Quick Shots: Indy 500

The 94th running of the Indianapolis 500 took place on Sunday, and here are some of my knee-jerk reactions.

Swish: Dario Franchitti, Chip Ganassi
The Scot became just the 17th driver in history to capture multiple Indy 500 titles, after a dominating effort saw him lead 155 of the 200 laps. Say what you want about this being a fuel strategy win - the #10 car was clearly the class of the field. As for team owner Chip Ganassi, he made some history as well, becoming the first team owner to win the Indianapolis and Daytona 500s in the same year. Jamie McMurray took the checkered flag in Florida back in February.

Swish: Andretti Autosport
After an embarassing qualifying performance the weekend before, the Andretti cars came to play on Sunday. Marco Andretti made the podium for the third time in five career starts, coming from 16th to finish 3rd. Tony Kanaan charged through the field after starting dead last to get all the way to 2nd place before running out of fuel and falling to 11th (still not bad for TK). Danica Patrick was a surprise as well. Despite being clearly uncomfortable with her #7 Go Daddy car all month long, she was able to carve out a 6th place finish. Maybe their performance in Indy will give AA a much-needed boost heading into the rest of the season.

Brick: Early TV ratings
Despite a larger crowd, and a bigger buzz around this year's race than the last few editions, the excitement didn't translate to the television ratings. The 2010 Indy 500 ratings were down both locally and nationally, netting just a 3.68 across the country. That was down over four million households from last year. In central Indiana, the 500 earned a 12.2, down from the 14.6 a year ago.

Air Ball: Team Penske
Roger Penske hasn't had too many rough days in Indianapolis, but this was one of his worst. Outside of 1995 when both of his entries in Al Unser Jr. and Emerson Fittipaldi failed to qualify, this may have been their poorest showing to date. Defending champion and favorite Helio Castroneves stalled out in the pits with 55 laps to go, costing him a chance at a victory, and giving him a disappointing 9th place finish. Give Will Power credit for rallying to jump into the top ten (8th), but he was behind the eight-ball all day after being assessed an early penalty for leaving the pits with a fuel pump still attached. The worst performance came from Ryan Briscoe, who hit the wall in Turn 4 hard, and continued his run of bad luck in Indy with a 24th place finish.

Bring a Jacket...

Hopefully this global warming phenomenon warms things up considerably by 2014, or else the NFL is in for a rude awakening. On Tuesday, the league gave the new Meadowlands Stadium in north Jersey Super Bowl XLVIII in four years. After first going to a northern city in Detroit in 2005, followed by a bid to our very own Indianapolis in 2012, the NFL has now thrown all caution to the wind. For those of you that haven't been to the New York area the first week of February, it's absolutely frigid.

According to NY.com, the average temperature in February is 33 1/2 degrees - hey, at least we know it won't snow! Actually, there's a very good chance for snow during Super Bowl XLVII, considering that a record 39 inches fell just this past February.

What I love about the Super Bowl is that it is the most neutral of neutral atmospheres. Generally it's played in a warm climate, so weather is not a factor. It's a corporate atmosphere with a small number of actual fans, meaning that there is no homefield advantage. By rolling the dice for a NY/NJ Super Bowl, the NFL is putting the neutrality of the site at risk. Can you imagine if the Colts (an indoor team) had a rematch against the Bears (a cold-weather team) again? It would give Chicago an unfair advantage. Teams are affected by playing in the cold/snow - there's no such thing as a cold-weather team (i.e. Chicago, Minnesota, either New York squad) struggling in 70 degree weather.

The cons far outweight the pros. Really, the only "pro" I can think of is the fact that it would be pretty cool to see a Super Bowl in the snow, and being played in the world's biggest market (New york), or at a place like Lambeau Field. The cons (weather issues, fan experience, traffic, etc.) could spell disaster for America's greatest sporting event.

Inspecting Interleague Play

The 14th season of Interleague play officially began last night in Major League Baseball, and like any other "tradition", it needs some spicing up.

While I was originally a big fan of Interleague play, I feel that the cons outweigh the pros. If Interleague baseball is going to continue, there are some things that need to be tweaked. However, hoping for constructive changes from Bud Selig is like hoping for Bob Sanders to stay healthy.

Interleague play hasn't been much of a struggle for the AL

Here are some of the issues I have with the current state of Interleague baseball:

1) The novelty has worn off
- even the great rivalries like Yankees/Mets and Cubs/White Sox don't have the same allure that they used to have.

2) The American League has become far too dominant
- the AL has won the season series for six years running, with an alarming 714-546 edge in the past five years.

3) Most of the so-called "rivalry" games are a joke
- does anyone really care about the Ohio Cup (Reds/Indians), Marlins/Rays (Citrus Series), Twins/Brewers, etc.?

