"We Don't Need Him"

You know, sometimes I wonder why exactly it is that I am considered so knowledgeable regarding sports. And then I hear someone call into EEI and advocate for the release of Wily Mo Pena in order to sign Bernie Williams, and I realize that it's not really that I'm particularly smart but that everyone else is functionally retarded.

Anyway, my feelings with regards to, as Michael Kay so aptly put it, the Pope addressing his people at St. Peter's Basilica last week? Well, they weren't quite as intense as Suzyn Waldman's (by the way, how exactly does one perform a one-on-one interview with TWO PEOPLE?!). They were all over the place, I suppose. My first reaction was disappointment. Yeah, I wanted him. I know he's an asshole and I know he's a six inning pitcher and I know he's been pitching against primarily weak offenses for the last 3 years. I'm sappy and wanted Roger Clemens to come full circle and end up in the Hall of Fame with a Red Sox cap on and I wanted to see 21 between 9 and 27 in ten years. However, even if he retired or went back to Houston or if he somehow ended up somewhere completely obscure, Roger's Boston legacy seemed to be quasi-restored. Things were at least amicable. By clearly going to the highest bidder (28 Million!!!), Roger Clemens ruined not only his Boston legacy, but he lost a lot of respect across baseball. When you can get David Wells to say that you're hurting the integrity of the game, you've done something pretty...out there.

I got pretty angry for a little bit before I was able to start looking for silver linings. A stupid but honest way of looking at the signing is to say, "At least it reignites the rivalry." This doesn't make it any better for us, not at all. The Yankees got a very good pitcher that we were after as well. Not good. However, right now he is on line to open his shortened season in Fenway Park and as a baseball fan, that should be an amazing night. Also, 28 million. That makes me laugh. It's disgraceful and ridiculous and perhaps a mockery of the game, but it's hilarious. If ever it has been arguable that the Yankees don't succeed through money, it no longer is. They literally bought 6 innings a week at a pro-rated price of 28 million dollars. Money's not an issue for them, as we all know, but the concept of paying $14,000 a pitch is just completely ridiculous, and hilarious.

Speaking of hilarious, does anyone else think it would be at all comical to have Runevlys Hernandez come to Fenway this week and make a 7th inning stretch announcement stating that he'll be up in September? And when he gets here, he can wear 21? Yeah, ya do.

I also find it a little bit funny that he pissed off his hometown fans in Houston. He really can't leave anywhere on good terms, can he? That's why he's still pitching at 45. "BY NO MEANS CAN I RETIRE ON GOOD TERMS WITH A GIVEN FANBASE. NEVER!"

Curt Schilling sparked a mini-controversy even before he accused Barry Bonds of aiding and abetting al Qaeda by saying, and I quote, “It would have been nice to have him, but we didn’t need him." Apparently, this is a clearly asinine thing to say. Curt Schilling acknowledging that it would have been great to have Roger Clemens but stating that we can do without him upset a lot of people. This brings me back to my opening statement. There are a lot of stupid, stupid people who follow sports. Yes, it would have been terrific to throw Roger Clemens out there as our fifth starter. But come on. Of 145 pitchers to have made at least 4 starts this year, we have 3 ranked in the top 30 in VORP. Daisuke is ranked 71st, and most everyone believes that we haven't seen the best of him yet. Nonetheless, being 71st would make him a decent third starter. And even Julian Tavarez is ranked 117th. That would make him a bad fourth starter or a good fifth starter. And Jon Lester is no more than two months from holding that role. So, no, we don't need him. He certainly would have been nice, but he was far from a necessity.

The Beginning of Two Eras

Adam and I have always been known as those guys that know a lot about sports. People have routinely asked us for our ideas, musings, and feelings about sports, and more specifically Boston sports. I've lived and breathed Boston sports since 1994 (except for my hangover year of 2005), and Adam since 2001, and we decided a few months ago that we should do a blog, not only as a way to vent about our local clubs, but also to keep in touch with friends and family that we might not be able reach while we're at school. So here we are; Bellhorn's Dealers (take what you want out of that name).

As Bellhorn's Dealers is beginning, so goes (potentially) a new era for the Boston Celtics. After a season 24 win season where we saw an 18 game losing streak, a streak of injuries that rivaled the 2007 Yankees, and where players like Brian Scalabrine averaged 19.0 minutes a game (grr...), there may be a light at the end of the Ted Williams Tunnel. As May 22nd approaches, the date of the NBA Draft Lottery Selection, the Celts sit with the 2nd worst record in the league, which gives them the second best shot for the #1 draft pick in a draft that features two of the greatest prospects that the NBA has seen in recent years, namely Texas forward Kevin Durant and Ohio State center Greg Oden.

One of the biggest questions in Celtic Nation is which player should the Celtics pick? Should they try to pick up arguably one of the best offensive players that the NCAA has ever seen in Kevin Durant? Or should they try to draft what most scouts project to be one of the most dominating big men ever in Greg Oden? Is there a wrong choice? Well, that's an easy question; no. Being able to choose between Greg Oden and Kevin Durant is like being able to choose a wife between Angelina Jolie and Scarlett Johansson (and if you're name happens to be Tom Brady, then hey, there's a shot!). Sure, Angelina is richer, gets more press and hype, and is the subject of teenage fantasies around the globe, but despite all of that, Scarlett Johansson is arguably just as hot, if not hotter! Do you follow me? In simpler terms, Durant may be the flashier choice, a future face of a franchise, but Greg Oden will probably be just as good, if not better. If the C's get pick one or two on May 22nd, Celtics fans rejoice, because it's the beginning of a new era of basketball in Boston.



