The Bandwagon Fallacy

The end of Dexter Season 4

2010-01-30T02:56:00.002-05:00

I am dissapointed by the end of Dexter season 4. First, the line was crossed from vigilantism to murderer when he killed an innocent person, and then was responsible for another innocent person's death. The trinity killer said it best when he said "but I don't take pride in my work." Dexter could have killed him earlier, but wanted him for himself, leading ultimately an innocent woman's death. Not just an innocent woman, but the love of his life for the entire series. Speculation about the next season is all over the place now. Was Trinity's family in on the murder of Rita? How will Dexter not lose his shit next season?

Two Movies I've seen recently

2010-01-25T15:47:00.003-05:00

I recently saw two movies: The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, and Daybreakers. The first was a grand tale of a travelling show that had a doorway to the realization of people's imagination. Christopher Plumber plays a bum who wagers with the devil, intertwining those he loves. The great Heath Ledger plays Tony, the Hanged man, a kind of middlepoint between the dialetical of the Devil and God in this story. The Hanged man is an ancient symbol from Tarot cards, otherwise known as the Traitor. Due to Heath Ledger's passing, the rest of the character was played by Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Ferrell. The story was actually adapted, and really enhanced the story of the movie. Each of the three actors play Tony in a different dream world, well matching the translucency of Ledger's character in the first place. Imaginarium is a great movie, indulging the fantasy world to a tee.

Daybreakers is more of a 3 to 3.5 star movie. Set in a world where vampires are the common race, and human blood is becoming more and more scarce, a compassionate scientist played by Ethan Hawke falls into an outcast human group. While the story was somewhat formulaic, it did not get too bogged down in playing out tired dystopian themes. The execution of the movie and some of the creepy crawlies were done originally enough.

What’s a good offer for Roy Halladay?

2008-08-27T08:06:00.000-04:00

While no Blue Jays fan wants to see the team’s best player and leader traded for emotional reasons, we all want to eventually see a World Series winning team. The popularity of Roy Halladay, and his unbelievable talent make it very unlikely he will be traded. It is not often a smart idea to trade away a player that will anger the fan base (unless you are Billy Beane, who has traded away Rich Harden, Dan Haren, and Nick Swisher this year, in a series of gutsy moves). But with rumours of a new GM and President as a possibility in the off-season, you never know if the team will listen to offers.

First thing to consider is what the value is of the commodity you are selling. Halladay is signed for 2 years and $30 million for the next two years. When he walks he will net you two top draft picks as he will probably be a Type A free agent. I don’t think it’s fair to say Halladay is at the top of his value. Sure, he leads the AL in IP, has a 5:1 K:BB ratio, and has a sparkling 2.64 ERA. But he has the track record to suggest that he can still do this for several years to come, as he is only 31. He is also out of the injury nexus that is the 20’s for pitchers.

The best free agent pitchers on the market the next two years will be CC Sabathia, Ben Sheets, and in 2010 Rich Harden, Jon Lackey, and Erik Bedard. Many of these players will earn $18-20 million per year, and have blemishes, such as health issues (Sheets, Harden, Bedard), and some might be retained by their former team (Lackey). Needless to say, having a workhorse with the talent and reliability of Halladay at a decent price makes him quite valuable.

The other thing to consider is what the trade market has bore the last two years for pitchers with similar age, talent level, and contract situation. Surprisingly, 4 of the 6 trades seem to have gotten fair value or better.

Trades deemed as underselling

Harden and Gaudin for Gallagher, Murton, Patterson, and Donaldson. Harden obviously came with the injury discount, but with an option year, his immediate dominance of the NL, and Gaudin thrown in for a bunch of nice but not stellar prospects, the industry consensus was that this was a steal for the Cubs. Nevertheless, Billy Beane never looks at the battles, but at the war, and this trade was clearly part of a larger scheme to deconstruct, as he did well with his many other sell-off trades (Haren, Blanton).

Santana for Carlos Gomez, Guerra, Mulvey, and Humber. Santana may be the closest comparison to Halladay all things considered, except that he had 1 year left on his contract instead of 2. Many better packages were thrown around, but the Twins did not want to trade him to an AL East team (for Hughes and more, a much better talent than Gomez), and ended up panicking and taking less than he was worth. The silver lining is the Yankees won’t be hands down dominant with an ace like Santana on their team for years, and the Twins are still competing this year.

Trades deemed as fair or better

Joe Blanton for Adrian Cardenas, Outman, and Spencer. Blanton is an average innings eater, the kind that gets 10-12 million on the open market, and had a nice few cheap years left on his contract. But the A’s got centre piece Adrian Cardenas, who is one of the best 2b prospects in the minors (despite their logjam with Jemile Weeks, Eric Patterson, and Mark Ellis).

Sabathia for Laporta, Bryson, and Jackson. For half a year of Sabathia, and the two high picks they will net when he walks, the Indians got a legitimate 30-homerun bat in Laporta, who is close to the majors. Sabathia has dominated the NL and given good value to the Brewers, especially if they make damage in the playoffs. I would use this trade as a model, hoping to net 2 or more similar centerpieces, on account of the 2 years of contract time, versus half a year.

Bedard for Adam Jones, George Sherrill, Tillman, Mickolio, and Butler. Bedard also had 2 years on his contract left, and was a bit younger, a bit more injury prone, had a bit less of a track record, but can be just as talented. The prize in the deal was Adam Jones, who is hitting respectably for a good fielding CF as a rookie, a nice lefty reliever in Sherrill, and a few other non-impact prospects. Personally, I would rather have 2 blue chip prospects and a piece like Sherrill than a 5 for 1 deal with one blue chip prospect.

Haren (and Conor Robertson) for Carlos Gonzalez, Brett Anderson, Aaron Cunningham, Greg Smith, Dana Eveland, and Chris Carter. Dan Haren has pitched very well for the Diamondbacks, but Oakland did very well, getting 6 very interesting and potentially useful prospects.

What about teams that might be interested? One NL team and one AL team fit the mold as good trading partners.

Texas has some of the best hitting in baseball and the worst pitching. They might not think they are far off from contention, and fleshing out there very good farm system would be worth it. Jon Daniels has not been afraid to make aggressive moves in the past. Texas could offer pieces that the Jays need for the future, such as short stop Elvis Andrus, one of their catchers (Saltalamacchia, but the logjam includes Max Ramirez, Taylor Teagarden, and Gerald Laird), as well as pitchers Neftali Feliz and Eric Hurley. The Jays could certainly use a C and SS of the future, as well as more pitching.

The Rockies have a similar situation. Good hitting, poor pitching, and not too far away from contending. They are Doc’s hometown, but the prospects don’t match up as well for the Jays. Ian Stewart is currently blocked at 3b by Garrett Atkins, and he is hitting well in the majors, and trying out his hands at 2b. They also have five-tool and hot hitting Dexter Fowler (OF), and some struggling pitching prospects in Greg Reynolds and Franklin Morales, as well as some light hitting shortstop prospects (Hector Gomez, Chris Nelson). The package doesn’t really wow me.

So is trading Halladay the answer? Not necessarily. If the Jays did decide to rebuild, I would suggest being aggressive. There are some pieces to build around in Lind, Cecil, Snider, Hill, and Rios (as a CF). Shipping off some veterans would free up some salary room, and that money could be poured into signing international players and drafting.

I’ve written about this before, but the main piece to consider moving is Vernon Wells. He is hitting pretty respectably, with a .778 OPS, while the average ML centerfielder has a .753 OPS this year, and he still probably has a good defensive reputation. But in terms of production versus dollars, the future looks bleak for Wells. He’s due 5/107 starting in 2010, for an average of 21.4 million per year, and players tend to decline in their early to mid-30’s. Eating a large amount of money now may save a larger amount of salary in the future, and Rios could take over in CF, while the corner OF spots are not as hard to fill (especially with Lind and Snider). Since the contract is back loaded, if the Jays ate only $17 million after 2009, Wells would have 5/90 left, which is what Torii Hunter signed for this off-season at age 31 (and it means the Jays will have paid only 18 million a year, exactly what they signed him to). They may of course have to eat more than this, but the dollars could be spent on a more potent bat if you think that the close-to-the-majors prospects will be enough to compete with in a couple of years. If that is the case, then I’d argue for keeping Halladay, since there’s no sign of him decreasing in performance, and he might resign for 2 or 3 more years (and the Jays can afford him). The Jays currently have the best pitching in the AL, and if that offense could jump from 11th to around 6th, with a few bats (like a Jason Bay or Manny Ramirez), then winning could be possible while Halladay is still here. Now, if you think the Jays are 5-7 years away, that is a different story, and would require selling off Halladay and every other major piece on the roster for a longer-term overhaul.

Favourite Motivational Posters

2008-06-12T14:24:00.005-04:00

Baseball as a War of Attrition

2008-05-15T14:22:00.001-04:00

(www.bluejayway.ca)

There is a new shift in the market taking place: more and more teams are locking up players over their arbitration years, often extending into free agency. For example, look at some of the recent signings teams have made (most of which for players who haven’t hit arbitration): Ryan Braun, Scott Kazmir, Evan Longoria, Aaron Hill, Alex Rios, Troy Tulowitzki, James Shields, Justin Upton, Chris Young, Hanley Ramirez, Ian Kinsler, Robinson Cano, Adam Wainwright, Curtis Granderson, and Brandon Phillips. There seems to be a divergence from free agent contracts, which have become very expensive, in part because baseball is awash in cash, and also because teams feel they may be one piece away from putting themselves over the top. Eighteen seems to be the new magic number to lock up star players, as most of the highest paid players hover around 18 million per year (+/- 1): Wells, Zito, Zambrano, Matsuzaka (incl. posting fee), Hunter, Lee, Jones, Ichiro, Soriano, Peavy, Cabrera, and Beltran. That of course excludes Santana and Rodriguez, who are both exceptional cases.

