The SoapBoxers

There is nothing quite as sad in sports as unfulfilled potential.  This team consists of players who fell short of their full potential for a variety of reasons.  For some, it was a simple twist of fate.  For others, the road was paved by their own actions.  Some still managed to achieve greatness even with the obstacles; the circumstances caused others to fall short.

Catcher – Thurman Munson – Munson was an All-Star seven times between 1971 and 1978 and won three gold gloves during this span.  Munson’s career came to an abrupt end when the private plane he was piloting crashed on August 2, 1979.  Munson ended his career with a .292 batting average and hit .300 or better five times.

1B – Lou Gehrig – Gehrig’s durability was legendary – he played in 2130 consecutive games.  After twelve straight seasons with a batting average higher than .300 and eleven straight seasons with an OPS of higher than 1.000, Gehrig fell off to .295 and .932 in 1938.  Those were still very good numbers, but not Gehrigesque.  Gehrig started the 1939 season very poorly and knew that something was physically wrong.  In June of 1939, Gehrig was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, which later became known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease (the only disease to ever be named after a patient).  He was elected to the Hall of Fame via a special election (the standard five year waiting period was waived) on the merits of his .340 career batting average and 493 home runs.  On June 2, 1941, at the age of 38, Gehrig died.  Had Gehrig remained healthy, he could have threatened Babe Ruth’s 714 career home runs.

2B – Chuck Knoblauch – Knoblauch was a five time All Star and was coming off a season that included 62 steals and a gold glove award when he traded to the New York Yankees.  A little more than a year later, Knoblauch contracted a severe case of the yips – the inability to throw accurately to first base.  The once stellar fielder’s throwing because an embarrassment, leading to his movement first to the outfield and later to designated hitter.  Eventually, his offensive game also fell off, and his career was over at age 34.

SS – Ray Chapman – Chapman was an excellent defensive shortstop with good speed – stealing 52 bases in 1917.  The 29 year old Chapman was hit in the head by a Carl Mays pitch on August 16, 1920.  Twelve hours later, Ray Chapman died.  A lot of people here would probably give the nod to Nomar Garciaparra.  Garciaparra was off to a great start to his career, but the fact that Chapman died from injuries suffered during the game gets him the spot.

3B – Ron Santo – Santo played his entire career while battling diabetes.  He was a ten time All-Star and hit 342 career homers.  The Cubs third baseman was traded to the White Sox before the 1974 seasons.  After a disappointing season with the Sox, he hung up his spikes for good at age 34.  A large contingent of baseball observers is pushing for baseball’s Veteran’s Committee to elect Santo to the Hall of Fame – but he is still waiting.

OF – Joe Jackson – You know the story.  Jackson was banned for life for throwing the 1919 World Series.  He has many defenders, but his lifetime ban keeps him out of the Hall of Fame.  Shoeless Joe’s .356 career batting average ranks third all time behind Ty Cobb and Rogers Hornsby.  Jackson was 31 when he played his final game.

OF – Ken Griffey Jr. – In the early 1990s, Griffey established himself as the best all-around player in baseball.  During his 10 years in Seattle, he had 1742 hits, 398 homers, ten All-Star game selections, ten gold glove awards, and an MVP award.  He had hit 40+ homers six times.  At age 30, he signed with his hometown Cincinnati Reds.  It seemed that 3500 hits and 700 homers were well within reach.  After a 40 homer season in his first season with the Reds, injuries began to mount.  More than ten years later, Griffey has added just 232 more homers to his numbers, and is still short of 3000 hits.  His career seems to be very close to an end.  It’s likely that his 630 homers will get him into the Hall of Fame – especially since he was never linked to steroids –  but you have to wonder what sort of numbers a healthy Griffey could have accomplished.

OF Darryl Strawberry – Strawberry was a rising superstar with the World Champion 1986 Mets.  Between 1983 and 1991, he hit 280 homers.  Over the course of the next 8 years, Strawberry battled a drug addiction and added just 55 homers in 1189 at bats.  The man threw away a Hall of Fame caliber career.

Pitchers

Babe Ruth – Ruth was a dominant left-handed pitcher.  Ruth compiled a career record of 94-46 with a 2.28 ERA – low even by the standards of the time.  Ruth was traded to the Yankees after the 1919 season.  He was 24 at the time of the trade and only toed the rubber  five more times in his career.  It’s quite likely that Ruth could have been a Hall of Fame player as a pitcher.  As it ended up, he became one of the greatest hitters in history.

