When people say Lebron’s departure from Cleveland will hit home it is not just the emotional effect of the Ohio native leaving but the economic hit the Cleveland Cavaliers and the city of Cleveland will take.  The impact of Lebron James leaving could result into losses up to $250 million according to former basketball executives.   Cleveland has suffered from the general national economic downturn and they don’t want any other negative hits. Ohio currently has an unemployment rate of 10.7 percent, compared to the national average of 9.7% according to Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. Losing Lebron James will add to what is already a weak economic climate for the area.  Cleveland will survive but a Lebron exit will hurt. 

In the seven years since the Cleveland Cavilers drafted Lebron in 2003 average attendance per game has gone from 11, 497 to 20, 562 fans per year.  This has brought downtown Cleveland great business.  Local sports souvenir shops, restaurants and even taxi services have benefited from the increased tourism during the basketball season.   The Cavaliers team franchise value even rose from $258 million to the leagues 5^th best $476 million, according to Forbes.com, since acquiring James.  Even as a global icon Lebron has a huge fan base with a TV audience in China of 100 million a game.  He single handedly helped Cleveland become known on the world map.

 There is a lot of talk about the economic impact that Lebron could bring to other teams like New York, Chicago and Miami.  There are reports that he could influence economic gains of hundreds of millions in New York and even billions in Chicago but at the end of the day none of these places would experience the idea of a loss like Cleveland would.  Cleveland is not just emotionally worried about Lebron leaving, as they are financially worried.  The NBA teams and their host cities are businesses and most of the time it all comes down to money.  One major advantage Cleveland has is the ability to offer Lebron $30 million more in a max contract than any other team which could lead to them keeping their star and meal ticket.

Sources

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/nba08_Cleveland-Cavaliers_324902.html

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/jan-june10/makingsense_06-24.html

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/07/04/1544122_cleveland-might-feel-economic.html

http://jfs.ohio.gov/releases/unemp/201006/unemppressrelease.asp

www.bloomberg.com

College Football Team of the Decade

The Winner: Florida Gators

Runners-Up:  Oklahoma Sooners, Ohio State Buckeyes, USC Trojans, LSU Tigers, Texas Longhorns, Boise State Broncos

As I mentioned in my last blog, this year’s national title game could have decided who would be the team of the decade.  Texas could have matched the Gators with a second BCS Championship, but failed to do so.  Therefore, Florida is the clear cut team of the 2000s.  And, to be honest, that probably wouldn’t even have changed with a Texas win.  The Gators have been so impressive over the last ten years, and even more so in the last four, in which they won two national titles and produced some of the most exciting players in the nation, including Heisman winner. Tim Tebow, and reigning NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year, Percy Harvin.  Texas has been very impressive as well, and won a national title at the expense of fellow award contender USC.  Both schools have had massive success in two of the nation’s most difficult conferences and have produced players that have become household names, like Vince Young, Mark Sanchez, and Matt Lienart.  LSU was a dominant team at the start of the decade, winning a BCS title, and continued to be ranked in the top ten for the majority of the 2000s.  The Oklahoma Sooners provided us with a National Championship and a Heisman winner in Sam Bradford, and played in one of the best games of the decade (you’ll see that later).  Ohio State is nominated by virtue of their sheer dominance in the Big Ten conference over the past ten years, as they have consistently been the team to beat in that league.  Boise State gets a nod for their significance to recent college football history.  I plan to write a longer article on their impact on the game, but they really have been the team to legitimize the non-BCS schools as real forces in the game of college football, and will constantly be cited in anti-BCS arguments for years to come. 

Now, with college football out of the way, we turn our attention to the NBA.  Pro basketball has provided us with some great talent and great teams over the past ten years.  We have witnesses the rise of the greatest power forward to ever play basketball, an influx of talent from around the world, a tenth championship for one of the world’s greatest coaches, and two “Jordan heirs” rise to form their own identities.  We’ll start with the award for…

