Are they HOFers?

This past Sunday the Baseball Hall of Fame honored manager Whitey Herzog, umpire Doug Harvey and outfielder Andre Dawson in its 2010 induction ceremony.  Over the next few seasons, many more key players will come up for election. 

Many different baseball "experts" have different feelings about candidates.  There are you more traditional people who stick by the old number standbys such as 3,000 hits or 500 home runs (for the most part nowadays).  There are your new-age Sabermetric people who have many more in-depth methods and pick apart each little aspect of a player's career.  Then you have people like myself who are "eyeballists."  I take into account statistics to some degree, but I think your eye can tell you more who is a true HOFer than any other way.  Another way to term it is to "go with your gut." 

At this point, I have seen the whole career of most of these players and a handful of them I have seen the large majority of their careers.  I will say that I believe the Hall of Fame should be restrictive.  Not as restrictive as only the Babe Ruths and Ty Cobbs, but guys like Phil Rizzuto and Bill Mazeroski are not HOFers to me.

So I'm going to take a look at the players who are eligible for the next few HOF classes.  This does not include managers or executives who now have a different process for election, the HOF announced this week.

My HOFers below are in BOLD.

First the 2011 nominees, which I'll include the holdovers from last year's election.  Here's the results of the 2010 vote with those who got under 5% removed since they are no longer eligible:

Bert Blyleven 400 (74.2%) -- I know Blyleven won a lot of games for some terrible teams and is one of the best strikeout pitchers of all-time. I am on the fence with him and could be talked into it because he was one of the guys who I did not see the majority of his career.  However, the fact he has been on the ballot for so long and those who did watch him have yet to vote him in makes me think "no."

Roberto Alomar 397 (73.7%) -- To me, a no-brainer.  Probably the best 2B of the '90s.

Jack Morris 282 (52.3%) -- I'd vote for Morris.  The guy won more games than any other pitcher in the '80s, was a bonafide ace, led three teams (Tigers, Blue Jays and Twins) to World Series titles and is one of the first candidates who spent his whole career in a five-man rotation so it is tough comparing his numbers.  Many sight his relatively high ERA, but Morris pitched to the score and he was a winner.  His famous Game 7 showdown of the 1991 World Series vs. John Smoltz and the Braves showed the type of competitor and winner he was.

Barry Larkin 278 (51.6%) -- I've heard the arguments for Larkin, but for me he was an all-star caliber player who missed too many games due to injury.  Close, but a no.

Lee Smith 255 (47.3%) -- No

Edgar Martinez 195 (36.2%) -- A tremendous hitter, one of the best right-handed hitters of a generation.  However, I can't get over the fact his career is primarily as a DH.  I grew up an American League guy and later worked for a National League team for a decade and I think that playing in the field is part of the game that can't be overlooked.

Tim Raines 164 (30.4%) -- An absolute yes.  I think Raines is continually overlooked because he was the same type of player as Ricky Henderson at the same time as Henderson but with the majority of his career played in the obscure Montreal.  Raines was a dynamic threat at the plate and on the basepaths and his low vote total last year is shocking.

Tim Raines had his career overshadowed by Henderson, but he's a HOFer.

Mark McGwire 128 (23.7%) -- Nope.  Not only does he have the PED issue, but he was a one-dimensional player.  Yes, it was quite a dimension, but when you throw in the PEDs too, it diminishes his career.

Alan Trammell 121 (22.4%) -- Nope.  A certain all-star, but not a HOFer.

Fred McGriff 116 (21.5%) -- No

Don Mattingly 87 (16.1%) -- No.  He was on his way, but his back shut him down.

Dave Parker 82 (15.2%) -- Parker gets overlooked often.  I don't think he's a HOFer, but is definitely a guy who history often misses.

Dale Murphy 63 (11.7%) -- A tough call given a review of his career without looking through the glasses of the PEDs.  A two-time MVP, a top-notch outfielder and one of the top players in the NL of the '80s for a generally terrible team.  The thing that hurts Murph and why I barely fall on the side of no too is how quickly his career fell off at the end.  His peak just wasn't long enough.

Harold Baines 33 (6.1%). -- Nope.  Too much DH.