Sandy Koufax – From 1963-1966, Koufax compiled a record of 97-27 with a 1.86 ERA.  He also nabbed three Cy Young Awards during this span (finishing third in his “bad” season with a record of 19-5 and a 1.74 ERA).  At age 30, Koufax had a career record of 165-87 with a 2.76 career ERA.  After battling traumatic arthritis (that’s the medical name for the condition) for years, Koufax retired in his prime.

Denny McLain – McLain was the last Major League pitcher to win 30 games, compiling a 31-6 record with a 1.74 ERA in 1968.  He won both the Cy Yound and MVP awards and for an encore grabbed another Cy in 1969 with a 24-9 record.  McLain was just 25 years old.  McLain’s gambling and affiliations with organized crime figures earned him a suspension from commissioner Bowie Kuhn.  Arm injuries hastened the end of his career.  McLain was  17-34 over the next three years and was out of baseball at age 28.  That would be a sad enough end to the tale of Denny McLain – but it’s not the end.  McLain has run afoul of the law many times since – for charges of drug trafficking, embezzlement, racketeering, and mail fraud.

JR Richard –   Between 1976 and 1979, Richard won more than 18 games each year, topping out at 20 wins in 1976.  He also topped 300 strikeouts in two seasons, while also leading the league in walks three times.  During the 1980 season, Richard began to complain of health ailments.  On July 30, while playing catch before a game, Richard suffered a stroke.  He would never again pitch in a major league game.  By 1994, Richard had been divorced twice and was broke and homeless.  He sought and received help from the minister of a local church.  Later, Richard himself became a minister.

Dwight Gooden – Dwight Gooden’s career numbers are very good – 194 wins, 112 losses, and a 3.53 career ERA.  However, 119 of those wins (and just 46 losses) were recored before Gooden turned 26.  Injuries and drug problems derailed his career.  His record for the rest of his career was just 75-66 with a 4.32 ERA.  However, there was one more shining moment – on May 14, 1996, Gooden threw a no-hitter against the Seattle Mariners.  Gooden pitched his final major league game in 2000, at the age of 35.  A healthy, drug free Gooden would have likely won 300 games and be awaiting induction to the Hall of Fame.

Do you have any suggestions for the team?

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 (with Thomas and Scalia dissenting) that the federal government has the power the keep some sex offenders behind bars indefinitely if officials determine that those prisoners may “prove to be sexually dangerous in the future.”  (Note: this affects only inmates in the federal system, not those in state prisons.  See United States vs. Comstock for more information).

I think that most people would agree that sex offenders do pose a threat to society and that they should be dealt with harshly by the justice system.  I agree with this, and the rest of this article should not be construed as condoning any of the actions of the offenders.  I most certainly do not condone their actions.

I do, however, have a problem with this Supreme Court ruling.  The primary building block of justice in this country is the jury trial.  The accused is entitled to a trial, and if convicted, is sentenced appropriately.  At the end of the sentence (or, more often, earlier), the prisoner rejoins society.

This SCOTUS ruling appears to subvert the decision made by the jury.  The ruling makes a complete mockery of the sentencing process.  Why should the jury waste their time determining an appropriate sentence when, in the end, it really won’t matter?

I understand the severity of sexual crimes, and also am familiar with research that suggests that it may not be possible to rehabilitate these criminals.  However, murder is also a severe crime, and we do set some murderers free after they serve their sentences.  This will continue to be standard operating procedure for all other crimes – criminals will be arrested, be convicted, serve their time, and then rejoin society.  Only sex offenders in federal prisons will be at risk of having their sentence extended indefinitely.

Are the current sentences handed down by juries too short?  If that’s the case, there is a better way to fix this.  Have congress and state legislatures impose more strict punishment for those crimes.  Then, from this date forward, impose those sentences upon those convicted of sex crimes.  However, I do not feel that it is appropriate to retroactively impose the law upon those whom have already been sentenced.

Am I defending sex offenders?  No, certainly not.  I am, however, defending justice.  It brings to mind a line from the movie Ghosts of Mississippi.  The defense attorney, defending the killer of civil rights leader Medger Evers, reminds the jury that “if the system doesn’t work for Byron De La Beckwith , it doesn’t work for anyone.”  If the system doesn’t work for sex offenders, does it really work at all?