Player of the Decade

Winner: Kobe Bryant

The Runners-Up:  Tim Duncan, Allen Iverson, LeBron James, Shaquille O’Neal

Of all the awards I have handed out, and will hand out, this was the one I flip-flopped on most often.  The two real contenders for this award, in my opinion, are Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan. Both men have won MVPs in the decade, both men have won multiple championships, and both men have never missed an All-Star game in the past ten years.   The argument for Bryant, in my eyes, was sheer statistical dominance.  Kobe is always among the league leaders in scoring and is one of the most difficult pros to defend because of his versatile game.  On the other hand, Tim Duncan is the consummate team player.  He is a superstar who doesn’t demand the ball and works perfectly within his team and his system.  However, this is an individual award, and while Duncan plays terrific team basketball, I can’t help but think that Kobe Bryant was the best player in the NBA over the past ten years.  As far as the other three contenders are concerned, they don’t merit serious consideration because of their inability to dominate for all ten years of the 2000s.  Shaquille O’Neal, when with the Lakers, was the most fearsome player in basketball.  If you were to go back and watch clips of his wars with the Kings and Blazers, you would see a man who tossed around defenders (Vlade Divac, Arvytas Sabonis, Brian Grant) like rag dolls.  In fact, people used to argue that it was so difficult to call offensive fouls on Shaq, because his normal basketball motions were just so much more powerful than the average person’s.  However, we’ve witnessed the slow decline of this legend in the past few years, whereas Kobe and Duncan continue to stake their claim among the elite of the league.  Another player who was an absolute stud in the early 2000s is Allen Iverson.  A multiple time scoring champ and perennial All-Star, Iverson led the Sixers to the NBA finals as, essentially, their only weapon.  They did feature an aging, and still effective Dikembe Mutumbo, but Iverson was their only real scoring threat.  He was utterly fearless while driving to the lane and constantly played with any number of nagging bumps, bruises, and tweaks.  Unlike Iverson and O’Neal, LeBron James emerged a bit too late to garner real consideration for the award.  While he may very well turn out to be the best player of the five, he debuted in 2003, winning the league’s Rookie of the Year award, and has been an All-Star ever since.  He led Cleveland to the NBA finals, which is a feat in and of itself, and he’s the reigning NBA MVP.  However, It’s difficult to give the award to a guy who played in high school for the first three years of the decade, so the award goes to Kobe Bryant. 

Team of the Decade

Winner: San Antonio Spurs

Runners-Up: Boston Celtics, Dallas Maverick, Detroit Pistons, Los Angeles Lakers

When Richard Jefferson became a Spur in the beginning of this season he was asked what San Antonio was like.  His response: “Basketball heaven.”  Now, giving out this award was no easy task, as this one, once again, was a clear battle between the Lakers and the Spurs.  However, it is my firm belief that San Antonio has been the best team of the past ten years.   In the decade, the Lakers won four titles and the Spurs took home three.  Their rosters read like a who’s who of playoff basketball over the last ten years: Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, Shaquille O’Neal, David Robinson, Robert Horry (for both teams), Gary Payton, Tony Parker, Karl Malone, Manu Ginobili, Pau Gasol, Bruce Bowen, Derek Fisher, Steve Smith.  And that’s just to name a few.  If we were simply going by number of titles won in the decade, then it would go to the Lakers.  However, this is more than just a test of one’s ability to count.  Whereas the Lakers had a few rough patches over the decade, namely the post-Shaq/pre-Gasol era, the Spurs were the only team in basketball to remain a relevant and legitimate title contender every year.  Furthermore, there is much to be said about the way in which the organization has been run.  The Spurs have found a way to seamlessly renew and replace the parts of their team each year.  The Lakers, on the other hand, have made puzzling decisions, like trading Shaquille O’Neal to Miami in order to satisfy Kobe, or Phil Jacksons semi-retirement and tell-all book.  Whereas the Lakers can be described as a carnival, the Spurs can be likened to a quietly-running and reliable machine.  For me, the character and fluidity of the organization and the selflessness of its stars make up for the one fewer title.  Detroit, for a while, was the East’s version of San Antonio, as they featured a well-coached, fundamentally strong squad with a perfect team mentality, but they emerged too late and faded too quickly to garner serious consideration.  The Celtics get credit for their team of stars that shone in the latter half of the decade, but they were relatively irrelevant throughout much of the first half.  Dallas is on the list, mostly because Mark Cuban was able to turn one of the NBAs worst teams into a perennial contender.  However, San Antonio is my choice for team of the decade.

