Dear ESPN:

Please stop talking about LeBron James' "impending" free agency (in July of 2010). There is still 3/4 of the current NBA season, in which Lebron's Cavs are looking like a true contender. Then there is another FULL season to go through and then he will become a free agent. That is, of course, he doesn't use his player option in 2010 or he signs an extension with Cleveland or is traded and signs an extension with that team. Just because he happens to be playing in NY against the Knicks and the Knicks have made two trades that scream cap space clearing for that summer's free agent market doesn't mean you have to cover it ad nauseum. They even sent Rachel Nichols to talk about it courtside. Is there no other story than a potential one 2 years from now? Thank you in advance.

All Day, and this Morning

I want to go down as being the person that coined the phrase "All Day, and this Morning." It has a variety of uses, mostly applicable while watching sports. When Joe Buck or Mike Tirico starts talking about how "Manning had alll day, and this morning" when he had abundant time to make a play. In a sentence: "Eddie House had all day, and this morning to shoot that 3." Mark it down its gonna be huge.

Boston's Blueprint

Warning: This will be a major jerk off of Boston sports. I will also provide, however, a persuasive argument to support the following claim. Boston sports teams have become the model of excellence in 3 of the 4 major sports. The Patriots, Red Sox and Celtics all have the attention of the rest of the class. We will start with the longest and most replicated but never quite duplicated example.

The New England Patriots burst onto the scene in 2001 with an unknown quarterback taking over for the face of a franchise and arguably the league (he was the highest paid player with a $100 M contract), Drew Bledsoe. The two touchdown (re. 14 point underdogs) beat the high flying Rams after an improbable late drive (Kneel that John Madden) and a legendary kick. The Patriots had shocked the world but it wasn't the first time that night they did. After the long drawn out introductions for the Rams, the Patriots "electing to be introduced as a team" came out of the tunnel as a unit. So began, the emulation of a dynasty. Your Super Bowl pregame is much shorter thanks to the Patriots, as this has become the status quo for every Bowl since.

The Patriots won with a mix of scouting/drafting, inexpensive veteran free agents and great coaching. They have shown time and again they know where to invest their cap money (Brady, Seymour) and when not to (Lawyer Milloy, Deion Branch). They know when a guy has more left in the tank (Rodney Harrison, Corey Dillon) and when its time to let go (Bledsoe, McGinest). They win with coaching, preparation and the luck any team needs to sustain winning. This is the model of excellence in the NFL. Every team wants to be the Patriots with their superb front office and scouting, superior coaching and a team first attitutde. The 9-0 Titans and Jeff Fisher would probably agree with me here.

The Boston Red Sox are a bit of a hybrid of this example. They have the money to toss around so not only can they sign big free agents and keep their homegrowns from leaving when arbitration/free agency hits, but, and this is something that gets overlooked by most, they can scout in far reaches of the world and drop bonus money to sign high draft picks that other teams stray away from because they simply know they can't cough up $5M for uncertainty. Revenue sharing is starting to buck this trend, as evidenced by the Rays success this year, but it certainly is still a factor in the success of the Red Sox.

The Red Sox have put a lot of money and effort into their scouting. They are looking where lots of teams haven't (China, Taiwan and Latin America) and they are drafting a mix of raw talent and finished, college type players. Their team this year, while falling short of the World Series, was evidence of the Red Sox scouting and development prowess. Pedroia won a gold glove and there is a good chance for him to be named MVP next week. Papelbon was dominant at the end of the bullpen and Lester looks like an ace. Throw in production from Youkilis, Ellsbury and Masterson, the Red Sox have a promising future filled with these homegrowns and some key trade/free agent acquistions (Bay and Ortiz). The Red Sox have traded their prospects wisely (such as Hanley Ramirez, a stud no doubt for Lowell and Beckett) for certain results and when to hang on to them (such as Lester and Ellsbury for Santana this past offseason. They have their bad ones (see Gagne last year) but again, they have the money to make up for this.

You have seen the price of minor leaguers go way up and it started with the Red Sox. You have seen an increasing number of foreign players in areas where they hadn't been taken from before. A premium has been put on scouting and development and the Red Sox have led the field in the MLB.

The Celtics have the most recent recipe for success that has been emulated. Teams saw what tenacity on defense could do for a team. Holding opponents around 90 points a game gave you a great chance to win, regardless of if there were hot hands on offense. You can already see this emphasis around the league early this season. Teams spent the offseason acquiring defensive minded players and the cliche the name on the front is more important than the one on the back has made a comeback. It will be interesting to see how this trend develops with the Celtics at the helm.

