The Show.

Recently, as I scrolled through ESPN.com, I stumbled upon an article by Buster Olney about who he thinks are the 15 most irreplaceable players in baseball. Unfortunately, I was not able to see the list because you have to be an ESPN "Insider," to see it (and to no surprise, all it takes to be an insider is about 7 bucks a month.) So I thought to myself, instead of paying ESPN to see this list, why not make my own? After all, I think my list may be a little different than Buster's (for example, I'm only going to put the top 12, not 15), although I guess I'll never know how differnt our list's will be unless I become an exclusive insider.

Now, when I'm talking irreplaceable, I'm talking about guys who are leaders and producers - guys who, if I were a GM, I would never think about trading. I realize that this list will be disagreed with, and it may even infuriate people, but that's what makes it fun, right? One last point about the list: some may notice that no starting pitchers are on the list. This is because a starting pitcher is literally replaced every game, and no matter how good a starting pitcher may be for a game, he is inevitably replaceable. For each player I'll provide a few key stats, (and now keep in mind these stats don't count for everything) so without further ado, THE LIST:



Albert Pujols
- 30+ home runs in first 9 seasons in the league.
- Career average of .332
- .322 postseason average
- 5 Silver Slugger awards
- 3 NL MVP awards
- 100+ RBI's every year in the league







Joe Mauer
- Career average: .325
- Batted .365 in 2009
- 2 Gold Glove awards
- 3 Silver Slugger awards
- 2009 AL MVP
- *Minnesota product - hometown hero!*







Derek Jeter
- 5 World Series rings.
- Career average: .316
- 4 Gold Gloves
- 4 Silver Slugger Awards
- In 138 postseason games: 55 home runs, .313 average.







Ichiro Suzuki
- Career average: .333
- Gold Glover award every year since 2001
- 2001 AL MVP
- Averages 1.4 hits a game in his career








Mariano Rivera
- Inning to hit ratio: 1/0.76
- Inning to home run ratio: 18/1
- Over 1000 strikeouts in less than 1150 innings pitched
- 5 AL Relief Man awards







Ryan Howard
- Averages 48 home runs a year
- Averages 148 RBI's a year
- 2006 NL MVP
- Averages 104 runs a year








Ryan Braun
- Averages 37 home runs a year
- Averages 119 RBI's a year
- 2 Silver Slugger awards
- 26 years old







Evan Longoria
- Averages 33 home runs a year
- Averages 115 RBI's a year
- 1 Gold Glove award
- 1 Silver Slugger award
- 24 years old







Hanley Ramirez
- Career average: .314
- Averages 27 home runs a year
- 2 Silver Slugger awards
- Averages 42 stolen bases a year
- 26 years old







Miguel Cabrera
- Currently batting .337
- Career average: .313
- Averages 33 home runs a years
- Averages 119 RBI's a year
- 2 Silver Slugger awards
- Currently leads AL in home runs (20) and RBI's (68)







Chase Utley
- Career average: .294
- Averages 105 RBI's a year
- 4 Silver Slugger awards
- Averages 110 runs a year
- Averages 29 home runs a year







Vladimir Guerrero
- Career average: .322
- Current average of .336
- Averages 36 home runs a year
- Averages 117 RBI's a year
- 4 Silver Slugger awards
- 2004 AL MVP

This week we saw attention breifly divert from South Africa as the longest tennis match in history spanned over a 3 day period. In a first round match at Wimbeldon, John Isner defeated Nicholas Mahut after a match that lasted for over 11 hours. This, in the midst of the World Cup, the proclaimed biggest event in all of sports, grabbed the attention of the sports world. But why? It was only a first round match, so the implications were minimal, right? While this may be true, it's the idea of the competition that made it so appealing, so exciting. We saw two men who refused to budge, playing longer than anyone ever had so they could win, despite it being just a first round match. On the flip side, we've seen a World Cup filled with equality, not victory. In round play alone there were 14 draws. I know that at the end of the day the teams with the most points get into the next round, but should a team like the US really get in after winning only one game? I think it's great that they got in, but they got in because of the way the system is set up, and it's clear to see that the system is seriously flawed. The World Cup is one of, if not the, biggest event in all of sports, yet we're not seeing the true nature of sport when we watch it. The idea of a sport is to determine who is the best, and we saw a tennis match this week that reaffirmed the importance of that determination.