Coach of the Decade:

The Winner: Greg Popovich

The Runners-Up: Larry Brown, Phil Jackson, Doc Rivers, Jerry Sloan

Given my first two awards, should it be any surprise that this one came down to a Lakers coach and a Spurs coach.  They have coached the two most successful teams of the decade to multiple championships, but have vastly differing philosophies.  Pop tends to be a bit more hardnosed and traditional, whereas Jackson is famous for his Zen-like approach to the game.  What this really came down to, was Jackson’s short absence from the game.  With all things equal, I chose the coach that was on the bench the whole decade.  Larry Brown was also in the running, as he had some real success with Detroit and Philadelphia and has rescued Charlotte from the cellar, but his time with the hapless Knicks and struggles with Team USA have to be taken into consideration.  Also, he’s been unable to show any firm commitment to a team he coaches.  Jerry Sloan has been Mr. Consistency in the NBA, reigning as the league’s longest tenured coach.  He dealt well with the departure of Stockton and Malone and has replaced them with Carlos Boozer and Deron Williams, and has fielded some very competitive teams.  However, the Jazz are rarely serious title contenders, and that works to their detriment.  Doc Rivers, who never should have been fired from Orlando, has proven that he has what it takes to coach a championship caliber team and keep the egos of his four superstars in check.  However, he emerged as a great coach a little too late in the decade to garner serious consideration. 

Well that’s it for the NBA.  The spurs and Lakers have been the dominant teams of the decade, and they have the hardware and the players to prove it.  Up next: The NFL.  See you in a few days.

Basketball Player of the Decade

The Winner: Tyler Hansbrough

The Runners-Up: Stephen Curry, Ryan Gomes, Adam Morrison, Jameer Nelson, Emeka Okafor, J.J. Redick

For me, the real competition for this award came between Hansbrough and Redick.  However, a quick look at the stats clearly tips the scales in Psycho T’s favor.  Hansbrough scored more points than Redick while playing in the same conference and delivered a national title to his school.  He was an All-American four straight times and a former national player of the year.  Redick is quite possibly the best shooter ever to play basketball and can also boast multiple All-American selections and a Player of the year nod as well, but he was unable to lead his team to the kind of success that Hansbrough’s Tar Heels achieved.  The fact that Redick was able to achieve such things while being the most taunted (and possibly hated) player in college is even more remarkable.  Stephen Curry is an improbable success story, as he was overlooked by almost every major college.  He emerged as a star at Davidson, putting on one of the most memorable NCAA tournament performances ever in 2008.  He led the nation in scoring in 2009 and was able to lead his team to the Elite Eight with very little support around him.  Okafor led UCONN to a national title and provided stout defense and efficient scoring throughout his career.  Undoubtedly, he is college basketball’s best center of the decade, and put up an impressive academic resume as well.  Jameer Nelson led St. Joseph’s to a perfect regular season, and has actually turned out to be the best professional player on the list, notching an NBA All-Star team selection last year.  Adam Morrison went toe-to-toe with J.J. Redick for the scoring title back in their playing days, and had many people calling him the next Larry Bird.  Unfortunately, those comparisons turned out to be ludicrous.  Ryan Gomes is perhaps the most underappreciated player of the 2000s, as he was able to come out of nowhere to be a dominant player for four years at Providence.  He piled up over 2,000 points and 1,000 rebounds, doing so while being the only really threatening player on the court.  In the end though, the nod had to go to Hansbrough, as he was able to combine superior statistics on both sides of the floor with an NCAA championship for his school.

Basketball Team of the Decade

The Winners: North Carolina Tar Heels

The Runners-Up: Duke Blue Devils, Florida Gators, Kansas Jayhawks, Memphis Tigers, UCONN Huskies

UNC won two national titles in the decade and produced some of the best players in the country, including Tyler Hansbrough, Sean May, Raymond Felton, and Rashad McCants.  The introduction of Roy Williams as the head coach has made all the difference, as he’s twice turned a group of talented players into national champions.  Florida is the only other team to have won two titles this decade, and did so while maintaining their impressive nucleus of talent that included Al Horford, Joakim Noah, and Corey Brewer.  Making matters more impressive is the fact that the Gators also produced talents like Mike Miller, Anthony Roberson, and David Lee before winning the titles.  However, Florida, unlike UNC, missed the tournament a few times this decade, and suffered some horrible first round upsets in the early 2000s.  Kansas, Duke, and UCONN all won titles this decade as well, but none has had the type of consistent success of either UNC or Florida.  Memphis is the only team nominated that didn’t win a national title, but they did win a ridiculous amount of games over the last ten year under John Calipari, even though many of those wins have been officially taken off the record books due to some NCAA violations, most notably by former star Derrick Rose.  However, even if those wins didn’t “actually” happen (and they did), Memphis has to be considered among the top programs of the decade, and they did come within a few bad coaching decisions of winning the whole thing (although that would have been vacated as well).