Three teams, three sports and three highly respected teams in their individual leagues. The Patriots have had the longest reign on top as they are still proving they can win with a team attitude and great coaching even as injuries ravage their squad. The Red Sox have pioneered several new attitudes in the MLB although they are certainly rivaled but many teams in their execution. Defense will be the increasingly emphasized for this season and beyond because of the Celtics' success last season. It will be interesting to see these teams and their counterparts take into the future seasons.

Digital Age

We just witnessed a presidential race that went on for more than a year. No incriminating story or photo about each candidate that was available was kept private. We had pictures of Mr. Obama with Mr. Ayers, we had pictures of John McCain drinking at his base and everything in between. As everyone one under 40 (its biggest increase in users is in the 30-39 range) takes to Facebook and other social networking sites, indiscriminately posting pictures of themselves doing dumb things, at what election year do we reach the inevitable photos from Facebook that ruin a candidates image?

We have been hearing how hiring managers are looking to these sites for more insight on candidates they interview or are looking to interview and how these sites ruin/promote a persons chances. When is the saturation point of social networking site users being the majority of the pool for political candidates? My guess is it will start at the local level, Mayors and the like and steadily move into state representatives and then on the national level, eventually to the President and/or his Cabinet members. How long before I get to see One of Our Future Leaders smoking a giant blunt or funneling a beer naked from a Facebook photo or an old friend's cell phone camera?

I feel its getting to the point where there are people recording all sorts of dumb things people do and storing it on their tera byte hard drive until they need leverage against someone in power. One of the thousands of creepers and paparazzi out there is bound to be hanging onto video or pictures just waiting for the right moment to cash in on their prize. People will pay good money to save their reputation or magazines will pay good money to get the inside scoop to destroy them.

Be wise all. You are almost always on camera in a big city such as NYC, at least in public areas. And you never know when that guy with the Iphone is going to snap that picture of you pounding beer out of a shoe.

Election '08

Well, with election day tomorrow, I guess it is time for the wRite, Rinse, Repeat official endorsement for president, no doubt trumping that of the WSJ or New York Times or even PerezHilton.com. We all know (or should know) the facts, policies/(empty) promises that each candidate possesses as this campaign has gone on for essentially (at least) twelve months. With all that in mind, I am endorsing Mr. McCain for president. Not McCain/Palin, John McCain. Let me throw my simultaneous endorsement with the people who are terrified of Sarah Palin becoming president. I am simply going to assume that with the best doctors in the world, he can be kept functional at least until its time for reelection and that he doesn't already have any number of degenerative diseases that could make him less "there" than Ronald Reagan was for at least his last two years when Alzheimer's was setting in.

My reasons for this are varied but can be succinctly expressed this way: For a position that should require a resume that goes on longer than a Best Buy receipt, Mr. Obama's is exceptionally thin while Mr. McCain's is double sided and lamenated. The next president will be elected into an atmosphere that has no rival in American history, at least on the global scale. (Lincoln's election prior to Fort Sumter could be argued because it would have severely altered the shape of America and the Americas during the age of imperialism and through the World Wars. However, after globalization and the double headed monster of an unparralleled attack on belief in Capitalism and a deepening worldwide recession and the reclosing of the Iron Curtain across new global lines this one could be much more perilous. Sorry to sound like a doomsdayer, but for the purposes of this crude blog, I will make this fact from here on.) Mr. Obama provides too much unknown and far left thinking for the role he is going to need to play on both domestic and foreign stages. As a small microcosm example of some unknowns he could steer us to, his tax reductions and the increased spending his agenda would cause would put us even further on borrowed time until the bill collectors from China and even old friends such as Germany and France come calling. His plans are just too risky.

Mr. McCain will provide more known course. I would compare it to your investment portfolio. The more risk you are willing to take on within that portfolio, the more extreme your results will be, both good and bad. This is what you have with Mr. Obama, one with lots of start up companies and a whole lot of that risk. Mr. McCain is like your 401K (this most recent plunge withholding), you have more manageable and forseeable growths and peace of mind that those treasury bonds and other slow growth investments are backed by the federal government. With that example, I do think Mr. Obama could be better than Mr. McCain. However, at this juncture in my life with it already being a transition out of the fantasy land that is college, I want to keep the future on a steadier course than Mr. Obama offers.