4) Scheduling inequities
- due to the designated rivalry, the Cubs get six games against the recently contending White Sox (.500 or better in eight of the last ten seasons, '05 champs) while the Cardinals get six versus the usually dormant Royals (one season over .500 since Interleague play began).

5) The "filler" games
- for every Yankees/Mets series, you have five "nobody cares" matchups like Rays/Astros (Planetary Series), Cubs/Rangers (Sammy Sosa Series), Rockies/Royals (The Ro-Ro Series), and Blue Jays/D’Backs (Do Snakes eat Birds? Series).

My solutions are simple. Kick Houston over to the AL West (where they belong) so you have even five-team divisions in each league. Just like in the NFL, each team plays a division every year that is rotated (i.e. an NL team would play the AL West in 2010, AL Central in 2011, AL East in 2012). You would still get the great games/players coming to your parks, and it would happen more frequently (once every six years) than in football (once every eight years). 15 of your 18 games will be against a specific division, while the other series would be with a designated "rival". For instance, the the Yankees/Mets, White Sox/Cubs, Angels/Dodgers, etc. would still play every year, but only one three-game series (instead of two). The home parks can rotate every other year.

I like Interleague baseball, and I don't necessarily want it to go away. But, the current format is tired and these changes can only help.

Party like it's 2008!

It may be an understatement to say that the NBA Playoffs have been disappointing. Outside of the storylines involving LeBron James in Cleveland, there hasn't been much drama to speak of at all.

To make matters worse, Boston winning back-to-back games in Orlando to take a commanding 2-0 lead, and the Lakers in cruise control, makes it seem inevitable that a 2008 NBA Finals reprise is on the horizon.

No offense to the Lakers-Celtics rivalry - the greatest in basketball history, and one of the top five all-time rivalries in sports - but didn't we just see this movie last year? The names and faces are almost exactly the same. Garnett, Rondo, Piere, Allen, Bryant, Bynum, Odom, and Gasol were all with their respective teams when we saw them battle 24 months ago. Even Doc Rivers and Phil Jackson are still on the sidelines.

What's the storyline between the last two champions in the NBA meeting again? It reminds me of the Bulls-Jazz sequel in '98 - the only reason to tune in was to see Jordan cement his legacy. I know that Magic-Suns wouldn't have piqued the interest of the casual basketball fan, but it would've been nice to mix things up.

It's too bad barely anyone cares about the NHL, because their product has been 100X better this postseason.

Perfectly Solid

After Dallas Braden pitched the 19th perfect game in baseball history, I got to thinking: this should be a great sign of things to come.

Unlike no-hitters, which have been accomplished by everyone from Nolan Ryan (324 career wins) to Bud Smith (7 career wins), perfect games have mostly been hurled by very good-to-great pitchers.

Four Hall-of-Famers have done it - Sandy Koufax, Catfish Hunter, Jim Bunning, and Randy Johnson (yeah, I'm jumping the gun, but it's inevitable). After that quartet, you have several pitchers that have had long and successful careers. Dennis Martinez won 244 other games besides his 1991 perfecto against the Dodgers. David Wells was one of the better lefthanders of his era, going 239-157 over 19 seasons including an afternoon in 1998 when he baffled the Twins. Kenny Rogers also toppled the 200-win plateau, playing for six different teams over nearly two decades. David Cone (perfect game in 1999 vs. Expos) struck out nearly 2,700 batters and won the 1994 Cy Young. Mike Witt (perfect game in 1984 vs. Rangers) won at least 15 games in four straight seasons from 1984-87, and Mark Buehrle (perfect game in 2009 vs. Rays) has played in four All-Star Games and is just entering his prime at 31 years old.

In fact, Don Larsen, who probably threw the most famous perfect game in the 1956 World Series, may be the worst pitcher to ever toss up all zeroes. He was just 81-91 in his career and was the only pitcher in modern baseball history to pitch a perfect game yet not ever play in an All-Star Game. Even Len Barker (perfect game in 1981 vs. Blue Jays) and Tom Browning (perfect game in 1988 vs. Dodgers), made one All-Star appearance each.

What does this mean for Braden? Nothing, as of now. He'll be 27 in August and has only made 53 career starts. While he seems solid, nobody is praising him as a future star. But, his accomplishment is unique because unlike a no-hitter, a perfect game is no fluke. Very good pitchers have made history before, and time will tell is Dallas Braden can stay true to that trend.

All-Ringless All-Stars

Another promising season ended early for one of the NBA's biggest superstars, as Dirk Nowitzki and the Mavericks were upset by the 7th-seeded Spurs in six games.