In the World Cup's round of 16 and beyond there are no ties, but rather shootouts. In fact, the final of the 2006 World Cup was decided by a shootout. Does this not seem right to anyone else? After two teams battle for weeks to get to the final, in arguably the biggest event in all of sports, should the outcome really come down to one shooter and a goalie? I don't think it's fair to the teams or the fans to have it come down to that, and I think the only way you can determine a champion is to simply play the game.

Of course, the World Cup is still a great event with all the ties, but why not play it out? At the 90th minute, why not play sudden death to get a winner? I understand that it's hard to score, but doesn't that make it more exciting? I think the World Cup could appeal to a lot more people, especially here in the US, if there weren't as many draws - it could turn indifference into passion. So even though soccer is in the spotlight right now, maybe it should take a peek out to learn about how to make the sport even better.

It's funny how a player's value can sometimes show when he's not on the playing field. Jimmy Rollins has been out of the Phillie's line-up since May 22nd with a strained right calf, and coincidentally, the team has struggled mightily since then. The Phillies are 6-15 since that date, one of their worst droughts in recent history. Over the past 30 days, the Phillies' average has been .223. That's the worst in all of baseball. That's right. Dead last. Keep in mind this is a team who has been known for having one of the best line-ups in baseball over the past couple years. However, this line-up, which has been so dominant over the last few years, is just not the same, and many tribute it to Rollins' absence. This absence is clearly bad for the Phillies, but for Rollins, it could be a blessing in disguise.

In 12 games this year Rollins hit .341 with 10 walks. The three-time Gold Glover and 2007 NL MVP has a career batting average of .275, but his true value may have been overlooked until now. Without Rollins the Phillies lose a leadoff man who can reach base and still be a threat. Rollins gives the Phillies speed on the bases, and he's a threat to pitchers no matter where he is on the field. So as Phillies fans sit and watch a Rollins-less line-up, an appreciation is mounting for the true value Rollins brings to this club - value that may earn him a lot of money come contract time.

Rollins is currently in the fifth year of a five year, $40 million contract. The Phillies exercised a team option for 2011 this past December. He's earning a big time salary now, but if the Phillies were to come out of this slump upon J-Roll's return, then what? There's no doubt that he gives this line-up life, and if they got back to their old form - the form they were in before he got hurt - it would speak volumes to the value he offers. Additionally, Rollins would have tons of leverage heading into contract negotiations, and he could take those negotiations just about anywhere in the league. Imagine for a second his agent negotiating a new contract, and simply saying, "see what happens when he's not in the line-up?"

With the Phillies recent re-signing of Ryan Howard, who signed for $125 million over five years, and the possibility of the team re-signing Jayson Werth, it is conceivable that Rollins may want to go somewhere that will pay him top dollar. It will take time to see what happens, but since Rollins has been out the Phillies have slumped to third in their division. There's still a lot of baseball left to be played this season, and it's clear that J-Roll's absence isn't the cause of all the Phillies' struggles, but what's also clear is that this line-up isn't the same without him, and as the Phillies sink downward, Rollins' image is floating up.

Over the years hockey has slowly been pushed down the totem pole of the professional sports ranks in the United States. TV ratings and attendance have been low while audience apathy has been up. However, the year that hockey has had could change that. This year two major events - the Olympics, and the NHL Playoffs - renewed feelings of excitement, pride, and passion towards the sport that was all but disregarded in the US. The only question is, were these events enough to make the excitement they produced last?

With the Olympics we saw a perfect script. The underdog US team, who wasn't even considered a top 3 contender, up against the powerhouse that is Team Canada for the ultimate prize. Two teams, two bitter rivals, battling for the gold, and just when people thought it couldn't get any better, it did when the game went into overtime and was won by none other than the man with the fairytale career, Sidney Crosby. This scenario could not have been more perfect for the game of hockey. The world saw exactly what it wanted to see, and this match up even peaked interest in the States which is exactly what the sport needs. In Canada, it wouldn't matter if Belarus were playing Latvia in the finals - they would still watch it. In the US, however, the case is slightly different. For the US to be interested they have to be involved, and because of this it's easy to see why it was so crucial for hockey that the US get into the finals. Even the fact that the US lost makes it even more favorable for the sport in my opinion. This way, instead of America assuming a typical cocky attitude about their team, they're hungry to win, and this should make hockey very appealing and exciting for Americans in the next Winter Olympics.