Now the new players who will appear on the 2011 ballot:

Rafael Palmeiro -- Despite the 3,000 hits and the 569 HRs, I just can't do it.  Not only does he have the PED aspect on his record, but he was never a guy who I thought was a HOFer while playing.  Rarely, he was the best player on his own team and he was a dangerous hitter but not one who struck fear into you like so many others.

"I am not a Hall of Famer, period."

Jeff Bagwell -- This will be a tight vote amongst the electorate, but I'm going with a no.  Bagwell was a dangerous hitter and one of the leaders of the Astros for a long time. He is widely considered a great guy and led the Astros to the playoffs several times but what stands out to me is that they did not win a playoff series until he was no longer in his prime when they had Carlos Beltran, Lance Berkman, Roger Clemens, Roy Oswalt and Andy Pettitte. 

Juan Gonzalez -- Nope.  I believe he was a big PED guy.

John Olerud -- No.

Larry Walker -- I would love to see what Walker's career would have been like without playing in Colorado or there with the humidor.  He did win five Gold Gloves too, but barely misses my cut.  If you could define the Colorado numbers better, maybe.

Tino Martinez -- No.

John Franco -- No.

On to the 2012 first-timers:

Bernie Williams, Tim Salmon, Brad Radke, Vinny Castilla, Ruben Sierra and Jeromy Burnitz -- all nice players, but none did enough for me.  You can make a case for Williams with all of his postseason success, but he's still not a HOFer for me.

The 2013 first-timers are a tough class to call:

Barry Bonds: Wow, what do you say about this guy.  He clearly was involved with PEDs later in his career and by all accounts that began in 2001.  He was probably a HOFer if his career ended then, so should he get in based on that time?  What about, despite his PED use, he was still the most dangerous hitter among all hitters whether they were cheating or not?  I'm going to go with yes here based on the early work, but you may have to ask me again in three years when this vote happens.


Roger Clemens: Sigh...another tough case.  When did he start his PED use?  Did he slack his last few years in Boston and then turn it to another gear in Toronto or did he have help doing so?  That was in 1997 and 1998, so were PEDs prevelant then?  Or was his use just later in his career with the Yankees and Astros.  His body of work, taken strictly on numbers and dominance, definitely make him a HOFer.  However, I'm going to go with no.  His time in Boston would make him a borderline candidate, but I'm just too suspicious of the time after that.  Whereas Bonds could have been a HOFer if his career ended after 2000 or 2001, depending on when you believe he started doping.

Sammy Sosa: No way.  The poster boy for PED use.  His career is based on it and he even cheated on the field with the corked bat.

Craig Biggio: For a long time I was a no on Biggio, but I came around to him near the end of his career so he is a yes for me.  Not only did he get 3,000 hits, but he did it moving from catcher to second base to the outfield and back to second base again and did it all with skill, including four Gold Gloves at 2B and one of his Silver Sluggers as a catcher in 1989.

Mike Piazza: People have always rumored PED use for Piazza, but nothing near the "where there's smoke there's fire" of a Clemens, Palmeiro or Sosa.  He's the all-time HR leader as a catcher and he absolutely passes the eye test for me.  He scared the crap out of me when he would face the Braves because not only could he hit homers, but he could hit pitchers' pitches out of the park.  He'd hack balls down the right-field line or clobber them in the left-center gap.  A HOF for me.

Curt Schilling:  He is a controversial candidate for many.  He had a mouth and attitude that turned many off, including me, during his career.  His career got off to a slow start, but from 1992 on he was one of baseball's most feared pitchers.  I am also someone who puts stock into postseason performances and he was one of the best of a generation, not just with Boston, but also with Arizona and Philadelphia.  His 216 regular-season wins may not do it for some, but those plus his playoffs make him a HOFer for me.
 
Kenny Lofton: Say what you want about Kenny, but he was probably the best leadoff hitter from the mid-'90s to the mid-'00s.  When he played well his teams won and when he played well he was tough to beat.  Those great Indians teams fed off of Lofton.  In his prime, he played like a HOFer.  However, I don't think his prime was long enough.  A star player, but not a HOFer.
 
David Wells: He is a no for me.  Wells was a dependable horse who played on some great teams, but I never felt he was dominant or someone you had to play around in a series. 
 
Finally, the 2014 nominees:
 
Greg Maddux: Um...yes.  I don't think I even need to explain.