I have discussed his ruling with several people, including a couple of hard-on-crime guys with backgrounds in law enforcement.  At this point, everyone seems to agree that the prisoners should be set free when their sentence is complete – while at the same time acknowledging the serious nature of the crimes and the high probability that the criminals will re-offend following their release.

I expect this Supreme Court ruling to remaining in place for many years.  The fact that it was a 7-2 decision means that change 1 or 2 members of the court will not swing the court to the other side.  The president’s Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan, actually argued the case on behalf of the government in her role of Solicitor General.

It seems, then, that it would be left up to congress to pass a law that would neutralize the impact of this ruling.  I’m not holding my breath – supports of such a law would no doubt be painted as supporters of sex offenders by their opponents.  I doubt that any politician is willing to risk being slapped with that label.

This week, many media outlets reported that the farm from Field of Dreams is up for sale.  The asking price for the 193 acre farm (including the 13 acres that encompass the field) is $5.4 million.  This amount has raised a lot of eyebrows.  After all, this is Iowa, not Manhattan!

Is it worth $5.4 million?  I don’t know.  One thing for sure is that there are several factors that come into playing when placing a value on the property.

First, the majority of the property is active farmland.  There is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 170 tillable acres.  Farmland in Dubuque County can sell for as much as $4500 per acre, placing the value of the cropland at as much as $765,000.  Then there is the house and the six outbuildings.  Put this all together, and you’re going to be getting close to $1 million.  Note that the farm is currently rented out to other farmers – so there’s already a cash flow in place from rents.

The there is the “cool” factor of living in a movie set.  If you’re a big fan of the movie (and have a lot of money) what is this worth?  There is only one Field of Dreams movie location (although there are many knockoffs) – so the sellers have scarcity on their side.

It’s also very likely that the new owners would want to make some money off tourists.  Although it has been 21 years since the movie came out, it still draws 65,000 visitors each year.  How much does it cost to walk around the field?  Absolutely nothing.  The Lansings are happy to let you do this for free – banking on the fact that this will give you a warm feeling when you visit the souvenir stand.

What could the new owner do to attract more tourists?

The obvious moneymaker would be a hotel on the site.  This would require a zoning change, though, as the location is currently zoned agricultural.

Baseball camps would be another good way to make some money.  In fact, actual baseball has been played on the field quite a bit over the years.  In 1991 and 1992, there were charity games on the site featuring Hall of Famers such as Bob Feller (a native Iowan) and Reggie Jackson facing off against Hollywood celebrities.  I remember that Reggie smacked one into the corn for a homer.

The Field of Dreams casino is probably not an option – there’s another casino a short distance away in Dubuque.

Some other tidbits:

• The field was originally owned by two different families.  The Ameskamp family owned left and center field.  After the filming was done, they plowed it under to plant corn.  Later, they realized that tourists were more profitable than corn.  Until the Lansings bought them out a couple of years ago, the two families maintained separate concession stands.
• In the book Shoeless Joe (upon which the movie was based), the angry writer was J.D. Salinger.  Salinger wouldn’t agree to having his name used in the movie – and if you see how he is portrayed in the book and movie, you can probably figure out why!  Of course, this is probably a blessing in disguise.  If the character had remained Salinger instead of the fictional Terence Mann, it’s very unlikely that James Earl Jones would have been picked for the role.  I’m a big fan of Jones.
• I grew up about 10 miles away from the Field of Dreams, so I’m biased in thinking it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread.  But if you do decide to visit, check out some other sites in Iowa when you’re here.  You can refer to this handy guide I wrote several months ago.

My wife recently bought an item on eBay.  She has purchased a number of this type of item in the past.  This particular transaction wasn’t particularly noteworthy, aside from the fact that the seller shipped the item in a normal envelope, in contracts to most of the other sellers who had used some sort of padded envelope.

Since she had no real positive or negative feelings about the transactions, she left a “neutral” feedback.  At this point, the seller began a string of multiple emails.  At first the seller tried to strong arm her into changing the feedback to positive or removing in entirely.  When my wife refused, the seller accused her of trying to ruin the seller’s business.  (Remember, this was just a neutral feedback, not a negative).  The seller even mentioned that the two other times a buyer had given her neutral feedback, she had gotten the buyer to retract the feedback.  Yes, she actually took pride in bullying someone into removing honest feedback.

A key point to consider is that the purpose of eBay feedback is to provide accurate information about the seller (or buyer).  The purpose is not to boost the seller’s feedback count to some sky-high number.  The feedback my wife left was accurate and reflected her neutral feeling about the transaction.