Football Player of the Decade

The Winner: Tim Tebow

The Runners-Up: Reggie Bush, Matt Leinart, Colt McCoy, Vince Young

Tebow should be an easy choice here, as people have been hailing him as, potentially, the greatest college player of all time (although I think Jim Thorpe, Herschel Walker, and Charles Woodson might have something to say about that).  However, it’s hard to deny that he has been the best player of the decade.  He played all four year, unlike many of the other players on the list, and was a part of two national championship teams (although he only started for one).  He was nominated for the Heisman three times and won one, becoming the first sophomore in history to do so.  He is also widely recognized as a tremendous leader.  And while it, at times, can be sickening to hear the amount of praise heaped upon this young stud (GQ said that “God has a Tim Tebow complex”), but even the most adamant Tebow haters must admit that he was a great player who was a huge asset to the game.  However, I do think a strong argument can be made that McCoy could have won this award.  He won more games in his career than Tebow and, while Tebow may be a better player, McCoy is a better quarterback.  He has been nominated for two Heismans and has a chance to finish his career as a national champion.  Also, like Tebow, McCoy has been a great college player and a fine ambassador of the sport.  Leinart, Bush, and Young were all competing at the same time and all three are responsible for one of the greatest games of the decade (to be discussed later).  However, while they were all great, and two of them (Leinart and Bush) brought home Heismans, they just fall short of the other two.  Bush was utterly electrifying at USC, but only played two years and only started 14 games.  Leinart and Young both started for three years, but weren’t able to put up the numbers that Tebow and McCoy did as sophomores.  In the end though, Tebow gets the award in a rather anticlimactic decision.

I’m actually holding off my football team of the decade award until the National Championship game this year.  The award has basically come down Florida and Texas, and Texas’s performance in this game could push them ahead of the Gators.  With that, it’s time for my choice for Album of the Decade.

Album of the Decade

Winner: The Beautiful Struggle (Talib Kweli)

Runners-Up: I’m Wide Awake, It’s Morning (Bright Eyes), Lupe Fiasco’s Food & Liquor (Lupe Fiasco), Van Hunt (Van Hunt), Yellow House (Grizzly Bear)

One thing I’ve noticed when comparing my older record to newer albums is the amount of crap that tends to go into a contemporary artist’s CD.  Whereas the classic albums rarely have a bad song, today’s singers and rappers tend to produce albums that are more frequently tainted by filler material and tracks that are just plain bad.  These five albums are exceptions to the rule.  Kweli’s work stands out for being honest and heartbreaking at times, with songs like “Around my Way” and “Black Girl Pain”, while still displaying awesome beats and grooves with “We Got the Beat” and “Broken Glass”.  Lupe fiasco is one of the most unique voices in rap today and isn’t afraid of criticizing today’s music industry, in “The Instrumental”.  Bright Eyes and Grizzly bear have been at the forefront of indy rock for a while now, and I’m Wide Awake, It’s Morning and Yellow House stand out as their respective masterpieces.  Both are contemplative and understated, and Bright Eyes may have produced the song of the decade, with “Land Locked Blues”, although Grizzly Bear’s “Knife” will definitely give it a good challenge.  Van Hunt’s smooth R&B voice and clever lyrics are unparalleled in today’s world.  He is capable of heart wrenching love songs, like “What Can I Say (for Millicent)” but never takes himself too seriously, as he eventually shows in “Who Will Love Me in Winter?”  However, top to bottom, Kweli’s work is the strongest of the decade.

See you next time when I’ll be giving out the awards for professional basketball and Comedy film of the decade.