Following suit with the Olympics, the NHL Playoffs were extremely exciting this year. We saw four game 7's, a #8 seed beat a #1 seed in the first round, a team come back from an 0-3 series deficit, and an all-American final that didn't include the Red Wings or Penguins. This year's Cup Final was an historic one for the NHL as they got their highest TV ratings in 36 years. It's evident why this Final was appealing to Americans - two big-market cities, both with long Stanley Cup droughts, that were hard-working, physical, and evenly-matched teams. The series was close too, as four of the six games were decided by one goal, and two of those four games were in OT.

This kind of hockey is exactly what the sport needs to survive, and eventually thrive. For hockey to make a comeback and escape the depths of sports obscurity the US must have attentive and involved fans. Without a strong following from a US audience, the sport could crumble and be an afterthought. Luckily, hockey created some serious momentum this year. Many people who were not fans became "on the fence" fans, and many fans who were "on the fence" about hockey before this season crossed over and became legitimate fans. The key now is for the NHL to find a way to get fans over and away from this metaphorical fence.
The NHL has to take action and be proactive to carry their recent success and make it long-lasting, and now is the time to do it because it's as good a time as they've ever had.

With the multitude of issues in the sports world it's at times difficult to talk about everything, and even when you do it's exhausting. So, with that in mind, today will be the first ever, "Around the Horn" post. It'll be a monthlyish post where I select an issue from each major sport and briefly dissect and potentially come up with a solution to said issues. So, for this first installment, our issues from our four major sports are:

- Hockey: Jeremy Roenick Crying
- Football: USC's Violations and Punishments
- Baseball: Perfect Game Blunder
- Basketball: The Cloud of Free Agency


Issue #1 - Jeremy Roenick Crying

This may not be hockey's biggest issue at the moment, but it is an issue nonetheless. At the conclusion of the Stanley Cup Finals, as the Chicago Blackhawks emotionally hoisted the Stanley Cup for the first time in 49 years, emotions were also running high in NBC's analyst booth, leading to the following:



Are you kidding me!? If there's no crying in BASEBALL, how can there be crying in HOCKEY!? It bothers me that this happened because despite his stint in Chicago, Roenick also played in Philly. As an analyst he's supposed to be objective but here he is going on about, "the Chicago Blackhawks, man." When he's behind the booth he needs to be objective, other than that he can cry all he wants.


Issue #2 - USC Violations and Punishments

The NCAA has decided to step in and punish USC after it was discovered that certain players had accepted money, among other things, while still at school. The funny thing about this though is that the 3 central figures in this issue - Reggie Bush, OJ Mayo, and Pete Carroll - are all safely residing outside the not-so-long-reaching arms of the NCAA. Yes, they've taken away some wins, but at the end of the day the people who are mainly being punished are the ones who had nothing to do with the incident. Think of the juniors and seniors in USC's football program. They've paid their dues for years and now they won't have the chance to win a bowl game as leaders of their team because of how the NCAA has handled this situation. Also, if the NCAA is going to bust players and programs for accepting money, maybe they should open their eyes next NFL Draft when all the first round picks are walking up to the stage with $10,000 watches, diamond earings and $3,000 suits. How'd they get those? Allowance money?


Issue #3 - Perfect Game Blunder

This story has been beaten to death, and rightfully so, but I think two important things stand out:
1) The League made the right decision not giving Galarraga a perfect game. Yes, everyone wanted to see him get the perfect game because everyone knows he deserved it, but if you reverse that call you have to put into question every missed call baseball has ever had, big or small. I don't think you can jeopordize the integrity of the game like that, because the human element is part of the game after all. If that was the first out of the game would people have the same reaction? Of course not, and you can't react a certain way because of the circumstance, which in this case just happened to be an amazing individual feat.
2) The reaction of Jim Joyce was perfect. He admitted he was wrong countless times, and it's hard to be mad at the guy because of how sincere and genuine he was. In fact, I feel worse for Joyce than I do for Galarraga. Hopefully athletes who screw up in the future can learn from this guy and admit when they're wrong, rather than blaming others or avoiding consequences.