Tom Glavine: Another no-brainer.

Jeff Kent: NO!  I can't stand people who only mention that he is the all-time HR leader at second base.  Yes, that is a credit, but he also did it in the era of the home run in the smaller parks, tighter balls and watered-down pitching from expansion. He was a good player, sure, but Kent never really scared you.  Look at his numbers sometime and look how he did with and without Barry Bonds.  Night and day.  Bonds should have won the MVP award Kent won, but people were tired of voting for Bonds, especially because he  wasn't well liked.  Kent also was a clubhouse jerk and not well liked among the media and teammates.  Guess how many times he was an all-star or even in the top 20 when not playing with Bonds?  Just twice.  You can argue he was the best player on his own team only once or twice his whole career and those were losing teams.
Frank Thomas: The Big Hurt gets in on my board.  A highly-feared hitter and one of the best of the '90s.

Mike Mussina: I wasn't in Mussina's corner for a long time, but I came around on him like I did with Biggio.  He was the ace of many staffs in Baltimore and some in New York and he did it in the AL during the steroid era.  The fact he came back and ended his career on such a high note says something in my book.

Moises Alou:  A nice, all-star career, but no. 
 
I'm not going to get into the 2015 guys, but if they don't pitch again I hope to see Pedro Martinez and John Smoltz together in the HOF.
 

Kent owes the best years of his career to Bonds.

Thoughts on LeBron James...

There isn't much I can add to what has already been written all over the internet by writers much better than myself.  Of course, as a native of northeast Ohio, I share many of the sentiments of those who have been negatively affected by LeBron James' decision to go to Miami.

Having worked in professional sports and been behind the scenes for a long time, I sometimes think my viewpoint is a little different than most fans.  I have a better understanding of how front offices work and I am a little more grounded.  So, in this case too, I am not as "fired up" as many Cavaliers' fans.  However, that doesn't mean I am happy about the situation.

As far as I'm concerned, James was free to go wherever he wanted.  It has been long stated what each of his suitors had to offer, whether that was location, a better immediate roster or the comforts of home with the chance at more money.  Obviously, I wish he stayed in Cleveland but if he wants to go play with his buddies in Miami, so be it.

Some thoughts though:

1. I'm not sure James fully understood the ramifications of his decision and how it would impact northeast Ohio and how the fans would react.  Whether that was his own failing or that of his friends and agent, many of whom are from the area, I don't know but someone dropped the ball here.  If James did know, then shame on him for how he handled the situation and he is going to have to live the rest of his life knowing that the circumstances surrounding any potential return to the area are of his own doing.

2. James probably could not have handled the situation any worse.  This is the area where many fans went from bummed-out and disappointed to angry.  To call ESPN for an hour-long special to announce his decision was pompous to begin with.  It was the first big decision of LeBron's career where his image started to tarnish.  Many thought there was no way he could call a nationally-televised special only to break Cleveland's heart, but as soon as I heard about the charity aspect and then later when I heard it wouldn't take place in Ohio, I knew the outcome would be a departure of some sort.

The charity aspect was a charade.  Sure, I'm glad that the Boys and Girls Clubs of America will get $2.5 million from the show, but I knew that was just to mitigate the pomposity of calling the special and to dull some of the pain he was about to inflict.

Then came the spectacle of the special itself.  Digging up Jim Gray from sports' no-man's land, for whom LeBron's people paid for the show, was just the humorous part of the episode.  ESPN and Gray dragged it out for 27 minutes after promising the announcement would come in the first 10.  Then LeBron handled the actual announcement

Like I said, he could have said whatever he wanted, but there was a way it should have been done, which is where James blew it.  Never in the course of the special while making the announcement or in the 30 minutes to follow did LeBron throw the people of northeast Ohio a bone.  He didn't need to cry and get emotional, but he needed to address the fans directly one way or another.  Thanking them for their support or explaining why he left home or showing some degree of sympathy for an area of the country that is the most damaged in its sports fanhood and more recently by the economic situation that anywhere else. 

Akron may be where James is from but it will never be the same again for him

He knew this.  He knew how much the city was struggling and how the town just wants more than anything else, to be called a champion.  To handle it as coldly as he did and on national television, well that was too low of a blow for many.  Even fans in Miami have expressed, despite their excitement over his decision, that they felt bad for Cleveland and worse for the way the whole episode went down.