Instead of attempting an awkward and transparent transition, I’ll move on to my topic for today.  With the 2000s coming to a close, it seems appropriate to look back on the decade in sports.  With every other major sports outlet recording their “of the decades” I figured I would join in with my End of the Decade Awards.  I will be looking at various categories in both sports and pop culture (for the fun of it) and giving my picks for the best of the decade in various categories.  So without further adieu, we move to the much anticipated (and by that I mean “anticipated by no one”) baseball awards:

Pitcher of the Decade:

The Winner:  Mariano Rivera

The Runners-Up:  Roy Halladay, Randy Johnson, C.C. Sabathia, Johan Santana

Rivera is my choice for Pitcher of the Decade, and, truth be told, it was a relatively easy decision.  He’s played in all but two All-Star games in the 2000s and finished in the top five of Cy Young voting three times.  He never finished outside of the top ten in saves, having led the league twice, and posted an ERA under 2.00 six times.  Furthermore, he’s been an almost unbeatable postseason pitcher, never posting an ERA over 3.00 in the postseason this decade.  Simply put, he’s unquestionably been the most dominant pitcher in his era, and possibly ever.  His main competition for the award comes from Santana and Halladay, who have had excellent decades as well.  Santana has won two Cy Youngs and led the league in ERA three times.  However, he’s struggled in the postseason, having a career ERA of 3.97, including one postseason in which he posted a 10.80 ERA.  Halladay also has impressive stats and boasts a Cy Young award, which has always eluded Rivera, but he’s never pitched for a contender, and he’s had a few years with sub-par ERAs, including a 10.64 ERA over nineteen games to open the decade.  Randy Johnson merits consideration, having won three consecutive Cy Youngs to start the new millennium, but suffered a serious decline over the last half of the decade.  Sabathia’s career has been the opposite of Johnson’s, as he struggled to open the 2000s, having posted an ERA over 4.00 four times, but emerged as baseball’s premier starting pitcher over the latter half.  While all five nominees have had a tremendous ten years, Rivera gets the nod because of his sheer dominance throughout the entirety of the decade and his stellar postseason resume.

Manager of the Decade

The Winner: Mike Scioscia

The Runners-Up: Ron Gardenhire, Tony LaRussa, Charlie Manuel, Joe Torre

Scioscia gets my nod as the best manager over the last ten years, as he’s made the Angels a perennial contender, often doing so with a lower payroll and less star power than his competition.  He won the Manager of the Year Award twice in the decade, and led the Angels to a World Series title.  His closest competition for the award is Gardenhire, whose fundamental, hard-nosed approach to baseball has helped make the Twins a steady force in baseball, despite often having inferior talent, and comparatively meager financial means.  The Twins have lost a virtual All-Star team worth of talent over the decade (Torii Hunter, Johan Santana, Luis Castillo, Christian Guzman) yet still manage to compete in the always treacherous AL Central.  However, he’s never led his team to the World Series, and that, ultimately, is why he just missed out on the award.  Joe Torre has had a stellar career, never having missed the postseason in the decade, but loses some points for usually having the most talented teams, and his tendency to mismanage the pitching staff.  Manuel gets overlooked for this award because of his struggles in the earlier part of the decade with Cleveland, where he was ripped for his undermanaging.  LaRussa, like four of the five other candidates, delivered a World Series victory this decade, but has also fielded some underwhelming teams and disappointing playoff exits.

Player of the Decade (Non-Pitcher)

The Winner: Albert Pujols

The Runners-Up: Barry Bonds, Derek Jeter, Manny Ramirez, Alex Rodriguez, Ichiro Suzuki

Pujols should be the obvious choice for Player of the Decade, as he’s clearly been the most dominant player over the last ten years, and could go down as one of the greatest players ever to play the game.  He’s a three time MVP, eight time All-Star, and Rookie of the Year winner.  He’s led the league four times in OPS, Slugging, Total Bases, and Runs Scored, despite often lacking protection in the lineup.  He’s also betted .322 in the postseason with 13 homers.  Furthermore, he’s managed to avoid any substantial PED allegations, which cannot be said for competitors, Bonds, Ramirez, and Rodriguez.  While all three have statistics that could, at least, rival (but not surpass) Pujols, they have their shortcomings as well.  Bonds was dominant during the beginning and middle parts of the decade, but faded out toward the end.  Ramirez has been one of the great run producers in the game’s history, but can’t account for his complete uselessness in the field.  A-Rod has won three MVPs this decade, but has been much maligned for his poor postseason performances, until this year, and didn’t have a truly meaningful at-bat in the decade until joining the Yanks midway through the 2000s.  Jeter has been a consummate sportsman and leader, and has been the game’s best ambassador throughout the steroid era.  However, statistically, he can’t quite live up to Pujols.  Ichiro has also been impressive, and shows no sign of slowing down at his age, but the Mariners are often irrelevant in the baseball world, keeping him out of the postseason and the public eye for most of his career.

