I honestly don't know why I cause people to do what they do. Sure I'm schizo; sure I like to provoke; but what's the expression these days: asymmetrical warfare? Something like that. anyhow, the response is just way out of kilter to whatever the original offense may or may not have been.

To wit: Baseball girl jumped into the fray twice recently: yesterday and today. Yesterday she said that my belief is that randomness does not play "any" role in baseball results. her word, not mine. Today she said that I refuse to believe at all in standard deviation or randomness.

Both statements could not, of course, be further from the truth. But for some reason she felt obliged to participate and make this flat lie. I can only conclude that she really didn't pay attention to the debate and the many times I cited randomness as a factor; or that she did and either didn't understand it or chose to disregard it; or that she simply enjoys insulting me, whether being truthful or not.

This is the kind of pile-on behavior that makes this site so much less than it should. (She made one funny repast at how I was ignoring "hundreds and hundreds" of years of scientific analysis-- I am currently trying to contact the heirs of Newton, Galileo and Copernicus to make an appropriate apology)

Professor Nico-- our other mathametics emeritus professor-- of course,couldn't resist, so he weighed in with his own putdown. saying the reason I am not "ever" right (his word, not mine) was that I didn't understand "standard deviation" and that I simply looked at two weeks of performance then assumed something would change in the next two weeks. Again this insult could not be further from the truth-- since the entire debate that produced the various arguments concerned two months of Marco Scutaro results, not two weeks.

And as to the claim that I am not "ever" right, well again that's a flat out lie. I have been wrong plenty of times.. but just this year I have been right about Zito, about Scutaro, about the Minnesota Twins (check out what a bunch of folks said about their offense about a month ago or so, and what I said, and realize who has been right as the Twins offense continues to be the most prolific in the league for over two months now), and about the basic likelihood that the A's who weer badly slumping would, by and large, turn their seasons around.

But this is not surprising coming from someone who went out of his away to brand me idiotic, masochistic, etc... the other day (and when this time I, obviously partly in jest, called him a "Blowhard"-- wow is that a horrendous insult-- his partner in crime, baseball girl, immediately chimed in and said that was a CGV. What are these people thinking?? Wow, that is disoproportionate response if I've ever seen it!

Anyhow, again I assume Nico is either misinformed, has let his ardor to attack me get in the way of the facts, or, i fear more accurately, doesn't give a you-know-what about the truth and prefers to lead the charge against a familiar target.

So let me get us to the point, for one last time.

Does anyone here disagree that the most fundamental factor that drives baseball performance is baseball ability? If not, my grandmother could have hit .300 in the bigs.

Koufax is better than Jamie Moyer not because of standard deviation or randomness, but because of ability.

Now.... does anyone also challenge the view that players are not automatons? That sometimes in their careers-- like we in our jobs, or our personal lives-- they perform better or worse than their norm-- not mainly because of some mathematical theory or pure luck-- but because they are simply better or worse then.

Now.. if you accept the two premises above, then you must also recognize that the "esablished level of performance"-- the so-called "true" level-- of a given player in the major leagues has been the result of his own ability as well as luck, randomness, the opposition, etc. And that the impact his ability has had in determining that true level has not always been constant. In other words he has undoubtedly had slumps where his eyesight was off, his swing was screwed up, his approach was faulty, whatever. And streaks where he performed at or near his peak.

So all I have ever said is that given this element in a player's toolbox-- along with luck, randomness, etc..-- if he slumps again, which could be the product-- either partly or mostly-- of some failure on his part-- his track recoprd and indeed human nature suggests that it will be corrected at some point by a better stretch of ability. So it has been.. so it will be.

AND IF THAT IS TRUE THEN IT IS UNASSAILABLY LOGICAL TO ASSUME THAT WHEN A PLAYER HAS AN ABERRANT BEGINNING TO A SEASON-- LASTING TWO MONTHS OR MORE-- THAT THAT SAME PLAYER WILL IN FACT BE MORE LIKELY TO HIT "BETTER" OR "WORSE" THAN HIS "TRUE LEVEL" OF PERFORMANCE IN THE NEXT STRETCH OF GAMES THAN HE IS TO CONTINUE TO HIT IN THE ABERRANT DIRECTION.

this does not mean that I believe the 200 hitting will be followed by 400 hitting for a 300 hitter. But it does mean that I believe it more likely that the 200 hitting will be followed by 320 than 280. And this is not a one day, one week, two week thing-- but in fact a longer stretch vs. a longer stretch-- within a given season.

and i guarantee with as much power as I have in this world that if and when someone runs the numbers-- corrects for rookies and aging bets to whom "true levels" are hard to assess-- that I will be proved right.

That doesn't mean randomenss, standard deviation, or any other statistical factor doesn't play a role. Of course it does. But you can't take human performance out of the equation.

And of course it is entirely consistent with the dictum we all want Beane to follow and all of us who have played rotisserie baseball have learned to respect: "Buy Low / Sell High"

Well, it's the daily double.

I'd like to make this one higher, but I cannot let bias change my view.

The 7 teams ahead include, in no particular order:

1. the three NFL teams that have won 5 Super Bowls
2. the winningest baseball team in the history of the sport
3. the two winningnest NBA teams in the history of the sport, plus the team that has won most of any pro franchise in the past 15 years.

Our boys don't quite match up-- but they do come close. Which is kind of the current motto, isn't it??

# 8: OAKLAND ATHLETICS

division titles in 1971, 75, 81, 92, 00, 02 and 03

pennants in 88 and 90

world titles in 72-73-74-89

13 winning years in the past 35, but unfortunately in most of the rest, the team was not even a contender as it suffered through the various indignities caused by a small revenue base.

You guys know the characters, but there have been quite a few, from Eck to Rollie to Reggie
to Vida to Byrnsie to Stew to Rickey to Jose to Miggy.

When all is saidand done-- counting cameo appearances and assuming that one day Big Mac comes to terms with his sport in the post-steroid era, or vice- versa-- the following A's will be in Cooperstown.

Jim Hunter
Reggie Jackson
Rollie Fingers
Dennis Eckersley
Rickey Henderson
Mark McGwire
Billy Williams
Frank Thomas

and possibly Miguel Tejada and Barry Zito

GREATEST FRANCHISE PLAYER: Is there any doubt about who deserves this? Rickey was one of a kind.

MOST MEMORABLE MOMENT: Again, I have to go with real history here. The Gibson homer certainly comes close; so does the classic fake pitchout as Fingers froze Bench; the Clemens tantrum; the Isringhausen strikeout to win the division in 2000; all the big moments in the 4 title years.

But the image that will linger longest occurred before Game Three of the 1989 World Series. It overshadowed then and still overshadows now-- along with the ongoing controversy surrounding two of our star players-- the actual outcome of that series. It happened-- improbably-- just as the game between two Bay Area franchises-- was about to begin.

Loma Prieta is the biggest memory.

SOMETHING YOU MAY NOT KNOW:

What? Can I slip something past this crowd??

Well, how about this one.

Since the beginning of the 1999 season, the A's have the 3rd best record in the game, trailing only the Yankees and the Braves.

Sorry for the delay here-- lots of home duties thos weekend and not a lot of free time.

And it is more fitting that I waited for yesterday's festivities in Canton and the appearances of Al Davis and John Madden.

Because "Number Nine...Number Nine...Number Nine..." is, of course:

THE RAIDERS

I'll leave location out of this for now.

Just because they've only had a smattering of successin the past 20 years: 1 SuperBowl blowout; two losses in the AFC championship; a game stolen from them by the zebras in the snow-- does not detract from the extraordinary record they amassed from 1960 through 1985, and even more the distinct and powerful image their team, colors, insignia, and fan base projected.

For nearly 30 years Al Davis could rightly brag that the Raiders had the best W-L% of any pro sports franchise over that period-- they were, quite simply, as consistent winners as any in their sport-- yes, even greater than the 49ers in many ways. (Though not enough to get a higher ranking from me, unfortunately)

John Madden never coached a losing team, and several of them went to the the conference championship. The team didn;t miss a beat under Tom Flores when Madden left for the broadcasting chair. Won a Super Bowl in 1977, 1981 and 1984.

What characters!!

John Matuszek
Ted Hendricks
Jim Otto
Jack Tatum
George Atkinson
George Blanda (yes, a 40+ year old man actually led the team to several victories playing QB, then won several more as a placekicker)
Ken the Snake Stabler
Otis (University of Mars) Sistrunk
Ben Davidson
Lyle Alzado

The list goes on and on.

HOFERs in Fred Biletnikoff, Art Shell, Gene Upshaw, Marcus Allen, Willie Brown, Mark Haynes and Ted "the MadStork" Hendricks

But think of the memories:

1. it was the Raiders that came back to beat the Jets in the infamous "Heidi" game with NBC cutting the game off with less than two minutes to go;
2. the Raiders who caused a rule change when Stabler and Co.fumbled a ball nearly 30 yards forward to beat the Chargers on the final play-- the infamous "Holy Roller"
3. the raiders who won a dramatic playoff game with a last second fling-- the "sea of Hands"-- to beat Miami;
4. the Raiders whose safety paralyzed an opposing player for life with a vicious hit
5. the Raiders who lost a playoff perhaps the most famous last second play in NFL history in a sequence initiated by a vicious hit by that same player-- tatum to Fuqua to Franco Harris
6. the raiders who lost a playoff game in the snow because of the "tuck rule"

IOt was the Raiders who for years enjoyed the best record on Monday Night Football by far;

The Raiders whom the phrases "Silver and Black"; "Pride and Poise"; "Commitment to Excellence" and, the granddaddy of them all, "Just win, baby" came to embody.