LeBron James will never be the same.  His image has taken a major hit, but it will improve to some degree if NBA titles follow.  However, he'll never have the sterling image he once had and he'll never be confused with Michael Jordan or even Kobe Bryant because he left and couldn't do it in his own city as the leader of the team.  I know he wants a handful of titles to compete with Bryant's five and Jordan's six, but how many reach that?  If he does reach it, but with Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade's help, then do they mean as much as the ones the other guys won?

On the flip side, one title with the Cavaliers would have defined him forever.  He would be given credit by everyone that he brought Cleveland the title it so desperately wanted and needed after close to a 50-year drought.  The country would identify with what he did and give him credit for it, much more credit than he will get now if Miami wins multiple titles.

Finally, I gave some thought to when LeBron's career is long over.  Jordan had a fall-out with the Chicago Bulls and is no longer a presence in that city.  However, that isn't home for him, which is North Carolina where he is the Charlotte owner now.  James may own a franchise one day when his career is done, but it won't be in his hometown. 

Jim Brown only played nine seasons for the Browns, but because he never shunned his Cleveland ties even after going "hollywood," he has been able to make a career and life long after his playing days ended.  Willie Mays has his long-standing ties with the Giants and Hank Aaron does with the Braves.  Dominique Wilkins is a Hawks announcer and Austin Carr and many others still relish their ties with their former clubs.  James will be a vagabond wherever he winds up.  He'll never have those ties to home he once said he cherished so much and when he sits back and looks at the meaningfulness in his life I believe he'll regret "The Decision."

After Jim Brown went "Hollywood" he still held to his Cleveland ties

Omar Infante...all-star??

With today's announcement of the MLB All-Star squads, you knew there would be the typical snubs.  Sometimes this is because the manager selects players from his team, with all things being somewhat close to equal, and sometimes is has to do with the antiquated rule that each team must have at least one all-star.

So imagine my surprise, and from what I am reading on the internet I am not alone, to see Atlanta Braves' utility man Omar Infante on the National League team.  I know there is a new rule this year that allows one player to re-enter the game so that teams don't run out of players and Infante can play many positions.  Still, you have got to be kidding me.  What is NL manager Charlie Manuel thinking?  Just because Omar has done well against the Phillies this year?

NL All-Star manager Charlie Manuel made quite a reach in Infante's case

I think Infante is a good player.  He hits for a decent average, is pretty clutch and can play all over the field.  He is also a good guy.  He's a little quiet around the English-speaking media and doesn't cause trouble and you can get a sense of his real personality from when he interacts with his Spanish-speaking teammates and coaches.  You want to root for a guy like him and I am happy he made the all-star team, but Omar is no all-star.

Players like Cincinnati's Joey Votto, who could be a legitimate MVP candidate, or Washington's stud third baseman Ryan Zimmerman are having to hope they get voted in by the fans online.  These guys are the guts of their teams in the heart of their teams lineups everyday.  Infante has started just 42 of the Braves 81 games this season and is only ninth on the team in at-bats.  He does have a solid .311 average, but with just nine walks he has an OBP of just .343.  It isn't like his numbers blow you out of the water.

To reinforce this, when Atlanta's GM Frank Wren called Infante this morning, Infante thought he was calling because he was being traded!  He then thought that he was the victim of a joke!

Like I said, good for Omar and good for the Braves, who have been one of baseball's best stories of the first half.  However, one of this year's NL snubs feels a lot worse than normal.

Omar is a good guy, but he doesn't deserve this honor

LeBron and the fate of the Cavs

So Thursday begins the NBA free agency period, one that will shape the face of the league for years to come.  Big names like Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Amare Stoudamire, Joe Johnson and Dirk Nowitzki are all out to be had along with some lesser, but still important players like David Lee and Carlos Boozer.  Obviously, unless you have been living under a rock for the past two years, you know the real story is the future of LeBron James. 
James' fate will determine where the rest of the dominoes will fall.  Teams like the New York Knicks basically sandbagged the last two seasons, even pretty much admitting as much to its fans, in an effort to clear salary cap space for James.

All of that has been well documented.  The only real question left is, "where he will wind up?"

