“Turn out the lights…”

I was at work today when I heard that "Dandy" Don Meredith died today in Santa Fe, New Mexico, at the age of 72.

I’m old enough to fully remember Monday Night Football’s first night, back in 1970, when Keith Jackson did the play-by-play for the Jets and Cleveland, and ABC had an idea to put 3 guys in the booth for a game. It was a radical idea 40 years ago, and MNF soon became many other things for millions of Americans that watched in enormous numbers back then. When Frank Gifford replaced Jackson, he teamed with Meredith and Howard Cosell to become one of the biggest TV nights in the country – much bigger than now. The advent of MNF more than anything else, shot the NFL on its way to the overwhelming media dominance it has had for a long time now.

Back then there was no Cable, so no Internet. I lived just outside of NYC at the time, and came to understand how lucky I was to have six TV stations to watch, even if they all went off the air by 2:00 A.M. or so, every night but a few. I spent many mornings trying to grab scores off the radio, or praying the NY Daily News would have a score. No 24/7 news cycle, no ESPN for about 10 more years.

The games were occasions, and even if Gifford proved to be a poor play-by-play guy he did call a play one Monday night in which he shouted that a QB had a receiver "wide open!"

What Gifford failed to identify before he spoke was that it wasn’t really a receiver, but an opposing cornerback.

"He’s open, all right!" joked Meredith, "he’s w-i-d-e open!"

By the mid-1970’s, I was living in Tucson, and frequented a bar that had what turned out to be a popular off night attraction for a lot of bars across the country on Monday nights that one fall. Customers would draw a ticket, and the winner got to throw a brick into a live TV set while Howard Cosell was speaking. Folks in Arizona didn’t have much love for Texans, but they despised Howie.

Hey, it was a simpler time, what can I say?

I liked Cosell at times, mostly for the half-time highlights, and Gifford too, even if he was bad. I always liked Meredith, even when I knew he was bored and finally left MNF to do other things, before making a comeback a few years later. He was funny, and a good old boy in the truest sense, and he was nobody’s fool, least of all Howard’s.

Thanks for the memories Dandy Don, "…all good things must end."

For What He's Werth

So much for the Nationals being out of play for free agents, by letting Adam Dunn get away.

7 years and $126 MM for 31 year old outfielder Jayson Werth reads like something only the Yankees would do. 

Mets GM, Sandy Alderson was stunned, and was heard to say "WTF?!?!"

Ryan Zimmerman, and long suffering Washington fans rejoice.  Yes Virginia (and it's environs), there is a Santa Claus...

Dear Red Sox fan-

I have a few questions.

Like having AGon for the holidays?

Yeah, I thought so. VMart was not the long-term answer at catcher, so he'd have to play 1st, or DH. And yeah, I'd rather have VMart than Papi at this point, but the Sox have some 2011 (Jeter-like?) tradition coming up too, with Ortiz, and we all know that Gonzalez has been their guy all along.  Do you think Ortiz would loved to get dissed like Jeter was?  Papi would die for 3 years at 17 million a year.  That one could get snarky, but that's "next year," right?
 
Regarding the rest, well, I really think they should let Papelbon walk, and give the job to Bard. With the 10 million they save, maybe they get a better catcher?  I mean are Saltalamacchia and Varitek the answer? "Salty" was hyped early on when he was with Atlanta and Texas, but the luster is off his star at this point. I think Paps needs a new home, plus Bard's stuff is nastier, and his price is a lot cheaper.
 
Re the two big bats, Crawford is two years younger than Werth, but will be more dollars. Werth would give them a right-handed bat they'll need, as they have to be out on Beltre now, right, with Youkilis moving back to 3rd, and Gonzalez at first? I wonder about Werth's ability to deal with Boston media? He seems to be a pretty quiet guy -- not very fan friendly?  Crawford is a stud. He's been a stud for a long time now. It’s been nice that Tampa Bay has had a good team. I don’t have to explain my Yankee hatred anymore to people that think I am a Boston fan.

I’ll tell you one true thing, and that’s that Boston better pray they get either Crawford or Werth to sign before Lee decides where he's going. If Lee signs with Texas, the Yankees may get so mad they sign every other free agent out there?

Hey, if Cliff Lee does sign with the Texas Rangers, the best starter left is Carl Pavano…you don’t think?

HOT STUFF off the Hot Stove

While San Diego GM Jeff Hoyer worked the Adrian Gonzalez deal with his ex-Boston employers with one hand, he made what could be another nice deal with the other. Aaron Harang signed a one-year deal with the Padres. As bad as his numbers have been at times in Cincinnati’s home run haven, a lot of those fly balls will result in outs at Petco. I look for a nice rebound for Harang in 2011, but don’t look for Heath Bell to be saving any of his games. Rumors out of San Diego have the Padres committed to trading him before the season.

A story out of Oakland on Friday had the A’s offering a huge deal to Adrian Beltre. I wonder what a "huge" deal is to Billy Beane? Of course they were also "on the verge" of signing Lance Berkman, and he ends up going to St. Louis on a one year, 8 MM deal. I heard that and immediately thought of how tired Colby Rasmus will be next season, chasing down all those fly balls that Berkman and Matt Holiday can’t get to.

