Like all my Oscar rants, I will say I have not seen all the nominated films and in this terrible, terrible year for films I probably will not see any more except for Drive (I'll see it when it comes out this weekend on DVD). But nevertheless considering I'm able to write posts on the best television shows of the year and some music and fantasy sports and able to hold my own in an Oscar conversation, I think the fact that I have not seen Albert Nobbs and We Need To Talk About Kevin should give me a pass.
- Young Adult was by far and away the best film of 2011. It was made by Oscar veterans Jason Reitman (Juno, Up In The Air) and Diablo Cody (Juno) and starred Oscar veteran Charlize Theron (Monster). Yet it garnered absolutely no nominations. Hollywood hated the film which is absurd. The movie is not for everyone because it is purposefully not a feel good movie and purposefully left a sour taste in people's mouths at the end but so did No Country For Old Men and yet that swept the Oscars. I knew Hollywood hated the film so I knew Reitman would get screwed for Best Director and the film would get screwed for Best Picture but at minimum I thought it would get Best Original Screenplay and I had hoped Theron would squeak in as the 5th Best Actress slot. Instead, that went to Rooney Mara for The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. Clearly, Hollywood did not see the great Sweedish original. Patton Osawlt also got fucked for his great, nuanced performance in YA. Overall, the film is walking funny, Lisbeth Salander style because of what the Academy did to it (Sorry, that might have crossed the line. My bad.)
- I knew Brad Pitt was going to get nominated for his portrayal of Billy Beane in Moneyball and while it wasn't a lock, no one was surprised to see Jonah Hill get nominated for his portrayal of Peter Brand/ Paul DePodesta. But I was pleasantly surprised to see Moneyball get nominated for Best Picture as well. I know my fellow GOI authors disagree with me on the film and all four of us are biased by the movie because of our intense love of the Michael Lewis book but the film was great. All sports movies are about the underdog willing their way to win at all in the end but Moneyball was different. It took the GM's perspective and (spoiler alert) they lost in the first round of the playoffs. It redefined sports movies and I'm glad it got its due. I would have liked to have seen Bennett Miller get nominated for Best Director because I loved his style but after all the other nominations I knew that was too much to ask.
- I love Gary Oldman and I'm glad he got his due for his years of great work by getting a Best Actor nomination for his role in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. I also love Michael Fassbender but he did not get a Best Actor nomination for his role as a sex addict in the NC-17 rated Shame despite getting a BAFTA and Golden Globe nomination for his work. While I haven't seen Shame (it's extremely hard to see NC-17 rated movies because mainstream theaters refuse to show them and mainstream stores like Wal-Mart refuse to sell them) but when I do end up seeing Shame I'm sure I will say Fassbender got snubbed.
- Kristen Wiig can say she has an Oscar nomination! She and her writing partner Annie Mumolo get nominated for writing Bridesmaids. While I'm glad to see the Academy broadened their scope and nominated a raunchy comedy, I'm still a little bitter that it took them this long. Writers for The 40 Year Old Virgin, Knocked Up, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and especially Superbad did not get nominated for Best Original Screenplay and all were much more deserving than Wiig and Mumolo. Melissa McCarthy also got nominated for her role in Bridesmaids for Best Supporting Actress although this was no surprise. Not only did she get nominated in everything before this and stole the movie but the Academy has always looked kindly towards comedic actors getting nominated in supporting roles. Robert Downey Jr. got nominated in 2009 for his portrayal of an actor undergoing surgery to become a black man in Tropic Thunder and Marisa Tomei won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar in 1992 for her work in My Cousin Vinny.
- To much of people's dismay, Tilda Swinton did not get anything for her role in We Need To Talk About Kevin. Not that I was going to see the film anyways but now I definitely do not have to see it because it didn't get any nominations.
- The Artist is going to sweep the Oscars this year and to be honest it's hard to argue with it. It was very well made, the acting (especially by its two leads) were great, and I was surprisingly entertained by it. No one is going to get Hurt Locker'd this year. I will say that as good as The Artist is, I never want to see it again. It's a one and done for me.
- My girlfriend was trying to force me to see The Help when it came out in theaters. I said "no" because it looked stupid and cheezy and I said the only way I will see it is if it gets nominated for Oscars. Thinking only chicks would like the film and it wouldn't get anything, I was fairly confident I wouldn't have to see it. Now I have to go see it as it got nominated for Best Picture, Best Actress, and two Best Supporting Actresses. Damn.
Showing posts with label Rant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rant. Show all posts
NFL Free Agency Thoughts. Part I.
Maybe this will be like History of the World and not have a Part II. Or maybe this will be like Kill Bill. Who knows. Either way, Part I is awesome.
Was it in the new CBA that 50% of your roster in 2010 was not allowed to be on your roster in 2011? I understand there was a lockout and everything but I can't remember an offseason being this crazy. Ever. Who isn't a free agent? Or got traded? Or flat out released?
New England Patriots
- Chad Ochocinco reminds me a lot of another disgruntled Cincinnati Bengals player who went to New England and transformed the Patriots offense- RB Corey Dillon. Both Dillon and Ochocinco were great players who got bad raps unfairly. Dillon, like Ochocinco, was just upset at being in Cincy and just wanted out. Maybe he shouldn't have created a fuss in the press but ultimately he got his wish- a trade and a playoff ring. But Corey Dillon was 29 and still in his prime when he got traded. Chad is currently 33 and has looked really bad in the past two seasons. Dillon was just injured in his last season in Ohio. What's Ochocinco's excuse? Although having the great Tom Brady can do wonders for a person's career.
- On a recent podcast, Cubsfan said he's rank Braylon Edwards a top 5 wide out in fantasy if he signed with New England. I assume he'd feel pretty strongly about Ochocinco as well. I still don't trust it and won't draft Ochocinco, but I'm risk averse. I"m sure he'll be the next Randy Moss.
- DT Albert Haynesworth has always had the talent to be a top 3 DT in the game since leaving Tennessee. Washington tends to do that to players though- bring out the crapiness in players (Although in Rex Grossman's case, there was nothing to bring out. It was already there). In Belichick we trust. However, I do find it strange that Haynesworth threw a stink when he was forced to play nose tackle in the 3-4 scheme under Shanahan. I really hope Albert knows the Pats play in a 3-4 scheme. Plus the Pats have one of, if not the best, nose tackles in game in Vince Wilfork. This moves seems really strange.
- The Pats mold for winning championships was always having the best offense and defensive lines, linebackers who were hungry and versatile enough to play in Belichick's scheme and Tom Brady to win on the very last drive because the team really wasn't that good throughout the first 3.75 quarters. Didn't the Patriots learn from Adalius Thomas! Paying for free agents will always backfire in your face!
Philadelphia Eagles
- Two years ago Dominque Rodgers-Cromartie was a top two cornerback. Last year he wasn't even close to the mediocrity that his cousin (Antonio Cromartie) was. Gotta think he'll be back to his top self playing next to Asante Samuel. Although he'll still be like his cousin was last year in the sense that quarterbacks will still be targeting him because he's the second best CB on his team. However, very few teams can have the privilege of having the caliber and talent of a guy like ARC as their *number two* corner.
- The sun will rise tomorrow. Bill Belichick will give the most boring press conferences in the world. And Michael Vick will get hurt in 2011. If it was just for draft picks, the Eagles shouldn't have traded QB Kevin Kolb because they will absolutely need him for games next season. However, you could not have passed up a deal like what Arizona gave them.
- DE Jason Babin was one of the best pass rushers (if not the best. How often do you think I can say that phrase in this post? My over/under is 5. I'm at 2 now) in the game in 2010. However, he was on his 5th team last year and had his break out season at age 31. This is also his second go-around with the Eagles. I don't trust him moving forward and thought that was a dumb move signing Babin by the normally smart Eagles.
Quarterbacks
- If Washington Redskins fans hated Donovan McNabb boy they are going to love Rex Grossman
- Kevin Kolb can hit the broad side of a barn. He can throw a ball into the ocean and it will actually hit water. Sounds easy right? Well it was something Derek Anderson, Max Hall, and John Skelton could not do in 2010. Larry Fitzgerald is now a top ten fantasy wide out and will most likely go to the Pro Bowl in 2011. It looks like Early Doucet will play opposite of Fitzy which I don't like as much as if Steve Breaston was there. But hey, Steve Smith and Jake Delhomme went to a Superbowl and Pro Bowls together with less. (Less meaning Jake Delhomme was in the equation)
- McNabb and Christian Ponder both probably have the same skill set right now. McNabb's skill is declining while Ponder's skill is rising and right now they're meeting at the exact same spot. However, both suck and will suck long term. Have fun being in the cellar for the next couple of years Minnesota!