LeBron's destination is the biggest question in sports

This week's news has surrounded rumors LeBron is destined for Miami or Chicago, both of which have created significant space under the cap with trades.  In Miami, he could team up with Wade and possibly Bosh to form a fearsome trio.  If he goes to Chicago, Bosh may join along and they could team up with Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah on an up-and-coming squad.

New Jersey, New York, the L.A. Clippers and Dallas all can make up scenarios that could intrigue James, but I don't think any are the threat to his resigning in Cleveland that Miami and Chicago provide.

In my heart, as a northeast Ohio native, I would love to see him come back.  Cleveland can offer him more money than any city and northeast Ohio is his home.  He has strong roots in the area, which include a large number of friends, his ties to the University of Akron and the community that helped raise him.  He is a product of a young, single mother and as a result many others helped him get to where he is today. 

LeBron knows if he leaves things will never be the same at home again.  He won't be Art Modell, but he will have caused some serious ill will and will have lost the fan support of the area.  Many outsiders don't understand his ties to home.  Most of the pundits are from big cities or fans from places where they can't understand what draw Cleveland would have for him.  I understand Cleveland isn't the most glamorous place.  I understand how it looks to outsiders, but to folks from there it is a different ball of wax.  Home means more for anyone, no matter where it is.  I believe LeBron has some serious conflictions and considerations with this decision.

Cleveland will never be the same if LeBron leaves

Can Cleveland give him the best chance to win immediately?  Probably not unless it pulls off a sign-and-trade for one of the max-caliber players and pulls off some trades to clear cap space.  That said, if he comes back, with the remaining players they still are a top-three team in the Eastern Conference and contenders, just maybe not the high-end, flashy contenders he could have in Miami or Chicago.  He has seen that owner Dan Gilbert is willing to spend and do whatever LeBron wants, but he has also seen coaching changes and franchise that is in a tough spot.

In the end, it's his call, but a tough one with an emotional element that can't be ignored.  I do believe he hasn't made up his mind yet, but I am also not blind to what's out there.  In the end, I think he'll turn to his chances to win multiple titles with the other max players and consider his legacy in the game as the key to his decision.  He won't want to turn his back on home, but he'll do so for his own future and hope people can understand.  So, ultimately I believe he'll take the Chicago or Miami route and Cleveland will be left in a tough place.

Dan Gilbert has tried his best to keep LeBron happy

Without LeBron, I am not sure Cleveland will ever win a title.  Only the 2004 Detroit Pistons have won a NBA title in the last 30 years without a superstar and that team had multiple all-stars.  No free agent is going to sign with the Cavs unless another star is there and the only way another star winds up in Cleveland is by draft.  Then the chances that star will be of LeBron's caliber is unlikely and the chance they are from northeast Ohio is just about zero.  So, if that guy ever does turn up he won't resign even the first time like LeBron did and the Cavs will be in NBA purgatory again. 

We'll see what LeBron chooses.  Only the future of Cleveland basketball success lies with his decision.

Dwyane Wade is looking for fellow superstar LeBron to join him in Miami

The looming NFL lockout will cast a shadow on 2010

In a recent SI.com article, DeMaurice Smith, president of the NFL Players' Association, said, "Chad Ochocinco asked me at the draft, on a scale of 1 to 10 where do you see the possibility of a lockout? I'd put it at about a 14."

This is not the first comment from Smith or many others closely tied to the new collective bargaining discussions to convey such pessimism.  It looks like 2011 may be unlike any the NFL has seen since 1987 when strike-replacement players were taking the field.  Since then, the NFL has flourished and become an empire in almost every aspect from merchandising to television and media coverage to fan interest.  From the outside fan looking in, this standoff doesn't make any sense.  They see the billionaires vs. the millionaires.

NFLPA president DeMaurice Smith knows his union is in a no-win situation (photo: AP).

Obviously the issues are more complicated than that.  The players are willing to extend the past contract while trying to work something out in the meantime, but the owners are steadfast in their refusal to do so.  They say the climate has changed and the recently-completed CBA has to change to go forward.  The owners want the players to contribute from their share of the revenue split toward new stadiums and capital improvements.  The players claim that no other sport asks players to do this and they shouldn't have to in this case.  That is just one of the many key issues on the table.