The seller was quite rude in her response and it was very clear that she had no desire to improve the experience of future buyers – she simply wanted more positive feedbacks.  In the process of overzealously protecting her feedback score, she has managed to alienate a customer and ensure that my wife never buys another item from her.  The seller wasted significant time actively cutting off a source of future revenue.

Can you imagine this scenario unfolding in the brick-and-mortar world?  Imagine that a food critic eats at a restaurant and rates the establishment as “average.”  Do you think the restaurant owner would use the review to try to improve the experience for future customers or would they instead waste valuable time browbeating the writer in an effort to get the writer to retract the review?  The restaurant that focuses of pleasing the customer is going to be more successful in the long run.  The restaurant who attacks the writer will only ensure that the critic doesn’t give them a second chance.

This seller –and some others on eBay – aren’t seeing the forest for the trees.  If your feedback isn’t what you think it should be, don’t blame the feedback.  Instead, take a look at closer look at how you are doing business.  While you may think that your communication, shipping time, packaging, and fees are exceptional, this might not be the case.  You may be lagging behind your competitors.

In closing, I’d like to point out that I’m not trying to paint all eBay sellers with the same brush.  In general, eBay sellers are great.  I’ve personally bought tons of stuff over eBay and have had very few transactions that weren’t positive experience.  This particular seller is definitely the exception and not the rule.

Kevin cursed as he saw that the side mirror was once again coming loose from the door.  This car was a cheap piece of plastic – nothing like the classic metal Detroit used to produce.  He had been getting the mirror fixed at least once a month for the last year.  He put the magenta sports car into gear and floored the accelerator as he exited the parking lot.

Kevin slid around the corner on two wheels and once again accelerated into the long straightaway.  When he popped up over the hill, he saw livestock roaming at the bottom of the hill – four cows, a pig, a few chickens, and something that appeared to resemble a buffalo.  The fence that typically restrained the animals was laying flat in the ditch – the apparent victim of the mid-day windstorm.  Kevin took evasive action, slowing the car slightly as he roared by on the shoulder – which had, fortunately, not become home to the mobile menagerie.

Kevin’s foul mood worsened when he realized that his mother-in-law was still at their house.  Was this woman never going to leave?  It seemed that she was constantly at their house.

“Leah, we must put a stop to this.  Your mother has to leave!”

“Stop yelling, Kevin.  It will just be a few more days.”

“It’s always just a few more days.  It’s been just a few more days for the last month!”

Kevin stormed upstairs to change into some comfortable clothes.  His head nearly exploded when he entered the room and saw that bedroom was missing the king sized waterbed.  An air mattress was now in its place.  To make matters worse, the twins’ bed and toys had all been transported into the room.  It was impossible to walk in the room without tripping over something.

Sarah had to be stopped.  It was bad enough that she was overstaying her welcome, but she was not going to steal his bed.  The woman was going to sleep on the air mattress and share a room with the kids.  If she didn’t like the accommodations, there was a hotel two blocks down the road.

Kevin finished tying his shoe laces and returned downstairs for the inevitable confrontation.  He spotted his mother-in-law in the kitchen.

“Sarah,” he began.  “You must stop –“

Kevin lost his train of thought when he looked around the room.  The refrigerator and stove had been torn loose from the wall, and the entire kitchen was in disarray.  What on earth had happened in here?  Had the old woman completely lost her marbles and attempted to destroy the house?

He had only a moment to ponder the question before he felt the earth move under his feet.  He made eye contact with Sarah and saw fear in her eyes.  This was an earthquake – a very bad one.  The house shook uncontrollably – debris flew in every direction.  This was the end – Kevin knew that he was going to die.

“Jennifer,” called out a voice from downstairs.  “Have you put your dollhouse away yet?  Supper is ready.”

Beat reporter Scoop Chevelle comes to us from a secret facility deep beneath the Grand Canyon.  This palatial subterranean complex, powered by a series of dams on the Colorado River, houses the research lab of Andy Seiler, baseball draft guru.

After a two-day hike through the most remote reaches of the canyon, Scoop reaches the hidden door of the facility.  After an iris scan confirms his identity, he is allowed in.  We join Scoop and Andy as they begin the interview in the formal dining room.

Scoop: Let’s start off with the question that everyone is clamoring to know the answer to.  Are you related to Marv Seiler, the man who was unjustly denied the 1992 Heisman trophy despite his heroic performance in Iowa State’s 19-10 victory over 7th ranked Nebraska?