Issue #4: NBA Free Agency

The vast cloud of free agency has overshadowed this years NBA Playoffs, (which isn't too hard to do considering the overall excitement of this year's playoffs) and unfortunately this cloud seems to be turing into a thunderstorm. The national media has presented every possible scenario of where these free agents could go, constantly breaking down and analyzing each one as if the media is in the front office negotiating. At times it seems like they make stories and rumors up just to maintain any grasp they may have on their audience. I have a hard time regarding any opinions I hear because no one knows, and it doesn't make much sense to me to talk about it until these players are actually signed. At the present moment the NBA Finals are under way and all attention should be directed there, however the minds of analysts continue to stay on these situations that will not be resolved until July, so I suggest we wait to see what happens and then discuss it.

At the conclusion of every NHL hockey season the Stanley Cup is ceremoniously handed from the league's commissioner to the captain of the winning team, and this exchange is considered sacred. The championship team watches as their leader accepts one of the most cherished and sought-after items in all of sports. Once the captain accepts the Cup, he will inevitably raise it triumphantly over his head and then lower is so he can kiss its body, which is littered with the names of every person who has ever had the pleasure of hoisting it. As this takes place, one of the most important moments and hockey and perhaps one of the most underrated events in sports takes place: the passing of the Cup. This first exchange, beginning with the captain, is in no way random - it's a selective choice made by the teams leader, and it is intended to be an honor. To have the Cup passed to you first means being one of the most monumental, respected, and important figures on your team. The sequence in which the Cup is passed is in many ways a sort of pecking order in which those who have earned the right to touch the Cup first will. Many times we see the Cup go to a long time veteran who has gone a whole career without winning a Cup. We saw this in 2001 when Ray Borque won his first Cup as a member of the Colorado Avalanche after 22 years in the league. So as we reach the end of this year's Stanley Cup Final round, the question has to be asked: Who gets the cup first? Normally, the first people you look at are the assistant captains. The Blackhawks' A's are Duncan Keith and Patrick Sharp and the A's for the Flyers are Chris Pronger, Jeff Carter, Simon Gagne and Kimmo Timmonen.

If the Blackhawks win I think it would make most sense for the trophy to go to Duncan Keith first - hes been nominated for a Norris Trophy this year as the league's best defenseman and he has been one of the most reliable players on the Blackhawks' roster this year. At this point in the playoffs he has 16 points in 21 games played, and during the playoffs he has averaged 28 minutes a game. If it doesn't go to Keith it'll most likely go to Sharp, but it'd be very surprising if that were the case.

For the Flyers, it seems that no player has been more feared, dominant, or respected than Chris Pronger. He's playing 29 minutes a game and has been an absolute force on the blue line. The Flyers have depended on him to shut down opposing teams' top guns through the entire playoffs and he has met the task. His competitiveness and toughness have made it extremely difficult on opponents to get in and around the net, which is a big reason why the Flyers are giving up less than 2.6 goals a game in the playoffs. Of course, Pronger has already won a Cup and if it were to go to another assistant captain who doesn't have a Cup, I'd pick Kimmo Timonen.

Of course, one of the great stories of this year's playoffs have been the Flyers' Ian Laperriere. He is a hero in Philadelphia. The fan's love this guy, and he is one of the most respected players in the whole league. People would love to see the Cup go to him, especially after all he has sacrificed for this team. The guy doesn't wear an A on his jersey but he plays like he wears a C. Despite not being an actual captain, he's considered a leader by anyone who has ever seen him play, and it would be awesome to see the Cup go to him.

The best part of this whole process to me is the fact that everyone is regarded. It doesn't matter if you were the best player on the team or the worst because you, in some way, contributed to the feat of winning the Cup, and that's what this tradition is all about. So as we watch the series come to a close we'll soon watch the camaraderie of the winning team as they share what they all earned together.

I feel like there's a big flaw in baseball's All-Star voting system. Every season, as we get closer and closer to the Midsumemr Classic, we see fans scramble to get as many players from their team in as possible. Of course at first glance this seems like the right thing to do, because after all, the All-Star Game is for the fans as well as the players. The reason I have a problem with it though is because in baseball the All Star game actually means something, which is a another issue all in itself, but we'll just stick with the voting issue today.