I think we all know in the end how this will turn out.  In most CBA disputes in major professional American sports, the owners hold the upper hand.  The NBA crushed its union in the 1999 standoff and the NHL locked out an entire season while defeating its players' union.  Even in baseball, where the players have made more inroads than any of the others, the owners still have come out on top.

In the NFL, the owners are going to win.  There is no realistic alternative option for the players to make a living unless they flood the Canadian Football League and that isn't going to happen.  The owners have planned for this years ago.  The current television deal will pay them almost $4 billion if they don't play this season, allowing them to build a war chest the players cannot compete with.  The owners have already aligned assistant coaching contracts with the lockout in mind. 

Smith said they advised the players last year to hold back 25 percent of their salaries in 2009 and 2010 for this exact situation, but too many players live paycheck-to-paycheck whether that is to maintain their current lifestyle or to deal with off-field issues such as alimony and child support.

So here we sit in the small gap before training camps kick off in earnest and the 2010 season will be right around the corner.  For the most part, these issues will not be noticed other than articles in the media and occasional television commentaries, but those who follow the league will feel it casting a shadow all season long.  The uncertainty of what lies ahead is uncomfortable for all involved. 

For example, look at my beloved Cleveland Browns.  I know they won't be making their first trip to the Super Bowl in 2011, but the hope of the fanbase is with the new leadership group led by Mike Holmgren and the optimism from the way the 2009 season ended with four consecutive wins that this team is finally pointed in the right direction.  With the lockout looming, everything is on hold.  Teams don't want to commit money and sign deals involving 2011.  Coach Eric Mangini may be a lame-duck coach, but no one knows yet.  Veteran players won't get deals for much, if any, money for that season and many long-time veterans across the league will be out of jobs.

Dallas owner Jerry Jones knows the owners hold all the cards in the CBA negotiations.

For other teams who are reaching their windows for a championship run, they may have the plug pulled on their chances.  Teams like New Orleans, Arizona, Green Bay and the New York Jets all will be a year older, a year with more rust on their bodies and offseason uncertainty regarding coaches and contracts will loom.

I am not sure what the players can do.  The fans may scream that they won't follow or support the NFL anymore, but that simply isn't true.  If they can come back in the other sports that don't have the fan support of the NFL, they will come back to football too.  The owners know this.  People LOVE the NFL and will always be there.  A non-descript regular-season Sunday game has ratings higher than playoff games of most other sports and the owners will use this knowledge to get what they want.

So, for an argument with only one real possible outcome, that of an owners' victory, it is frustrating that an entire season could potentially be impacted.  Yes, the players have some issues the owners can address such as the health insurance and coverage of current and former players and I am sure the draft will be tweeked too, but overall they are fighting tanks with sticks and rocks.  I think the NFLPA leaders know this deep-down, but would never admit it.  My hope is they take that understanding into negotiations and get something done before America's favorite game is missing next fall.

Floyd Landis and why I think Lance Armstrong cheated

Just a thought on a news item of note this week...

Floyd Landis/Lance Armstrong -- I am not condoning Floyd Landis' lying and his behavior.  He is a cheater, ethically bankrupt and his name will forever be associated with everything that is wrong in sports.  To summarize, Landis won the 2006 Tour de France before having his title removed for testing positive for performance-enhancing drugs.  He then entered a crusade against the anti-doping and cycling governing bodies while shouting his innocence from the top of his lungs.  He even wrote a book comically named "Positively False."

This week Landis finally came out admitted he cheated his whole career.  This didn't exactly come as a shock, but it did destroy all credibility he may have had left. However, he could just stop there.  Whether it was jealousy, revenge or just being a bitter soul, he decided to implicate many others as his ship was sinking.  Most notably, seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong was included in those allegations.

Landis knew this moment at the 2006 Tour de France was a complete fraud

Here's the kicker...I believe him.  I am among those who has thought Armstrong has cheated for a long time.  Yes, he hasn't failed any tests, but in this current PED climate I can no longer take his word on it because logic isn't on his side. 

Armstrong has been accused several times of using illegal methods such as EPO, steroids and blood doping.  Governing bodies and fellow riders are among his accusers.  The problem is nothing sticks.  Part of that is the lack of any positive tests, but the other part is not discussed much publicly. 