While most wouldn't argue Nowitzki belongs among the elite tier occupied by LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, and Dwyane Wade, he definitely is at the top of the 2nd tier along with players like Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, and Tim Duncan. What makes Dirk different is that he is such a unique talent - a 7-foot perimeter player that is virtually unguardable. Much like Kevin Garnett, he is one of the few players to revolutionize the NBA with his unprecedented skill-set.

However, despite leading Dallas to ten straight 50+ win seasons, Nowitzki remains without a ring. The question is does Dirk Nowitzki belong on the starting five of the greatest players to never win an NBA Championship?

The Candidates (no, not like "LOST")
Point guard: This is an unbelievably deep and talented group of Championship-less players. Most immediately think of Utah's John Stockton, who despite holding the all-time assists record by over 5,000 (15,806 total), never found himself in the winner's circle. Jason Kidd, arguably the most complete point guard of all-time, is without a ring as well. Two-time MVP Steve Nash, four-time scoring champ Allen Iverson (26.7 ppg career), and the revolutionary Pete Maravich also find themselves on the list.

Shooting guard: Nearly all of the great shooting guards in NBA history (Jordan, West, Bryant, etc.) have won multiple Championships. Even second-tier players like Joe Dumars, Ray Allen, and Earl Monroe won at least one title. Headlining the list is George Gervin. The Iceman had a deadly finger roll which he used to become one of the most prolific scorers in NBA history, averaging over 27 ppg from 1977-82. Other ring-less SGs include Reggie Miller, who was never surrounded by a Championship-caliber supporting cast in his 18 seasons in Indiana. Dave Bing was waived by Washington months before their only Championship in 1978. After jumping from the ABA, Hall-of-Famer David Thompson spent his career with mediocre Denver and Seattle teams.

Small forward: Knowing that Elgin Baylor spent his entire Hall-of-Fame career with the Lakers, most people probably assume that he's won multiple NBA Championships - that unfortunately is not the case. Baylor went an astonishing 0-for-8 in his NBA Finals appearances, seven of those setbacks coming to Bill Russell's Boston Celtics. One of the more underrated players in NBA history, Dominique Wilkins never got a chance to play in the NBA Finals. However, he was one of the best players in the NBA from the mid-1980's to mid-90's, and is ninth on the league's all-time scoring list. Original Dream Teamer Chris Mullin also went his entire career without a title, despite playing with the memorable Run TMC trio (with Mitch Richmond and Tim Hardaway) during his prime in Golden State. Bernard King's potential was derailed by a crushing knee injury in the middle of his prime, and Grant Hill never got a great opportunity due to injury issues of his own.

Power forward: Like the point guard spot, this is another list of fantastic players. Karl Malone, the NBA's 2nd leading all-time scorer, never won a Championship. Neither did Charles Barkley, who at just 6'6, did things at the forward position that were unprecedented. This is also where you would categorize Dirk Nowitzki, and even a guy like Shawn Kemp warrants a mention.

Center: There's Patrick Ewing, and then there's everybody else. This is one of the few no-brainers on the list, and I'm not just saying that because I'm a Knicks-homer. Bob Lanier is one of the only other Hall-of-Famers on this list, and like Ewing, rarely had a strong supporting cast. Lanier played on some contending Bucks' teams in the early 80's, but at that point was in the twilight of his career. Artis Gilmore would make this list, but he spent most of his early years in the ABA (where he did win a championship with the Kentucky Colonels in 1975).

The Starting Five
PG Jason Kidd
This is just a personal preference and you could put just about anybody here. Kidd was a five-time All-NBA First Team selection, and made the All-Defensive Team nine times. He also made the NBA Finals twice (with the Nets of all teams!), something that only John Stockton was able to match on the list. Though Kidd played on some great Nets' teams in the early 2000s, he never played alongside a player as great as Karl Malone. That's why he gets the nod over Stockton.

SG George Gervin
Nothing against Reggie, but he only made five All-Star Games, while Gervin won FOUR scoring titles. Gervin also matched Reggie's postseason heroics, averaging a whopping 27.9 ppg in 57 career NBA Playoff games.

SF Elgin Baylor
The 10-time All-NBA First Team selection is considered the greatest player to never win an NBA Championship, and it's a tough point to argue. Had his career not collided with Bill Russell's, he would've had a ring for every finger on one hand, if not more. No offense to 'Nique or Mullin, but this isn't even up for debate.

PF Charles Barkley
You can certainly argue Malone because of his numbers, but from a pure talent standpoint, I don't believe there's much debate that Barkley was the superior player. While Malone was an all-time great in his own right, I never felt that he was as dominant as Barkley was.

C Patrick Ewing
Because I'm a homer. Duh.