realize that many of our more politically correct readers might be beginning to cry right now, because I have just offended their sense of equality, but I speak the truth. Society has done more damage than good by inventing feel-good awards for moral victories, like ‘Best Effort’, ‘Most Improved’, and the ultimate homage to losing – The Participation Trophy. What ever happened to learning to improve and overcome from your losing?

When you stop and think about it, competitions are nothing more than events that classify participants as winners and losers based on a given set of criteria. Take a race for example; the first person to cross the finish line is declared the winner. Each competitor who crosses the finish line after the winner is at least in some respect a loser. It doesn’t matter whether they finish the race in second place or last place; they have lost and therefore are losers.

Should Olympic athletes be proud to receive silver and bronze medals? Yes. Those athletes have represented their respective countries with honor and world class performances. Their medals certainly signify great accomplishments, specifically being second and third best in the world at a given sport. But ultimately there is no substitute for winning the gold.

One needs look no further than the Man of Gold, Eric Heiden, for a perfect example of how quality trumps quantity. During the 1980 Winter Olympic Games at Lake Placid, New York, this American speed skating legend truly beat the world. He won an unprecedented five individual Olympic gold medals, which was more than Finland, Norway, the Netherlands, Switzerland, West Germany, Italy, Canada, Hungary, Japan, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia and France combined. Sure the Commies topped the American medal count that year, but Heiden proved unquestionably that he and his country reigned supreme in speed skating.

Another American speed skating legend represents the quantity argument of this debate, Apolo Ohno. He boasts an impressive 7 total medals making him arguably the best of his generation, but ‘arguably’ is the key word. Ohno’s Olympic record is tainted with silver and bronze. While accomplishments in their own right, the rank him among the best…but that is not the same as the unquestioned best.

The same concept can be applied at the national level. At the time this article was written the US sat atop the medal count at the Vancouver games with 26 overall medals, 7 of which were gold. Germany was nipping at our heels with 24 overall medals, also including 7 gold. Counting silver and bronze medals leaves room for argument–our losers are better than your losers—and there can be no argument when determining who is the undisputed best. The question of superiority can only be settled with gold.

To borrow from a ruthless legend, “Winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing”. In the case of the Olympics, winning is gold.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg!
Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Olympic Quantity Versus Quality Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

The NFL Combine Relevance Debate – Relevance Still Exists For the Combine

February 25, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless.

A couple of weeks ago, I mentioned in one of my arguments that several sporting events are over hyped. The Kentucky Derby came to mind, as did National Signing Day for college football as basis for that particular argument. The NFL Scouting Combine could be lumped into that category as it has seemingly grown in stature over the past few years. Many of the time trials and drills are actually televised by the NFL Network. However, I recognize the fact that NFL teams want to do their homework and their due diligence on the players. Does that make the combine still relevant? That is the focus of this debate.

Babe Ruthless openly questions the validity of the combine, stating that the activities at the combine do not truly evaluate the ability of a player to play football. The Wonderlic test, which has gained more awareness in recent years, does not escape the wrath of Babe Ruthless. I happen to agree that this test really does not test an athlete’s football ability and has no place in football, as evident by the fact that a punter is the only player to ever score a perfect 50 on the test.

I will admit that Bleacher Fan went an entirely different direction than I initially thought he would, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. In addition to the field activities, one of the things that the teams do with the players is talk to them individually and get an indication of how their “football” mind works. Bleacher Fan chose to highlight Chris Johnson. We all know Chris Johnson now, and he has helped many fantasy football owners, including me, in his first two seasons in the league. But coming out of college he was a relative unknown, at least to the casual fan anyway. He parlayed an impressive overall performance at the combine in 2008 to a first round selection, something that most definitely would not have happened otherwise.

I can see both sides of this. On one end, how much can we really tell about a player because of a 40-yard dash time? There are some fast NFL players who are not necessarily good football players… just as there are strong some NFL linemen who are just average at blocking. However, I also realize that the combine is essentially a job interview. The players, or future employees, are there to impress the teams, or their future employers. The teams will be spending millions of dollars on these players over the coming years, so they definitely have a right to gather all the information necessary. As Bleacher Fan wrote, scouting is an inexact science. So, every bit of information, no matter how minute it may appear to be, can provide some insight to the organization. Taking all of that into consideration, I am declaring Bleacher Fan the victor.

It is up to the organizations to decide how much value to put on a player’s performance at the combine. But it is the job of the scouts to come up with the best possible evaluation, and watching a player go through tests and watching how the player interacts is a part of that evaluation. That makes the combine still relevant.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The NFL Combine Relevance Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The NFL Combine Relevance Debate – Is the NFL Scouting Combine Still Relevant?