This was/is an historic franchise even under down times and even we A's fans have a somewhat jaundiced view of their current Bay Area presence.

GREATEST PLAYER: wow. A whole lot to choose from. Al Davis is obviously the greatest presence in the franchise. Marcus Allen may technically be their greatest player. I'm gonna go with a duo-- both because of their on-field greatness but also their off-field importance to the league and the fanchise: Art Shell and Gene Upshaw

MOST MEMORABLE MOMENT: Sorry-- it is not a good memor, but nothing beats the Immaculate Reception

SOMETHING YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW: I can't stump a true Raider fan with some arcane piece of trivia. I'll pass on this one for now.

We had a heated debate a while back.

I argued for more playing time for Scutaro, since I contended that he was likely to exceed his career OPS for the rest of the year given the horrible start he endured for the first two months. Others disagreed, saying the rest of his season would be essentially random-- he had as much chance of having a lower OPS than his career mark as having a higher OPS.

Well, here are the facts. At his nadir on June 2nd, Marco's OPS was 495.

Since then he is 306-344-484 for an OPS of 828, and his seasonal total is now very close to his career mark.

W-L, at least. That pesky run differential is still a bit of a problem.

Since I have been a skeptic recently, I am duly bound to report the following:

A's started at 23-29-- since then they are 35-22, which is .614 ball. Not exactly the Tigers or the Twins but still a 99 win pace.

Since the AS break the A's are now 13-8, which is a .619 pace. On the road they 9-5, which is a .643 pace.

In this latest stretch of 19 consecutive games vs. contenders that ends with the Texas series they are 8-6.

We've all talked about the impact of Bradley, but there are other promising signs as well--

1. chavez has been better;
2. Payton keeps delivering;
3. scoot filling in well for Crosby-- I think he's over 750 OPS since his horrendous start;
4. haren and Blanton starting to look like 2005-- Haren has been pretty solid all year but it would be nice to see Cupcakes go on a little run here with 4-5 good starts in a row;
5. the bullpen is as close to normal as it's been since April with Kennedy close to returning.

A lot of problems remain: I'm not sold on Kendall in the leadoff spot, but our options are limited; Kotsay is hitting better and in the clutch, but the overall numbers are down; what will Swish do the rest of the way? Ellis is fighting off a demotion to the bench; Loaiza is still a mystery; Crosby ditto though maybe the time off will recharge him for the finish.

But somehow... someway.. they are winning. And the schedule does turn softer after this next series.

No game for us tonight; rangers clinging to a lead over LAA as i write this.

The previous 10 have included:

Baseball: Cincinnati Reds, Baltimore Orioles, Boston Red Sox and St. Louis Cardinals

Basketball: Philadelphia 76ers

Football: New England Patriots, Denver Broncos, Miami Dolphins, Washington Redskins and Green Bay Packers

The next 10 made me think pretty hard about where they should land-- they divided fairly easily into 3 groupings, but within those subgroups it was agonizingly difficult to figure out the right order. I'll try to defend my choice, but would gladly listen to counterarguments.

#10 LOS ANGELES DODGERS

they'd be higher if their best team hadn't been in the mid 60s. But why LA and not St. Louis??

1. In the 1960s the Dodgers won 3 pennants, 2 world championships, and lost a 3 game playoff in 1962 for the NL pennant. the Cardinals by contrast won 3 pennants and 2 world championships but that was it. And as great as Gibson and co. were, there is something that lingers in the mind and the spirit about Koufax, Drysdale and the great Dodger teams;
2. In the 70s and 80s, the Dodgers won 5 pennants, 2 world championships, and 2 more divisional titles. The cardinals won nothing in the 1970s, and then 3 pennants and 1 world championship in the 1980s. This was a clear edge for LA.

Now if the Cardinals had won a World Series since or at least gone to more than one, I might have switched the order. The dodgers in the Piazza and then post-O'Malley era have been disappointing-- two playoff series and that's been it.

Ever since they cleared a Latino neighborhood to build a new ballpark on a hill overlooking downtown LA, the dodgers have been a team noted for its pitching. Sandy Koufax stands above all the rest, but we should not forget that the rest includes HOFer Don Drysdale, the first pitcher to throw more than 50 innings in a row without allowing a run; HOFer Don Sutton, who scuffed and cut and who knows what else to the ball on his way to 300 wins; the charismatic Fernando Valenzuela, who captivated a nation in his 2nd season with his "eyes to the sky" delivery and great screwball. Who can forget Fernando pitching on guts alone to win a key WS game vs. the Yankees in 1981. Other great lefthanders such as Tommy John (and it was after the surgery named after him that his career got a 2nd win in LA and then NY) and Jerry Ruess occupied the Chavez Ravine mound. And then of course the other Dodger who had a scoreless streak over 50 innings and in fact broke Drysdale's record, our vanquisher from 1988, Orel Hershiser.

But for all that pitching, we shouldn't lose sight of the great position players who have worn Dodger blue.

At catcher: piazza, preceded by Scioscia; preceded by Yeager; preceded by Roseboro;

First Base: Steve Garvey

Second Base: Gilliam, Lopes, Sax;

ShortStop: maury Wills and Bill Russell;

Third Base: Ron "the Penguin" Cey

Outfielders such as Willie Davis, Tommy Davis, Dusty Baker, Rick Monday, Kirk Gibson and Reggie Smith

Not one is in the Hall of Fame and only Piazza will ultimately get that ticket, but these were hard-nosed, winning ballplayers.

Dodger memories:

1. My first game was at the coliseum-- wally Moon hit a ball over the short porch in left field, but I have no memory of it;
2. Koufax' perfect game, and his great leg kick and stride as he blew another fastball or sent another backbreaking, kneebuckling curve homeward;
3. Drysdale's controversy-- when he hit Dick dietz of the Giants with the basesloaded but saw his scoreless streak improve as the umpired ruled that Dietz didn;t get out of the way (sound familiar??)
4. The horrible Marichal-Roseboro confrontation;
5. Koufax skipping a start in the 1965 World Series vs. the Twins due to Yom Kippur, then winning the 7th game on just 2 days rest;
6. willie davis misplaying 3 separate balls in Game One of the 1966 Series, instigating an Oriole sweep;
7. Maury Wills failing to get traction as a baserunner at Candelstick park in the 1962 3 game playoff, as the Giants' groundskeepers created a virtual lake near first base by watering the dirt so much;
8. The Dodgers being intimidated by NY in the 1977-78 Series, letting the situation and reggie Jackson get the best of them. In 1981, they had a different attitude in beating the Yankees after Rick Monday's dramatic lennant-winning HR vs. Montreal.
9. Did anything interesting happen in the 1988 World Series-- "I can't believe what I just saw".

And many more.

My most painful baseball memory-- yes, even more than Jeter/Giambi or the many disappointments from 2000-03-- was at the hands of teh dreaded Dodgers. The 1977 Philadelphia Phillies were headed for the WS and a date with the Yankess. They had split the first two games of the NLCS in LA, then returned to Philadelphia and watched as Dodger Burt Hooton lost his cool and walked in a couple of early runs. the lead held, and as the very dependable Philadelphia bullpen mowed down Dodger after Dodger, one couldn't blamed for drifting to thoughts of Steve Carlton on the hill for the clincher in game Four.

And then the Dodgers' trotted 41 year old pinchhitter Vic Davallilo to the plate with 2 outs and no one on vs. Phils' closer gene Garber. And davalillo dragged a bunt past Garber for a hit. Up stepped 39 year old pinchhitter extraordinaire Manny Mota who lifted a hard liner to left. With a collective gasp every Philly fan realized at once that Greg "The Bull" Luzinski was still out there-- manager Danny Ozark had somehow forgotten to pull the Bull for a defensive replacement, as was the custom. This was worse than Billy Buck, as Luzinski spun around in confusion, drifting back to the wall, gloving Mota's hit for an instant then watching it bounce off and against the wall, and when the play had ended davalillo had scored and Mota stood on 3rd abse after a wild throw back to the infield.

Whereupon Davy Lopes bounced a hard grounder to third, and HOFer and perennial Gold Glover Mike Schmidt saw it bounce of the heel of his glove, over to shortstop Larry Bowa whose hurried but strong throw to first was deemed to have arrived just a split second late. Lopes stole second, Bill Russell knocked him in and before the horror the Doders had a 2 run lead, a 2 to 1 lead in games, and their best pitcher, Tommy John, set to try to close it out the next night. Which he did-- over Carlton-- in a driving rain.

FRANCHISE PLAYER:  Koufax, of course

MOST MEMORABLE MOMENT: Hate to say it, but "I couldn;t beleive what i just saw, either". Gibson's home run, after he staggered to the plate, and given the quality of the pitcher whose backdoorslider he crushed, is one of the great moments in WS history.

SOMETHING YOU MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN:

Tommy LaSorda-- and how have I forgotten him up until this point?- was a lefthanded pitcher in the Dodger organization struggling to make the roster in 1955, which would be, of course, the year dem Bums finally broke the Yankee stranglehold over them. LaSorda was sent back to the minors and ultimately to the Kansas City A's because a bonus baby who was very wild and not a big part of the team's plans had to fill a major league slot.