Keeping in mind that the MLB All-Star Game counts for something - the league that wins receives home field advantage in the World Series - presents a serious problem when it comes to the voting system of the game itself. If I'm a fan of an NL team, I want the NL to win so in the case that my team makes it to the World Series, they'll have home field advantage. So, wouldn't it make sense for me to vote for AL players who are perhaps not deserving, thus allowing my team a better chance to win? Now, I'm not one to actually do this - I rarely vote at all because of my opposition to the system - but you have to believe that there are people out there that will do this as an attempt to unlevel the playing field, which isn't fair to the players. Does anyone remember the 2007 NHL All-Star voting campaign? The same, "fan-only" voting system that is employed in the MLB also exists in the NHL, and in 2007 a sort of, "ballot box stuffing" incident occurred in which Rory Fitzpatrick - a Vancouver Canucks defenseman with 1 point in 22 games - was in second place for votes amongst West Coast defensemen when the preliminary votes were announced. This sort of thing isn't right for a number of reasons. For one, Fitzpatrick wasn't deserving of an All-Star spot, yet his campaign could have worked because the system is flawed. Luckily, Fitzpatrick was not named to the All-Star Game, but it's easy to see that fan-only votes can result in undeserving players being selected, and when this happens it's unfair to the players who deserve it. It's a big deal for a player to make an All-Star Game if hes paid his dues, and to have it spoiled because of a flaw in the system isn't fair.

Another issue with baseball's All-Star Game voting is this whole, "player campaigning" disgrace. In baseball's current voting system there is a one-player fan-vote after the 33-man roster is selected. Last year Shane Victorino was one of the five NL players up for this final spot, and a frenzy amongst Phillies fans ensued. Whether or not Victorino was deserving of the final spot was disregarded because the fans only cared about getting as many players from their team in as possible. Now I'm not criticizing Phillies fans because this happens with nearly every team, but in the current system all it comes down to is the pride of a fan, and with that he'll vote in a player based on the jersey he wears, as opposed to the numbers he produces.

Of course people are going to argue that the All Star Game is about what the fans want to see, and I agree that they should have a say, but shouldn't fans get the best game possible? One of two solutions would best solve that problem: 1) Limit fan voting to 1 vote instead of 25. That way, a fan has to weigh his choices a little more, and he can only vote for his favorites once. 2) Make it a "funnel" vote, for lack of a better term, in which the fans select say the top 5 at each position, then the managers and/or players and/or owners vote amongst those 5 for the starters. This way you have the fans voting in their favorites while the ultimate selection is left to those who know the game best, which in turn will lead to the best game possible.

Fans should certainly have a say in who gets to play in an All Star Game, but when the game actually counts for something the stakes are a little higher, and when this is the case it should be done right, and a popularity contest is not the right way to do it. Of course, if Major League Baseball wasn't dumb enough to actually make the All-Star Game count for something as big as the World Series, we wouldn't have this mess, but like I said before, that is another issue for another time.

For the third straight year Marian Hossa will be playing in the Stanley Cup Finals, but if the Blackhawks manage to win it will only be his first Cup. For the last two years Hossa has found himself on the losing end of the championship series. In 2008 as a member of the Penguins his team lost in 6 games to the Red Wings. Hungry for a championship, he signed a one-year contract with the Red Wings the following year, but lost in Game 7 of the Finals - to the Penguins. So is this guy cursed? Or is it just a coincidence?

Most people are favoring the Blackhawks to beat the Flyers in the Stanley Cup Finals. They have a very balanced team, a lot of depth and size, and their goalie has been on fire all playoffs. But should Hossa have Hawks fans worried? Hossa has struggled to score in the playoffs, tallying just 2 goals in 16 games. Last year with Detroit he only scored 6 goals in 23 playoffs games. If Chicago wants to win, they're going to need Hossa to score. He does have 11 assists in this year's playoffs, but he's capable of scoring more goals, and they're going to need him to do that if they want to win.

It should be interesting to see whether he can finally get that elusive ring, or if he'll have to wait even longer. If he doesn't win this year, he'll have to continue his luck with Chicago because this is the first year of a 12 year contract, and seeing as he's going to be 43 when that contract is up, it's hard to believe that he'll win one at all if he doesn't win it in Chicago. So while Marian and Blackhawk's fans pray that the third time is the charm, you know that every fan in Philly is hoping the curse will prevail.