With the Gonzalez trade, Boston moves Kevin Youkilis back to third base, and can now throw most of their remaining resources at Carl Crawford or Jayson Werth. They have already re-signed Jason Varitek as a back-up catcher, but do they really want to go with Jarrod Saltalamacchia as their #1 guy? He may be a post-hype break out at some point, or may only remain the MLB player with the most (6) syllables in a last name?

Earlier last week the World Series Champion Giants signed Miguel Tejada to play short, after the Dodgers took Juan Uribe to play the position for them. Jhonny Peralta re-ups to play short with the Tigers, and the Derek Jeter soap opera is done in the Bronx with his new deal. What ever happened to having a guy at the position that can actually get to ground balls?

STATS Inc. devised a number that measures the "Range factor" for fielding. It is determined by taking putouts + assists and dividing that number by 9 innings. It is one excellent way of judging how good (or bad) a fielder really is. It takes into account how many balls a player actually gets to, as opposed to just looking at what they did once they got a ball in their glove. In a list of all of MLB short stops last season, these are the range factor rankings for the 4 shortstops named above:

#59 is Peralta, in 46 games.
#66 is Tejada, in 58 games.
#87 is Uribe, in 103 games.
#89 is Jeter, in 151 games.

There is no way to sugarcoat this list – they all suck defensively. It’s hard for me to believe that any of them (except for Jeter) will remain the primary short stop for their teams in 2011.

Adrian Gonzalez is going to Boston

ESPN has just reported that San Diego is trading All Star first baseman Adrian Gonzalez to the Red Sox for a number of prospects.

There's one big bat they needed.  If they sign either Werth or Crawford, they'll weather the storm of losing Martinez, and probably losing Beltre.

No Mo (just more Pap) for Boston, Ozzie's donkey, and Sandy weeps

Baseball news has the Red Sox (reportedly) offering Yankee closer Mariano Rivera 30 MM over two years, and that they were prepared to let Jonathan Papelbon walk away.  Rivera decided to re-up with the Yankees, taking the same contract.  I think the Sox should let Pap walk anyway, and give the closer job to Daniel Bard.  With the money they save, maybe it'd help sign either Carl Crawford or Jayson Werth?

With the Angels apparently going after Crawford, and the Red Sox wanting him (or Werth, if they don't get Crawford), the best thing that could happen to LA and/or Boston is that the Yankees get Cliff Lee, hope Hal stuffs Hank in a trunk, and NY fails to sign either outfielder.  With the Sox losing Victor Martinez, and Adrian Beltre wanting too much, Boston could be a quiet city this summer if they don't get a big bat or two.  If the Rangers lose Lee, and the Angels sign Crawford, I still make Texas my pick to win the AL West.

Meanwhile...my main man Ozzie Guillen gets a donkey!  Yeah, the White Sox sign home run hitting meat-head Adam Dunn, and are still going hard to retain Paul Konerko.  Could be a lot more fireworks this summer in Chicago, and more jolly audio from Tom and the Hawk.  "Put it on the board....yes!"  I like the White Sox chances to win AL Central in 2011 more now, as Ozzie can only do so much cursing.

Does anyone else feel that the Mets new GM Sandy Alderson cried a bit (or a lot?) when Francisco Rodriguez pled guilty and avoided jail for pounding his girlfriend's dad?  I guess that now the Mets will have to pay him, which means they'll have to use him, which means Met fans will probably be weeping this summer.  All the curses have been used up, and Ozzie isn't likely to trade any.

Still (the) Greek to Them

It continues to amaze me that there are seemingly millions of people following sports that haven’t got a clue on how betting lines or odds are set for games.

I’d lay big odds* that 75% of the adults in this country who regularly watch NFL games have no idea how a betting service or a casino goes about setting the line, and why they set any specific number (or odds) on a game.

This is the line for the Houston Texans at Philadelphia Eagles NFL game tonight.

Houston       +8  (+300)   -115o  52
Philadelphia  -8   (-400)   -105u   52

I'd assume that at least 90% of the people that regularly watch NFL football know that in order to win a $5 bet with a friend while using the above line, the person taking the Eagles would have to “give 8 points” to the person taking Houston. The Eagles bettor needs to have Philly win by 9 or more, to win the bet. Take Houston and 8 points, and even if they lose by 7, you win. Philly by 8 and it’s a push.

Everyone knows all that stuff, right? Everyone knows what a “push” is on a bet? But what does all the other stuff mean?

I am going to conduct a small poll (or test) of folks I have contact with, and ask them some questions on the topic, and see what I get. I’ll try to gather answers from a good sample of folks. These are the questions I am going to be asking, and the points awarded for correct answers. 100 is an A. You need better than that for an A+. A score of 65 is needed to pass.

For 30 points:
What is a sports book’s objective when they set a point spread in a football game?

For 35 points:
What is the only reason why sports book’s care which team wins a game?

For 15-20 points:
In sports betting parlance, what do “juice” and “vig” mean?
One correct answer is worth 15 points. Two are worth 20 points.

For 15 points:
If someone had the ways and means to bet $100 on every NFL game in a season using the point spread from one specific sports book, what is the minimum percentage of bets they’d need to win to not lose money?

Extra credit: Again, in sports betting parlance, what does “middling” mean?

Comments? If you give answers, did you look them up first?

*Big odds would be 5-1.