His name: Sandy Koufax, of course.

You know if you had put a serious baseball fan on a desert island so he couldn't watch or listen to any game this year; then gave him the AL West standings plus run differential with the names of the teams blacked out...

he'd have to conclude that it was pretty much anyone's ballgame as to who would win. team A has obviously won the most close games and has the best pitching. team C appears to be the most explosive, but has the biggest isues with pitching. Teams B and particularly D should have slightly better records than they currently boast.

So what if.... The Rangers take 3 of 4 from the Halos; and we are winless in Seattle.

Monday morning's standings would be:

Oakland  57-54
Seattle  56-54
Texas    57-55
Anaheim  56-55

4 teams bunched within 1 game-- with no clear favorite.

Not predicting this, mind you, but it isn;t the craziest possibility, particularly if we are without both Payton and Crosby this weekend with Chavez and Swisher still subpar.

Blez covered the game pretty succinctly-- they made the plays in the field, and we did not.

So on to this exercise, and tonight I'm gonna have some fun.

So far, the order has been:

#20: Philadelphia 76ers
#19: Denver Broncos
#18: Cincinnati Reds
#17: New England Patriots
#16: Baltimore Orioles
#15: Miami Dolphins
#14: Washington Redskins
#13: Boston Red Sox

#12: GREEN BAY PACKERS

I admit is was hard to figure out where they belonged. In terms of performance over the past 38 years, they're nowhere near. But in the previous 7 years they won 5 titles and both of the initial Super Bowls. And they've had a resurgence that may have ended last year under the charismatic leadership of Brett favre. But mostly we value the Pack for just how unique this franchise is. The community owns it; the history is extraodinary; it is the smallest market by far of any major pro franchise; the kids still have the players ride their bikes to and from summer practice.

And oh yes, they once had a coach named Lombardi.

In 1958 the Packers were basically a memory-- of Curly Lambeau and Don Hutson and championships gone by. They had the worst record in the league. And so the team's fathers reached east to an assistant coach from the lordly New York Giants who burned to be the head man, and the NFL was never quite the same.

Lombardi-- the coach who treated his players all equally-- like "dogs"-- would not abide losing. And so in 1959 they had a winning record. In 1960 they went to the championship game, falling just short of the Philadelphia Eagles on the final play. In 1961, title. ditto for 1962. In 1963 they lost one of their best players, Paul Hornung, the wayward son Lombardi always had a fond place for in his heart, to a gambling suspension. they struggled to regain their greatness in 1964, but then ran off three more championships, including two memorable games vs. a new rival-- Dallas-- and the first two Super Bowl victories.

it was a team of great players--Hall of Famers Starr, Gregg, Hornung, Davis, Wood, Adderley and Nitschke. It was a team that reflected its leader-- supremely confident, able to execute under supreme pressure, tough-minded. Nowhere were those qualities tested more than in the frigid cold of the ultimate championship test-- the Ice Bowl in 1967-- 17 below and a frozen field and the Packers trailed Dallas late in the 4th quarter. and using everything Lombardi had taught them-- without both great running backs from seasons past-- Hornung and taylor-- with the worst footing imaginable, the Packers moved inexorably down the field and then, rather than kick a tying field goal that would almost certainly guarantee on overtime, with no timeouts remaining they elected to go for the winning score, and even then QB bart Starr countermanded Lombardi's play call and decided to sneak it himself rather than risk a slip and missed handoff. A sneak that if it had failed would have lost the game.

It's the stuff that legends should be made of.

but let's also not forget that after 25 years in the doldrums, Mike Homlgren and Brett Favre produced a new era of greatness. Up until last year's disappointing 4-12 finish, the Packers had the best record in the NFL from the time Favre made his first start. Two Super Bowl appearances, 1 title-- probably should have been two, but they have mattered again.

GREATEST PLAYER: It's obviously Favre. But I think we should add another category-- greatest influence-- so we can also cite the incomparable Vince Lombardi.

MOST MEMORABLE MOMENT: I've already covered it. The QB sneak for the winning touchdown in the Ice Bowl in the 1967 NFL championship game (the leagues would merge three years later);

SOMETHING YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW: When Dallas emerged as the Packers' main rival, after years of division battles with the Lions, bears and, near the end, Johnny Unitas' Baltimore Colts, the simple contrast was a flashy team with an explosive offense vs. a fundamental team with a hard-nosed defense. and yet the two coaches actually came from the reverse background. They had been the two principal assistants in the New York Giant's ascendancy in the mid to late 1950s under head Coach Jim Lee Howell.

But Lombardi, the old offensive lineman (Fordham University's famed "7 Blocks of Granite"-- a line that probably averaged less than 200 pounds), was the offensive coach in New York. And it was his schemes and relentless call for discipline which reached its peak performance unde the guidance of Bart Starr (Lombardi's "Good" son as opposed to the "Prodigal" son of Hornung)-- the infamous Packer sweep, the "run for Daylight" philosophy.

And Tom landry-- the man who for 30 years was the "only coach the Cowboys have ever had"-- was the Giants defensive leader alongside lombardi's offensive squad. His schemes produced the great Dallas "Doomsday defense" of the 1970s-- of Too Tall Jones, Harvey Martin, Cliff Harris, and Charlie Waters.

Have you noticed the team is playing better since I started this exercise?

Bradley again.. Payton again... and what a start from Haren and he gave the bullpen a much-needed night off.

And did you see Carlos Lee lose two balls in the Metrodome roof??

OK-- So far we've had:

#20:  Philadelphia 76ers
#19:  Denver Broncos
#18:  Cincinnati Reds
#17:  New England Patriots
#16:  Baltimore Orioles
#15:  Miami Dolphins

#14: WASHINGTON REDSKINS

"hail to the Redskins...
Hail Victory.
Braves on the Warpath...
Fight for old D.C."

OK, the song itself is fairly offensive. The drum interlude is everything the Braves and Florida State do and worse; Braves on the warpath is a pretty awful line.

But the nickname itself is the single-most offensive in all of sport. It is a travesty that it has never changed and probably never will.

But the franchise? It has mattered for over 30 years, and Daniel Snyder is making sure it will again after a number of missteps.

I lived in DC during much of the Gibbs era, and can attest firsthand to the extraordinary dominance of this team in the DC area's conscience. it is the only thing that competes with politics, and when one of my "greatest moments" took place (see below), it was the perfect blend. Think 49ers times two. And the feeling when RFK started literally to shake as the Skins engineered another late rally was uncomparable.

But people forget that it wasn't this way until a certain legendary coach decided he couldn't stand being on the sidelines and asked out of his job as General Manager of the Green Bay Packers to come to the Nation's capital and run the woebegone Redskins.

And when Vince Lombardi convinced players and free spirits such as Sonny Jurgensen and Sam Huff that things were different, well soon they were., Lombardi tragically only lasted one season before succumbing to cancer, but it was a playoff season.

Then came the defensive genius of the Bears and Rams-- George Allen-- with a cheerleading attitude and reverence for the older players that were soon given the moniker "The Over the Hill Gang." If Lombardi would be infamous for his "winning isn't everything.. it's the only thing" quote, Allen would put his own stamp with his "the Future is Now" philosophy.

And he had a beer barreled, whisky drinking quarterback that threw nothing but ducks but did nothing but win, and Allen trusted Billy Kilmer more than the legendary Jurgensen. In 1972 they destroyed the hated Cowboys, but then were clobbered by the unbeaten Dolphins in the Super Bowl, a game noted for a failed reverse play called in advance by none other than President Richard M. Nixon.

A couple of more years contending and the Allen magic wore out. (Note: I once shared the Dulles people mover shuttle back to the main terminal with Allen, his wife and family. he was in his last year on the planet the coach of the Long Beach State 49ers, but the fire was still there. I am a democrat but it is a testament to Allen that one of his sons is a U.S. Senator after a stint as Governor of Virginia and is talked about as a potential Presidential candidate; another is a leading NFRL executive, including a long stint with the Raiders, and his daughter wrote a moving memoir about the football coach father who really wasn;t around for his family very much)

The team drifted through several mediocre seasons until owner Edward Bennett Williams decided to take a chance on a offensive coordinator with no head coaching experience. Joe gibbs is and was one of the most underrated coaches in football. All he did in a decade was lead the Redskins to 4 Super Bowls, winning three, with quarterbacks as diverse as Doug Williams, Joe Theismann and Mark Rypien.

And now he's back and the team is winning again.

Many memorable plays:

1. they returned that Garo "pass" in the 1973 Super Bowl for a touchdown-- or more accurately Mike Bass for the Skins' only score of the day;
2. Remember Theismann's screen pass at the end of the first half that Jack squirek picked off at the 10 and waltzed in for a game-clinching score in the 1983 SBowl??
3. Remember the gruesome sight of Lawrence Taylor shattering Theismann's leg in a Monday Night Game?
4. How about Doug Williams and Co. erupting for 35 points in a quarter in the 1988 Super Bowl vs. Denver? and Timmy Smith running for over 200 yards in that game? ever hear of him again?
5. Gus Frerotte going heads up with a wall?