Thus, teams are trying to maximize their young superstar’s years before they hit free agency. What sort of affects will this have on team construction in the future? For one, so many young players locked up means fewer will hit free agency, and that may be part of the reason why the last few years have had such a dry crop of free agents. Second, teams are building up to be competitive for a long time, because they control the core of their young player’s contracts for a long time. Another advantage is that players tend to peak in their late 20’s, whereas many free agents are being signed for their decline years, in their 30’s.

Third, there will be more sunk cost contracts in the future. Tying up Scott Kazmir for potentially 4/$40 million is a potentially incredible steal. But if he blows his arm out, then they are looking at a $28 million loss (which is what is currently guaranteed). Fourth, it is smart to trade for prospects who are late bloomers and thus are not incorporated into their teams’ long-term plans, such as Carlos Quentin (who’s killing the ball in Chicago right now). If I were another GM, I’d be eyeing Adam Lind on the cheap right now. Conversely, teams should be wary of overvaluing a rookie who got off to a hot start. But if there is a consensus of positive evaluations from the scouts, then it is a safer bet to lock up a young star.

Some other nuances are worth noting. Even the arbitration process is not immune to inflation. Ryan Howard won an arbitration case this year for $10 million in his mere first year of arbitration. Since players make what comparable players make, there will be an increase in other arbitration salaries in the ensuing years. Nevertheless, it remains a fraction of what the inflation on the free agent market is worth. Second, I am predicting a more aggressive approach by teams to give out major league deals in the draft this year. For example, Jonathan Mayo of MLB.com predicts the Pirates (yes, that’s right, the Pirates) will draft Pedro Alvarez, since he is both the most expensive player they can get, and also, the best one.

Finally, where do the Jays stand? Marcum and McGowan are the front runners to be locked up long-term. They are both a bit on the older side, so perhaps a pitcher’s injury might be a bit less of a risk. As well, Travis Snider is a good candidate to start well in the majors and hopefully be a Jay masher for a long-time. But he’s still extremely young.

The Blue Jays Off the Field

2008-05-07T11:37:00.001-04:00

(www.bluejayway.ca)

A recent article on THT (1) tackled the issue of how to increase the value of a baseball franchise. While we are all familiar with how the Jays are on the field, I thought it would be interesting to see how the Jays stand as a profitable franchise, and how that relates to fan experience.

The third variable the THT article tackles is “building success and payroll.” I will spend the least amount of time on this subject, because you can look no further than the forums to see ample discussion on how to make the Blue Jays a winning team. But the payroll is a nice transition into the first variable THT mentions, which is:

“Where is the revenue ceiling?”

In other words, is money being maximized? The payroll, which stands in the mid-90 million’s this year, is about 12th in MLB, whereas the recent Forbes team valuations (which are in a sense somewhat crude, but useable numbers) put the Jays 22nd overall in value, at $352 million. Revenues come in at $160 million, with $42 million of that coming from gate receipts. (2) So on the one hand, it would seem that Blue Jays ownership really cares about making a winning team.

Two other columns are of interest in the Forbes report. One is operating income, which is “earnings before tax, depreciation and amortization.” The Blue Jays lost $1.8 million last year in terms of cash flow. As THT says,

“Five years ago, 16 teams lost money. In 2007 only three teams--Blue Jays ($1.8 million), Red Sox ($19.1 million), Yankees ($47.3 million)--posted an operating loss. But even those losses are misleading. For the owners of the Yankees and Red Sox, the huge dividends they get from their unconsolidated cable networks more than make up for the teams' losses. Meanwhile Rogers Communications, which owns the Blue Jays, their stadium and the cable channel that televises its games, derives huge benefits from owning the Blue Jays not reflected on its team's P&L statement.”

In other words, the Jays are a huge promotional vehicle for the Rogers brand, saving tons of money in national advertising. The Jays have historically had a strong audience on TV, especially since Toronto is the 5th biggest city in North America, and has a national audience. (3) But this doesn’t have to affect the way the Jays market and over-advertise at the game. (“It’s time for the Rogers home phone to the bullpen.”) Rogers mere ownership of the team and station is giving it tons of free advertising on TV. I also found it interesting that in 2006, the Jays had one of the highest operating incomes, in the $30 million territory. I haven’t looked at that year’s valuations, but the 2006 valuations probably refer to the 2005 year, when the payroll was in the $50 million range still. Rogers decided to put that money in the green into player payroll.

Nonetheless, when you go to a game, it is apparent the Jays are throwing as many ads at you as possible. The Jays seem to be marketing to families and children, because the hard core fans will spend money either way, they believe, whereas if you hook a kid at a young age, you will hook them for life. Seems like a weird business model, considering business usually doesn't look down the road 20 or 30 years, but for maximization of profits right now.

The other column in the Forbes table is debt to value. (4) Debt to value basically “indicates what proportion of equity and debt the company is using to finance its assets. A high debt/equity ratio generally means that a company has been aggressive in financing its growth with debt. This can result in volatile earnings as a result of the additional interest expense.” (5) The Jays are one of 3 teams to have a zero debt to value ratio, along with the Cubs and the Braves, who are both (surprise!) owned by publicly funded corporations. But if you look at these teams, one has been ultra competitive for years, and one has a fantastic atmosphere at the games, so the publicly-funded ownership angle really shouldn’t come into play as an excuse (though I can see it being the main argument for why the team shouldn’t sign Barry Bonds). As a result, it seems the Jays are being financed with a very anti-aggressive approach, a typically Canadian mark on an American game.

The second factor of increasing the value of a team is building a new stadium. New stadiums tend to bring in fans for the novelty, and estimates are that actual profit (which is over and above revenue) increases by at least $5 million per year in the first 3 years once the new stadium is built. (1) They are also often paid for in part by the government. I’d argue that now is the time to strike for a new stadium. In just a few years, the Rogers Centre will be one of the oldest stadiums in baseball, in which you can count on one hand. With the new developments on the Toronto waterfront, and the Toronto Bills playing 8 games over the next 5 or so years, now is the perfect time. Engineers could design a stadium with a lakeshore or city view, a dome for the weather, and natural grass. The horrible artificial turf is going extinct, only being used by a handful of stadiums now. However, the recent upgrades in the Rogers Centre tell me that the stadium may be around for a few more years. Especially because “the Jays have been one of baseball’s biggest revenue-sharing receivers in recent years because they are permitted to deduct their hefty stadium expenses from revenues in the league's revenue-sharing formula.” (2)

Toronto is I believe the 5th biggest city in North America, and has the only baseball team in Canada. Even if this is a hockey town, it has a good sports market. The city itself is great, for example being ranked 4th in terms of neighbourhood on the SI.com stadium rankings. (6) That's right no stickups when you go to see a Blue Jays game. La-dee-da. (But this is why I don't understand why JP Ricciardi says free agents are hard to get to come here. Now that the dollar is back up, the only thing is the weather, but that's the case in a lot of cities. Also, I don't really buy the argument that free agents come here for any special reason other than they were all paid top dollar to, or that they hate Tony LaRussa.) Atmosphere is 26th, and on a side note, food is 27th (seriously, did they get their menus from a convenience store?). There’s no reason why the Jays can't be the Yankees of the next decade. If it were me, I’d turn things on its head from a business standpoint. Build a new stadium, and start improving fan experience. Stop the barrage of ads and gimmicky promotions to bring in and breed fair-weather fans in the stadium. If they are having fun at the game, then that will really hook the youngsters.

Things can be improved on the field as well. In part, the bigger following of the Jays in recent years is from signing bigger names. But these are expensive free agents that give marginal wins, which are not enough to put this team over the top. So, I’d knock down the major league payroll by $10 million, and pour that into drafting and development. In other words, I’d splurge on the Rick Porcello’s of the world, as the Detroit Tigers just did, who are in a smaller city, with no better attendances than the Jays before they got their new park and GM.

As well, only a small portion of revenue sharing is part of the commissioner’s discretionary fund, which he sees fit to distribute. For example, years ago the Jays received a couple of extra million in equalization payments for the weak Canadian dollar. I doubt that they currently still receive it. Otherwise, the Jays aren’t in Bud’s pocket any more than any other team, and if anything, they are being good owners by spending their revenue sharing money on team payroll, instead of pocketing it like the Marlins. When all is said and done, baseball is a sport about winning, so toeing the company line when great opportunities present themselves to win (ie: drafting over slot) should be taken, especially when your very own rivals are doing it (Yankees and Tigers).

There is relatively good parity in baseball, but the Jays are unfortunate enough to be in the one division that is uber-rich and uber-smart. Baseball is not going to change and make an expanded playoff system just for them. So it’s up to the Jays to bring success to themselves, and make their business strategy a bit more aggressive.