- Matt Hasselbeck will do his best Kerry Collins impression in Tennessee.
- Matt Leinart choose to stay in Houston as opposed to go to Seattle and be reunited with his college coach Pete Carrol. He claims he wanted to have a starting job and with Tavaris Jackson there that shot is lost. It makes sense because Matt Schaub is not even close to what Tavaris Jackson is. Matt Schuab wishes one day he could be Tavaris Jackson. Leinart had/has the talent to be a damn fine, if not great, starting quarterback (Three?). Instead he wants to be a perennial back up so he doesn't actually have to do shit and still gets to say to chicks that he's a professional football player to fuck them. It's a pussy-shit move on Leinart's part and of many in the storied career of the Heisman winner.
- In a post I wrote in February and re-wrote in last July, the best quarterback available this offseason is Kyle Orton. He has proven how good he is in both Chicago and Denver and can adapt to your system. I find it hard to believe that it's difficult to pry him away from Denver right now.
Chicago Bears
- This comes from a facebook status of a friend of mine:
- I actually don't mind getting rid of Greg Olson, it's what we got back that upsets me. Once I saw him get full playing time I started to grow weary and disdainful of him. TBO ragged on me for that for the past two years. Apparently the rest of the league knew what I knew as he gets traded only for a 3rd round draft pick. That's a bit ridiculous.
- With Olson gone I don't know who Jay Cutler is going to have butt sex with now. Is he going to have secret trysts, Brokeback Mountain style, to North Carolina? Maybe breaking up with KC was premature.
- The Bears do not need Olin Kruetz. He's way past his prime and he's 34 years old. He has not been good for years and the Bears do not need him. Being in Chicago I keep hearing the Bears do. ESPN radio host here in Chicago Carmen DeFalco was upset because the Cardinals signed center Kyle Sendlein (???) and he was to be the fall back plan if Kruetz doesn't sign with us. The Bears can trot out right now as an offensive line this year- Gabe Carimi, Chris Williams, Roberto Garza, J'Marcus Webb, and Frank Omiyale and it will still be better than our porous O-line from last year because we have Carimi. Either Webb or Garza an play center just as well as Kruetz did the past few seasons. So can you.
- A sidenote to my previous point- the New York Giants just released center Shaun O'Hara and G Rich Seubert. Both would be upgrades over what Chicago has now. Center Jonathan Goodwin (formerly of New Orleans) is also still available. Plenty of O-lineman still out there for the Bears to get.
- There are plenty of great wide outs still left as well. The Bears will not get any of them. The Rams should get a few if they're smart.
I know there are many, many, many, many more free agent stuff to talk about but I had to delete the word "quick" from the title of my post because this mofo is like three hours long. If I have time maybe some thoughts on guys like Reggie Bush, Takeo Spikes, and Sidney Rice. But for another time.
Was it in the new CBA that 50% of your roster in 2010 was not allowed to be on your roster in 2011? I understand there was a lockout and everything but I can't remember an offseason being this crazy. Ever. Who isn't a free agent? Or got traded? Or flat out released?
New England Patriots
- Chad Ochocinco reminds me a lot of another disgruntled Cincinnati Bengals player who went to New England and transformed the Patriots offense- RB Corey Dillon. Both Dillon and Ochocinco were great players who got bad raps unfairly. Dillon, like Ochocinco, was just upset at being in Cincy and just wanted out. Maybe he shouldn't have created a fuss in the press but ultimately he got his wish- a trade and a playoff ring. But Corey Dillon was 29 and still in his prime when he got traded. Chad is currently 33 and has looked really bad in the past two seasons. Dillon was just injured in his last season in Ohio. What's Ochocinco's excuse? Although having the great Tom Brady can do wonders for a person's career.
- On a recent podcast, Cubsfan said he's rank Braylon Edwards a top 5 wide out in fantasy if he signed with New England. I assume he'd feel pretty strongly about Ochocinco as well. I still don't trust it and won't draft Ochocinco, but I'm risk averse. I"m sure he'll be the next Randy Moss.
- DT Albert Haynesworth has always had the talent to be a top 3 DT in the game since leaving Tennessee. Washington tends to do that to players though- bring out the crapiness in players (Although in Rex Grossman's case, there was nothing to bring out. It was already there). In Belichick we trust. However, I do find it strange that Haynesworth threw a stink when he was forced to play nose tackle in the 3-4 scheme under Shanahan. I really hope Albert knows the Pats play in a 3-4 scheme. Plus the Pats have one of, if not the best, nose tackles in game in Vince Wilfork. This moves seems really strange.
- The Pats mold for winning championships was always having the best offense and defensive lines, linebackers who were hungry and versatile enough to play in Belichick's scheme and Tom Brady to win on the very last drive because the team really wasn't that good throughout the first 3.75 quarters. Didn't the Patriots learn from Adalius Thomas! Paying for free agents will always backfire in your face!
Philadelphia Eagles
- Two years ago Dominque Rodgers-Cromartie was a top two cornerback. Last year he wasn't even close to the mediocrity that his cousin (Antonio Cromartie) was. Gotta think he'll be back to his top self playing next to Asante Samuel. Although he'll still be like his cousin was last year in the sense that quarterbacks will still be targeting him because he's the second best CB on his team. However, very few teams can have the privilege of having the caliber and talent of a guy like ARC as their *number two* corner.
- The sun will rise tomorrow. Bill Belichick will give the most boring press conferences in the world. And Michael Vick will get hurt in 2011. If it was just for draft picks, the Eagles shouldn't have traded QB Kevin Kolb because they will absolutely need him for games next season. However, you could not have passed up a deal like what Arizona gave them.
- DE Jason Babin was one of the best pass rushers (if not the best. How often do you think I can say that phrase in this post? My over/under is 5. I'm at 2 now) in the game in 2010. However, he was on his 5th team last year and had his break out season at age 31. This is also his second go-around with the Eagles. I don't trust him moving forward and thought that was a dumb move signing Babin by the normally smart Eagles.
Quarterbacks
- If Washington Redskins fans hated Donovan McNabb boy they are going to love Rex Grossman
- Kevin Kolb can hit the broad side of a barn. He can throw a ball into the ocean and it will actually hit water. Sounds easy right? Well it was something Derek Anderson, Max Hall, and John Skelton could not do in 2010. Larry Fitzgerald is now a top ten fantasy wide out and will most likely go to the Pro Bowl in 2011. It looks like Early Doucet will play opposite of Fitzy which I don't like as much as if Steve Breaston was there. But hey, Steve Smith and Jake Delhomme went to a Superbowl and Pro Bowls together with less. (Less meaning Jake Delhomme was in the equation)
- McNabb and Christian Ponder both probably have the same skill set right now. McNabb's skill is declining while Ponder's skill is rising and right now they're meeting at the exact same spot. However, both suck and will suck long term. Have fun being in the cellar for the next couple of years Minnesota!
- Matt Hasselbeck will do his best Kerry Collins impression in Tennessee.
- Matt Leinart choose to stay in Houston as opposed to go to Seattle and be reunited with his college coach Pete Carrol. He claims he wanted to have a starting job and with Tavaris Jackson there that shot is lost. It makes sense because Matt Schaub is not even close to what Tavaris Jackson is. Matt Schuab wishes one day he could be Tavaris Jackson. Leinart had/has the talent to be a damn fine, if not great, starting quarterback (Three?). Instead he wants to be a perennial back up so he doesn't actually have to do shit and still gets to say to chicks that he's a professional football player to fuck them. It's a pussy-shit move on Leinart's part and of many in the storied career of the Heisman winner.
- In a post I wrote in February and re-wrote in last July, the best quarterback available this offseason is Kyle Orton. He has proven how good he is in both Chicago and Denver and can adapt to your system. I find it hard to believe that it's difficult to pry him away from Denver right now.