But the greatest moments and the greatest redskin are linked:

GREATEST PLAYER:  John Riggins. anyone who lived in DC during the late 1970s and early 1980s could make this call in a plit second. yes he ran behind the Hogs... and there were the SMurfs in a later iteration making all those touchdown catches... and HOF players from Jurgensen to Huff to Taylor. But Riggins was the heart and soul of that team. And it is to his credit that he contributed two memorable moments...

MOST MEMORABLE MONENT(S): The on-field one was Riggins breakaway TD run vs. Miami in the 4th quarter of the 1983 Super Bowl; and the other? Riggins at a black tie function in Washington; ahd a few too many and said, just before passing out, to Supreme Court Justice O'Connor:
"loosen up, Sandy baby".

Riggo was something else.

SOMETHING YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW: "Hail to the Redskins" was written by the team's original owner, George Preston Marshall, who, among other things, was the product of the South and not particularly tolerant of racial matters.

#13 is a very long essay... give me a little time-- it's coming.

Leave it to Billy to shock the world, but Jayson Stark has just reported on ESPN that the A's are now in bidding for Soriano, whether it is in a straight deal or a 3 way combo where Soriano may or may not be coming here, he does not say.

All I can say is that we have a .220 hitting 2Bman and a .230 hitting SS-- put Soriano at 2nd; play whichever between Scutaro, Ellis or Crosby is hitting best at SS;-- and roll the friggin' dice.

Quite a win today, wasn't it. My reverse karma was in rare form during the game (though I did call a victory pregame then retracted it after the Johnson leadoff homer) as I praised Bonderman an instant before the 6 run Twin rally and then praised Ethier and attacked the trade (a deliberate reverse karma ploy) before Milton's walkoff. And a big set in Anaheim beginning tomorrow.

So here's the latest in my countdown:

#20: Philadelphia 76ers
#19: Denver Broncos
#18: Cincinnati Reds
#17: New England Patriots

#16:  BALTIMORE ORIOLES

OK, Peter Angelos has ruined the franchise. it's been nearly 10 years since this team mattered in a pennant race, and nearly that long since Cal Ripken passed Gehrig.

But for nearly 20 years before Angelos showed up they were the Gold Standard: the organization that filled the vacuum as the incredible 45 year Yankee dynasty finally petered out in the mid 60s; the team with the manager who probably did more than any other to advance the philosophy that would reach full flower with the work of Bill James and the actions of Billy Beane; and a squad that kept producing pitching, pitching and more pitching.

4 20 game winners in a season? baltimore. (McNally, Palmer, Cuellar and Dobson)

A rotation referred in print as Cy Young (Stone), Cy Old (Palmer), Cy present (Flanagan) and Cy Future (McGregor)

And don't forget Mike Mussina from a small town in northern Pennsylvania, or Dennis Martinez from a small town in Nicaragua.

And oh yes, Cal Ripken and Brooks Robinson on the left side of an infield; Frank Robinson in the outfield; Eddie Murray (and Boog Powell) at first; interesting catchers from Rick Dempsey to Elrod Hendriks to Andy Etchebarren.

And the first of the great retro ballparks-- the one all others woud be measured against-- Camden Yards.

There were two organizations when I became conscious of more than just statistics-- but also why teams did what they did-- good or bad-- that were basically viewed as the models for the rest. They actually had "books" preaching the fundamentals and their organizational philosophy-- there was a "dodger" way and an "Oriole" way.

The facts are pretty impressive:

Contention as the Yankees won their final pennants of the Mantle era, 1966 WS champs; 1969-70-71 pennants, with one WS title, losing to the Miracle mets and the Clemente led Pirates-- but one the of best 3 year records in modern history; divisional titles in 1973 and 74; an AL pennant in 1979; losing the division (pre wild card, remember) on the last day of 1980 and 1982, a WS title in 1983.

6 pennants all told-- 3 titles.

And then there's a personal side. I lived in DC in the late 1970s and 1980s. I hated the Yankees-- who couldn't? I didnt have any love for the Red Sox having been exposed to their fans and fanaticism in college. The Phillies were my team but in the pre-internet/pre-ESPN days, it was hard to follow a team, even one barely 200 miles away. And so I gravitated to the Orioles and their much maligned but very accessible ballpark near the Johns Hopkins campus. Memorial Stadiuum and the Coliseum both got bum raps over the years-- they were great places to watch a ballgame. And the Swinging A's were now-- but for one year of BillyBall-- the awful A's and wouldn't reach me again until my son saw the light in 1988.

And so in 1983 I had the Hobbesian choice between my original team and the team I had adopted-- I had not joy nor no pain after each game. The Phils had won their title 3 years before, so i suppose deep down I hped the Orioles would get theirs although I actually went to a game and definitely was rooting for the NL team.

But the 1979 season was fun, funner, funnest-- made even more enjoyable when Earl Weaver referred to his closer as Don "Fullpack" Stanhouse, because of his penchant for getting in and out of deep late inning trouble while the manager retreated to the safety of the runway to the clubhouse and smoked cigarette after cigarette.

And another memory-- my sister and like 20,000 other Student Crossing Guards went to a game in Baltimore in, like, 1965 or 1966-- and the escalators broke down, causing a stampede and several kids were killed.

FRANCHISE PLAYER:  Cal Ripken, of course. But I always felt the streak was perpetuated at the expense of the team, as Ripken's 2nd half numbers were routinely worse than his 1st half, and he elected to stay in a separate hotel than the rest of the team. What are the odds that the next guy amassing a consecutive games streak would also be a SS for the Orioles (though not much longer, it seems)

GREATEST MOMENT: Despite what you read above, the 2131st Ripken game comes very close. But I'm going to go for another one-- the last game at Memorial Stadium. Without much hype or fanfare, after the final out, the Orioles announced that the fans should stay for a "memorial" to Memorial Stadium.

And then as stirring music began to play, Brooks Robinson-- in uniform-- trotted out to third base. And then Frank to right field. Jim Palmer to the mound.. Eddie Murray to first base... etc, etc. It was one of the most moving ceremonies I've ever seen (and no, I wasn;t there in person) and made all the more so because it wasn't accompanied by a lot of hype.

SOMETHING YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW:

The greatest pitcher in A's history (and perhaps baseball history) and the greatest player in Yankee history (and perhaps baseball history) each began their professional career as members of the.... Baltimore Orioles, a minor league independent franchise owned and operated by Jack Dunn. Eventually Dunn would sell Grove and Ruth in a very different system than the feeder system major league franchises currently benefit from.

#15 coming later tonight.

Better news on our front today-- Big Papi reminds everyone-- as if we needed reminding-- who the best clutch hitter in the game is; Barry Zito does what a quality professional starter does after a horrible start: settle down and give his team a chance for the win; and the key hits came, particularly 8 of them from the outfield, including 3 from Mr. Bradley. And as of this writing General Lee's new team-- well, actually, El Caballo around these parts-- is losing to hapless Kansas City again.

So let me keep going with this exercise:

20. Philadelphia 76ers
    
19. Denver Broncos
18. CINCINNATI REDS

This is a franchise that has had a couple of memorable encounters with our boys, of course, but to me any discussion of the Reds begins and ends with the guy who, as a kid, we had to decide whether we loved or hated. Before the Reds were the Reds- and championship contenders for most of a decade-- they had this crazy guy playing OF and 2B who sprinted to first base on a walk, who played the game with reckless abandon, and who could flat out hit, even if it was mainly singles. Think David Eckstein squared in terms of intensity and ability.

And more than 40 years later it's funny: we're still talking about him, aren't we? And once again it's a simple Up/Down question, though not the one anyone could have anticipated watching Cincinnati's home town hero rap out 200 hits a year in the 60s and early 70s.

The redlegs are, or course, the game's original franchise-- but they deserve entrance in this list and ahead of the more recently successful Atlanta team for three simple reasons:

1. Their 1975-76 team is considered by many observers the best team of this era and one of the greatest of all time;
2. The 1975 World Series vs. Boston is also considered by many to be the best in this era and one of the greatest of all time;
3. as is Game Six of that series, the great 12 inning game capped by Carlton Fisk's home run off the left field foul pole.

Personal Note Injected here: I have many reasons to hate the Reds. I confess i didn't like Rose  much; they blasted my Phillies out of the 1976 playoffs; and of course they did a number on the Bash Brothers and Co. in 1990. And as I'll describe in a minute they weren't exactly my stylistic cup of tea.

But all of that is negated by one simple four hour experience on a cold Boston October night-- yes, i was there for that infamous Game Six-- after paying $30 -- that's right, about 1/30 of what those same tickets would go for against the Yankees these days-- from a scalper for standing room. We got there an hour early, and established our position directly behind home plate. And then watched the greatest baseball game I've ever seen. And my college buddies can attest to this that I called Bernie Carbo's 8th inning 3 run jack that tied the game at 6 and set up all the heroics in extra innings (Dewey Evans' great catch of Morgan's blast; Fisk's HR)

I didn't really have a rooting interest in that game or series-- but 30 years distant and the images are as clear as day.

And that Reds team was special-- 4 pennants, 2 world titles, the best 1-8 lineup I've ever seen, HOFers in Bench, Morgan and Perez with Rose, of course, easily deserving based on his playing career.

But it was tough team for many of us to embrace-- they were sort of the Nebraska of baseball-- boring red uniforms; very conservative sensibility (no facial hair allowed; generally very short haircuts at a time when long hair, long sideburns, mustaches were very prevalent). liberal East Coast me jsut didn;t like them.