Andy: I could be, but not that I know of. Most in my family aren’t athletic in the football sense. That’s why we like baseball.

Scoop: You’ve been called the Mel Kiper of baseball.  How do you feel about that comparison?  More importantly, how does your hair feel about it?

Andy: I don’t know how I feel about that. My hair is insulted, but if he’s the guy most turn to for draft information in the NFL, I’ll take that as a compliment. There always has to be a Todd McShay, though…

Scoop: The draft is quickly sneaking up on us.  How many hours a week are you spending on research?  How are you managing to balance this with the other priorities in your life?

Andy: I probably spend more time on research and writing than anything else in my life right now, including sleep. I keep telling everyone that as soon as the last pick of the 50^th round is announced, I’m going to go into a sleep coma for 36 hours. I’d say the average week in the last three or four has included 80+ hours of research and writing, though that includes weekends. Luckily, this is my wife’s busiest time of the year, too, so it’s not like there’s any pressure to reign it back in.

Scoop: A lot of people are excited about your book, which will contain 750 player profiles and well as information about each organization.  Some of us – including me – have already pre-ordered it.  Several publishers sell guides to the NFL draft, but baseball’s draft has historically been nearly ignored by the mainstream media.  When did you get the idea to publish such a comprehensive guide?

Andy: I’ve had the idea for a couple years, but I didn’t feel strong enough with my information and contacts to know that I’d put out a quality product. My handle on the information and the depth of it have really matured over the last year, so I feel it’s going to be the go-to resource on draft day for those who buy it. I think people will be pleasantly surprised by how the quality of my product and depth of information is as good as or better than any source out there on the Internet, and the price is a fraction of what you have to pay for it online.

Scoop: Bryce Harper is the most hyped prospect in this year’s draft, and many observers feel that the Nationals will grab him with the top pick.  Grab your crystal ball and take a look into the future.  How long do you think it will take Harper to reach the majors, and what do you expect him to accomplish in his career?

Andy: I would say mid-2013 at the earliest is the best possibility. Think of 2011 spent at Low-A ball, 2012 split between High-A and Double-A, then 2013 between Triple-A and the Majors. That’s a best-case scenario, but I think he has the talent to make it happen. I see him becoming a perennial all-star, but he’ll probably follow the career path of more of a Craig Biggio, who had to move off catcher to lengthen his career relatively early in the game. He could also turn out to be J.D. Drew if injuries creep in, and that’s a question that few can answer years in advance.

Scoop: Do you ever get burned out on baseball and just want to sit on the couch and watch reruns of 2 ½ Men for a solid week?

Andy: Definitely. I think the one thing I dislike most about what I do is that I can’t sit on the couch and just watch baseball for enjoyment anymore. I’m always looking at it from a different angle, through the lens of an evaluator rather than a fan. I’m not saying I’m the best scout or anything, but the mindset changed at some point, and I’m not really able to turn it off, even at a little league game watching a cousin’s kid. That being said, though I get tired of it, I always seem to enjoy what I do in the long run.

Scoop: OK, final question, and a very important one.  What sort of cuisine do you partake in when you go to a ballgame?  Personally, I try to grab a Pepsi, bratwurst, and nachos before the game and then try to grab some cotton candy around the 6^th inning.

Andy: I’m pretty basic. I get the hot dog with mustard and a Dr. Pepper or Sprite, depending on if I need the caffeine. Once you go to enough high school games, you realize that the caffeine is necessary. Since I’m glued to my seat or wherever I’m standing to scout, I don’t get anything during the game, so I have to get it all down between infield practice and the lineup announcement.

Scoop: Thank for your time, Andy.  I’ll let you get back to your work in the bowels of the Draft Cave.

Be sure to check out Andy’s draft blog, MLB Bonus Baby, where you can find his 2010 Draft Guide for sale (PDF format).  It will contain profiles of 750 potential draftees as well as organizational previews of all 30 Major League teams.  The book will be delivered via email the Saturday before the draft, but you can order yours today.  At ten bucks, it’s a steal for die-hard fans.  Want a preview before you buy?  Check out a couple of draftee profiles and a team organizational profile.  Note – I am not being compensated in any way for endorsing the book – I simply truly believe that it will be a top shelf publication.

This week, we found out that President Obama’s nominee will be current Solicitor General Elena Kagan.