Chicago Bears
- This comes from a facebook status of a friend of mine:
Busy sports day! Getting rid of Maynard, Olsen, Manumaleuna, losing Daniel Manning, and possibly kreutz is not what worries me. What worries me is that many of the players that the Bears initially went after had no interest in the Bears. I think its time for the Bears to do a little Self-reflection and figure out why?Well, we know why- the Bears are a shit organization right now filled with shit leadership going all the way to the top.
- I actually don't mind getting rid of Greg Olson, it's what we got back that upsets me. Once I saw him get full playing time I started to grow weary and disdainful of him. TBO ragged on me for that for the past two years. Apparently the rest of the league knew what I knew as he gets traded only for a 3rd round draft pick. That's a bit ridiculous.
- With Olson gone I don't know who Jay Cutler is going to have butt sex with now. Is he going to have secret trysts, Brokeback Mountain style, to North Carolina? Maybe breaking up with KC was premature.
- The Bears do not need Olin Kruetz. He's way past his prime and he's 34 years old. He has not been good for years and the Bears do not need him. Being in Chicago I keep hearing the Bears do. ESPN radio host here in Chicago Carmen DeFalco was upset because the Cardinals signed center Kyle Sendlein (???) and he was to be the fall back plan if Kruetz doesn't sign with us. The Bears can trot out right now as an offensive line this year- Gabe Carimi, Chris Williams, Roberto Garza, J'Marcus Webb, and Frank Omiyale and it will still be better than our porous O-line from last year because we have Carimi. Either Webb or Garza an play center just as well as Kruetz did the past few seasons. So can you.
- A sidenote to my previous point- the New York Giants just released center Shaun O'Hara and G Rich Seubert. Both would be upgrades over what Chicago has now. Center Jonathan Goodwin (formerly of New Orleans) is also still available. Plenty of O-lineman still out there for the Bears to get.
- There are plenty of great wide outs still left as well. The Bears will not get any of them. The Rams should get a few if they're smart.
I know there are many, many, many, many more free agent stuff to talk about but I had to delete the word "quick" from the title of my post because this mofo is like three hours long. If I have time maybe some thoughts on guys like Reggie Bush, Takeo Spikes, and Sidney Rice. But for another time.
If I Could Turn Back Time: Oscars Editions
I was listening to a recent Bill Simmons podcast where he joked that like all Hall Of Fame voting, there needs to be a waiting period between when the movie comes out and when people actually get to vote on the Oscar nominations. Obviously this will never happen, but there's plenty of truth to this sentiment. After watching last Sunday's Oscars and seeing The Social Network getting fucked in the ass like a Hugh Grant hooker by The King's Speech, I'm really sick of the politicking that goes on in Hollywood for what wins and what does not.
Now I fully realize that my cries will fall on deaf ears. Not only is one blogger (who writes for a blog that no one reads) going to change anything, but like everything in life, the Oscars are driven by money. They need an award show to appeal to the masses. They nominate movies in order to help those movies make money. What can I say though, I have a great medium to bitch, so bitch I shall.
Part of the reason the Oscars are this way is because that's how it's always been. The format for nominating movies, the way the award ceremonies go, and even what type of hosts and speeches should be performed. It's all essentially more of the same.
Well that's not an acceptable excuse here at Game Of Inches (and really shouldn't be an acceptable excuse anywhere). Whether it's the way we look at baseball and football statistics or the way we look at the Oscars and its ceremony. If the old way of doing things is not the best result, then the old way of doing things should not be done.
Did Hugh Grant ever have anal sex with a prostitute? I don't know. Anyways, here's a list of the films and nominees that got screwed out of awards at the time and with the ability of foresight, we can now saw the Academy got it wrong.
BEST MOVIE
1941
What Should Have Won: Citizen Kane
What Did Win: How Green Was My Valley
1964
What Should Have Won: Dr. Strangelove
What Did Win: My Fair Lady
1971
What Should Have Won: A Clockwork Orange
What Did Win: The French Connection
1977
What Should Have Won: Star Wars
What Did Win: Annie Hall
1979
What Should Have Won It: Apocalypse Now
What Did Win: Kramer vs. Kramer
1980
What Should Have Won: Raging Bull
What Did Win: Ordinary People
1990
What Should Have Won: Goodfellas
What Did Win: Dances With Wolves
1994
What Should Have Won: (1a) The Shawshank Redemption, (1b) Pulp Fiction
What Did Win: Forrest Gump
1996
What Should Have Won: Fargo
What Did Win: The English Patient
1997
What Should Have Won: Good Will Hunting
What Did Win: Titanic
1998
What Should Have Won: Saving Private Ryan
What Did Win: Shakespeare In Love
2008
What Should Have Won: The Dark Knight*
What Did Win: Slumdog Millionaire
2009
What Should Have Won: Inglorious Basterds
What Did Win: The Hurt Locker
I will say that between The Hurt Locker and Avatar, I'm super glad The Hurt Locker took it, but I can't believe how screwed Tarintino was in 2009
2010
What Should Have Won: (1a) The Social Network (1b) Inception
What Did Win: The King's Speech
There are definitely more films that got screwed (especially movies from 2001-2010) but up above were a few I found the most egregious.
Some other notables that got "screwed'. These are films that got left off of the All-Star team and I wish they made it on but I'm content with them being left off: There Will Be Blood (2007), Mystic River (2003), The Sixth Sense (1999), E.T. (1982), Jaws (1975), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Chinatown (1974), The Exorcist (1973), The Graduate (1967), To Kill A Mockingbird (1962), 12 Angry Men (1957), Sunset Blvd (1950), and The Maltese Falcon (1941) (has the unfortunate luck (for the sake of this post) to go up against the greatest movie ever made in Citizen Kane. Also goes to show you what a crock it was for How Green Was My Valley to win anything).
BEST DIRECTOR
1941
Who Should Have Won: Orson Wells (Citizen Kane)
Who Did Win: John Ford (How Green Was My Valley)
SIDENOTE: I get upset nowadays with Oscar voters but one thing that's just unacceptable was how screwed Citizen Kane was during the 1941 Oscars. You may not have liked the movie, the movie may not even hold up anymore, but the reason films and movies and directors do what they do today was because of Orson Wells and Citizen Kane. Wells revolutionized film making and I have to imagine people who saw the movie at the time realized the great piece of cinema that is Citizen Kane- and yet snubbed it.
1960
Who Should Have Won: Alfred Hitchcock (Psycho)
Who Did Win: Billy Wilder (The Apartment)
1963
Who Should Have Won: Federico Fellini (8 1/2)
Who Did Win: Tony Richardson (Tom Jones)
1968
Who Should Have Won: Stanley Kubrick (2001: A Space Odyssey)
Who Did Win: Carol Reed (Oliver!)
1971
Who Should Have Won: Stanley Kurbick (A Clockwork Orange)
Who Did Win: William Friedkin (The French Connection)
1972
Who Should Have Won: Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather)
Who Did Win: Bob Fosse (Cabaret)
1980
Who Should Have Won: Martin Scorsese (Raging Bull)
Who Did Win: Robert Redford (Ordinary People)
1994
Who Should Have Won: Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction)
Who Did Win: Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump)
While I absolutely still think Taratino should have won this award no matter what, it's a damn travesty that Frank Darabont didn't even get a directing nod for The Shawshank Redemption.
1996
Who Should Have Won: Joel Coen (Fargo)
Who Did Win: Anthony Minghella (The English Patient)
1997
Who Should Have Won It: Gus Van Sant (Good Will Hunting)
Who Did Win It: James Cameron (Titanic)
2009
Who Should Have Won: Quentin Tarantino (Inglorious Basterds)
Who Did Win: Katheryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker)
2010
Who Should Have Won: David Fincher (The Social Network)
Who Did Win: Tom Hooper (The King's Speech)
There are some other notables that I think deserved to win but them losing the Oscar really wasn't THAT big of a deal. I personally think Jonathan Dayton and Valarie Faris (Little Miss Sunshine) had the best directed movie in 2006 but at that point in time, because the Oscar's were so dumb and Scorsese hadn't yet won an Oscar, it had to go to him. Plus, Dayton and Feris weren't nominated.