It is interesting how they contrasted to the three teams they are most associated with: 1) the glitzy Dodgers of sinatra and Dinah Shore and Don Rickles; 2) the funky A's with everyone having a moustache and the type of characters and free-wheeling style that was anathema in the River City; 3) and the classic New England style and vibes of the Red Sox-- both equally proud traditions but expressed by players, management and fans alike in very different ways.

And the Reds had a resurgence under Lou Piniella that included a memorable upset of our team in 1990. some success in the mid 1990s, and now, apparently, a bit of a small marker resurgence in a new ballpark.

world Series appearances in 1961, 70, 72, 75, 76, and 90; 3 titles; Hall of Famers in Robinson, Bench, perez, Morgan and, probably one day, Rose.

FRANCHISE PLAYER: Pete Rose, of course. he is Cincinnati, for better or worse. And he provided the final impetus that Mike Schimdt and my boyhood team-- the Phillies-- needed to finally get over the hump in 1980. (Would that Thomas or Bradley or someone could do the same here);

GREATEST MOMENT: Joe Morgan's 9th inning looper that brought home the wining run in Fenway in 1975;

SOMETHING YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW: Between Mays and Cecil Fielder (and then the onslaught) only one major leaguer hit 50 home runs in a season-- roughly a 25 year period and the longest with such a drought since Ruth did it the first time.

It was the Reds' george Foster (1977) and his was a strange career where he went from being the msot feared hitter in the National league for two or three years to basically out of the game just a few years later.

17. NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS

I don;t have to talk much about the team we've all seen the past 5 years or so, or about Tom Brady-- from Serra high school by way of Ann Arbor (my parents met at that school and I have always been a Wolverine backer in football-- or the genius of Bill Belichick. They have been the best since the Cowboys in the 1990s or 49ers in the 1980s. And the story may not be over yet.

But the Patriots were an interesting if frustratingly unsuccessful franchise in the preceding 40 years. I had a neat experience as a 12 year old kid-- a business associate of my father lived in Andover, Mass, where the Pats had their preseason camp, and his son was a ballboy for the team. I got to do the same for a few days and watch these huge athletes (and today, of course, they are much bigger) run around in the hot sun, and then pitch pennies in the locker room afterwards (what do they pitch now? C-Notes??)

But a competitive team in the last years of the AFL fell way down, until they drafted their savior-- Heisman trophy winner Jim Plunkett out of Stanford. (Like the Reds and A's; the Pats and Raiders have had an interesting, somewhat symbiotic relationship. Plunkett didn't save the Pats but he did win two Super Bowl with the Raiders)

But Plunkett suffered under high expectations, and it wasn't until another QB-- Steve Grogan-- playing behind an offensive line anchored by all-time great John Hannah-- that the team started to contend for a title.

And here's where the raider stuff gets really intense:

1. the playoff victoy in oakland where New England fans absolutely believe they were jobbed by the refs. Particularly a "pseudo-roughing the passer penalty on Ray "sugar bear" Hamilton;
2. Darryl Stingley's hideous paralysis at the hadns of a vicious hit by Raider free safety Jack Tatum;
3. The Plunkett connection;
4. and, of course, more recently, the "Tuck" play where my wolverine, Charles Woodson, made a great football play agaisnt his former teammate, Tom Brady, and then watched the Zebras negate it. How would the futures of each of these franchises have been if a ref hadn't decided to get so literal??

And the final connection to the Pats (the one and only conference championsho football game I've ever attended was there upset over Dan Marino and the Miami Dolphins in 1985, which only meant that it would be they, and not the Fins, that would get pulverized by Dah Bears) for me was their appearance to oppose my adopted pro football team-- the Green Bay Packers. so they denied Marino his title but not Favre.

FRANCHISE PLAYER: Tom Brady, of course

GREATEST MOMENT:  Adam Vinateiri's kick to upset the Rams wins out over his field goal in the snow to beat the Raiders in the Tuck game- though the latter was more difficult.

SOMETHING YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW: Tom Brady won 11 straight postseason games, going back to his Michigan days, before finally losing last season.

Numbers 16 and 15 coming tomorrow-- there will be another baseball team among the two.

On a night when Loaiza failed us yet again; where Bradley took the collar and also made a critical defensive misplay while Ethier was a solid 2-4 with a jimmy jack and 2 RBI; and, oh by the way, the Angels proved that all this strength of schedule talk is poppycock by doing what the A's did a while back-- going into Fenway and taking over first place, I thought I would-- as Barry Zito does so often-- throw a change of pace.

So in a somewhat baseball related effort-- obviously baseball teams will be part of this discussion-- I thought I would borrow from the Top Ten ALL-Time A's that, I believe, ohad, brought to us last year, and rank the Top 20 Pro Sports franchises of my era-- which starts roughly about 1960, when i was old enough to be conscious of Roger Maris and mickey Mantle and Willie Mays and Johnny Unitas and Wilt Chamberlain.

This will be a football-baseball-basketball judgement only-- so all you fans of the Montreal Canadiens, Arsenal Gunners, and the Miami Hurricanes (sorry-- couldn't resist that one), hold your fire and if you want to start a separate thread, be my guest. (By the way, what is Phonak?? I mean I'll confess I didn't know who Floyd Landis was a month ago, and I certainly didn't know Phonak)

How did I arrive at this? totally subjective, of course. Well, on-field/court performance matters most, with two slight weightings: yes, I value recent perfomance more than the Stone Age of the 1960's, even though that's when I started to care about all this (I do hope I can give some of you young-uns a history lesson or two in this process), but I also value consistency-- i.e, a team that constantly makes the postseason but may not win a lot of championships could be valued over one that broke through and won a coupld of times but never mattered all that much in other years.

And i did value panache-- the intangibles of fan base, franchise history, presence (can you think of a couple of Bay Area franchises that might be helped by this element? i bet you can.)

So here goes: I'll do two per day for the next ten days.

First off, despite my paean to consistency above, the 21st best franchise and thus the first runner-up is the Atlanta Braves. I'm sorry-- just one title does count against him. So do all those moribund years in the 1970s and 1980s when, other than Aaron's home run, all they really had to talk about was an eccentric owner. (yes, he suited up and managed a game; and yes, he "convinced" Andy Messersmith to put the word "Channel" on the back of his uniform since it was Number 17, the Braves' flagship station).

NUMBER 20:

The Philadelphia 76ers.

OK, I confess, this was one of the teams of my youth, but they are deserving for many reasons.

They did win 2 championships-- the Chamberlain great 69 win team of 1966-67, and the malone/Erving "fo..fo..fo" squad of 1982-83. They lost 4 other NBA finals, three times with Erving and once more recently with Allan Iverson.

The 76er-Celtic rivalry was one of the best, if not the best, rivalry in pro sports in both the 1960's and then again in the early 1980s. And it was the terrific personalities which defined it. Most of you weren't around to watch Chamberlain and Russell go at it-- but suffice to say that outside of perhaps Borg and McEnroe or Ali and frazier there never has been a more compelling direct one-on-one confrontation in sports. Back in that day, pre-cable of course, there were perhaps a grand total of 10-12 nationally televised NBA games each year (and believe it or not, the NBA finals weren't even nationally televised until the very end of the Celtic dynasty), and all on Sunday afternoon. I guarantee you that-- in a foreshadowing of everything Yankee and Red Sox on ESPN-- at least half of those games in the period from 1965-68 were Philly-Boston/ Russell-Chamberlain.

Ironic of course that Wilt's one title in his hometown was against his former team. Another thing a bit different back in that day were player movement rules-- when the Warriors went West and the Syracuse Nationals (that's right-- there was a NBA franchise in Syracuse in the early 1960s) came to Philadelphia to become the 76ers, Wilt Chamberlain somehow stayed. (Or maybe he went to SF for one year? anyone know?)

The Sixers couldn't keep Wilt long, of course, and after a choke job vs. Boston in part caused by the new arena-- the Spectrum-- having its rood blown off, which forced playoff games to be played in the old Penn Palestra where rookie sensation Billy Cunningham took a hard fall and broke his wrist, thus missing the Celtic series; and where Wilt, the most prolific scorer in the history of basketball, took all of one shot in the second half on Game Seven-- Chamberlain was dispatched to the Lakers.

And the Sixers went quickly downhill, establishing a record for futility that has stood the test of time-- the infamous 9-73 season in, i believe 1970-71. This was a period where all the Philly teams were singularly inept, causing a typical Philadelphia response (sometime around this period was when the Eagle fans booed Santa Claus).

But a hockey team-- the notorious Broad Street Bullies-- pulled the area out of that depression with Stanley Cups in 1974 and 1975, and then, like a bolt of lightening came the news that as the ABA was merging with 4 teams (Nets, Nuggets, Pacers and Spurs) into the NBA, the 76ers had acquired Julius Erving, joining former Pacer star George McGinniss.

Surely the Sixers would win a title, but when former Philadelphia legendary coach Dr. jack Ramsay (yup, the same guy you hear on the radio doing NBA games) and some tall white Deadhead kid out of La Jolla, California by way of UCLA stunned the favored Sixers in the NBA finals in 1977, Erving and Sixer management were compelled to create an off-season marketing campaign entitled "We Owe You One". (Thank God the A's haven;t followed that example recently)

The finger soon became a hand as the Sixers got close to the Promised Land on several different occasions in the next 5 years, twice losing to the Lakers in the finals. the first time was Magic Johnson's coming-out party, as he led a Kareem-less Laker squad to a stunning clinching win in Philadelphia in Game Six with an outstanding triple-double from the center spot. Yes, it happened.