Let’s get one question out of the way. What, exactly, does the Solicitor General do? She represents the government of the United States before the Supreme Court in cases where the government is one of the parties involved in the lawsuit.

Kagan is coming under fire on a few different fronts. Kagan hired 32 tenured and tenure-track professors when she was Dean of Harvard Law School. Only seven of these faculty members were female, and only one was a racial or ethnic minority. This could be explained by a relatively small sample size, or simply by the overabundance of white males in the law school ranks. Or it could be indicative of bias during the hiring process.

Kagan’s lack of judicial experience is also a concern to many. Although Kagan has considerable experience in academia, she has never presided over an actual trial.

Despite this, it is quite possible that Kagan will be confirmed by the Senate. If she joins the high court, it would have three female justices for the first time ever (Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor being the other two).

Perhaps more important is her age. At 50, she would be the youngest justice currently serving on the court (although she’s considerably older than Justice Joseph Story, who was just 32 when he was appointed by President Madison in 1811).

Age is an important consideration in a Supreme Court Justice because the justices are appointed for life. A justice cannot be fired. There is a good reason for this, of course – to insulate a sitting justice from political pressure. An influential senator cannot strong-arm a justice with any threats.

While the judicial branch is separate from the executive and legislative branches, it is nonetheless affected by those branches. Justices are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The end result is that the justice often represents the views of the president who appoints them. It would be nice if justices were selected based solely on merit, but this simply is not the case. Every president attempts to influence the court with the justices they appoint.

Appointing a Supreme Court Justice is perhaps the most impactful thing a president can do – influencing important judicial decisions for decades after the president leaves office. I’m not a big fan of having the other two branches exert so much influence over the judicial branch, but I’m also not sure how this could be achieved in a more fair manner, aside from setting the confirmation bar very high (80%?) to ensure bipartisan support? I’m not sure if even the ghost of George Washington could get 80% approval in the Senate.

The justices are also not oblivious to political ramifications. Justices will often time their resignations to occur during the tenure of a president who is likely to replace them with a similar justice. When a justice is unable to this – for example, if they die suddenly – there can be a seismic shift in the makeup of the court.

From a partisan perspective, then, the perfect justice would not only align with the beliefs of the President and Senate, but would also be young and in good health in order to influence the direction of the court for many years to come before voluntarily stepping down at the perfect time for a suitable replacement to be seated on the court. The next step in vetting a nominee (if it isn’t already being done) may be a deep look into the medical history of the nominee and the nominee’s family, in an effort to determine the nominee’s susceptibility to heart attacks, strokes, and other ailments that could kill or incapacitate a justice.

I wonder what sorts of birthday presents a justice gets? Perhaps a health club membership and a fruit basket from the leader of the party that aligns with their beliefs – and an annual membership at the Gorge Yourself 24 Hour Buffet from the leader of the opposing party?

Martin watched the apple core sail high into the air before landing with a satisfying plop in the water.  He lay on his back, basking in the warm afternoon sun and listening to the sounds of classic rock music escaping from the transistor radio.  He listened to the girls chatting as they finished the last bits of the picnic lunch.  Talk of college dominated the conversation, with the three teens set to begin their university education in the fall.

“Aw, girls, can’t we talk about something other than college, college, college?  It will be time to hit the books before long.”

“Sorry, Marty,” chirped Samantha.  “We’re just so excited.  Imagine all the fun we’ll have!  Parties, concerts, football games …”

“Not to mention classes,” replied.  “You are planning to attend the occasional class, right, Sam?”

“Of course,” she giggled.  “Education comes first.”

“Well, maybe not first,” chimed in Michelle.  “Partying is pretty important.  But it’s definitely a solid number two.”

“You girls need to make sure that you put some energy into your coursework so that you don’t flunk out first semester.”

“Yes, mother,” they replied in chorus, laughing at Martin’s expense.

Martin began to utter a sharp retort but caught himself just in time.  It was best not to engage in a battle of wits with these girls.  They could very effectively tag-team with each other and make mincemeat of him with their insults.  Better to just change the subject and move on.

“You think we can catch the Cardinals game up here?” he asked.

“I wouldn’t be surprised,” replied Michelle.  “We’re so far away from civilization that you could probably pick up Canadian stations.”

Martin began to fiddle with the dial on the old radio.  After a minute, he caught the strains of a baseball game – but it was the Cubs game.  After another moment of fiddling with the dial and he could faintly hear the Cardinals game.  Albert Pujols had drawn yet another walk, bringing Matt Holliday to the plate.