Other notables who got "screwed": Ridley Scott (Black Hawk Down, Gladiator), David Lynch (Blue Velvet, Mulholland Drive, The Elephant Man), M. Night Shyamlan (The Sixth Sense), Martin Scorsese (Raging Bull, Casino, Goodfellas, Gangs Of New York), Francis Ford Coppola (Apocalypse Now), Sidney Lument (Dog Day Afternoon, Network, The Verdict), P.T. Anderson (There Will Be Blood, Boogie Nights*), Robert Altman (Short Cuts, Nashville), Darren Aronofsky (Requim For A Dream*, The Wrestler*) and Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight*, Inception*, Memento*, Batman Begins*, The Prestige*) who has never even gotten a best director nomination.
*Not nominated
Now I fully realize that my cries will fall on deaf ears. Not only is one blogger (who writes for a blog that no one reads) going to change anything, but like everything in life, the Oscars are driven by money. They need an award show to appeal to the masses. They nominate movies in order to help those movies make money. What can I say though, I have a great medium to bitch, so bitch I shall.
Part of the reason the Oscars are this way is because that's how it's always been. The format for nominating movies, the way the award ceremonies go, and even what type of hosts and speeches should be performed. It's all essentially more of the same.
Well that's not an acceptable excuse here at Game Of Inches (and really shouldn't be an acceptable excuse anywhere). Whether it's the way we look at baseball and football statistics or the way we look at the Oscars and its ceremony. If the old way of doing things is not the best result, then the old way of doing things should not be done.
Did Hugh Grant ever have anal sex with a prostitute? I don't know. Anyways, here's a list of the films and nominees that got screwed out of awards at the time and with the ability of foresight, we can now saw the Academy got it wrong.
BEST MOVIE
1941
What Should Have Won: Citizen Kane
What Did Win: How Green Was My Valley
1964
What Should Have Won: Dr. Strangelove
What Did Win: My Fair Lady
1971
What Should Have Won: A Clockwork Orange
What Did Win: The French Connection
1977
What Should Have Won: Star Wars
What Did Win: Annie Hall
1979
What Should Have Won It: Apocalypse Now
What Did Win: Kramer vs. Kramer
1980
What Should Have Won: Raging Bull
What Did Win: Ordinary People
1990
What Should Have Won: Goodfellas
What Did Win: Dances With Wolves
1994
What Should Have Won: (1a) The Shawshank Redemption, (1b) Pulp Fiction
What Did Win: Forrest Gump
1996
What Should Have Won: Fargo
What Did Win: The English Patient
1997
What Should Have Won: Good Will Hunting
What Did Win: Titanic
1998
What Should Have Won: Saving Private Ryan
What Did Win: Shakespeare In Love
2008
What Should Have Won: The Dark Knight*
What Did Win: Slumdog Millionaire
2009
What Should Have Won: Inglorious Basterds
What Did Win: The Hurt Locker
I will say that between The Hurt Locker and Avatar, I'm super glad The Hurt Locker took it, but I can't believe how screwed Tarintino was in 2009
2010
What Should Have Won: (1a) The Social Network (1b) Inception
What Did Win: The King's Speech
There are definitely more films that got screwed (especially movies from 2001-2010) but up above were a few I found the most egregious.
Some other notables that got "screwed'. These are films that got left off of the All-Star team and I wish they made it on but I'm content with them being left off: There Will Be Blood (2007), Mystic River (2003), The Sixth Sense (1999), E.T. (1982), Jaws (1975), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Chinatown (1974), The Exorcist (1973), The Graduate (1967), To Kill A Mockingbird (1962), 12 Angry Men (1957), Sunset Blvd (1950), and The Maltese Falcon (1941) (has the unfortunate luck (for the sake of this post) to go up against the greatest movie ever made in Citizen Kane. Also goes to show you what a crock it was for How Green Was My Valley to win anything).
BEST DIRECTOR
1941
Who Should Have Won: Orson Wells (Citizen Kane)
Who Did Win: John Ford (How Green Was My Valley)
SIDENOTE: I get upset nowadays with Oscar voters but one thing that's just unacceptable was how screwed Citizen Kane was during the 1941 Oscars. You may not have liked the movie, the movie may not even hold up anymore, but the reason films and movies and directors do what they do today was because of Orson Wells and Citizen Kane. Wells revolutionized film making and I have to imagine people who saw the movie at the time realized the great piece of cinema that is Citizen Kane- and yet snubbed it.
1960
Who Should Have Won: Alfred Hitchcock (Psycho)
Who Did Win: Billy Wilder (The Apartment)
1963
Who Should Have Won: Federico Fellini (8 1/2)
Who Did Win: Tony Richardson (Tom Jones)
1968
Who Should Have Won: Stanley Kubrick (2001: A Space Odyssey)
Who Did Win: Carol Reed (Oliver!)
1971
Who Should Have Won: Stanley Kurbick (A Clockwork Orange)
Who Did Win: William Friedkin (The French Connection)
1972
Who Should Have Won: Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather)
Who Did Win: Bob Fosse (Cabaret)
1980
Who Should Have Won: Martin Scorsese (Raging Bull)
Who Did Win: Robert Redford (Ordinary People)
1994
Who Should Have Won: Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction)
Who Did Win: Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump)
While I absolutely still think Taratino should have won this award no matter what, it's a damn travesty that Frank Darabont didn't even get a directing nod for The Shawshank Redemption.
1996
Who Should Have Won: Joel Coen (Fargo)
Who Did Win: Anthony Minghella (The English Patient)
1997
Who Should Have Won It: Gus Van Sant (Good Will Hunting)
Who Did Win It: James Cameron (Titanic)
2009
Who Should Have Won: Quentin Tarantino (Inglorious Basterds)
Who Did Win: Katheryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker)
2010
Who Should Have Won: David Fincher (The Social Network)
Who Did Win: Tom Hooper (The King's Speech)
There are some other notables that I think deserved to win but them losing the Oscar really wasn't THAT big of a deal. I personally think Jonathan Dayton and Valarie Faris (Little Miss Sunshine) had the best directed movie in 2006 but at that point in time, because the Oscar's were so dumb and Scorsese hadn't yet won an Oscar, it had to go to him. Plus, Dayton and Feris weren't nominated.
Other notables who got "screwed": Ridley Scott (Black Hawk Down, Gladiator), David Lynch (Blue Velvet, Mulholland Drive, The Elephant Man), M. Night Shyamlan (The Sixth Sense), Martin Scorsese (Raging Bull, Casino, Goodfellas, Gangs Of New York), Francis Ford Coppola (Apocalypse Now), Sidney Lument (Dog Day Afternoon, Network, The Verdict), P.T. Anderson (There Will Be Blood, Boogie Nights*), Robert Altman (Short Cuts, Nashville), Darren Aronofsky (Requim For A Dream*, The Wrestler*) and Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight*, Inception*, Memento*, Batman Begins*, The Prestige*) who has never even gotten a best director nomination.
*Not nominated
Quick 2011 Oscar Rant
- Did Christopher Nolan sleep with the Academy's girlfriend or something!? Why does he keep getting fucked? First the greatest movie of the past decade- The Dark Knight- doesn't get a Best Picture nomination and Nolan doesn't get a Best Director nomination for the movie. Now, Nolan doesn't get nominated for Best Director for Inception. I was talking with a co-worker of mine when the 2009 Oscar nominations came out and we were both discussing how TDK got screwed and he said to me, "The reason The Dark Knight made so much money was not because of movie hype or anything like that, but because it was good." And that's a great point. Movies like The Matrix 2 and Transformers 2 made so much money not because they were good, but because they had media hype and people loved their prequel (and to a lesser extent Avatar had this same effect- a not good movie making lot and lots o' money). But The Dark Knight made so much money because of the great quality of the movie.
- Not only do I think Nolan should have at least gotten a Best Director nod over David O. Russell (The Fighter), I thought Russell did a bad job directing the movie. That first scene where Mark Wahlberg and Christian Bale are walking through the streets was piss poor directing and the whole first half of the movie I thought was so bad that it almost took me out of the movie.
- Although The Dark Knight absolutely would have gotten a Best Picture nod if the Academy had nominated 10 movies like they did last year and now this year, I hate nominating 10 over 5. I think it takes away from the prestige of getting nominated for Best Picture. Although I'm sure Nolan loves it because I'm convinced Inception wouldn't have gotten nominated with the five movie format.
- Inception deserved every single Oscar nomination except for the four acting awards (because the acting was pretty bad in the movie). Yes, it even deserved the nomination for Best Animated Short and Best Foreign Language Film.