February 24, 2010

Read the opposing arguments from Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless.

Surely you knew The Sports Debates could not go too long without a football debate, right?

The NFL Scouting Combine begins in Indianapolis today, with 329 players set to be put through the ringer by NFL scouts and assorted “front office personnel.” Obviously, the NFL Network will have wall-to-wall coverage. I have friends who will be watching hours and hours of coverage over the next few days. I will watch some it, and catch a peak at how some of the players do. It is an opportunity for pre-draft favorites to cement their status as one of the draft’s elite players, and give other lesser regarded players a chance to shoot up the draft board. Obviously, it gives ESPN’s Mel Kiper, Jr. and Todd McShay something to talk about on air, too.

Players are also interviewed by the teams as they are poked and prodded about their past and present and how they envision their future. Many psychological tests are administered, and let’s not forget about the infamous Wonderlic intelligence test. What it boils down to is the fact that the players are undergoing an extensive job interview. In fact, here is a list of all the things that each of the 329 players will have to go through in the coming days.

But is the NFL Scouting Combine really necessary? Is it relevant? That is where your favorite sports debate website comes in to settle the score. Summoned to the courtroom today are Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless.

Bleacher Fan will argue that the NFL Scouting Combine is relevant and that, among other things, it gives the prospective employer a chance to interview players and see, in person, the various skills that each player brings to the table. Since Bleacher Fan has been in the position of hiring people over the years, it will be interesting to see the thought process.

Babe Ruthless, on the other hand, will argue that the NFL Scouting Combine is not really that relevant and is both overrated and overhyped.

The stage is set, the stopwatches are ready, and this is in fact your Wonderlic Test! Let’s see how smart you are!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

2 Comments | The NFL Combine Relevance Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The NFL Combine Relevance Debate – The NFL Combine Stinks

February 24, 2010

Read the opposing argumens from Bleacher Fan.

Football is a perpetually evolving sport. Football teams are constantly searching for the next breakthrough that will give them even the slightest advantage. The introduction of sabermetrics style data driven decision making, the wildcat formation, and the emphasis of the two back rushing attack are just a few examples of how NFL teams are leaving conventional wisdom in the past throughout the last decade in search of new, innovative approaches. So that is why I am shocked that NFL teams are still putting so much stock in the NFL’s Scouting Combine. The combine is not a relevant tool for gauging player’s future performance in the NFL.

How does anyone make an argument for the validity of the combine? Really, I want to know. The combine activities are designed to measure the readiness and successfulness of potential NFL players. But, do they really? While the tests provide basic information about the health and athleticism of players, none of the combine activities demonstrate a player’s actual ability to play football. The standing broad jump and bench press are not actual parts of the game. Yet, for some strange reason, scouts, coaches, and general managers flock to the combine to compare notes on just such statistics. There are even less relevant aspects to the combine like sprints, shuttle runs, and intelligence tests.

Before you get all defensive about that last statement, let me admit that speed and intelligence are a large part success in the NFL. But these tests are not an accurate assessment of either trait. Players do not run undefended routes without pads in game situations. In the NFL speed is not measured against a stopwatch, but against mean, bone-crunching linebackers and defensive backs. Similarly, intelligence is a positive attribute in the NFL. But I have never seen Peyton Manning take a paper and pencil test to the line of scrimmage. In fact I would argue that the intelligence testing is truly invalid because it measures academic knowledge and not football knowledge. For example, the Wonderlic test, a 50 question intelligence measure, is given to each combine participant. The test asks questions ranging from “Which of these don’t belong” type questions to solving volume equations (you know, the usual football stuff.) In general, combine participants usually score in the average range, and thus far only one NFL player has ever scored a perfect 50 out of 50 – former Cincinnati Bengals punter Pat McInally (Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that he went to Harvard.) So, what does a test that measures academic knowledge that only a Harvard grad can ace tell us about a player’s football ability? Nothing!

Combine supporters argue that the event is needed to classify players, but that is not true. Most of the time teams have already classified players (in terms of speed, hands, agility, etc.) based on observations from scouting and film breakdown. Just this week Sports Illustrated writer Peter King reported that one of his highly respected sources in the NFL – who wished to remain anonymous – pointed out that this season his team’s draft board is already “90 percent set.” It seems that the only legitimate football purpose of the combine is helping indecisive scouts and football personnel further classify players. To think the NFL combine is the only – or even the most effective – way to make these classifications is wrong. Teams can still invite players for a workout, and scouts can still observe players speed in actual game situations… both of which are far more accurate measures of ability than the combine’s pad-less drills offer.

It stands to reason that the old fashioned method of scouting players and watching them actually play football is far superior to the combine.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The NFL Combine Relevance Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.