Armstrong has a long history of law suits and threats of lawsuits or alternative actions against his individual accusers that has resulted in the loss of people's jobs and threatened their livelihoods.  He has a stable of lawyers and money on his side and he badgers and bullies people into keeping quiet and dropping lawsuits.  Even fellow American cycling legend Greg LeMond has accused Armstrong of cheating and bullying.

As I said before, logic fails me when it comes to Armstrong's side.  I am supposed to believe this man, who had testicular cancer that metastasized to his brains and lungs and had an grim prognosis, not only survived but became the greatest cyclist of all-time? 

Keep in mind, EVERY other top rider during Armstrong's prime tested positive for cheating one way or another.  These riders were the best in the sport and in peak condition who never went through such arduous cancer treatments as Armstrong, yet they still couldn't beat him even while cheating!  This man went from almost dying to the cream of the crop in one of the most physically-demanding sports and beat all of his cheating competition...and we are supposed to believe that in this day and age with the revelations across all sports over the last few years?

Maybe he is a complete miracle.  I give the guy all the credit in the world for his fight against his cancer and the incredible effort he has undertaken trying to fight cancer worldwide.  Maybe he did make himself into the best cyclist of all time without PEDs or cheating, but my brain won't let me wrap my head around it.  It is a comment on the sad state of sports and PEDs.

Armstrong won the Tour de France seven times, but I think he was using more than champagne to get by.

The Cavs: The Day After

As I sat down to write something about last night's unexpected premature end to the Cleveland Cavaliers season, I realize that I am one of the lucky ones among Cleveland sports fans.

It isn't that I was able to leave the area to move to Atlanta, but it was my relationship with sports that makes me so fortunate. To some people that may sound a little crazy since the only 2002 Ohio State Buckeyes football team has won a title from the teams closest to my heart.

However, the perspective gained from being a Cleveland sports fan, when added to my background beneath the fans-only surface of sports, allows me to take a different view than many. I have seen what goes on behind the scenes and I have seen how players, coaches and front offices work.

I have also seen how fans react and how sometimes they don't have the big picture or a true handle on what is going on. Fans are fans for a reason. They are passionate and driven to support and love their teams. This is great, but it exposes many to emotions and feelings that sometimes get the best of them or become too much.

It is a fine line. Part of what makes sports so great is that passion and love, but for those with such a tough history with so much unfulfilled promise as Cleveland sports fans it actually can turn in to a type of illness that spreads through a community.

I am not "freaking out" today. I am not crying or reading everything I can find on the internet about what went wrong and where LeBron is headed next. The season is over and they didn't get it done.

There is not much more to add to that. It does no good to look back and nitpick about the coaching, lack of chemistry or the inconsistent and sometimes baffling play on the court. That is for Danny Ferry, Dan Gilbert and LeBron James to decide, not me.

In the coming weeks with LeBron's free-agency decision looming, much will be written and said. The two Dans need to figure out what they plan to do whether James returns or not. In either case, these are not my decisions. I have no impact on these men and whatever decisions they come to I will have to live with. They may not be the ones I would have made, but I refuse to let myself get caught up in the fray.

I think that is an important perspective for many angst-ridden Clevelanders. Let it play out, take a deep breath and it will be what it will be. Getting too caught up in it makes no sense.

For instance, let's take dying. We have no control over the fact one day all of us will have our time end on this planet. Worrying and fixating on this will do nothing but make cause sadness, anger, frustration and many other feelings across the board. So what do we do? We live our lives, knowing in the back of our head that looms but not letting it handicap our ability to live and be happy. These basketball decisions are not to the level of dying, unless you count the possible death of basketball in Cleveland, but the point is the same. We can't worry about it and what it will be, it will be.

LeBron won't be a free agent until July 1 and over the next six weeks the talk will be insufferable. Keep in mind, however, that nothing can happen until then. So, sit back and take a deep breath because the answers will come soon enough and there is no sense in yelling to the highest mountain (or loudest sports-talk radio mouth).

Am I bummed the Cavaliers season finished as it did? Absolutely, but these feelings aren't new. My sincere hope is all of these disappointments over the years will make that first title since 1964 mean that much more.

I just hope I'm around to live it.

My hope is one day a Cleveland title will mean even more after so many photos like this.