Okay, so if there's no real wrong pick in the 1/2 position, which one would be a better fit with with Celtics? Let's start with Kevin Durant. Durant's biggest strengths are obviously on the offensive side of the ball, where at Texas last year he averaged 25.8 points per game and 11.1 rebounds a game. He has been regularly compared to Kevin Garnett because of their comparable offensive skillsets. Durant's freakishly long wingspan helps him pull down rebounds (when he wants to), and even with his height (6'9"), he still possesses the quickness and outside shot of a guard. Durant uses this speed and quickness often to start fast breaks, creating mismatches on the offensive side of the ball. He's a great ball handler, averaging only 2.8 turnovers per game last year, and many scouts believe he has the ability to become a very solid defender. Durant's downside is his physical strength. He often got pushed out of rebounds last year because he was lacking the strength needed to truly dominate the backboards. He also is not known as the greatest passer, and while not a selfish player, he only averaged 1.3 assists per game (although some of that could be attributed to his lack of offensive weapons on his team last year). With Durant on the team, the Celtics would either put him at Power Forward, moving Al Jefferson to the Center position, or they would play him at Small Forward, putting Pierce into the Shooting Guard slot. A starting lineup containing Rondo, Pierce, Durant, and Jefferson could eventually develop into an offensive juggernaut.

Greg Oden (or Scarlett Johansson, if you will) brings an entirely different facet to the team. From the same mold as "The Admiral" David Robinson, Oden brings a dominate defensive presence into the middle of a Celtics team that was one of the weakest defensive teams in basketball last year. Oden's dominate performance in the NCAA Title game against Florida gave basketball fans everywhere what may be a glimpse of the future, where he led the struggling Buckeyes with 25 points, 12 rebounds, and 4 huge blocks. Oden is seen as a work in progress offensively, as he doesn't possess a large amount of moves under the basket, but scouts see him developing into a Robinson-esque player with the right tutelage. Defensively, he could already play in the NBA. He doesn't bite on double fakes and gets great position in the post. He's dominant under the boards and will actually be one of the quickest big men when it comes to lateral movement in the entire NBA. The Celtics get an instant upgrade from Oden, with a defensive lineup that could feature Oden, Jefferson (who is vastly improving on defense), and a healthy Tony Allen, who is widely regarded as one of the top defenders in all of basketball. The Celts go from worst to first, essentially.



So which should the Celtics want? Personally, I think that Oden will be the best NBA player and best fit for the C's between himself and Durant. Durant needs to put on some weight in order to become extremely effective (or he's in danger of becoming Darius Miles), and while many think he may blossom into a great defender, it has yet to be seen. As the old adage says, defense wins championships, and Oden gives the Celtics one of the best defenses in the league.

But what happens if the Celtics don't get one of the first two picks. While they have the second highest probability of having a top two pick, that probability is still only 38.7%! So what happens if the Celtics get the third or fourth pick?

Personally, I would try to trade it, as after you get past the two supermodels at the top of the draft, it's really a bunch of cute girls, at best. It is no secret that Kevin Garnett is unhappy in Minnesota and wants to be moved, and maybe Minnesota would take a package of the #3 pick and Gerald Green for him.

This is all speculation, obviously, but the promise of a Greg Oden or a Kevin Durant should make any true Celtic fan salivate profusely. If the Celtics happen to get either one of these guys, the Celtics could see an immediate turnaround of their program that has been essentially stale since the Nets series in 2002. 19 days until May 22nd. My fingers, toes, and eyes will be crossed until then.

Quick musings

I feel as though my first entry on this blog should be something extravagent and amazing. My colleague, Dan R, tells me that my fatal flaw is that I often try too hard to be different, but I think that if I try too hard to be different then I will never get this first posting out of the way.

So, I'd just like to point out that after 6 starts this year, Josh Beckett's ERA is more than 2 full points lower than it was at this point last year, he has 12 more strikeouts in less than 3 more innings, and he's walked 7 less guys. Looking at this as a supplement to what I can see with my eyes (primarily what looks right now to be a devastating changeup), I think it's fair to say that Josh Beckett has turned a corner. Knock on wood.

I also think Coco Crisp is hitting the shit out of the ball right now and is playing much, much better in center than he did last year. People tend to forget that he spent much of his Cleveland years, including virtually all of his career year in '05, in left. I don't think it's out of the question that he could still be a very good defensive centerfielder, he just needed to get used to it. Having said that, Coco's skillset really makes me think he's a sell high kind of guy, especially with Pena on the bench and Ellsbury probably ready to be playing in the Majors by next spring at the latest. But good for Coco. He's at least shut me up for the time being.

Spiderman 3 comes out tonight. That doesn't have anything to do with baseball, or any other sport. But it will rule.