- The Social Network is going to sweep the Oscar's this year. It's going to win Best Picture and Best Director (David Fincher). Now I liked The Social Network a lot. In fact, the first time I saw it I thought to myself "Hmmm, I don't know which one I liked more, Inception or this?". So the fact that's it's going to beat out the best movie of the year- Inception- is actually fine with me. And I like David Fincher a lot (Se7en, Fight Club, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) so I'm glad to see (fingers cross) him get an Oscar.
- I would have liked to see TSN gotten a Best Supporting Actor nomination. I thought Justin Timberlake (who played Sean Parker) was fabulous in it and I would have liked to seen him get critical support. Andrew Garfield (who played Eduardo) got a Golden Globe nomination for Best Supporting Actor so I thought for sure he was going to get the Oscar nod as well. Hell, I also would have been fine with Armie Hammer (the guy who played both Winklevoss twins) get the nod. Either way, SOMEONE from that movie deserved at least one of the nominations.
- Although I haven't seen The King's Speech and Colin Firth's performance, I absolutely loved Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network. He's such an asshole (as seen in the opening scene where he's bantering with his then girlfriend) but he put so much depth into Mark Zuckerberg that deep down inside this is a just a nerdy, socially awkward kid who just wants to be liked. And don't we all feel that way. (At least in the movie character of Zuckerberg).
- I'm really happy Despicable Me did not get a Best Animated Movie nomination. It was a really bad movie in general and I'm glad to see How To Train Your Dragon did get a nod.
- Back to my Inception rant, it didn't get every technical award. It didn't get Best Editing!
- I saw the documentary Restrepo- a movie about an American army unit deep in enemy territory in Afghanistan where early on a soldier named Restrepo died- and it was really bad. I normally don't watch documentaries but every Oscar nominated documentary I've seen in the past 7 years I've loved or enjoyed. I guess Retrepo is now the exception. I heard great things about the movie Waiting For Superman and although I haven't seen it so I can't fully judge, it probably deserved the nomination over Retrepo.
- I can't decide which score I liked more. Nine Inch Nail's Trent Reznor's score in The Social Network or Hans Zimmer score in Inception that kept you on the edge of your seat for the five hours that damn white van was falling off of the bridge.
Here's who I think will win
Best Picture: The Social Network
Best Director: David Fincher (The Social Network)
Best Actor: Colin Firth (The King's Speech)
Best Actress: Natalie Portman (Black Swan)
Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale (The Fighter)
Best Supporting Actress: Melissa Leo (The Fighter)
Best Screenplay (Adapted): Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network)
Best Screenplay (Original): David Seidler (The King's Speech)
Best Animated Movie: Toy Story 3
Best Foreign Language Film: Mexico (Biutiful)
Best Cinematography: Wally Pfister (Inception)
Best Editing: Kirk Baxter, Angus Wall (The Social Network)
Best Art Direction: Inception
Best Costume Design: Jenny Beavan (The King's Speech)
Best Make Up: Rich Baker, Dave Elsey (The Wolfman)
Best Score: Trent Reznor, Atticus Ross (The Social Network)
Best Original Song: "Coming Home" (Country Strong)
Best Sound Mixing: Inception
Best Sound Editing: Richard King (Inception)
Best Visual Effects: Inception
Best Documentary: Lucy Walker, Angus Aynsley (Waste Land)
To me, the wild card in this whole race is The King's Speech. Not only did it garnish the most nominations, but it seems the Academy really loves lumping movies in with each other for wins. Let me explain via examples.
Last year, after Precious started building up steam, getting nominations, and Mo'Nique winning Best Supporting Actress, the Best Screenplay went to Geofrey Fletcher for Precious over the more deserving Jason Reitman an original leading front runner for Up In The Air. And with The Hurt Locker getting a nomination for Best Actor and winning Best Movie and Best Director (Kathryn Bigelow) it also stole the Best Screenplay Award from Quentin Tarintino (Inglorious Basterds).
In 2007, it was lock that Martin Scorsese was going to win Best Director for The Departed (which he did) but the movie rode that wave and took the Best Movie award as well over what was thought to be a lock for Little Miss Sunshine.
The point is, that The King's Speech is picking up steam at just the right time (as shown by its many nominations). However, The Social Network just won Golden Globes for Best Movie, Best Director, and Best Screenplay. Luckily for these two movies one is an adapted screenplay and one is an original so both movies that can that award but I think either the Best Director and Best Movie locks for The Social Network will spill over into a win for Jesse Eisenberg but I think most likely will happen is this King's Speech steam will steal either a Best Movie or Best Director award. Or both.
________________
I guess this wasn't "quick" huh?
- Not only do I think Nolan should have at least gotten a Best Director nod over David O. Russell (The Fighter), I thought Russell did a bad job directing the movie. That first scene where Mark Wahlberg and Christian Bale are walking through the streets was piss poor directing and the whole first half of the movie I thought was so bad that it almost took me out of the movie.
- Although The Dark Knight absolutely would have gotten a Best Picture nod if the Academy had nominated 10 movies like they did last year and now this year, I hate nominating 10 over 5. I think it takes away from the prestige of getting nominated for Best Picture. Although I'm sure Nolan loves it because I'm convinced Inception wouldn't have gotten nominated with the five movie format.
- Inception deserved every single Oscar nomination except for the four acting awards (because the acting was pretty bad in the movie). Yes, it even deserved the nomination for Best Animated Short and Best Foreign Language Film.
- The Social Network is going to sweep the Oscar's this year. It's going to win Best Picture and Best Director (David Fincher). Now I liked The Social Network a lot. In fact, the first time I saw it I thought to myself "Hmmm, I don't know which one I liked more, Inception or this?". So the fact that's it's going to beat out the best movie of the year- Inception- is actually fine with me. And I like David Fincher a lot (Se7en, Fight Club, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) so I'm glad to see (fingers cross) him get an Oscar.
- I would have liked to see TSN gotten a Best Supporting Actor nomination. I thought Justin Timberlake (who played Sean Parker) was fabulous in it and I would have liked to seen him get critical support. Andrew Garfield (who played Eduardo) got a Golden Globe nomination for Best Supporting Actor so I thought for sure he was going to get the Oscar nod as well. Hell, I also would have been fine with Armie Hammer (the guy who played both Winklevoss twins) get the nod. Either way, SOMEONE from that movie deserved at least one of the nominations.
- Although I haven't seen The King's Speech and Colin Firth's performance, I absolutely loved Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network. He's such an asshole (as seen in the opening scene where he's bantering with his then girlfriend) but he put so much depth into Mark Zuckerberg that deep down inside this is a just a nerdy, socially awkward kid who just wants to be liked. And don't we all feel that way. (At least in the movie character of Zuckerberg).
- I'm really happy Despicable Me did not get a Best Animated Movie nomination. It was a really bad movie in general and I'm glad to see How To Train Your Dragon did get a nod.
- Back to my Inception rant, it didn't get every technical award. It didn't get Best Editing!
- I saw the documentary Restrepo- a movie about an American army unit deep in enemy territory in Afghanistan where early on a soldier named Restrepo died- and it was really bad. I normally don't watch documentaries but every Oscar nominated documentary I've seen in the past 7 years I've loved or enjoyed. I guess Retrepo is now the exception. I heard great things about the movie Waiting For Superman and although I haven't seen it so I can't fully judge, it probably deserved the nomination over Retrepo.
- I can't decide which score I liked more. Nine Inch Nail's Trent Reznor's score in The Social Network or Hans Zimmer score in Inception that kept you on the edge of your seat for the five hours that damn white van was falling off of the bridge.
Here's who I think will win
Best Picture: The Social Network
Best Director: David Fincher (The Social Network)
Best Actor: Colin Firth (The King's Speech)
Best Actress: Natalie Portman (Black Swan)
Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale (The Fighter)
Best Supporting Actress: Melissa Leo (The Fighter)
Best Screenplay (Adapted): Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network)
Best Screenplay (Original): David Seidler (The King's Speech)
Best Animated Movie: Toy Story 3
Best Foreign Language Film: Mexico (Biutiful)
Best Cinematography: Wally Pfister (Inception)
Best Editing: Kirk Baxter, Angus Wall (The Social Network)
Best Art Direction: Inception
Best Costume Design: Jenny Beavan (The King's Speech)
Best Make Up: Rich Baker, Dave Elsey (The Wolfman)
Best Score: Trent Reznor, Atticus Ross (The Social Network)
Best Original Song: "Coming Home" (Country Strong)
Best Sound Mixing: Inception
Best Sound Editing: Richard King (Inception)
Best Visual Effects: Inception
Best Documentary: Lucy Walker, Angus Aynsley (Waste Land)
To me, the wild card in this whole race is The King's Speech. Not only did it garnish the most nominations, but it seems the Academy really loves lumping movies in with each other for wins. Let me explain via examples.