References
(1) http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/how-can-gms-increase-the-value-of-their-franchise/
(2) http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/33/biz_baseball08_The-Business-Of-Baseball_Rank.html?boxes=custom
(3) The stats are pending, as the THT writer forgot to put in one team in this section of the article, being the Blue Jays. I may update this if the information gets emailed to me.
(4) I also want to bring up an interlude here. I don’t have a business background, generally being an artsy person in school (but I was good at math!). I may be wrong here and there, but the general purpose of these articles is to spur on discussion on the Jays. So feel free to discuss on the forums what you will, and point out any business details I may have messed up.
(5) http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/debtequityratio.asp
(6) http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/specials/fansurvey/2008/index.html?eref=T1

The Best Names in Baseball History

2008-05-07T11:34:00.002-04:00

(http://www.bluejayway.ca/)

Baseball is as much about its tradition as it is about the sport. For generations, it has attracted the weirdest, and most typically baseball names. Why is this information useful? It’s not! But I’m going to write about it anyway! Actually, if you ever need to make a chant, or you don’t know who to draft in the last round of your fantasy draft, then it always helps to know some good baseball names. So, without further adieu, here is a list of some of the best Blue Jay, and non-Blue Jay names in the history of the game.

Toronto Blue Jays:
Unintimidating names

Phil Roof
Dennis Lamp
Bob File
Robert Person (these last 4 names are the least scary names…ever)
Lance Painter
Cliff Politte
Pedro Swann

Won’t fit on the back of the jersey names

Lee Gronkiewicz (this category should be named after him)
Mark Rzepczynski (probably the hardest name I’ve ever seen)

Intimidating names

Butch Edge (sounds pretty dangerous)
Tom Lawless
Ron and Jeff Musselman
Mark Bomback

Throwback names

Willie Upshaw
Hosken Powell
Mickey Klutts (Look me straight in the eye, and tell me this isn’t David Eckstein’s long lost father).
Doyle Alexander
Bud Black
Huck Flener
Tanyon Sturtze

Funny names

Mookie Wilson (makes a great chant)
Mauro Gozzo (is this guy asking for some gauze in another language?)
Howard Battle (Battle could have been intimidating, if it wasn’t accompanied by the least threatening first name ever)
Tim Crabtree
Tilson Brito
Ben van Ryn (points for uniqueness)
Homer Bush
Geronimo Berroa
Buck Coats
Marco Scutaro (MARCO???)
Alfredo Griffin
Candy Maldonado

Non-Blue Jays:
Unintimidating names

Taylor Teagarden (okay, we may have two things that are less threatening than lamp and roof)
Johnny Wockenfuss
Rocky Roquet (wasn’t this a name of a doll for girls?)

The Lee Gronkiewicz award

Tim Spooneybarger (played in a rock band called Mad Ink with A.J. Burnett in Florida)

Intimidating names

Antonio Bastardo and Alberto Bastardo (both are playing in the minor leagues right now, and no, they aren’t related, we think)

Throwback names

Lance Broadway
Catfish Hunter
Rollie Fingers
T.J. Beam
Baron Frost
Winter Polo (a personal favourite)
Houston Summers
Dusty Napoleon
Al Alburquerque
Zelous Wheeler

Funny names

Callix Crabbe
Rocky Cherry (an alcoholic beverage needs to be named after this guy)
Benito Beato (I get heartburn just thinking of this guy’s name)
Rowdy Hardy (I think he wrestled in the WWF in 1990)
Jetsy Extrano (I was going to put this in the throwback names category, but it sounds too futuristic)
Tobi Stoner (must have been friends with…)
Jung Bong
Kosuke Fukudome (If you went to a Cubs game, you’ll know why Cub fans hate the Rogers Centre)
Duane Below (LOOK OUT!)
Noochie Varner
Mayobanex Acosta
Sugar Ray Marimon
Mark Hamburger
Gonzalo Gonzalez
Pete Lacock (sorry, these last 4 had to be put in here somewhere)
Dick Cox
JJ Putz
Jorge Poo Tang

And…..the top 5 baseball names of all time

5. Rusty Kuntz (it’s pronounced koonts)
4. Wonderful Terrific Monds III (this was a college player who never made it to the big leagues. Extra points for being “the third.”)
3. Cirilo Cumberpatch (points for its absurdness)
2. Urban Shocker (enough said. You don’t mess with this guy)
1. Billy Jo Robidoux (Remember that Simpsons episode, where another Homer walked into Moe’s bar, and said it was Joey Jo-Jo Juniour Shabadoo? Well any name that sounds like that one has to be the best name in baseball history)

The Top 10 Blue Jays Homeruns of All-time

2008-02-12T13:26:00.000-05:00

(featured on http://www.bluejayway.ca/)

Here are the top 10 Blue Jay homeruns of all time. There are 9 homeruns that clearly stand out for their historical significance. There always will be subjective favourites, so I will leave the reader to choose your personal favourite as number 10. On with the top 9:

9) Doug Ault's first homer for the Blue Jays franchise.

This was bound to happen by someone, and it wasn't hit by the most memorable of Blue Jays. But Ault hit 2 homers in the first Jays game ever, a 9-5 home win over the White Sox on April 7, 1977.

8) Kelly Gruber's homerun as part of the first cycle in Jays history.

The Jays crushed the Royals in this 1989 game 15-8. Gruber was a part of the great late-80's and 1992 World Championship teams. The only other Jay to hit for the cycle was Jeff Frye (2001), a no-name player who had 175 at-bats, and managed 16 career homeruns over 8 seasons. So honourable mention to him!

7) Ed Sprague's pinch-hit homerun in game 2 of the 1992 World Series.

The Jays were trailing 1-0 in the 1992 World Series to Atlanta. It was 4-3 in the top of the 9th. Wanting badly to not come home with a 2 game deficit, Sprague cranked a 2-run shot, which eventually won the game 5-4. He had only 1 more at-bat the rest of the series.

6) Fred McGriff hits record 10th team homerun of the game.

On September 14, 1987, the Jays set the record for most homeruns in a game, crushing the Orioles 18-3. The homeruns hit were by Ernie Whitt (3), George Bell (2), Rance Mulliniks (2), Rob Ducey, Lloyd Moseby, and McGriff. The record stands by a single homerun over the 1999 Cincinnati Reds, but I have a feeling this record will not stand the test of time. In recent years teams often reach the 7 and 8 homerun plateau. All it will take is a team to have one extra good night to break it.

5) George Bell's last homerun in Exhibition stadium.

Bell hit a dramatic walk-off 2-run shot in the bottom of the 10th on May 28, 1989, to end an era at exhibition stadium, where the team saw a rise to prominence. The homerun is complete with a classic Tom Cheek quote (one of the greatest announcers of all time): "What an ending to a story!" Honourable mention to Fred McGriff, who hit the first homerun in the SkyDome 8 days later.

4) Carlos Delgado's 4-homerun game.

This is the only place Delgado, the greatest Blue Jay of all-time, makes the list. Delgado was never in the playoffs with the team, unfortunately being here mostly during the post-strike dark ages. But the 4 homer gem on September 25, 2003, well captures his great power. The homers were hit consecutively, and the 4th one tied the game up, which the Jays eventually won over the Devil Rays 10-8. Only 15 players have done this in baseball history. This record has a chance of standing more so then the team record does, unless someone hits a 5th dinger in a long extra innings game.

3) George Bell's 47th homer during his MVP campaign.

The only Blue Jay to win an MVP award (1987), versus the 4 Cy Young Awards. The 47 homers stand as the most in team history, 1 ahead of Jose Canseco (1998). Unfortunately, the homerun was hit on September 23, one day before the team's epic collapse began. With 8 days left in the season, the Jays relinquished a 3.5 game lead over the Tigers. They were swept by the Tigers in the final series, losing the division by 2 games, and going home with a wasted 96 win season in their pockets.

2) Joe Carter’s 1993 World Series winning homerun.

Easily one of the biggest homeruns in MLB history, Joe Carter hit a come from behind, World Series winning homerun in game 6. Different lists out there put Joe a little bit further down the list than he deserves (other than this one: http://espn.go.com/page2/s/greatesthomerunslist.html). The only other World Series walk-off homer was Bill Mazeroski in game 7 of the 1960 World Series. No offense to Kirk Gibson, but as kids we don’t really dream of having a sore leg, swinging badly on a few pitches, then hitting a walk-off homerun in game 1 of the World Series, only to have that be our last at bat. We dream of a situation a lot closer to this: bottom of the 9th, 2 on, 1out, team down by 1 run, game 6 of the World Series...the ball is hit…it’s going, going…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AG6GcSwQCE

1) Roberto Alomar’s go-ahead homerun in the 1992 ALCS.

I actually remember this homerun, when I was 8 years old, and jumping for joy in my parents bedroom, in disbelief we were back in the game. The Jays were leading the series 2-1, playing against the formidable Oakland Athletics at the Coliseum. Dennis Eckersley was the dominant closer of the time, and part of a great A’s team that featured Rickey Henderson and Mark McGwire in their prime. They had toyed with the Jays in the 1989 ALCS, winning the series 4-1, and the Jays were back in the playoffs after years and years of near-greatness, always coming up short. Down 6-1 in the top of the 8th, Carter, Olerud, and Maldonado all had run scoring singles, to bring the game to 6-4. Eckersley made a cocky gesture by glaring and pointing earlier on. In the top of the 9th, after a Devon White single, Alomar cranks a homerun, immediately raising his arms (a triumphant gesture over Eckersley’s), tying up the game. Pat Borders went on to hit a sacrifice fly in the top of the 11th, and the Jays took a commanding 3-1 lead in the series. From that point on, all the momentum in club history had changed. The Jays believed they could win.