But the real story of those years were bitter and terrific playoff series between Larry Bird's revitalized Celtic team and the Sixer team led by the great Julius Erving. In 1980 Philly blew Boston out, but in 1981, the Celtics came back from a 3-1 deficit, as they had in Wilt's last season, to win, and in 1982, history seemed to be repeating itself until the Sixers dug deep and won a Game Seven (first time up until that point that Boston had ever lost a game Seven at the Garden) in Boston, made more noteworthy by the Celtic Crazies yelling "beat LA.. Beat LA" to the hated Sixers as time ran out, a tremendous gesture of respect between two great franchises.

the next year Moses Malone and the came just one game short of his classic "fo..fo..fo" prediction. Soon thereafter arrive the irrepressible Charles Barkley, and while his teams never could reach the highest rung, as the power base in the East moved to first to Detroit and then to Chicago, things were always with Charles around. As they have been for most of the past decade with Allen Iverson.

FRANCHISE PLAYER: Wilt Chamberlain, with Dr. J as a close runner-up;

GREATEST MOMENT: Wilt scored 100 for the Warriors, so that can't be it. I'm actually going to say the "Beat LA" moment from 1982, even though it would be the next year the Erving and Co., finally made good on the "We Owe You One" pledge from 6 years before.

ONE THING YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW: Two little elements about the 76ers were legendary. First, they produced in the time before websites that offer every bit of information about every thing imaginable the best team preseason sports guide of any franchise, and not just basketball. Second, they featured perhaps the most famous PA announcer this side of Roy Steele or the guy in the Bronx-- Dave Zinkoff was his name and you just had to be there to hear him say "Chamberlain!!... from Greer" or, back when the NBA had an absurd extra shot on a shooting foul: "Cunningham.... shooting three... for two".

I can't do it justice but anyone who remembers knows how expressive and interesting the Zink was.

NUMBER 19

Denver Broncos.

OK-- this won't be so long, because I've never lived in Colorado. They are a hated rival of the Raiders, of course, but that shouldn't blind people to the striking and consistent success this franchise has had for more than 30 years now.

Floyd Little was the first Bronco i really remember-- a great running back, but the most memorable thing I can remember about his career was when, in an experiment, he aped the movements of a 2 year old one day and, needless to say, was utterly exhausted in just an hour or so.

In the 1970s it was the Orange Crush defense and an always pass-happy offense (Thank God for the AFL) led ultimately by Craig Morton which reached the Super Bowl only to get spanked by Morton's former team, the Cowboys. (I think that is the AFC title game with a phantom touchdown that Raider fans still gripe about)

In the 1980s it was John Elway-- the Drive, all those great comebacks, the Three Amigos (It is a testament to Elway's greatness to realize how well he did with so little memorable talent around him all those years-- Quick: name one wide receiver on those Bronco teams of the 1980s)--- but Super Bowl failure after Super Bowl failure. But then came Terrell Davis and Mike Shanahan and, all of a suddenm they finally won the Big One. And then repeated that feat.

Incredibly loyal fan base-- i believe Denver routinely has the highest proportion of people watching the games on TV of any NFL market-- historic field that has since been replaced by one of these indistinguishable new football palaces, consistently good teams.

FRANCHISE PLAYER: Elway, of course.

GREATEST MOMENT: Not when Mike Holmgren told the Packer defense to let Terrell Davis score so Favre could still get the ball back, 8 points down, with a chance to score in the 1998 Super Bowl. It's either the Drive or Elway's "Helicopter" leap-- I'll go with The Drive.

ONE THING YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW: Well, Bay Area fans know this all too well. But many, many years from now I'm sure you can stump someone-- a la the "who was the only person to hold Michael Jordan under 20 points a game/Dean Smith question"-- with this question: "What did John Elway do in the most single famous play in his football career?"

The answer of course is sit on the bench, or at least before he stood up and started screaming at Joe Kapp, the trombone player, the referees, and the Cal kickoff return team in greatest single PLAY in football history.

More coming tomorrow.

To those who think I can't dispense praise, here's some.

Kudos to Beane for landing Thomas. And kudos to Thomas for showing the world he can still rake. After a slow start caused largely by inactivity in the spring and few PAs the past two seasons, he's been everything we could have hoped these past two months.

There are other, more measured successes: haren, Swisher, the bullpen. Zito, of course, in his final season.

But Thomas is the Real Deal.

and only 3 games ahead of the last-place Mariners. We have the worst run differential in the division.

One week for Beane to begin the salvage operation.

And for those who think that's crazy, or are mocking my willingness to start a fire sale that will take full force in the offseason:

I ask this simple question: How many players-- looking ahead-- do the A's have or are grooming in the minors-- that are truly "plus" performers-- i.e, among the best-- now or in the future-- in the league at that position??

We once would have thought Chavez and Harden-- until either or both prove they can produce for a full season, I don't see how can you count either one. obviously not Crosby, Ellis or Johnson-- though Maybe barton will be by 2008 or so.

Swisher-- perhaps.
Street-- we hope.

And possibly Haren.

The rest won't be here long, are mediocrities or among the worst at their position.

This team isn't built for the long haul and they're struggling through the short haul.

It's time for a different direction. Is beane capable of admitting defeat and starting over? Is Wolff willing to take that very tough step? Does any of this involve oakland? Or anywhere in the Bay Area? or is the team one out of town shovel away from leaving us forever?

The drama of the next week will be to see how many A's Beane unloads, and for what in return. Zito is almost assuredly gone-- but what about Crosby or Harden? or even Chavez??

or next to last start?

I can't be there tonight, but I will be there on Saturday no matter what for the end of an era and to cheer my favorite Athletic on in his last appearance in the Green and Gold, assuming he's still with us then.

But make no mistake-- the jumble of injuries and contradictions that is Eric Chavez will soon be the final connection to an era rapidly slipping away. Barry Zito was the best of this time in my opinion-- he almost always came through when we needed him most. Good luck to him, and when we're playing meaningless September games this year and in the forseeable future, I hope Z is taking the hill for a team on the way to postseason glory-- lord knows  he deserves it.

Sounds like a Robert Ludlum title.

He's the least effective starting pitcher in the AL-- now about 20% into his $21 million contract.

This was the most unBeane like decision he's ever made-- Billy preached for years about the folly of shelling out big money for starting pitchers-- particularly veterans-- because of the great inconsistency in their performance.

Why did 7 million a year go to such a horrible option?

Why not another bat?

But maybe we shouldn't be surprised because Beane also chose to spend top dollar on Rhodes, Redman, Kendall, Kotsay and Chavez.

The whole point of Moneyball is to do more with less; to exploit market inefficiencies; to choose the promise of youth over the cost of experience.

Beane didn't believe his own philosophy-- and as a result, he is in the process of decimating this franchise. Loaiza will be his legacy as much as the "sh_t not working in the playoffs" as much as the five year stretch of strong regular season finishes.

It was an inexplicable decision.

What was he thinking?

I have been particularly critical of A's management recently, and especially William Lamar Beane, who I have been very praiseworthy of for most of the past 5-6 years.

In response a couple of ANers have responded with extra venom and essentially tried to claim that this negativity is "polluting" the site or has no place here in the midst of a better-than-expected road trip with the team in first place.

Obviously, I beg to differ.

We all have our own paths to becoming a fan, and our ways of experiencing the journey. I will not claim one is superior to another, except that each of us has to find the way to get the most out of the experience, which by its very essence (fan derives from fanatic) is pretty irrational.

In my case I have been very supportive of this team-- with occasional bipolar exceptions caused generally by the team's own schizophrenic behavior. Last year I supported the two big trades, but was shocked how poorly the team played in April and May. When the worm turned I felt justified for my original optimism and I quickly believed-- accurately, it turned out-- that the team would keep being world-beaters, which they were until the injuries to Harden and Crosby primarily stopped them short.

This year I was very optimistic, then more realistic as one injury after another piled up. The June winning streak convined me-- prematurely-- that things were going to be A-Ok after all. Since then I have basically come to a different view. The luck ran out. But so has some of the genius. Too many Beane decisions-- particularly those which involve big money-- have either backfired or are yet to see a positive outcome-- for me to be quiet. it's not my nature.

So if the world i see is a team more mediocre than good-- and a future more mediocre than good-- what am i supposed to do? Shut up. Don't come here any more. Bury my true feelings. Go along???

I thought Blez largely left BB off the hook in his latest interview, though i understand it's not so easy when you're face to face with the guy. And if it had taken place a few days later after the Angel series it might have been better.

So I think someone should be asking the hard questions. And frnakly, during a good 8 game road trip is the most important time to do it. It's always easy for us to pile on one way or the other when they're going good or bad. My problem now is that I have no confidence that any 8-10 game A's team will carry over to the next 8-10 games. I have lost confidence in beane's heretofore extraordinary ability to keep this team competitive. i don;t see a lot of bankable talent any more.

Any if you are a fan-- a true fan-- IMHO your responsbility is to express your true feelings. Others may be happy with 51-46 and a nominal first place standing. i can't be.

He had slumped lately, but overall since his early struggles was hitting close to 300.