Last year, after Precious started building up steam, getting nominations, and Mo'Nique winning Best Supporting Actress, the Best Screenplay went to Geofrey Fletcher for Precious over the more deserving Jason Reitman an original leading front runner for Up In The Air. And with The Hurt Locker getting a nomination for Best Actor and winning Best Movie and Best Director (Kathryn Bigelow) it also stole the Best Screenplay Award from Quentin Tarintino (Inglorious Basterds).
In 2007, it was lock that Martin Scorsese was going to win Best Director for The Departed (which he did) but the movie rode that wave and took the Best Movie award as well over what was thought to be a lock for Little Miss Sunshine.
The point is, that The King's Speech is picking up steam at just the right time (as shown by its many nominations). However, The Social Network just won Golden Globes for Best Movie, Best Director, and Best Screenplay. Luckily for these two movies one is an adapted screenplay and one is an original so both movies that can that award but I think either the Best Director and Best Movie locks for The Social Network will spill over into a win for Jesse Eisenberg but I think most likely will happen is this King's Speech steam will steal either a Best Movie or Best Director award. Or both.
________________
I guess this wasn't "quick" huh?
Is Cliff Lee A Top Five Starting Pitcher?
A friend of mine and myself were at a bar about a week or so ago and got into a pretty heated, but interesting debate that I would like to extend to the rest of the internet and blogosphere: is Cliff Lee a top five starting pitcher in the major leagues? Clearly he is the top crop pitcher of the FA pool, but is he one of the five best in all of baseball? My friend says yes, and I say no, though I feel Lee is top ten.
Here is my list of the top fifteen starting pitchers in baseball (based on age, talent and durability -- salaries are ignored):
Leave the answers in the comments section.
Here is my list of the top fifteen starting pitchers in baseball (based on age, talent and durability -- salaries are ignored):
- Felix Hernandez
- Tim Lincecum
- Roy Halladay
- Adam Wainwright
- C.C. Sabathia
- Josh Johnson
- Jon Lester
- Cliff Lee
- Jered Weaver
- Justin Verlander
- Ubaldo Jimenez
- Dan Haren
- Francisco Liriano
- Max Scherzer
- Mat Latos (yes, I really believe he is that good)
Leave the answers in the comments section.
Quick ROY Rant
Can someone please explain to me why Steven Strasburg received no NL ROY votes? I presume it is because he "only" tossed 68 innings this season. However, that Neftali Feliz guy who won the AL ROY award only tossed 69 innings. What, is 69 the magic number all of the sudden here (hehe, I said 69)? I find this outcome quite perplexing.
According to Fangraphs' WAR system, Strasburg was worth +2.6 WAR in his limited pitching role for the Nationals this year. That extrapolates to approximately an +8.0 WAR full season. Now I realize that awards on not based on extrapolated values, but the logic of ROY voting befuddles me here on two accounts. First, Strasburg gets 0 votes, while Netali Feliz, in a mere +1.7 WAR showing, takes the AL ROY cake. Second, following the theme of voters should ignore extrapolated values, how in the hell did Buster Posey (+3.9 WAR) beat out Jason Heyward (+5.0 WAR) for the NL ROY award? And don't tell me it was because Posey was a catcher, because WAR factors in relative positions. Heyward got a -6.2 run positional adjustment off his bottom line, while Posey got a +3.5 run bump. With this extra WAR considered, Heyward was still more than a full win more valuable. In the absolute context of 5.0 versus 3.9, the 1.1 WAR differential may not seem like much. However, in terms of relative value, Heyward was 22% more valuable this season. So no matter how you argue it -- that we are not looking at extrapolated value or that we ARE looking at extrapolated value -- the voters got the NL ROY award wrong. Plain and simple, no argument to be made to the contrary.
Don't like WAR?
Heyward was also better than Posey in WPA, was more clutch (per Fangraph's leverage-indexed "Clutch" rating). Heyward's 91 walks this season is also top ten all time for a single-season for a player under age 21 (in good company with guys like A-Rod). Heyward also has better minor league numbers, better MLE numbers, better major league numbers, was a comparable defender (if we ignore position), produced more batting runs...Really, Posey only beat Heyward in K%...the power output for the two players was comparable this season and Heyward's numbers to date (and pedigree) indicate that he has the clear power upside.
Don't like WAR?
Heyward was also better than Posey in WPA, was more clutch (per Fangraph's leverage-indexed "Clutch" rating). Heyward's 91 walks this season is also top ten all time for a single-season for a player under age 21 (in good company with guys like A-Rod). Heyward also has better minor league numbers, better MLE numbers, better major league numbers, was a comparable defender (if we ignore position), produced more batting runs...Really, Posey only beat Heyward in K%...the power output for the two players was comparable this season and Heyward's numbers to date (and pedigree) indicate that he has the clear power upside.
Also, I think that AL ROY voters are too obsessed with relief pitching.
Ugh. I have a headache.
A Quick Rant About The NL DH
My always interesting college Anna McDonald posed an interested thought earlier today about the NL and the use of a DH in the World Series. Implicitly, she posed the question of whether the DH was an advantage or disadvantage for NL teams.
En point, I rant accordingly, and conclude that it does.
The average NL team's starting line up consists of eight hitters and a pitcher who also bats. The "ninth" hitter for NL teams is a bench player. Given the fact that pitchers generally cannot hit and that bench players see limited and infrequent playing time, an NL team trying to optimize their starting lineup has little incentive to "pimp out" the bench. Rather, an NL team has an incentive to focus their resources on maximizing the talents of their other eight starting hitters. A team's batting resources, therefore, will be primarily focused on eight hitters, with the residual going to the bench -- which optimally is designed to be deep rather than feature a "stud."
On the other hand, the AL has seven starting hitters (thanks to the DH) and hence has an incentive to invest in that ninth hitter, who is essentially a "batting specialist." There is less of a focus on the "deep bench," instead finding an effective ninth hitter to slot into the daily line up.
Thus, comparing the AL to the NL, one notes a clear difference in strategy due to the league's traditional lineup composure: the NL has an incentive to maximize the primary eight hitters and diversify the remaining resources amongst the bench, while the AL has an incentive to spend on nine hitters (creating a polarity between the NL's 9th guy and the NL's 9th guy).
So what is the point?
Well, this explains, in part (the other part being sample size), why the average NL DH (as derived from interleague play) tends to function less effectively than their AL counterpart. In 2010, for example, the average major league DH hit for a .699 OPS, while the average AL DH hit for a .757 OPS.
in 2010. NL DH's hit for a .649 OPS. This makes sense because NL teams focus on bench depth, not having a best "#10 hitter", whereas the AL invest directly in their DH (he plays regularly). Meanwhile, the average NL DH only hit for a .649 OPS. This disparity is also observable in 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, and so on (2009 seems to be an exception...).
This of course, noting the above incentive structure, make sense. NL teams, who use pinch hitters more frequently than a "ninth hitter" have a greater incentive to diversify the bench than polarize said resources in a "reliable" ninth hitter. Meanwhile, AL teams have a pervasive need for a "reliable" ninth hitter. Furthermore, the AL has a hitting specialist whose sole value derives from his batting skills, whereas the NL's ninth, tenth and eleventh batters all derive value not just from batting, but also playing the field. This is because 1) there is no DH in the NL and because a fielding pinch hitters gives an NL manager greater lineup flexibility. Thus, it makes more sense that the AL's DH would be of higher quality than the average NL DH.
In terms of the World Series, therefore, it is the AL who inherently gains the advantage through the use of the DH. Whereas both teams may have equally poor hitting pitchers, the AL teams tend to have the clear upper hand in terms of ninth hitters. Of course, this assumes that the distribution of potential talent between teams is uniform, which is ridiculous to say the least, but it indicates that in a vacuum, between two teams with equal access to talent, the AL has an upper hand at the plate when they play at home.