Bonus: Some favourites from the BJW message boards for memorable homeruns

Joe Carter, Josh Phelps, Shawn Green and Carlos Delgado all crushing homers into the 5th deck at SkyDome.
Ken Huckaby's inside the park homer.
Tony Batista's broken bat home run.Rance Mulliniks and Greg Myers hit inside the park homeruns.
Jesse Barfield becomes the first Jay to swat 40 in 1986.
Junior Felix inside-the-park grand slam against Boston in 1989.Kelly Gruber's inside the fog HR at the CNE.
Vernon Wells off Mariano Rivera game winner in 2006.
Mark Hendrickson's "shot heard round Quebec."
Eric Hinske's go ahead homerun in the Halladay vs. Johnson pitching duel in 2005.George Bell hits one on the roof at Tiger Stadium.
Candy Maldonado cranks one to CF at Yankee Stadium in 1992.Reed Johnson leading off and walking off in the same game.
“3 HR games by Darnell Coles in '94 (hit 4 total that year), Woodward in '02 (33 career HRs).”
“McGriff's homer in '87 in Yankee Stadium. Way up in the upper deck. After that, everyone knew who Fred McGriff was.”

Written with help from the BJW community.

There Will Be Blood

2008-01-11T20:18:00.001-05:00

Spoilers.

This is a bleak movie. Right from the get-go, a creepy string arrangement signals the discovery of oil with as much horror as there is excitement. Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) starts out as a reasonable businessman. He is practical and loves his family. But we then witness his progression into one of the worst movie villains in recent memory.

Eli's church is a rather wacky one, resembling the miracle healers we see on TV today. The dynamic between Eli and Daniel reflects the entanglement of Church and Enterprise. You can definitely feel how annoyed Daniel is by Eli's plans. Daniel's first wrong step is when he beats up Eli when he asks for his $5000. Sure, Daniel was peeved that his son had lost his hearing and Eli was a miracle healer, but it was a small concession and part of a contract. Daniel's ambition and competition are what consume him. He has a chance to become a millionaire by selling to another company, but he opts to build his own pipeline to become even more filthy rich. Then in a conversation with his half-brother, he admits that he is competitive, not just wanting to win, but wanting others to lose.

As the greed surges in Daniel, the humanity slips away. He first alienates his son by sending him away, when he was in need of help the most because of his lost hearing. The man who claimed to be Daniel's half-brother turns out to be completely innocent, but that doesn't stop Daniel from killing him. And of course, at the end he has become a wretched, old, and lonely man, but it is his prerogative to humiliate and then kill Eli.

This is a tough, challenging movie, but it reveals some truths about our culture today, particularly about greed for more money than one really needs, and how that can lead to political and personal exploitation. Daniel Day-Lewis is amazing and the movie is exceptionally well-crafted, so it's definitely a must-see.

Distrcit 13

2007-12-30T18:33:00.000-05:00

District 13 is a 2004 French martial arts film re-released in dubbed English in 2006. They waste no time getting to business, and what is most engaging about this movie is how much adrenaline it provokes without the use of special effects or wires. A druglord has an enemy's sister, as well as a nuclear weapon he may blow up the French slums with, thus drawing both Damien (a cop who can diffuse the bomb) and Leito (a slum-dwelling avenger who seeks his sister) together. The main characters use parkour, a french technique that was invented by one of the main characters (David Belle, Leito), which emphasizes maximum efficiency in manipulating your environment with the use of the human body. There is a lot of jumping, flipping and spinning in this technique, for example in the popular urban ninja video on youtube. They used a variety of martial arts, as the cop was a self-professed kickboxer, and the druglord watches a famous UFC fight at one point in the movie. The movie was also politically clairvoyant, as the French attitudes towards the slums of Paris showed up in the media a year later when riots broke out due to the hopelessness of the ignored areas. But still, District 13 was a 90-minute adrenaline-rush, that is fitting for any martial-arts movie-fan.

The Protector

Another installment by Tony Jaa, who goes to Australia to protect his companion elephant, a sacred animal in Thai culture, which has been kidnapped by some crooked business people. Some of the plot, acting, and music were silly, but there is one reason to watch this movie, and that is to watch Tony Jaa kick some ass. He is a lot more aggressive and dominant than in Ong-Bak, and there were some long and daunting fight sequences.

The Golden Compass

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

2007-12-22T11:17:00.000-05:00

Tim Burton delivers another masterpiece in Sweeney Todd. Johnny Depp plays a vengeful barber who becomes a serial killer, while his wife Helena Bonham Carter makes meat pies out of the bodies. The movie will have the amount of gore and grief you would expect from an R-rated movie about a serial killer, even though it's a musical. The singing was pretty good, even by Depp who reportedly had not sung in decades. Tim Burton said that auditioning so many people singing was as intimate as seeing them naked for a porno. The singing certainly brought a level of intimacy to the film that contrasts the dark tone, and the score was as grandiloquent as the barber himself. If you like Tim Burton's aesthetic, then you will love Sweeney Todd. Almost the entire movie was colourless, except of course for the blood, and two brief scenes bookending the movie.

The sub-text played on the theme of how "man eats man," the eating of human meat pies a metaphor for this. The judge wants something that Sweeney Todd has, his beautiful wife, and so unfairly sentences him to life in prison. The judge reflects man's selfish nature. Todd, who escapes and comes back years later, requires vengeance, in his all-too-human nature. Todd has a great capacity for evil, and carelessness, definite traits of humanity. This was probably Tim Burton's darkest movie, but it was a great one, and further cements his status as one of the best director's of his generation.

Latest Views

2007-12-19T04:24:00.000-05:00

Walk Hard

The latest from Judd Apatow parodying a Johnny Cash-style singer's life. It's silly and dirty and pretty funny. Not quite 4 stars, but I would probably give it 3.75 if I could. In comparison, Superbad was worth 4 stars, Knocked Up closer to 3.25, and the 40-Year-Old Virgin closer to 3.75. The movies that this core of actors generates are on average better than the one's the "fratpack" usually spurts out. The groups are pretty easy to delineate. The core of the "fratpack" features Will Ferrell, Ben Stiller, Vince Vaughn, Owen Wilson, and Luke Wilson. Old School was amazing, Zoolander and Anchorman pretty good, but then the catalogue starts to slip a bit with Dodgeball, Meet the Parents, Wedding Crashers, and Blades of Glory. The Apatow group is centered around Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill, Paul Rudd, and to an extent Steve Carell. Obviously there are a lot of overlapping casts and what not. I could probably designate three side groups: one is Jack Black, who gets to be in a field all by himself (Tenacious D, Nacho Libre, School of Rock, Orange County, and High Fidelity). Another is Wes Anderson, who uses Jason Schwartzman a lot, and generally does more self-explorative, sophisticated comedies (Rushmore, Royal Tenanbaums, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, and The Darjeeling Limited). These are probably the highest quality movies out of the bunch. Then there is Bill Murray, who is Bill Murray.

Legend

No, not I Am Legend, but the 1986 fantasy classic by Ridley Scott, featuring Tom Cruise as a pants-less forest-dweller, and Tim Curry as one of cinema's most memorable Devil's. It's amazing what a Director's Cut, as well as good DVD quality can do for these solid 80's movies. Watching this made me want to watch Dark Crystal, another movie I remember from my childhood.

Ong-Bak: Muay Thai Warrior

Tony Jaa is pretty good, but this movie proved to be a fairly standard martial arts movie.

Interesting Non-Tendered Free Agents

2007-12-13T11:58:00.000-05:00

(featured on www.bluejayway.ca)

After Wednesday’s non-tender deadline, there are a few interesting names available.

Dallas McPherson (3B) – A former Angels prospect, and a lefty with a lot of power. He has been plagued by injuries, but a low market team with no 3B would be smart to give him a shot, especially because he has tons of service time left. The Blue Jays would also be smart to look for a backup 3B in case Glaus gets injured for a few months.

Morgan Ensberg (3B) – Still could produce, as he had good walks and power in the past. But unless he can play LF, another team might be able to offer him a starting spot.

Adam Everett (SS) – One of the best defensive shortstops in baseball, with a poor bat. His type of tools are the kind that go underrated when contracts are given out.

Kevin Mench (OF) – He’s got a decent bat for LF, with a career .791 OPS.

Miguel Olivo [C] – Has hit 32 homeruns over the last two years (and 23 walks!). He might be that good backup catcher Ricciardi has been looking for. He threw out 33% of baserunners last year.

Johnny Estrada [C] – An even better solution offensively than Olivo, since he’s a switch hitter, and has a higher career OBP by 45 points. However, defensively he’s not as good, throwing out 13% last year, even worse than an injured Zaun.

Kiko Calero (RHP) – A career 3.55 ERA has got to make some teams look twice for bullpen help, even though he struggled last year. The Blue Jays would be wise to beef up their bullpen to protect against any possible regressions from some of the overperforming young pitchers last year. Not that the Jays bullpen will be bad, but you can never have enough pitching.

Akinori Otsuka (RHP) – He has a 2.44 career ERA. I’m not sure why the pitching hungry Rangers non-tendered him, as even though he’s returning from injury, he still has an awful lot of service time left, making the risk of losing a few million dollars over 1 year logical. He was also the last valuable commodity left in the Adam Eaton/Otsuka for Adrian Gonzalez/Chris Young/Termel Sledge trade.

Mark Prior (RHP) – The Cubs non-tendering Prior makes more sense than the Otsuka situation. He will be a free agent after next year, and could resign anywhere. He will be returning from injury, so a big market team might want to drop $3.5 million to see if he can be useful for half of the year.

Josh Towers (RHP) – NL West bound.

Matt Wise (RHP) – Another potentially useful bullpen arm. He’s got a career ERA of 4.18, with a good K:BB ratio (238:103).