Baseball Team of the Decade:

The Winner: New York Yankees

The Runners-Up: Boston Red Sox, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, Philadelphia Phillies, St. Louis Cardinals

This is really a two team race, in my opinion, between the Yankees and Red Sox.  Both have clearly been the most dominant teams throughout the 2000s.  Both teams won two World Series titles, and both teams are consistently among the league’s best.  The tiebreaker is that the Yankees have won eight division titles, to only one from the Red Sox (Tampa Bay having the only other American League East championship).  Really, an argument can be made for either squad, especially given that the Yankees had a rough (by their standards) 2008, but the dominance within the league inches them slightly ahead of their arch rivals.  The Angels and Cardinals have consistently fielded competitive squads and are almost always contenders, but they have fewer World Series titles and appearances than the other two.  The Phillies are the fifth nominee by virtue of their strong teams in the latter half of the decade, but they weren’t as impressive in the first part of the 2000s.

Pop Culture Nominee #1

Movie of the Decade

The Winner: In Bruges

The Runners-Up: Crash, Inglourious Basterds, The Man Who Copied, Requiem for a Dream

As I tend to not be a fan of the big blockbusters, and favor foreign and independent films, many of my nominees may be unfamiliar to most people, but In Bruges gets my nod for the best film of the 2000s.  Having debuted last year, the film stars Collin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson as two hit men hiding out in the small town of Bruges, Belgium.  It’s basically the perfect movie, as far as I’m concerned, as it blends real, witty humor, with a beautiful story of redemption.  Farrell turns in a strong performance in the lead role, combining strong comedic timing with real emotional subtleties.  Crash won the Best Picture Award in 2004, and forces Americans to look at the way race is perceived in modern culture, and stars a strong ensemble cast, including Matt Dillon, Terrence Howard, Sandra Bullock, and Ludacris.  Inglourious Basterds is, in my estimation, Tarrantino’s best work, and was easily the best film of the past year, bolstered by an amazing performance from Christoph Waltz.  The Man Who Copied is a little known Brazilian film that features a quirky love story and a dose of magical realism.  It also combines action, crime, and peril with romance and humor in a seamless way.  Last on my list, but probably second in my heart, is Darren Aronofsky’s Requiem for a Dream, a brilliant adaptation of Hubert Selby’s novel.  It starts Jared Leto, Ellen Burstyn, Jennifer Connelly, and Marlon Wayans as four addicts, looking to find happiness in a grim, unforgiving New York City.  All five of them are must sees in my opinion, and get the nod in my first non-sports related award of the decade.  Next time, we’ll take a look at college sports and my choice for album of the decade.

The Voting : Currently, Vince Carter is ahead of Joe Johnson, and Garnett leads Bosh in the voting totals, but since they both belong on the squad, there’s no harm done.  Where the ideal situation can, potentially, be destroyed is if Ray Allen or Gilbert Arenas sneak ahead of Carter on the ballot.  That would most likely knock either Rondo or Lopez off the team (assuming Garnett wins a starting spot, Bosh would most likely slide in as a backup center).

My Outlook: For me, the East was pretty simple.  The starting five all belong on the team, without any question, and the current voting situation isn’t terribly offensive.  Wade and LeBron are having a MVP-type seasons, and Johnson has suddenly turned Atlanta into a contender.  Howard continues to be the premier center in the NBA, and Bosh puts up ridiculous numbers on a mediocre Toronto team.  The Celtics get three reserve spots, and while none of them have impressive scoring totals, the team is winning and playing a very solid brand of team basketball, led by assist-leader, Rajon Rondo.  Brandon Jennings is having a shockingly successful rookie campaign and seems impossible to leave off the team and Josh Smith is the most underrated player in the game.