Nick Swisher-- another Beane favorite-- on the other hand has been in steady decline for two months and has some obvious behavorial/discipline issues.

Eric Chavez-- another Beane favorite-- has been hitting .150 for two months. And yet he stays in the lineup in another curious and destructive Beane decision a la Hatteberg last year.

This front office gets curiouser and curiouser and its team's on field record increasingly reflects the mediocrity and arrogance of its management.

Bring DJ back up; DL Chavez; Bench Swisher more often in favor of Bobby Kielty, who has hit well all year long. Play to win-- not just to survive.

and one that can't make Billy Beane feel very good about the future.

One team has two young hardthrowing starters who are vey much part of the future; and they added a very effective and crafty veteran.

And the other has a hardthrower on permanent disability; a pretty good youngster who got bombed tonight and is not ready to be an ace; and the disaster that is Esteban Loaiza.

The tigers are now the team constructed for the future, not the A's.

And to make things worse, on a night when the player some of his teammates apparently feel is an attitude problem goes 4-5 and tries to singlehandedly will his team back in the game, the franchise player billy Beane selected continues to disappear into the distance with yet another pathetic performance at the plate.

Trade zito.. blow the team up.. let's borrow from a successful franchise-- the Marlins-- and stop beane's pseudo-Moneyball approach that sees Bonderman and ethier and tejada and others elsewhere, and a bunch of underperforming passionless mediocrities here.

Crucial stretch of games begin tonight.

19 in a row vs. contenders (OK, everyone's a contender in the AL, but you get the drift)

Det-Bos-Tor-LAA-Tex-Sea

Will BB be a buyer, a seller, both, or neither?

Is BZ's final start in an A's uniform be Monday vs. the Sox, next saturday vs. the Jays-- or some yet to be determined date in September or, we hope, october?

Will the offense show some consistency?

Will Loaiza buckle down and throw a good game when he has to?

Will Bradley totally implode?

Will the A's be in 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th (Seattle may acquire Soriano, folks-- don't count them out yet) after these 19 games?

Will Crosby-- who has now been called out in multiple public discussions-- rise to the occasion or continue to frustrate us all?

I have been a harsh critic of Beane lately-- but I respect his acumen when it gets to the short strokes of analyzing his team and seeing if he can leverage the right deal. For once none of us are quite sure if the "right deal" has someone coming or going. And the games matter and certainly hold my attention. I hope they prove me wrong and go something like 12-7 in these games. but either way we have arrived at the tipping point for 2006-- let's see how it all shakes out.

Don't look now, but the defending World Champs, after dropping 2 of 3 in Motown-- are now just 2 games ahead of the Skanks for the WC and only 4 ahead of the surging Minnesota Twins.

since June 7th-- and this sounds familiar to us, doesn't it-- twins are 29-7-- best record in baseball and have gained 7 games on Chicago.

They do have injury issues-- familiar as well-- as their entire starting outfield of Hunter-Stewart and Ford are currently on DL-- but they've won 7 in a row and they have the two best pitchers on the planet throwing twice every five days. And they play Chicago 12 more times. and Mauer and Morneau are as good a 1-2 punch as any other team in the league.

Sad to say it, but the two Evil Empires could both make the playoffs again, meaning that the AL West winner would be playing one of them again in the first round.

a little historical probe.

Was it:

1. The Chavez/tejada decision. For all those who think this was purely a Schottman decision, please reread your Moneyball copy-- who did BB deride as "Mr. Swing at Everything?"-- Was it a) Eric Chavez or b) miguel tejada? and now he has Mr. Swing and Miss at Everything Instead!
2. The Dye signing. let's see-- we're a small market team but by God we're great. Just because ny sh_t didn't work in last year's playoffs doesn't mean it won't next time. I know the guy's leg is shattered in three pieces but I'm feeling lucky. Put it on Red!!

3)The Kotsay trade. Ramon won't block the plate and TLong won't block many pitched balls with his bat, particularly vs. Derek Lowe, so since a lot of the sabermetrics geeks have criticized me for both of those signings-- I'll show 'em! Let me get one of my SoCal homeys-- Mr. Cal State Fullerton MVP himself, whom the defensive metrics all rave about. I'll figure out the catcher thing some other time;

4. the Redman and Rhodes signing. "Pitching is too variable to spend money on"-- I've been saying it so long I think I really did believe it until Keith Foulke told me to go jump in the san francisco Bay. My other theorem: "You can find a closer anywhere" trumps the first-- come on down Arthur!!
5. Oops-- I better get Kendall. Because how else will i dump the Rhodes and redman boo-boos? Never mind that his power is diappearing-- he's a gamer. Never mind that he's put a lot of innings behind himwearing the tools of ignorance-- he's a gamer. Did i say he was born in San Diego YET????
6. Stebby. Yeah, I know, don't blow money on pitchers- particularly veteran pitchers. Hey-- didn't I ship Mulderand Huddy out just in time? have you seen their friggin' ERAs this year? Tell me I'm not a genius? (Uhhh, Billy. Einstein was a genius. Stephen Hawking, too. Maybe even Pele. But you are not a genius) But lew said "Billy, here's 21 million. Seriously. Here it is. Now spend it!"

Dang I can be just like the Mets and orioles all these years-- the hell with scrimping and saving. Come on, Esteban-- the water's warm and the beer's cold!!

7. Ethier vs. bradley. Small Market team says: "prospect not needed. even though he comes dirt cheap. let us get injury-prone and mentally unstable veteran instead. Hell, he did wonders for DePo, didn't he??
8. All the management departures. Ricciardi, Fuson, depodesta, peterson-- seriously, now-- maybe Billy Beane was simply the name we gave a very efficient and talented system whose key personnel-- the most crucial personnel-- were simply irreplacable.

Thoghts, anyone?? Other nominees?

If there's one discernible pattern to many of the Great Beane's moves, it is to trust some white guy from SoCal and, better yet, San Diego. usually it is a player of Latin descent that gets shipped out in favor of this guy. And since our third baseman's name is pronounced cha VEZ, he definitely counts as white, not Latino. (OK-- tongue in cheek, everyone, but you get my drift)

Enter Bobby Crosby.

Of all the decisions the Great Beane has made, the one to trust a vital position to this udnerachieving headcase may be the most costly. It undoubtedly influenced, if not decided, the decision to let Tejada go in favor of Chavez. and for a while last year, it appeared to be paying off big time.

But now? We see a stubborn player unwilling or able to make the necessary adjustments to hit in the big leagues. A guy more likely to hit 230 than 280. A guy on pace for 15 home runs when it should be double.

In another year or two-- at this pace, his trade value will be next to nothing. I don't have the obvious replacement in  mind, but I do know this-- he could still fetch a player or two now.

Trade him, Oh great One-- don't be as stubborn as your SoCal buddy.

I have to admit even I wasn't prepared for this.

The A's have 3-- count 'em-- 3 position players in the top 200 in VORP-- and in about two or three more days that number will be reduced to two.

Swish at 62nd (and he has been steadily declining); Hurt at 104 (and he has been very consistent); and Chavy plummeting to 196.

So for all the teams that have 6, 7 or more guys in the TOP 200, we will soon have two.

And meanwhile, there's this other team out there of 13 former A's or former A's farmhands:

Catcher: Hernandez  99
         Laird     157

First Base:  Giambi   20
           Hatteberg  83

Second Base:  German   152

Shortstop:  Tejada   16

Third Base: Hinske   175 (OK, I don't think he plays there anymore, but you get the picture)

Outfield:   Dye     11
           Byrnes    51
           Ethier   111
           Stairs   149

DH/Other   Saenz    176
           Spiezio  183

Listen there were many varied reasons why these guys are no longer here. I am not arguing that Beane screwed up en masse. But it is striking how well our former players are doing, and how poorly the current ones do by comparison.

The BP model is a Monte Carlo simulation-- they play the remainder of the season millions of times. It does take into effect schedule strength, but not injuries (past, present or future) or deadline deals or anything else other than run differential.

So it has limitations.

In the past when I've thrown these numbers up, I've gotten a lot of flack. Fine. maybe a discussion at how I arrive at them might make them a bit less controversial.

Let's take the three longshot propositions in the AL right now:

1) odds of an AL West team winning the Wild Card. In order for there to be even a 1% chance of this eventuality-- given rounding- we must conclude that the odds are better than 1 in 200. Two teams-- let's call them Oakland and LAA-- but one could be Texas-- have to outperform 4 teams-- Minnesota, Toronto, and one of the leaders in each of the other divisions-- by anywhere from 5.5 to 11 games.

Well, you might say the 2001 and 2002 A's did it. yes, but that was just one team, and this year's A's are a far cry from those in terms of starting pitching, health and consistent offense. and the division is balanced enough that it may be hard to sustain a .650 or .700 run for this long. I'd say 1 in 200, but just barely.

ODDS OF AL WEST TEAM WINNING WC: 1%

What about the Twins? the team that has played .800 ball for a month and gained exactly one game on the division leaders. Do they have even a 1% chance of winning this division, trailing the Sox by 6 and a half and the Tigers by 11? Add a slew of recent outfield injuries and the odds do seem daunting. But one can pretty forcefully argue that both the Tigers and White Sox have overperformed this year,and second halves have a way of correcting an aberration. And they do have those two lefties. Call the Twins a 1 in 50 shot at the division.