Other names:

Jose Garcia, RHP, John Parrish, LHP, Cory Doyne, RHP, Roberto Novoa, RHP, Nick Gorneault, OF, Brendan Donnelly, RHP, Emil Brown, OF, Chad Durbin, RHP, Jason Tyner, OF, Andy Gonzalez, INF, Heath Phillips, LHP, T.J. Beam, RHP, Matt DeSalvo, RHP, Darrell Rasner, RHP, Bronson Sardinha, OF, Willie Harris, OF, Aaron Miles, 2B, Mark Hendrickson, LHP, Scott Munter, RHP, Ben Johnson, OF, Juan Padilla, RHP, Nook Logan, OF, Mike O’Connor, LHP, Jack Cassel, RHP, Ryan Ketchner, LHP, Jason Lane, OF, Brad Eldred, 1B; Brian Rogers, RHP, Jerry Gil, SS, Brad Salmon, RHP, Sean Barker, OF, Darren Clarke, RHP.

Dexter: End of Season 2 Comments

2007-12-11T09:53:00.000-05:00

SPOILERS! Please don't read unless you've finished season 2.

Season 2 was pretty fun in that there was a whole lot of tension and excitement throughout the entire season. There was also more introspection into Dexter's past, which I enjoy. However, I and many other fans can't help but feel a little disappointed with the plot developments. Doakes ends up dying, getting blasted to smithereens, and is pinned as the Bay Harbour Butcher (BHB). Doakes is no different from Dexter. He's a good cop that wants justice and to kill bad guys. Everyone who watches the show roots for Dexter. He's the loveable serial killer. The feeling of disappointment comes in when you realize that Doakes' blood is on Dexter's hands. Even though Lila killed him, Dexter was planning to frame Doakes for the BHB murders, which would probably have lead to him getting the death penalty since it is legal in Florida. So even if you're not the one doing the killing, but you set them up to be killed, you are absolved? I also think that was a weak plan by Dexter, considering Doakes' accusations would at least cause investigation into Dexter's past, basically screwing him over. The chances of them finding something in Dexter's past to connect him to the BHB would be way higher for him than Doakes. As well, season 2 saw a markedly different Dexter, who battled much more moral problems (since his hand was forced by the law and revelations by Harry's code), and he got a lot closer to people, such as Lila, and caring for Rita and the kids. At times you wonder, if Dexter stops killing people, then wouldn't this be just a normal cop drama?

I loved the conversations between Doakes and Dexter once Doakes knew that he was the BHB. Towards the end, you felt that Doakes layers were being knocked down, and he somewhat understood Dexter. And Dexter also helps Doakes from being killed by those drug lords. What a team those two would make! That would have been epically cool, if there weren't the problem of the law hunting down at least one of them as the BHB.

I did write one alternative ending, which I think would have tied things up much better:

Doakes survives the blast - but is in a coma, and when he wakes up has retrograde episodic amnesia. He is able to be a cop, but not homicide, as he has lost his episodic memory for a few months back (forgetting that Dexter is the BHB). He still hates Dexter for some reason. The law acquits him because they find out that Lila is the BHB, after its discovered she was trying to make Doakes her latest victim in a plea to get Dexter back. (I suppose her fingerprints were found on something in the cabin, and they identify her motive). Lila as the possible BHB could have worked well if the writers developed it more. The viewers of the show know that she can kill, and that she had all those body parts in her studio, alluding to chopping up bodies. From the law's perspective, they first find she has an alias and no paper trail. All that would be required is writing in on how she was a killer of chopping a person up 15 years ago in Britain before coming here, yadda yadda yadda. Anyway, before the law gets to her, Dexter has already "taken care" of her, both framing her and killing her in the process, making it look like a suicide because she was "found out." This way, Dexter doesn't have any of Doakes blood on his hands, Doakes lives, and Dexter goes on being his old self.

Do you believe in the Jays?

2007-12-11T09:11:00.001-05:00

On a recent board discussion on Blue Jay Way, someone asked if you really believed that the Jays had a chance. I'll put my long rant of an answer here. However, I was partly depressed because I lost my mp3 player last night by leaving it on a (coach) bus.
--------------------
First, no one can say with absolute certainty who is going to win this year. I know you may think I'm being facetious, but look at it in terms of a matter of probability. No one can answer "no the Jays won't make the playoffs again next year." There is a shot, even if it's in the 10% range, it's still could happen.

With that being said, and in my honest opinion, it's really tough to see the Jays ever making the playoffs. The Red Sox and Yankees are way too good for us. They both have money and are both developing terrific young players. The Jays spend a decent amount, though considering the cap of $100 million, you could heavily criticize the allocation of resources by JP Ricciardi. The Wells contract looks expensive in the last few years, though that is far away. BJ Ryan is a very expensive reliever. Not only that, but JP seems to acquire those free agents with his eyes and ears closed with regards to their medical reports. It's almost like he pretends it might not be a factor. It was known that Glaus, Burnett and Thomas were all injury concerns, and that BJ had a funky delivery and was due. The point is, spending money in an absolute vacuum may increase your chances to win, but the Red Sox and Yankees pummel us on that front, so we have to be even more shrewd with spending money.

The Red Sox and Yankees have been drafting better than us until this year and perhaps the last. JP wasted picks here and there (for example, on some of the aforementioned signings, and maybe the Koskie one), and blew several high picks on signability. Look at what the Tigers are doing. They drafted Maybin for a signing bonus of perhaps 400K more than Ricky Romero, and just traded him as the centrepiece for Miguel Freaking Cabrera. I know it's in the past, but I think that with JP at the helm, and the current economic structure (luxury tax, no draft slotting), as well as weighted divisions, the Jays are essentially screwed. The Red Sox and Yankees are going to make the playoffs almost every year, and if not them, an AL Central powerhouse. It is almost like the NBA, where the Western Conference is dominant and the Eastern one not so much (for baseball, like the AL over NL). However in basketball 8 teams make the playoffs, whereas only 4 do in baseball. A small change that could help is taking away the weighted divisions, and making the best 4 teams in each league make the playoffs. Baseball is usually slow to change though, so you can't expect something drastic like a salary cap or expanded playoffs (which would probably require a shortened season, even though 8 playoff teams would be really fun and lucrative).

It IS a delicate situation though. You can't just fire JP unless you can hire away a Brian Colangelo type guy. There are much worse GM's than Ricciardi. There are a few great GM's floating around right now, like Terry Ryan or John Schuerholz. The Jays could offer a somewhat big payroll, a good market, a good paycheque, and a supportive ownership group to try and sway one of these guys away.

It's also frustrating when you think that basically any other team has a chance but the Jays (and other AL East teams). If you haven't noticed, there is a lot of parity in baseball. Seven different world champions in the last 8 years (or so), with several new teams making the playoffs. However, the newest CBA actually heightened the level for luxury taxes, and there has been no discussion on slotting of the draft. With the weighted divisions, the Jays have to face these two teams very often, and have to hope that they both don't automatically make the playoffs. At least teams in the Central and West can hope to win the division in any one year.

What do I want from the games? Well, you can always watch them with tempered expectations, because certain good things will happen, like breaking out young players like McGowan, etc. You can watch for the good plays too. I don't agree with corpusse on his point about having an awful team. It would just desensitize you. It's better to have a somewhat competing, talented team...and even if you get good draft picks every year, it could take you 10 years to be good. Plus, you can still draft the Roy Halladay's of the world with the 18th overall pick. Also, you can always find a new team (which is hard for me to do personally because I've grown up with the Jays), but I'm a big fan of what Dave Dombrowski does for the Tigers. Look at how they draft over slot every year, getting Andrew Miller, Cameron Maybin, and Rick Porcello. Why can't we do that? It'd be only adding another $5 million on the draft, easily affordable. It's pennywise, poundfoolish not to. They are also the closest team to us, and Dombrowski used to work for the Expos I believe.
--------------------
Now someone did respond and intelligently pointed out that the Red Sox and Yankees merely have an abundance of picks the last several years, and that the Blue Jays drafts are improving tremendously. That and the solid payroll makes me feel better about the future at least, since they are going in the right direction.

Garza for Young: A Prospect Blockbuster

2007-12-01T15:07:00.001-05:00

It's hard to say who got the better of the Delmon Young for Matt Garza trade right now. The Twins gave up the 5th best pitching prospect in baseball last year and a possible number 2 starter, a great defensive shortstop in Jason Bartlett, and power-pitching relief prospect Eduardo Morlan. The Rays gave up the best player in the deal – Delmon Young, who many scouts see as having unlimited potential - as well as role players Brendan Harris and Jason Pridie. Young was a number 1 overall pick who treaded water in the majors at 21, a resume you don’t want to give up on too quickly. It all basically breaks down as to whether Delmon Young breaks out into a superstar. He had discouraging plate discipline in 2007, with 127 k’s and only 26 walks, despite logging only 13 homeruns in 645 AB. However, he still had 38 doubles, and some of those will turn into homeruns. Scouts have always loved his quick bat speed, and I should reiterate that he is only 21. It may not be for a couple of years, but there’s no reason to think Delmon Young still won’t become a perennial All-star.

In the context of how each team improves, it’s still a fairly even trade. Both teams dealt from a position of strength to fill a weakness. The Twins had numerous young pitchers for the rotation without Garza, including Bonser, Baker, Slowey, Perkins, Liriano, and Swarzak, so selling high on Garza makes sense. In 2006, Baseball America said of Garza, “calling him a No. 2 starter behind Johan Santana almost seems conservative.” He had a good year in 2007, and obviously the pitching hungry Rays believe the same things that Baseball America does. However, they are downgrading their shortstop position, hoping that Harris, Alexi Casilla and Nick Punto can share time effectively between SS and 2b. The offense still looks weak up the middle (including CF) and 3b, but will obviously be helped if Delmon Young breaks out.