“C’mon, Happy,” shouted Samantha.  “Park it in Big Mac Land.”

They were engrossed in the game and didn’t hear the oncoming vehicle.

“Oh, shit,” yelled Michelle.  “TRAIN!”

Martin’s heart caught in his throat.  He could see the locomotive in the distance, moving toward them.  They jumped to their feet and began to run across the trestle toward the safety of the opposite side of the river.

When Martin reached the other side, he turned back and saw Michelle quickly approaching and Samantha lagging behind.  He watched the train for a moment and calculated the closing speed.  It would be a close race, but it seemed that the train was going to beat Samantha to the other side.

“Jump, Sam, jump!” he yelled.

Samantha ignored his advice and continued to sprint toward the shore, with the beastly train in her wake.  It was a thirty foot drop to the water below, and she couldn’t swim.  If she could just dig down for an extra bit of speed, she could get to the other side.  Sam’s adrenaline gave her a burst of speed, and the locomotive had begun to slow ever so slightly as the engineer saw her and applied the brakes.

Martin and Michelle held their breath for a long minute.  Yes, it definitely seemed that Samantha could beat the train to the other side.  Then it happened.  Sam stumbled slightly.  She quickly regained her balance and continued her race toward the shore.  The stumble had cost her a precious couple of seconds.  A moment later, the train smashed into her and flung her lifeless body off the trestle and into the muddy river below.

As many of you know, Major League Baseball’s draft is coming up next month.  I’m sure that many of you will set your DVRs to record the event.  I certainly will.  (Yes, I’m serious).

The baseball draft doesn’t receive the same attention given to the NFL’s draft (which seems to nearly overshadow the Super Bowl) or even the NBA’s. 

There are several reasons for the lack of popularity for the event.  Historically, about half the players drafted have been high schoolers, although the balance has shifted in favor of college players in recent years.  Even the very best high school players will take 3-4 years to develop into major league players, and 6+ years is a more common timeline.  Even the college players typically spend a few years in the minor leagues.  Thus, baseball players don’t jump straight from the draft to the television set like athletes in others sports.

Baseball’s 50 round draft is much longer than the NBA’s (2 rounds) or NFL’s (7 rounds).  Considering that the active roster for a baseball team is just 25 players, this necessitates using the minor leagues to develop players.  Without the minor leagues, the players simply wouldn’t get ample opportunities against live competition.  The minors also serve to bring baseball to small cities across America, allowing nearly anyone to hop in a car, drive an hour or two, and catch a game at any point during the summer.

The eligibility rules for baseball’s draft can make your head spin.  First of all, only residents of the United States, Canada, and U.S. territories – and well as students at institutions within those counties – are subject to the draft.  Players in other countries can sign with a team at age 16.  Thus players from Puerto Rico (a U.S. territory) are subject to the draft, but players from the Dominican Republic are not.  It is desirable to not be subject to the draft, as it allows you to negotiate with multiple teams, instead of just with the team that has exclusive rights to you.

As mentioned earlier, high school players are eligible.  Quite a few of the drafted high school players do not sign and opt to attend college on scholarship.  Sometimes teams will take a shot on “unsignable” players later in the draft, and try to convince them to sign with the team.  This is a low-risk/high-reward strategy.  An example of this is Rockies outfielder Dexter Fowler.  Fowler was a multi-sport star in high school and was committed to attending college at the University of Miami.  The Rockies took a flier on him in the 14^th round.  After freeing up some cash by trading Larry Walker, they were able to sign him for $925,000 – an amount that is more in line with a high second round pick than a 14^th rounder.

If a player decides to attend a four year college, they have to wait until their junior year.  An exception to this is that sophomores who turn 21 before the draft are also eligible.  The juniors and draft-eligible sophomores typically sign for more money than college seniors because they have more leverage.  If they don’t sign, they can always return to college and re-enter the draft.

If a player decides to attend junior college, they are eligible to be drafted after their first year.  This is why you will sometimes see very good players in the JUCO ranks instead of at an NCAA school.  In fact, Alex Fernandez transferred from the University of Miami after his freshman season in order to attend Miami-Dade Community College.  As a junior college player, he was eligible for the 1990 draft.  Had he stayed at Miami, he would not have been eligible until 1991.  Fernandez was the #4 overall pick in the 1990 draft.