Or maybe none of this makes a lick of sense. That is also entirely plausible.
En point, I rant accordingly, and conclude that it does.
The average NL team's starting line up consists of eight hitters and a pitcher who also bats. The "ninth" hitter for NL teams is a bench player. Given the fact that pitchers generally cannot hit and that bench players see limited and infrequent playing time, an NL team trying to optimize their starting lineup has little incentive to "pimp out" the bench. Rather, an NL team has an incentive to focus their resources on maximizing the talents of their other eight starting hitters. A team's batting resources, therefore, will be primarily focused on eight hitters, with the residual going to the bench -- which optimally is designed to be deep rather than feature a "stud."
On the other hand, the AL has seven starting hitters (thanks to the DH) and hence has an incentive to invest in that ninth hitter, who is essentially a "batting specialist." There is less of a focus on the "deep bench," instead finding an effective ninth hitter to slot into the daily line up.
Thus, comparing the AL to the NL, one notes a clear difference in strategy due to the league's traditional lineup composure: the NL has an incentive to maximize the primary eight hitters and diversify the remaining resources amongst the bench, while the AL has an incentive to spend on nine hitters (creating a polarity between the NL's 9th guy and the NL's 9th guy).
So what is the point?
Well, this explains, in part (the other part being sample size), why the average NL DH (as derived from interleague play) tends to function less effectively than their AL counterpart. In 2010, for example, the average major league DH hit for a .699 OPS, while the average AL DH hit for a .757 OPS.
in 2010. NL DH's hit for a .649 OPS. This makes sense because NL teams focus on bench depth, not having a best "#10 hitter", whereas the AL invest directly in their DH (he plays regularly). Meanwhile, the average NL DH only hit for a .649 OPS. This disparity is also observable in 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, and so on (2009 seems to be an exception...).
This of course, noting the above incentive structure, make sense. NL teams, who use pinch hitters more frequently than a "ninth hitter" have a greater incentive to diversify the bench than polarize said resources in a "reliable" ninth hitter. Meanwhile, AL teams have a pervasive need for a "reliable" ninth hitter. Furthermore, the AL has a hitting specialist whose sole value derives from his batting skills, whereas the NL's ninth, tenth and eleventh batters all derive value not just from batting, but also playing the field. This is because 1) there is no DH in the NL and because a fielding pinch hitters gives an NL manager greater lineup flexibility. Thus, it makes more sense that the AL's DH would be of higher quality than the average NL DH.
In terms of the World Series, therefore, it is the AL who inherently gains the advantage through the use of the DH. Whereas both teams may have equally poor hitting pitchers, the AL teams tend to have the clear upper hand in terms of ninth hitters. Of course, this assumes that the distribution of potential talent between teams is uniform, which is ridiculous to say the least, but it indicates that in a vacuum, between two teams with equal access to talent, the AL has an upper hand at the plate when they play at home.
Or maybe none of this makes a lick of sense. That is also entirely plausible.
Facts of Life: Kenny Williams' Big Mistake
The White Sox decided to experiment with their DH spot in 2010. Instead of re-signing a prodigious slugger with great on base skills (Jim Thome), Kenny Williams instead decided Mark Kotsay was awesome (he is not) and that the DH should exist for the alternative purposes of resting the fielders (some of whom -- specifically Quentin -- should not be playing defense in the firse place). Comically enough, Ozzie Guillen blames Thome for no longer being a White Sox. Quote Guillen:
The White Sox, after tonight's win against Cleveland, sit four games behind the Minnesota Twins in the AL Central Standings. Jim Thome, who makes a measly $1.5 million this season, has accrued +2.4 WAR for the Twins while Mark Kotsay, who has the exact same salary as Thome this season, has produced -0.6 WAR for the White Sox.
In a vacuum, a re-signing of Thome by the White Sox would give the South Siders a +3.0 WAR swing in the AL Central Standings. Note, however, that Thome has only accrued 279 PA this season while splitting DH duties with Jason Kubel. Of course, Thome's been platooned, which may exaggerate his bottom line, but any potential non-platoon "regression" would surely be offset by the additional playing time he would have seen with the White Sox. Let's just leave the WAR at +2.4 and call it even.
The White Sox do not play in a vacuum, however. Thome, in not re-signing with the White Sox, signed a deal with the Twins. Hence, in a Thome-on-the-Sox-over-Kotsay theoretical situation, you have to not only add +3.0 WAR to the White Sox 2010 win total, but also subtract 2.4 WAR from the Twins' 2010 win total. That turns a 4.0 game lead by the Twins in the AL Central into a 1.5 game lead by the White Sox.
Still think it is OK to be sarcastic, Ozzie? It gets worse.
Not only are the White Sox sitting 4.0 games behind the Twins in the AL Central standings, but they have found themselves ultimately in need of a hitting DH (turns out burning Mark Kotsay's bat was not enough of a move at the July trade deadline. Maybe the White Sox should have tried burning Kotsay's contract (and Mark Teahen's, while they were at it) instead).
Unable to procure either Adam Dunn or Lance Berkman, the White Sox claimed Manny Ramirez from the Dodgers in exchange for salary relief. Without question, the Manny move is an upgrade for the White Sox. Whereas Manny is projected by ZiPS to hit .290/.398/.533 (.399 wOBA) for the rest of the season, Kotsay was only pegged to hit .244/.313/.384 (.305 wOBA) down the stretch. Dave Cameron sees this difference as worth around +1.0 WAR for the White Sox. Unfortunately for the White Sox, however, they are four games behind the Twins (thus, they have three more wins to make up somehow) and Thome has a wOBA of .413 on the season (with a projected wOBA of .370 down the stretch).
Per MLB Trade Rumors, 31 games of "salary relief" means $3.8 million. That figure is more than 2.5 times what Thome will make all season and almost $1 million more than Kotsay and Thome's salaries combined.
Then, of course, you need to consider that Manny is Manny and you never know quite what you are going to get with him. He might try and get pregnant again or invoke his alleged "do not play" clause during day games. In another chapter in the "Manny Being Manny" saga, Manny took the early flight to Cleveland from L.A. this morning and was at Progressive Field in time to play ball, but did not in the White Sox starting lineup. Manny told reporters that he felt like he was 25 again, but he could not play because, as TBO speculates, he woke up to early that day. Ozzie Guillen's comments after the game seem to confirm this speculation.
To summarize, the White Sox are not in first place this year because they decided that subpar offensive production from the DH position was acceptable so long as they could rest Alex Rios' and Juan Pierre's knees every so often and find a way to work Mark Kotsay's mighty bat into the lineup. Had the White Sox just not give Kotsay a bat to burn to begin with, the Sox would be at least a half game closer in the AL Central Standings. Because the White Sox gave Kotsay said bat, they are now paying 2.5 times the money it would have cost them to keep Thome all season for just 31 games (scratch that, 30 games, as Manny did not play Tuesday) of Mannywood. Talk about "fail."
I wonder if the White Sox will sell re-branded Manny dreadlock caps left over from his time in L.A.
Jim Thome made the decision to leave to the Dodgers," Guillen said initially about the August 2009 deal. "He made that decision to himself, all right.Though Ozzie Guillen has sarcastically accepted the blame for the Thome non-signing, he and G.M. Kenny Williams owe a genuine apology to White Sox fans. Here is why.
The White Sox, after tonight's win against Cleveland, sit four games behind the Minnesota Twins in the AL Central Standings. Jim Thome, who makes a measly $1.5 million this season, has accrued +2.4 WAR for the Twins while Mark Kotsay, who has the exact same salary as Thome this season, has produced -0.6 WAR for the White Sox.
In a vacuum, a re-signing of Thome by the White Sox would give the South Siders a +3.0 WAR swing in the AL Central Standings. Note, however, that Thome has only accrued 279 PA this season while splitting DH duties with Jason Kubel. Of course, Thome's been platooned, which may exaggerate his bottom line, but any potential non-platoon "regression" would surely be offset by the additional playing time he would have seen with the White Sox. Let's just leave the WAR at +2.4 and call it even.
The White Sox do not play in a vacuum, however. Thome, in not re-signing with the White Sox, signed a deal with the Twins. Hence, in a Thome-on-the-Sox-over-Kotsay theoretical situation, you have to not only add +3.0 WAR to the White Sox 2010 win total, but also subtract 2.4 WAR from the Twins' 2010 win total. That turns a 4.0 game lead by the Twins in the AL Central into a 1.5 game lead by the White Sox.