The Rays had an overloaded outfield, a bad pitching staff, and the league’s worst defense. The defense is helped by Jason Bartlett at shortstop, and the rotation is much deeper now: Kazmir, Garza, Shields, Sonnanstine, Niemann, Jackson, and Hammel. I still don’t see the Devil Rays competing next year. They lost 96 games, and the bullpen is still awful, even though it is fronted by Al Reyes, Dan Wheeler, and now Troy Percival. Their offense is not as strong as it looks: you can't rely on Baldelli because of injuries. B.J. Upton may regress offensively due to his ridiculous .393 BABIP (definition: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?search=babip), showing that he was getting lucky with hits, and whopping 154 strikeouts. However, he's still a good hitter, as his power, stolen bases, and walks were all good. Carlos Pena may be good next year, but not as good as his career year in 2007. As well, Bartlett, Josh Wilson (2b), and Dioner Navarro [C] don’t have great bats. Considering the long-term upside of Delmon Young, I would say that the Twins have the slight edge in this trade.

Jim Callis of Baseaball America is driving the 2010 Devil Rays World Series champion bandwagon. He also does not believe in the Jays at all. In a recent chat, he picked the Blue Jays as the worst AL East team over the next 10 years (that’s right, even worse than the Orioles, even though the Jays organization is run better in many ways over the Orioles). So will the Devil Rays be taking the traditional 3rd place reigns (or higher) in a few years? It’s an important question, because the Rays have been an arch nemesis to the Blue Jays, beating them when they needed wins the most, while the Red Sox and Yankees frequently posed as less a problem.

The future has several key prospects coming up. Evan Longoria (SS/3b) and Reid Brignac (SS) will presumably take the left side of the infield, while Iwamura moves to 2b, and Pena stays at 1b if he is still there. The rotation could have 5 number 1 or 2’s, with Kazmir, Garza, Shields, Wade Davis, Jake McGee, and David Price, which may be enough to put them over the top. But that is several years away, and not counting the attrition rate for prospects, especially pitchers. Prospects often take a long time to develop, and may not hit their stride until well past 2010. If their management is reluctant to start spending a lot of money in a poor market to keep players like Crawford and Kazmir, then all the pieces will never be there at once, and they will never reach their potential. All in all, the Rays have collected many top prospects from years of losing, but their future is so prospect-based that I’ll believe it when I see it.

The Vernon Wells Contract in Perspective

2007-11-23T13:22:00.000-05:00

(featured on www.bluejayway.ca)

Torii Hunter just signed a deal worth 5 years and $90 million with the Angels. That’s an annual average value of $18 million. I was waiting to see how this deal turned out to compare what Wells would have cost the Jays. Hunter and Wells are relatively similar players. They are both very good defensive centre fielders and probably in the same bracket (remember, all those homerun stealing catches by Hunter is partly because the fence is low in his home park). Hunter averages about 25 homers a year, with 17 steals, 42 walks, 114 strikeouts, and a .271 average. Wells chimes in at 26 homers a year, with 11 steals, 47 walks, 91 strikeouts, and a .281 average. All in all, Wells is a slightly better hitter. Another thing to consider is that Wells is entering his age 29 season, whereas Hunter is entering his age 32 season, and younger players always get a higher premium. However, Hunter had a better walk year, whereas Wells struggled with an injury.

The Vernon Wells contract is much better than the Torii Hunter one. The Angels are paying Hunter through his age 36 year, whereas the Blue Jays are paying him only through his age 35 year. However, the key difference is that the Jays have Wells for 2 extra years closer to his prime. Now, considering Wells had such an awful year, perhaps he would have earned less. In this instance, Andruw Jones may be a good comparable because he had such an awful walk year as well. He is a bit older than Wells, but in the past has been a better hitter. We don’t know what sort of contract Jones will get, but the speculation is that it will be for $15 million per year (number of years unknown).

So, even by this criteria, at worst the Blue Jays are overspending by $3 million per year (or $21 million over the life of the contract), hardly a crippling amount. Yes, it’s true that it would be much better for the contract to be about 1 or 2 years less, as a player is more likely to decline by their mid-30’s, and Wells is being paid an awful lot by then. However, if the organization is smart, this obstacle will hardly be crippling, and they can field a competitive team around Wells just as the 2007 Rockies did around Todd Helton.

Tracy Ringolsby recently wrote an article (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7469504) hammering the Jays for their lack of direction. First, Ringolsby is wrong in saying that the Jays are only an $80 million team, and not a $100 million one. Last year, they spent $90 million on payroll, and when you add up all of the money given out in arbitration, and include signing bonuses, the payroll will be right up against the $100 million mark (I have an estimated $95 million right now). Their willingness to spend money shows that they are trying. The division is formidable, so some owners would see no point in adding in the extra $40 million a year to at least try and win. Second, the Red Sox illustrate perfectly why the payroll disparity in the AL East is not the main reason why they won the World Series. Free agents JD Drew, Julio Lugo and Daisuke Matsuzaka were all disappointments. The real contributors mostly came from the farm system: Pedroia, Youklis, Bucholz, Papelbon, Ellsbury, Delcarmen, Lester, and the ability to trade for Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell (Hanley Ramirez).

So, if the Jays are going to compete, they are going to need to draft well, and not just spend a lot of money. The Jays had a great draft this year, taking Cecil, Jackson, Ahrens, Arencibia, Eiland, and Tolisano. They also have Travis Snider waiting in the wings. The players from this years draft all project to be in the majors in 3-5 years, around when the Wells contract gets expensive. The Jays FO are clearly smartening up when it comes to the draft, and they are hoarding picks too. The mutual interest with Michael Barrett is a good example. The Jays rightfully don’t want to give up their first round pick just for him. (If they do, I’ll quickly agree with Ringolsby). J.P. Ricciardi can be baffling, but he does have strengths, such as at identifying quality major league talent (see: Burnett deal, not trading McGowan), and he deserves kudos for assembling one of the best pitching staffs in baseball last year. My guess is Ringolsby is just trying to earn his paycheque. Ricciardi is an above average GM, and his weakness is soon becoming a strength. It’s going to be hard to close the gaps between the Red Sox and Yankees, who are both rich and intelligently run. But luck is the residue of design and if the Jays continue to draft well, you never know what could happen.

The Un-reviewed

2007-11-10T22:26:00.000-05:00

There are a couple of shows and movies that I have watched recently but have not reviewed.

The Wire

Slow-moving cop drama that forgoes the usual mindless violence and gets to the meat and potatoes, with politics, plot-turns, characters, and a bit of humour on the side.

30 Rock

The funniest show on TV since Arrested Development.

Arrested Development

The funniest show on TV.

Juno

A quirky comedy about an under-aged girl who gets pregnant, with many of the same actors as Arrested Development.

Lars and the Real Girl

An original take on the romantic comedy genre, where a socially withdrawn man starts to date a plastic woman, thinking she is real. The small-town plays along and dives into what it means to be loved in a relationship.

Let's Go to Prison

A silly comedy that probably got bad reviews elsewhere, but since it's my type of humour, with prison and Will Arnett, I found it enjoyable.

No Country for Old Men

2007-11-10T20:47:00.000-05:00

No Country for Old Men is the Coen Brother's best film since The Big Lebowski (1998) and Fargo (1996). The story is an adaptation of a book by the same name by Cormac McCarthy. A drug deal has gone wrong near the U.S.-Mexico border in 1980. Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) is a welder that stumbles upon the abandoned drug deal shoot out, and decides to take a large sum of cash ($2 million). But taking the money causes some people to hunt his trail, particularly Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem). Moss occupies most of the story-line, but is not your typical American movie-hero. Instead, he is a Tragic hero, as he's likeable and not particularly evil, but he's greedy when he starts to protect his found money. Anton is a cold hard killer and at times uses coin-flips to decide whether to spare people's lives (unless of course you really inconvenience him). Chigurh is described at times as "just a psychopath" and the "ultimate bad-ass." He carries around a cattle gun, which normally shoots a rod at an animal's head to make it "lose consciousness"; but Chigurh uses it to break open locks and shoot people in the head. Bardem is a heavy-weight actor, staring in such films as The Sea Inside, where he plays a quadriplegic who fought for 28 years for euthanasia and the right to end his own life. Tommy Lee Jones' character (Sheriff Ed Tom Bell) was great, and anchored the movie morally. He also provided scenes that were subtly humourous, that evolved organically. The movie had no soundtrack, and was as minimalistic as the barren Texas landscapes that it featured. (spoilers) In the end, the movie is a tragedy. Chigurh is a completely unstoppable evil force, and ruthless too, as he kills the wife just for the sake of killing. Sheriff Bell's remarks cast a hopeless attitude on a modern cultural landscape that features violence and dishonesty. (spoilers end)

There is one more Western movie coming out at the end of the year that I want to see called There Will Be Blood, by P.T. Anderson. The genre is seemingly making a mini-resurgence, as all of the 2007 Westerns have been very good. Even though this movie is more a modern Western than a classic one, it exceeded 3:10 to Yuma and Jesse James in quality. In sum, the Coen Brother's are masters of their craft and exceed conventions on so many levels, that this movie is a must-see for movie-lovers.

