Posted at 9:53 AM on July 5, 2005
by Ben Tesch
Sports Illustrated has a nice photo gallery feature of 25 revolutionary American athletes. Baseball notables include Hank Aaron (#19), Curt Flood (#7), Babe Ruth (#4), and Jackie Robinson (#2).
Posted at 12:20 PM on July 5, 2005
by Bob Collins
There are certain things that are just wrong. While watching the Indians game yesterday, one of them violated the sanctity of my July Fourth. Lousy players wearing #44.
The number, of course, belongs to a slugger. Aaron wore #44. Reggie Jackson wore #44. Willie McCovey wore #44. (By the way, that's a great trivia question. Those are the three retired #44s in Major League Baseball.)
Josh Bard (.197 1 HR 7 RBI) should not be allowed to wear #44. Josh Bard shouldn't even be allowed to look at someone wearing #44.
It's wrong. It's just plain wrong.
A look at some of the people wearing the number as of the start of the season.
|Arizona:||Michael Gosling (argh!)|
|Cincinnati:||Adam Dunn (acceptable)|
|Colorado:||Preston Wilson (Preston, be gone!)|
|New York Mets:||Mike Cameron (OK, he hit 30 HR last year)|
|St. Louis:||Jason Isringhausen (Pitchers shouldn't wear #44. Ever)|
|San Diego:||Jake Peavy (This is more than a pet Peavy, I tell ya!)|
|Washington:||Larry Broadway (Larry started the season as #44 and is now listed as #64, but you have to root for this guy. This is the greatest name in baseball since Bombo Rivera.|
|Boston||Jay Payton (absolutely not)|
|Minnesota||Robert Bowen (A Josh Bard wannabee....and wanna-is)|
|Oakland||Erubiel Durazo (Power hitter. OK.)|
|Seattle||Richie Sexson (A fine example of a deserving 44.)|
|Toronto||Billy Koch (This is allowable since with the exchange rate it's really only 37.)|
Posted at 3:43 PM on July 5, 2005
by David Zingler
Although MLB’s marketing department and the Fox network may disagree, we are currently sitting at the half way point of the baseball season. Sure, the “official” second half doesn’t begin until after next week’s All Star game (which counts, if you haven’t heard), but a quick glance at the standings today shows most teams have played from 80-82 games.
The division leaders are currently the Red Sox, White Sox and Angels in the AL and the Nationals, Cardinals and Padres in the NL.
Which team is LEAST likely to cough up their lead?
With all apologies to the White Sox, it appears the Cardinals have the tightest stranglehold on their division. They are currently 11 ½ games up on the second place Cubbies – its ovahhh!!
Which team is MOST likely to cough up their lead?
I’ll stay in the NL here, where the feel good Nationals have a tenuous lead in the East. Their 4 ½ game lead is not the smallest margin (that belongs to Boston, who has 2 ½ game lead over Baltimore in the AL East), but they are the least experienced team in a division that includes perennial contenders Atlanta and Florida. I’ll take the Marlins, who have underachieved up to this point.
Which team(s) seemed poised to make a charge?
In the AL, Cleveland and Oakland come to mind, although the A’s may have dug too big of a hole at the start of the season. The Tribe meanwhile has quietly overcome a slow start and is currently 10 games over .500. They should keep the Wild Card leading Twins from getting too comfortable in second place of the AL Central.
Although these are far from bold predictions, do you think I am way off or flat out wrong? If so, put me in my place, my wife will appreciate it.
Have any other observations/predictions? Please share.