Still think it is OK to be sarcastic, Ozzie? It gets worse.
Not only are the White Sox sitting 4.0 games behind the Twins in the AL Central standings, but they have found themselves ultimately in need of a hitting DH (turns out burning Mark Kotsay's bat was not enough of a move at the July trade deadline. Maybe the White Sox should have tried burning Kotsay's contract (and Mark Teahen's, while they were at it) instead).
Unable to procure either Adam Dunn or Lance Berkman, the White Sox claimed Manny Ramirez from the Dodgers in exchange for salary relief. Without question, the Manny move is an upgrade for the White Sox. Whereas Manny is projected by ZiPS to hit .290/.398/.533 (.399 wOBA) for the rest of the season, Kotsay was only pegged to hit .244/.313/.384 (.305 wOBA) down the stretch. Dave Cameron sees this difference as worth around +1.0 WAR for the White Sox. Unfortunately for the White Sox, however, they are four games behind the Twins (thus, they have three more wins to make up somehow) and Thome has a wOBA of .413 on the season (with a projected wOBA of .370 down the stretch).
Per MLB Trade Rumors, 31 games of "salary relief" means $3.8 million. That figure is more than 2.5 times what Thome will make all season and almost $1 million more than Kotsay and Thome's salaries combined.
Then, of course, you need to consider that Manny is Manny and you never know quite what you are going to get with him. He might try and get pregnant again or invoke his alleged "do not play" clause during day games. In another chapter in the "Manny Being Manny" saga, Manny took the early flight to Cleveland from L.A. this morning and was at Progressive Field in time to play ball, but did not in the White Sox starting lineup. Manny told reporters that he felt like he was 25 again, but he could not play because, as TBO speculates, he woke up to early that day. Ozzie Guillen's comments after the game seem to confirm this speculation.
To summarize, the White Sox are not in first place this year because they decided that subpar offensive production from the DH position was acceptable so long as they could rest Alex Rios' and Juan Pierre's knees every so often and find a way to work Mark Kotsay's mighty bat into the lineup. Had the White Sox just not give Kotsay a bat to burn to begin with, the Sox would be at least a half game closer in the AL Central Standings. Because the White Sox gave Kotsay said bat, they are now paying 2.5 times the money it would have cost them to keep Thome all season for just 31 games (scratch that, 30 games, as Manny did not play Tuesday) of Mannywood. Talk about "fail."
I wonder if the White Sox will sell re-branded Manny dreadlock caps left over from his time in L.A.
Fuck the fucking Cubs
Seriously. Between bullpen issues and runs scoring problems, the Cubs have been disappointing this season. Law school may have deprived me of the time I used to spent trolling daily changes in BP projections and fangraphs statistics, but it doesn't take a stat-heavy person to recognize the deficiency of the Cubs!
Despite Milton Bradley's .400 OBP abilities, his lack of any semblance of power has left Cubs fans drinking for Mark DeRosa juice. Even with the return of Ramirez and resurgence of Derrek Lee, the Cubs have failed to do anything necessary to win. Much of the problem has lied in the bullpen (Marmol's increasing BB/9 ratio, Kevin Gregg's inability to pitch, ETC.) and lineup's ability to score runs (where did the balance of power go? The Cubs have the 12th best ISO, but it's skewed between players like Fox and Ramirez). This season, the Cubs have the sixth worst Cluch rating in baseball -- in other words, as it is apparent to ANYONE who watches Cubs games, the Cubs cannot fucking cash in on runs scoring opportunities.
GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I hate this team's underachieving bullshit so much. When will be sign GOOD players?? When will we stop OVERPAYING mediocre ones (I'm looking at you, Alfonso Soriano)? My generous hope is that the sale of the Cubs to the Ricketts -- which was allegedly completed tonight -- will enter our organization into a new era of fan recognition in by which team management will finally fill areas of leadership with competence. Since Hendry was promoted from player development coordinator to GM, his track record has been spotty. Nothing he has picked in the first round since Mark Prior has been valuable and despite the awesome trade he engineered for the Ramirez, most of his moves have been questionable at best. The Cubs need a new direction. Such direction, in my opinion, is a new beginning. Fuck Hendry. Fuck the new Hitting coach. Fuck everyone. Put Ryno in the managerial position, get me a competent GM (hell, the Brewers got Doug Melvin!) and get me some draft talent!!
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Cubsfan4ever argues he should be a GM if for no other reason than Steve Phillips were one. I argue that I should be one because I have some idea of statistical knowledge in reference to impact. If I were the Cubs, as of Aug 10, I would have made the following two moves:
1) Pick up John Smoltz off waivers -- the high K, low BB rate and inflated HR/FB rate all indicate that Smoltz still has gas left in the tank. His 4.37 FIP is well below his current ERA and the HR/FB rate is statistically due for regression to league average levels, given his peripherals.
2) Claim Billy Wagner off waivers -- if the Cubs have truly finalized the team's sale, new ownership should begin its tenure by efficiently spending its resources. Wagner struck out two tonight with 0 walks and 0 hits, putting 90s velocity on his offerings. If that's not a guy who is healthy and able, show me someone who is. Even if Wagner isn't 100% healthy, the Cubs are 6 games back after tonight's loss and need to start taking some high upside risks if they want to catch the Cardinals (or Wild Card).
If the Cubs took a risk with B.J. Ryan, why not with Smoltz? Oh yeah! Smoltz isn't a lefty! BRAIN FREEZE! :( -- Is it that unreasonable to expect at minimum this from a GM? Ugh!!
Despite Milton Bradley's .400 OBP abilities, his lack of any semblance of power has left Cubs fans drinking for Mark DeRosa juice. Even with the return of Ramirez and resurgence of Derrek Lee, the Cubs have failed to do anything necessary to win. Much of the problem has lied in the bullpen (Marmol's increasing BB/9 ratio, Kevin Gregg's inability to pitch, ETC.) and lineup's ability to score runs (where did the balance of power go? The Cubs have the 12th best ISO, but it's skewed between players like Fox and Ramirez). This season, the Cubs have the sixth worst Cluch rating in baseball -- in other words, as it is apparent to ANYONE who watches Cubs games, the Cubs cannot fucking cash in on runs scoring opportunities.
GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I hate this team's underachieving bullshit so much. When will be sign GOOD players?? When will we stop OVERPAYING mediocre ones (I'm looking at you, Alfonso Soriano)? My generous hope is that the sale of the Cubs to the Ricketts -- which was allegedly completed tonight -- will enter our organization into a new era of fan recognition in by which team management will finally fill areas of leadership with competence. Since Hendry was promoted from player development coordinator to GM, his track record has been spotty. Nothing he has picked in the first round since Mark Prior has been valuable and despite the awesome trade he engineered for the Ramirez, most of his moves have been questionable at best. The Cubs need a new direction. Such direction, in my opinion, is a new beginning. Fuck Hendry. Fuck the new Hitting coach. Fuck everyone. Put Ryno in the managerial position, get me a competent GM (hell, the Brewers got Doug Melvin!) and get me some draft talent!!
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Cubsfan4ever argues he should be a GM if for no other reason than Steve Phillips were one. I argue that I should be one because I have some idea of statistical knowledge in reference to impact. If I were the Cubs, as of Aug 10, I would have made the following two moves:
1) Pick up John Smoltz off waivers -- the high K, low BB rate and inflated HR/FB rate all indicate that Smoltz still has gas left in the tank. His 4.37 FIP is well below his current ERA and the HR/FB rate is statistically due for regression to league average levels, given his peripherals.
2) Claim Billy Wagner off waivers -- if the Cubs have truly finalized the team's sale, new ownership should begin its tenure by efficiently spending its resources. Wagner struck out two tonight with 0 walks and 0 hits, putting 90s velocity on his offerings. If that's not a guy who is healthy and able, show me someone who is. Even if Wagner isn't 100% healthy, the Cubs are 6 games back after tonight's loss and need to start taking some high upside risks if they want to catch the Cardinals (or Wild Card).
If the Cubs took a risk with B.J. Ryan, why not with Smoltz? Oh yeah! Smoltz isn't a lefty! BRAIN FREEZE! :( -- Is it that unreasonable to expect at minimum this from a GM? Ugh!!