The NBA Lottery is about chance, which makes part of the Draft about chance. Tuesday night we saw 14 teams lend their futures to the hands of fate and luck, and after seeing the outcome defy the odds and chances, it becomes clear that this is the way drafts should be in every league.

Most leagues don't distribute their draft picks by luck-of-the-draw. In most leagues, the worse the team, the higher the pick. Why should it be that way though? Why should teams be rewarded for being the worst? I understand that it's an attempt to balance the playing field, but I think there should be a little more excitement, a little more chance, and a little more effort, because that's what sports themselves are all about. Now this is for my open-minded friends if they're out there: in my ideal sports world, teams would compete for higher draft picks. Take the 6 worst teams in a league and play a round-robin. Of course, most people would say, "The worst team would lose all their games though," to which I would respond with a few handy statistics and some logic. Let's take the NBA for instance - this year, the Nets were the worst team in basketball by far. They won 12 games. This is common knowledge for most, but what a lot of people tend to overlook are some of the quality wins New Jersey had this year. They beat San Antonio, Boston, Chicago twice and Charlotte twice. These were all playoff teams, so it's not like the Nets were incapable of winning a tough game. With that in mind, let's say we took the 6 worst teams in the NBA this year - the Nets, Sacramento, Washington, Minnesota, Golden State and Philadelphia. Have them play a round-robin where the winningest team gets the highest pick. A lot of people would think that it's be unfair to the worst team, but why not make a team earn a high pick? Plus, now that they actually have something to play for, the results and effort might be a little different than you'd think. I think the fact that the Nets had nothing to play for pretty much all year explains some of their losses, but in a system in which they have something to play for, you might see a different team.

Now for all the nay-sayers out there, don't get too upset because this would never happen. I'm just trying to prove a point. I think teams should have to earn their picks if they're that desperate to get better. This is partly why I think the NBA Draft Lottery is a great thing - it doesn't guarantee that the worst team gets the best pick. Why not adopt a system like this in all sports drafts? I think it's great that the Nets didn't get the first pick - now we'll see if the organization has what it takes to deal with what they've been given in their attempt to rise from the ashes. We're never going to see a system in which teams have to earn a pick unfortunately, but the next best thing would be lending their futures to chance - that seems fair enough. Chance plays such a big part in sports - when you watch a game it's full of players and coaches taking chances, taking risks, and the uncertainty makes the games exciting! So why not extend the excitement to the offseason. Make it so a terrible team has to deal with the cards they've been dealt, rather than being handed the pot.

It's that time of year again, and we're down to the final four teams in the NHL. In the West we have the #1 seed San Jose Sharks up against the #2 seed Chicago Blackhawks, while in the East it's the #7 Philadelphia Flyers against the #8 Montreal Canadiens.

WEST MATCHUP: Sharks vs. Blackhawks

This is going to be a really offensive series. Both teams have some really big guns on offense, but it should be interesting because both squads have good goalies as well. The Blackhawks have been challenged more to this point and I think they're better off for it. They're also getting big time production from their big time players: Toews, Kane, Sharp and Hossa have combined for 59 points in 12 games. The Sharks are getting production as well, but I think Chicago has more weapons. I give the edge to Chicago because of their weapons offensively, and I think they have a slight advantage in between the pipes as well.
PREDICTION: Blackhawks in 6













EAST MATCHUP: Flyers vs. Canadiens

No one would have guessed that a 7 and 8 seed would be playing for a trip to the Stanley Cup Finals, yet here they are, and deservedly so. The Canadiens took down the #1 overall seed in the first round and the defending champs last round in 7 games. They're getting a ton of production up front - Mike Camalleri is scoring at will as he has 12 goals and 18 points in 14 playoff games. The Canadiens have 4 players with over 10 points, and Jaroslav Halak continues to dominate. Through 14 games he has a 2.42 GAA and a .933 SV%. However, in a series against Montreal it counts a lot to have home ice advantage. The Flyers will benefit from the extra home game. Defensively the Flyers have played very strongly. They lead the playoffs with the least goals against average while also scoring over 3 goals a game. Their offense is surging, and getting Simon Gagne back in the line-up proved to be the difference in their series against Boston. If the Flyers keep playing this dynamic, all-around game I think they'll come through and make it to the Finals.

PREDICTION: Flyers in 7












Stay tuned - Finals predictions are soon to come!