Who will be the top pick in this year’s draft?  Most are saying that the Nationals will go after teen phenom Bryce Harper.  Harper passed his GED in order to skip his final two years of high school (yes, you read that correctly) and is currently attending junior college in order to gain eligibility for this year’s draft.  Although most scouts are rubbed the wrong way Harper’s arrogance and sense of entitlement, most admit that he is a tremendously skilled player.  While in high school, Harper racked up the miles criss-crossing the country and playing in a variety of elite tournaments.  He got off to a slow start this season, but has heated up in a hurry and it putting up video game type numbers.  Even better, Harper is a catcher – a position where there is traditionally a scarcity of great offensive players.

Should the Nationals and other teams take Harpers demeanor into account before decided to throw millions of dollars at him?  Certainly.  However, the landscape of professional sports is hardly barren of athletes with big egos.  As for Harper’s young age, it’s worth noting that he’ll turn 18 on October 16 – just a month later than some of the other 2010 draftees.

My advice to the Nationals?  Pick Harper – he’s the best available talent.  Then find him a Crash Davis type of player to make sure his head stays on straight.  The Nationals front office has been making some decent moves lately, and the team is actually doing fairly well so far this year.  Add Stephen Strasburg to the mix in a few weeks and Harper a few years down the road, and I think they’ll have a solid core to build upon.

For information about other players in this year’s draft, I recommend the blog MLB Bonus Baby.

A couple of days ago, an idiot fan ran across the field during a Phillies-Cardinals game and was chased by authorities and subdued with a blast from a Taser. This incidents brings to mind the controversy of whether or not Tasers should be used by law enforcement.

Opponents of Taser use point to statistics of deaths that have occurred following shocks from a Taser.  (For those who aren’t familiar with them, Tasers are stun guns which temporary incapacitate with a high voltage electrical charge).  However, there are some flaws with these statistics.  First of all, many of the deaths have occurred during violent struggles during which a Taser has been used.  However, even if the Taser wasn’t used, these situation would have a relatively high probability of serious injury or death – due to the fact that they involve violent struggles.  Breaking down the numbers to show how many deaths were directly caused by the Tasers is much more difficult.

A second problem is that people seem to want to compare these numbers to a baseline of 0 deaths.  However, it’s important to note that a Taser is one option available to law enforcement personnel.  If the Taser were not available, the law enforcement officer would still have to subdue the offender.  In many cases, it would be necessary to shoot the offender.  Getting shot with a Taser may have a certain degree of risk, but I think I’d prefer it to a Glock-induced lead injection.  Additionally, bullets can ricochet and hit innocent bystanders.  The maximum range of a Taser is about 30 feet – so the 5 year old playing 100 feet away isn’t endangered by an errant Taser shot.

It’s also important to bear in mind the fact that subduing the offender can prevent injuries to innocent bystanders.  The reality is that the safety of the innocent bystanders should trump considerations about the safety of the offender.  After all, they have done nothing wrong, whereas the offender has committed a crime.  In many cases, it is absolutely necessary to use force to subdue an offender.  Not everyone meekly allows themselves to be cuffed.

As you can see, I support the use of Tasers by law enforcement.  In my opinion, Tasers can provide a safer alternative to discharging a firearm.  However, I do have some caveats.

First, it’s very important for people to realize that the Taser is a weapon, and not some cool tech toy.  A few years ago, I cringed when I heard the story about a cop Tasering his son at the request of the so, who wanted to see how it felt.  I am certain that these incidents are rare, but nonetheless are disturbing.  Would the same officer have shot his son with a gun if the kid wanted to know what it felt like?  Probably not.

Second, it’s important to gauge the severity of the crime.  Tasers should probably not be used to subdue jaywalkers and people with overdue library books.  Taser use should be used for any situations which allow for the use of deadly force, as well as other situations where the safety of law enforcement officers of the public is at risk.  The safety of law enforcement and the public should be given more importance than the safety of someone who just committed a crime – they put themselves into the dangerous situation.

Should the Taser have been used at the Phillies game?  I’m a bit torn.  On the one hand, it seems that security probably could have captured the guy without the use of the Taser.  Even if the guy had managed to elude them, tens of thousands of fans would have been happy to aid in the capture.  On the other hand, you need only to look back to the on-field attack of Royals coach Tom Gamboa by two “fans” in 2002 to be concerned about the safety of on-field personnel.

I support the use of Tasers by law enforcement, while also promoting continued training on their proper use.