ODDS OF TWINS WINNING CENTRAL:  2%

And finally what about the Blue Jays, who trail two rich but flawed giants by only 3 and 3.5 games respectively? Now the jays probably can't help their cause as much as either of the Evil Empires by the trade dadline, but one cannot dismiss them. One hot fortnight and they could be in front.

I think if it were heads-up with either of these two teams, I'd rate the Jays chances as at least 1 in 4. Combined it's obviously tougher, but let's give them a 1 in 10 chance at doing the deed.

ODDS OF BLUE JAYS WINNING EAST 10%.

Let's parcel out the two easy divisions now.

If the Twins have a 2% chance at winning the Central, what about the other 98%? We'll know a lit more after the Chicago-Detroit series at Comerica this week, but I don't see how you can conclude anything other than the Tigers as favorites. Their pitching has been better; they've played better longer.

Call it 5 to 3-- or 55 to 43% Tigers over White Sox.

In the East, there is now only half a game separating Boston and New York. NEWS FLASH: Number of times Red Sox have won AL East since Derek Jeter first wore pinstripes:  ZERO.

Hard the bet against Steinbrenner's checkbook  too-- but I'll still stick with Boston- narrowly.

Call it 46 to 44% with the remaining 90%.

What about the Wild Card?

To calculate this, you must of course rate each team's chances of winning in that percentage of times they don't win the division.

So the teams are (and the ultimate percentage must add to 99% since we are giving the West teams a collective 1% here)the following to win their respective divisions:

Detroit: 55%
Boston:   46%
New York:  44%
Chicago:   43%
Toronto:    10%
Minnesota:  2%

And no we're not assuming Cleveland or Baltimore have any chance. They just don't.

So take the team with the best record: Detroit-- 32 games over .500. In the 45% of the time that they don't win the division, you must make the Tigers pretty strong favorites to still garner the WC, given that they lead the two East frontrunners by 7 and 7.5 games, respectively. I'm going to assume, then, that the Tigers have a 60% chance of winning the WC should they fall short in the division-- or 27% overall;

Chicago-- what are their odds in the 57% of the time they don't win the division? They lead Minnesota by 6.5 games and Boston and new York by 2.5 and 3 games, respectively And Toronto by 6. I'd make them a plurality favorite-- in other words, more times than not, some other team will catch them, but they have a better shot than each of the others. Call it 40% or 23% overall.

Minnesota-- in the 98% of the time they don't win the division, they still must catch Chicago and either new York or Boston. A tall order-- I don't rate the Twins ability to do this at much more than 1 in 20-- so give them 5% overall.

Boston-- In the 54% of the time they don't win, they will be trailing the White Sox by 2.5 games and ahead of the Twins (+4) and Blue jays +3.5. I'd say those odds are just about one-third-- call it 18% overall.

new York-- I'd make almost the same calculation for the 56% of the time they don't win-- call it 18% overall;

Which leaves 8% for Toronto.

so the combined odds so far for all the teams Not in the West are :

Detroit: 82%
Chicago:  66%
Boston:  64%
New York: 62%
Toronto: 18%
Minnesota: 7%

That leaves 101% for the 4 West teams.

Seattle: 4 back of the A's-- closer to the other two. For all the lack of recognition for this team (and lack of respect, too)-- they're still pretty darn close. I'd say they have at least a 1 in 10 chance to win this division. Call it 12%

Texas: baseball Prospectus still rates them as hevay favorites, but we know better, don't we? Too many pitching problems. But they're only one game out, so I'll give them  a 25% chance of winning the division.

The remaining 63%??

Who is the true favorite? a's have slight lead, but Angels are playing better and have the better starting pitching and are getting an influx of talent. Plus they've won close races he past two years.

I'll call it LAA 33%

and the A's at 30%, with the A's getting the 1% extra for Wild Card simply because they aren't the favorite to win the division.

So the final odds, IMHO, as of this moment, are:

Detroit:   82%
Chicago:  66%
Boston:     64%
New York:    62%
LAA:        33%
Oakland:     31%
Texas:       25%
Toronto:    18%
Seattle:    12%
Minnesota:   7%

We're sixth best-- let's hope it changes before too much longer.

compared to baseball girl's "incredible feat" of winning three of four in Fenway, which would have been a more pedestrian split but for Mark Loretta.

1. They did, on the whole play well. Pitched well with one big exception-- Haren-- fielded well, hit well. Give credit where credit is due.
2. Did their standing in the division improve? Depends on how you measure it. It did over two teams, but not vs. the team I, and i suspect most A's fans are most worried about. angels came out of three straight vs. us with a sweep of the DRays-- sure, the competition was much weaker, but they've won 11 of 12. Escobar going on DL may or may not be good news-- he appears to be the one starter who's pretty hittable these days;
3. What is the deal with Eric Chavez?? hopefully he's going to go on the DL. This offense has been powered largely by four players (assuming the word "powered" is even appropriate, which seem dubious): Thomas, Kielty and/or Payton, and Swisher. To see Ellis, Kendall and Kotsay all start to ring the bell-- plus Bradley's reemergence-- takes some of the pressure off the "play Chavy, even though he's subpar, because we can't afford not to" chorus. Sit him down-- even if it's for a month-- to get him strong for the stretch.
4. Blanton did pitch a very nice game. The starters were adequate in this series; Zito survived for 5 innings, thanks to Bradley; same for Loaiza; Haren did not. The real story of this series was the pen, which was absoutely stellar when it had to be. We may be about a week or so from saying it is "deep and healthy"-- two words which simply couldn't be used as we ran every single RiverCaT in and out of here for most of the past three months;
5. Nice to see Swisher "up in the lineup"? I don't get that reference. he batted 4th subbing for Thomas. Most of the time he hits higher in the lineup-- 2nd. Maybe baseballgirl meant "down", not up;

They won a nice series, but that's all it is. When they've won four or five in a row like this-- then we can start getting more confident. as for now, we wait to see what the LA doctors think is the solution for Richard the Lionhearted/, and we wonder just how good we can reasonably expect Jason Windsor to be.

First off-- no matter what we think of his recent moves, the fact is that Beane does not allow stagnation to set in. He saw as well as all of us the 4 games with the Angels-- and I'm sure everyone noted Teixeira's 3 bombs tonight-- and he knows the clock is ticking quite fast on this season.

So let's take these one by one:

DJ sent down in favor of Bradley. A pretty obvious move to go to Swisher at 1B and two better all-around options (defense improves at every position with these moves) platooning in the OF in Kielty and Payton. If Bradley doesn't hit, or one of the other slumps, then a trade for an additional bat could make sense. Who is the backup for Swish at first?? Well if Chavy is put on the DL, it might be DJ again before too long. For now Melhuse would seem to be it;

Chavy resting. Antonio Perez can't be worse than Chavez over the past month-- and now we'll find out how much better by giving him some atbats. I think the DL is a clear option here and if so, it might be more like a month (with DJ returning) than just a couple of weeks to allow the forearms in particular to heal;

Windsor pulled from Sac rotation and Harden seeks 2nd opinion. I think these are interrelated. The A's must now realize-- as Macha more than hinted the other day-- that Harden is done for the year and that it is a distinct possibility that TJ surgery-- and him missing most if not all of 2007 as well-- is a clear possibility. In which case, why not begin to find out what we've got in Windsor, partic. with Zito's departure after the season pretty much guaranteed? Saarloos is only a stopgap starter who has returned to earth this year--- and he can take the long role in the pen along with Halsey. With Kennedy and Witasick coming back soon, Sauerbeck and gaudin are not long for this world either.

And finally Beane wants to give this team the best chance to perform for the next couple of weeks-- Chavez, DJ and Saarloos all fail in one way or another to do that-- because he must determing just how likely a playoff run is, and then act accordingly with Zito or perhaps another trade (Crosby, for example) if he concludes the playoffs are not in the forecast this year.

No, I didn't make these up out of whole cloth. These are the latest from Baseball Prospectus' model-- and for the record, even when the A's had taken the lead over Texas, they have never determined Oakland to be the favorite in the division. At some point that ugly run differential rears its head.

Obviously they don't account for injuries-- or healing of same-- but still this is a pretty daunting conclusion. Let's see how it all plays out.

As of July 12th:

Texas:    54%

LAA:       25%

Oakland:   14%

Seattle:    8%

Numbers add up to 101 because BP deems there to be a slightly less than 1% chance that the WC will come from the West.

Do the numebrs lie? Let's hope so. I'm not doing mine but I can't figure the A's at any better than about 25% to win the division.

And maybe he did, since we haven't seen the second installment:

1. It is often said that a team is only as good as their up the middle players. Your 4 up the middle players have OPS' right now of 653, 600, 651 and 659-- clearly the worst in the major leagues. Do you believe that you may have shifted the organization's emphasis too much to the defensive side of things?
2. Rich Harden is now in his 4th season in the big leagues and he has yet to throw 200 innings in a season. Does he have a long-term future with the A's-- and is the Cubs' experience with Prior and Wood evidence of the danger of waiting too long for a talent like this to get healthy?
3. You are a part owner of a team which should experience an attendance decline for the second consecutive season and where a lot of the players you have spent substantial money for in recent years have disappointed (Chavez, Dye, Loaiza, Kendall, Kotsay). Is the current payroll feasible going forward, or is the smarter strategy for the A's is to cut back-- not as far as the Marlins-- but to get much leaner and dependent on young players?