American Gangster

2007-11-01T15:21:00.000-04:00

American Gangster was about the real life story of Frank Lucas, a black man in the 60's and 70's who outdid the mafia by getting shipments of heroin straight from Southeast Asia and peddling it onto the streets of Harlem. On the other side is Richie Roberts, a good cop who attempts to take down both Frank Lucas, and the heavily crooked drug force working in New York at the time. The movie was fairly conventional, although it was well-made and well-acted. The ending was intriguing, but there was not much to dig beneath the surface, as the movie worked more as a biopic than a commentary. Taken together, American Gangster is a good movie, but not necessarily a must-see unless it particularly interests you.

A side-note is that today, I started watching The Wire, an unheralded but critically acclaimed HBO TV show that is entering it's final season. The show is a very slow developing crime drama based in inner-city Baltimore. Unlike American Gangster, the cops are a lot less resourced, and at times seemingly defeated, for a more realistic and humbling feel. It's not as easy as marching in to get the bad guys, since there is a lot more crime and politics than anyone bargained for.

Gone Baby Gone

2007-10-30T22:40:00.000-04:00

I took awhile before sitting down to write this review because it's a difficult one to write. The story is too complex to dissect in full: it's about a drug-addicted, neglectful mother, whose daughter (Amanda) is kidnapped. A private investigator, Patrick Kenzie (Casey Affleck) is hired due to his inside knowledge of the Boston neighbourhood. Chief Doyle (Morgan Freeman) lost a young daughter of his own and is dedicated to persevere on the issue of missing children. After Patrick stumbles upon inside information, he is drawn more and more into mystery and corruption, as he constantly tries to make the honourable decision.

The movie blurs the lines between right and wrong. Patrick is constantly taking risks to find Amanda: he offers an under the table exchange with a drug lord, and he seeks to uncover the truth behind corrupt cops - typical vigilante stuff. But in his final decision, Patrick goes up against his notions of love and sacrifice for the state. (spoilers) He discovers that Chief Doyle had Amanda all along, and he is forced to decide on whether to expose Chief Doyle for the selfish kidnapper that he is. His wife claims she will hate him for returning the girl because despite it being the "right" thing to do, the mother was a no-good, lying, drug-addict. Patrick believes that the mother will change, and that he owes it to Amanda who, when she grows up, would have her real identity. In the end, Patrick realizes his mistake, as the mother does not show signs of change, opting to sleep around on dates while leaving her 8-year-old daughter at home unattended. Despite Chief Doyle's delusional motives for kidnapping the girl (to fill a void in his life for his own lost daughter), you really get the sense that he's a good person that wanted to save her from a bad home. In a way, everyone loses - Patrick loses his partner, Chief Doyle goes to jail, Remy (a corrupt police officer played by Ed Harris) dies, and the girl is left with a loser of a mother. The movie delivers strong emotions to masterfully emphasize its point. (spoilers end)

Casey Affleck, Morgan Freeman, Michelle Monaghan, and Ed Harris were all superb in Gone Baby Gone. Casey's acting resume is much better than Ben Affleck's is, but Ben did a great job in his directorial debut. This movie is a lock to be nominated for Best Picture, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it won.

Famous Puppet Death Scenes

2007-10-27T17:41:00.000-04:00

First a note on the Distillery District, home to the Young Centre for the Performing Arts. I've never been to this part of town, and I consider it a hidden gem, as it was new to me. It had brick roads and Industrial Gothic style buildings, saved from earlier industrial use. There are galleries, bakeries and cafe shops galore. It's a very nice neighbourhood to hang out in.

Famous Puppet Death Scenes is gaining notoriety and is traveling internationally. The show is exactly what it sounds like; it truly captures what the Theatre of the Absurd is all about. The influences of Edward Gorey were highly apparent. The skits were at times funny, in a quirky, black comedy type of way. But there was also imaginative scenes that perplexed the mind - a tendency in which the topic of death is inclined to do. There is a video on you tube, but it does not do justice to the charm and craftiness of the show. The puppets themselves were detailed, and their expressions and gestures were able to say so much. Famous Puppet Death Scenes was a very good show, and merits 4 stars based on its originality and creativity alone.

Shortstop Options in 2008

2007-10-24T00:21:00.000-04:00

(featured on www.bluejayway.ca)

The Blue Jays failures in 2007 can be summed up to one aspect of the game: offence. While much of the offence can be blamed on injuries, teams have to prepare knowing that injuries are a part of the game and affect every team. While some people reflect on 2006 as being a great offensive year and what the “real” Blue Jays are like, I should point out that they still finished 7th in the AL in runs scored per game, and that was even with great years from Molina, Overbay, Glaus, Wells, Rios, Zaun, Hinske, Catalanatto, and even Hillenbrand. Everybody and their dog had a career year in 2006. Going into 2008, there is offensive potential at every position except for shortstop. John McDonald is a great defensive shortstop, but as a team the Jays had a .598 OPS out of the shortstop position, compared to an average OPS of .758 for starters (2006). That's a whopping difference of .160 OPS points. McDonald had a .612 OPS this year (and .595 career), which would slot in 3rd last amongst qualifiers (in 161st place, beating out Jason Kendall and Nick Punto). I’m as much a John McDonald fan as the next guy, but I don’t see this team making the playoffs with him as the starting shortstop. JP has said he’ll stand pat this winter, but I think he is bluffing, and is going to make a splashy move, which will most likely be an improvement at shortstop. So, with 2008 looking rosy as ever, with some great pitching and healthy hitting, let’s see what is available (* denotes free agent in 2008):

Top 10:

1) Tomohiro Nioka*: He is not technically a free agent until next year, but he could be posted and perhaps had for Akinori Iwamura money (around 3/$12 million), which is great for a shortstop. He hit .295/.346/.457 with 20 homers and 83 RBIs last year, and is 31 years old. As a basis of comparison, Iwamura hit .311/.389/.544 in his last year in Japan at 27, and ended up with a .770 OPS in his first year in the major leagues.

2) Alexei Ramirez: Ramirez is a 26 year old player from Cuba who also might be worth the risk financially. He went 6-16 in the WBC, has played in the Olympics, led his team with 20 homers last year, and is considered one of the top Cuban players around. For more information and a video, see: http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=597

3) Jack Wilson (trade): he might be the best option to get without paying too much in talent or money. He is still quite valuable as he had a .790 OPS this year (.690 career) with a .983 fielding percentage, edging out McDonald’s .982. The Pirates might be desperate to get that $14 million/2 year contract off their hands, but if they threw in some money, this would be an improvement.

4) Orlando Cabrera* (trade): of the next 3 big name possibilities, he is the most likely. There are tons of options for the Angels at SS/3B next year, from Brandon Wood, to Chone Figgins, Maicer Izturis, Erick Aybar, and Sean Rodriguez. Cabrera had a .742 OPS and a slick .983 fielding percentage last year, and is due about $9 million. Really, any of these players are trade options: Maicer Izturis is interesting, as he has a .724 careers OPS and has experience at 3b, a definite plus with Glaus’ creaky legs at 3b.

5) Rafael Furcal* (trade): also in his last year, and is due $13 million. His speed would go nicely at the top of the Blue Jays lineup. The prospect pushing him out, Chin-Lung Hu, might also be trade bait, as he won the MVP at the futures game and had an .871 OPS between AA and AAA this year as a 23 year old. We all know how reluctant the Dodgers are to play prospects. It would be a heist if some relievers could net Lu.

6) Edgar Renteria* (trade): he has a nice $11 million option in 2009, and with how shrewd the Braves are with prospects, I don’t see this as a viable trade possibility. They have Yunel Escobar that could take over, or could also be trade bait in a swap for one of the Jays young pitchers.

7) Felipe Lopez*: either him or Cristian Guzman* is a non-tender candidate, but Lopez’s bat has declined badly over the last two years, and he has poor defence. Angel Berroa* is in the same boat, as he may be released by the Royals, and despite hitting .300/.364/.433 in AAA this year, has a poor glove.

8) Ronny Cedeno (trade): he is known to have a great glove, and has had a .959 OPS last year in AAA, and a .921 OPS in AAA in 2005, but has been a disappointment at the ML level, and is thought to amount to a light-hitting shortstop. Only Ryan Theriot is blocking him and the Cubs may need him for their own shortstop problems.

9) Clint Barmes (trade): he is blocked in Colorado, mainly by Tulowitzki, Ian Stewart, and Kaz Matsui, but had a nice year in AAA (.815 OPS). It might not take a lot to get him in a trade but he’s a bit of a wild card.

10) Others: David Eckstein - he’ll be 33, and his bat has .100 OPS points over McDonald's, but his defence is slipping (20 errors this year), and he might not be worth the dollars he’ll command in free agency. Juan Uribe*, who will probably be retained by the White Sox for $5 million, is basically John McDonald plus 20 homers a year. And Jeff Keppinger of the Reds might not be a bad trade option, as the 27 year old has an .806 OPS at the major league level and .794 career minor league OPS. He played mostly 2b in the minors, but had a .989 fielding percentage at shortstop filling in for Alex Gonzalez.

World Series Preview

2007-10-22T16:13:00.000-04:00

The Red Sox vs. Rockies World Series is primed to be an epic series. The Rockies are playing the role of the classic underdog with a $50 million payroll (ranked 25th in MLB), while the Red Sox are supported with a much nicer $150 million payroll (ranked 2nd in MLB). These teams met in the regular season with the Rockies taking the series 2-1 (including a 7-1 win over Josh Beckett), which nicely sums up how the Rockies are well-suited to battle an American League style team. As a die hard Jays fan, I whole-heartedly want the Rockies to win. They have only reached the playoffs once in their 15 year existence and have never made the World Series. What is more is that they have a history of a good attendance record (especially for a consistently underachieving, low payroll team), partly added by a beautiful park.

They have constructed their team the way any mid-market fan boy would admire: through the farm system approach, having their farm system widely seen as the second-best one behind only the Devil Rays to begin the year. And the team is full of homegrown products, led by future perennial all star and rookie Troy Tulowitzki, who has a great bat (24 hrs, .291 ave, 57 walks) and gold glove defence to back it up. They also have long-time and very underrated Todd Helton, who has played for only the Rockies since he was 23 in 1997, and put up one of the quietest .928 OPS seasons ever. What's more is that this truly seems like destiny's team. The Red Sox are lauded for the miraculous 3-0 come back in the 2004 ALCS, but the Rockies have gone 21-1, including winning 13 of their last 14 regular season games against potential playoff teams, and becoming only the second team to go 7-0 to start the postseason ever (tied with the 1976 Reds). Whether the 9 day layoff will rest them up or make them cold (like the Tigers last year), we will see - it's too hard to predict - but the Rockies are definitely the hotter team right now.

Offensively, these teams are about even. The Red Sox scored 867 runs in the regular season, while the Rockies scored 860, both very good offensive totals. However, the Red Sox are going to be without their DH for 3 games of the series, and they are struggling with their own issue of whether to put in Youklis or Ortiz at 1b under the NL rules. It is a tough question, as Ortiz has a much better bat, but Youklis has been scorching hot this postseason (he's batting .500/.576/.929!!! in 28 at bats) and likely has better defence at 1b. The Red Sox and Rockies are also home to two of the most intriguing parks in baseball. The Rockies have an extreme hitters park, as the lower gravity and drier air causes balls to be hit farther; and the further fences ensures a more spacious outfield for hits to fall into (although recent humidors have dampened the effects). Questions have always been on Rockies hitters whether they are as good in other parks, as many of them have extreme home/road splits. As a team, the Rockies hit an .852 OPS at home this year, and a .731 OPS away (.121 diff), whereas the Red Sox hit a less extreme .844 OPS at home and .768 OPS away (.76 diff). What complicates things is the Red Sox enigmatic park: it is hitter friendly but suppresses homeruns. The green monster greatly reduces homeruns hit, but the short right field porch may increase them. As well, there are many nooks and crannies for balls to get caught in, and they can bounce off the green monster to increase the number of hits. It is going to be interesting to see how these teams adapt to playing in such different parks; but as a whole these are very close offences and an edge cannot really be given to either team.

The Rockies are faced with a similarly tough question on the pitching front. Bring back Aaron Cook, one of the Rockies better pitchers, but who hasn't pitched since August 10th, or stay with Franklin Morales, a highly regarded prospect and flame throwing lefty. Both could do well or implode, one is rusty and the other inexperienced. Personally, I think Morales is a better pitcher and has a better chance of being dominant, whereas you never know what you're going to get with a returning from injury pitcher. The match-ups should look something like this:

Beckett vs. Francis

Schilling vs. Jimenez

Matsuzaka vs. Morales/Cook

Wakefield vs. Fogg

Defensively, these are both good teams, with the Red Sox tallying 81 errors in the regular season, versus the Rockies record-breaking 68 errors (they set the ML record in fielding percentage with 0.98925%, edging out, ironically, the 2006 Red Sox with a 0.98910%). The Rockies and Red Sox both have good bullpens, led by relief aces Papelbon and Okajima, versus Fuentes and Corpas. But the starting pitching looks definitely in favour of the Red Sox. The team ERA's favours the Red Sox by 3.87 vs. 4.32, however, in a short 7 game series that seems to have less importance. Furthermore, aside from one of the game's most clutch pitchers in Josh Beckett, the difference is not as big as it initially appears with the following matchups - and the Rockies already pounded Beckett this year to the tune of 6 earned runs in 5 innings. Not to say that that will happen again, but all in all I think this series is going to go 7 games, and the Rockies are going to win it, becoming the 8th new team in 8 years to win a World Series. This is going to be an exciting series, with two evenly matched teams that have it all: speed, defence, offence and pitching.

30 Days of Night

2007-10-20T01:12:00.000-04:00

As a basis of comparison I will talk about Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles, which ushered in the modern vampire, as her books are one of the most widely read fiction books ever, and to this day (they were written from the 70's to the 2000's) do not appear dated one bit. They span the creation of vampires from Ancient Egypt to the present day when Lestat becomes an MTV rock star. Her vampires are chosen for their beauty, and they are capable of feelings of love and morality. Rice's vampires are the sort that you would want to be: they can be very much human, like Louis who is very capable of love and is very aware of his conscience. And they can have super strength and senses, like the "brat prince" Lestat, who is powerful and in need of vanity and excitement. They are immortal, unless sunlight or fire maybe kill them (if their ashes are scattered after that). Stakes and crosses, in the words of Louis, are "bullshit." And even only a select few live long periods of time, as the rest are "all too human" and succumb to existential dead-ends and find their way to death. These vampires are seductive, and reason and love.

The vampires of 30 Days of Night are of a much different breed. These are nasty things. They screech like crows, scratch like cats, and seem to have no inherent reason in the excessive killing that they do. You do not want to be one of them. They do not seem to think, but they use weapons and normal fighting techniques. At times the 30 Days vampires looked very cool, all messed up and bloodied. But there was a consistency lacking, where you felt Larry the guy with donuts was just off screen, and the acting in the gestures often did not hold up. Yes there were some iconic images (like the one at the end of the trailer just before the title), but for all of these there were clumsily acted vampires. As well, while some looked absolutely disfigured, the leader looked like a lawyer who had a long night (but had enough time to get a buzz cut in the morning). At times they looked too much like normal people. Story-wise, they did a good job setting up the movie with a lot of intimate, close-up shots of the human characters, in all parts of town. Much of the rest of the movie was tense, while the audience waited for the next encounter. And by the time the ending rolls along, you can truly sense the graphic novel influence on the movie.

All in all, this is not a groundbreaking movie as far as vampire movies go, but it definitely stands out as worth-seeing if you like the vampire genre. I give it 3.5 stars out of 5.

Dexter

2007-10-18T04:34:00.001-04:00

Dexter is a brilliant show that is a cut above standard TV shows on every level. The production is well-done, from the creepy solo violin theme, to the acting, the story, the dark humour, as well as incorporating crime drama into the show. But the show goes even deeper, looking intensely into the psyche of Dexter, and what it means to be a moral killer. Is there such a thing?

The first insight into killing the show explores is that of nature versus nurture. Dexter experiences events early in his life that trigger natural genetic urges to kill - but he is raised by a good cop to release these urges in a constructive way, by killing only bad people and knowing how to not get caught. By the end of the first season Dexter has a choice to release his inner killer, to be free and not confined by ideas of 'goodness', or stay to the code with which he was raised. (spoiler) Dexter chooses to stay good, by not killing his 'fake' sister through adoption, but instead killing his murderous blood brother. He sacrifices a brother that he could truly connect with, for a sister that he is close to caring about (if he could). (end spoiler)

The second insight is the issue of whether it is right to kill people at all, ever. A pre-law friend I was talking to said how she hated the show because it tells people that killing is good. But these aren't innocent people - they are evil people, and some people have done such bad things that a Biblical eye-for-an-eye form of justice would be embraced by the families of victims and the rest of society. As well, there are numerous incidences where Dexter has a chance to prevent someone from dying, in which he becomes a sort of avenger. For example, a gang leader named Little Chino murders people who give information about his gang, and Dexter was able to 'intervene' before a child was next. This also happened in the most recent episode where a car salesman was zeroing in on a new single female friend to rape and kill.

Dexter proclaims that he cannot really care about anyone in this world and has no feelings, the typical symptoms of a psychopath. But the show repeatedly shows evidence to the contrary. He constantly makes sacrifices to be closer to his girlfriend Rita. He has an awareness of morality, to help the good and kill the bad. And he reflects on the death of his mother with great sorrow and angst. The closest Dexter is to being mentally unhealthy is having multiple personalities, because it seems the only time when he's cold and calculating is when he's about to kill. It's strange because Dexter fits the bill as a moral killer - most people seem to think he's good (about 85% according to the promo site that asks if he is good/evil), yet if he lived in real society there would be a need to categorize him as mentally unhealthy.

Welcome to my site

2007-10-17T22:38:00.000-04:00

I am not going to do this blog to achieve external accolades (except for money and women; women flock to unemployed bloggers, right?). Instead I hope to just synthesize a bit about the tremendous amount of media I take in, from movies to shows to books. I'll also throw in the occasional internet meme that I find hilarious. For me the highest form of accomplishment in these media is when there is meaning underneath the entertaining surface - and that is what I'd like to talk about.

My first official movie "review" will be on Friday, a movie I've been waiting awhile to see called "30 Days of Night," about a bunch of vampires that realize Alaska is a good vacation spot where the sun goes down for 30 days. I love vampire movies and books, and recently have been reading Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles - which kicks ass by the way - so hopefully that will be a good basis of comparison.

By the way, the site's title comes from the logical fallacy that a proposition is true because many or all people believe it, or argumentum ad populum. Be individual, think for yourself.

As well, a note on my rating system. I generally give decent movies 3.5 stars out of 5. Four stars is a benchmark that I give out often to very good movies. Three is mediocre, while 2.5 or below is probably not worth seeing. Five stars is rare, but it means that the show or movie was great on all levels.

Edit: If you haven't discovered it by now, I am also using this site to type a lot about my interest in baseball. So it serves a dual function, and should be pretty evenly balanced - if you don't like baseball, skip over those parts and read on for the media-related entries.