Players in Jeopardy: As I mentioned before, Lopez and Rondo may be the most likely to be squeezed off the team.  If Garnett continues beat out Bosh in the fan voting, Lopez will be shoved out of the way, as it’s difficult to include a player from the NBA’s worst team.  However, he has been the second best center in the East this year, so his spot is warranted.  Rondo may suffer from lack of fan recognition and low point totals, but he leads the conference in assists, and continues to evenly distribute the ball amongst the Celt’s many stars.

Hardest Players to Exclude: Danny Granger would unquestionably be on the team, if not for his recent injury.  Granger will be sidelined for 4-6 weeks, and it’s difficult to include a player who will have missed that much time.  Luol Deng is having a very good year in Chicago, and, while I don’t see him bypassing Smith for the second forward spot, he could make a run at one of the wild card slots.  Gilbert Arenas has made a nice comeback to the league, and his scoring numbers warrant inclusion, but he turns the ball over 3.6 times per game, to only 6.6 assists.  Rondo, on the other hand, averages 9.3 assists to only 2.3 turnovers.  One can also make a case for the Pistons’ Ben Gordon, but he’s a bit too one dimensional in my book.

The West

The Voting: The voting in the West is pretty much right on, with the exception of T-Mac, who needs to play at least a few games to make his votes justifiable.  The good news is that Nash and Chris Paul are right on his heels, and will likely overtake him once voters realize their mistakes.  Other than that, everything is as it should be in the West.

My Outlook: All the starters were an open and shut case for me, with the exception of the point guard position, as Nash, Williams, and Paul all made convincing cases for the starting spot.  In the end, when all things are equal, I’ll take the veteran on the better team over the young guns.  Kobe, Melo, Dirk, and Amar’e are all no-brainers in their respective positions, as their stats are superior to most of the competition.  The bench was also relatively simple.  Tim Duncan started slowly, but has regained his form lately.  Williams and Paul are putting up amazing numbers in both scoring and assists, and can’t be ignored for their overall contributions to their respective teams.  Roy and Durant are blossoming into the players everyone expected them to be, and Boozer has done a good job of shutting up all the people that were calling for more Paul Millsap.  Andrew Bynum is looking to finally have season without a serious injury and is putting up the type of numbers everyone expected a few years back.

Players in Jeopardy: The only player on this list I see being in real trouble is Bynum, as he is injury prone and could go down at any minute.  Furthermore, the return of teammate Pau Gasol will limit Bynum’s potency in the offense, and lead to a decline in numbers for the youngster.  If that happens, Marcus Camby or Chris Kaman can take over that spot.  However, it seems more likely that Duncan might slide into the backup center role, and allow one of any number of players to steal a spot on the team.

Hardest Players to Exclude: Camby and Kaman are both having great years for the Clippers, and could easily sneak onto the roster.  For me, Camby is the toughest to leave off, as he’s probably the best player, since the invention of the All-Star Game, to not make an appearance at the event.  Tony Parker, Rudy Gay, and Trevor Ariza are all also playing exceptional basketball and could make a late run for roster spots.  King’s guard Tyreke Evans is having a phenomenal rookie year, and it would be great to see Evans and Jennings square off in the game, but, as far as I’m concerned, Evans will need to earn his stripes before leapfrogging the more experienced stars in the West.  Overall, though I think most of the players I named above are relatively safe, with the exception of Bynum.

As I said earlier, I’ll keep this updated as the season progresses, leading up to the selection of the NBA All-Stars.

Bert Blyleven

Last year, Blyleven secured over 62% of the voters, making him the second leading returning vote getter, behind Andre Dawson. Blyleven, no doubt, had a very, very good career.  But was it great?  He is fifth all-time in strikeouts, with 3,701 Ks to his name, and 27^th all-time in wins, with 287.  That number puts him ahead of Hall of Famers like Bob Feller, Jim Palmer, and Bob Gibson.  It also puts him behind non-Hall of Famers, like Tommy John and Bobby Matthews.  Furthermore, Blyleven also has 250 losses, including 1988 in which he led the league in that category.  Granted, Blyleven played for some pretty poor teams, having appeared in the postseason only five times in 22 years, but while he ranks 27^th in career wins, he ranks tenth in career losses.  While he is behind the likes of Cy Young, Nolan Ryan, and Walter Johnson in that category, he clearly is not as good a pitcher as those thee.  Furthermore, he was elected to only two All-Star games in his career, and registered in Cy Young voting four times (all four of which being top ten finishes).  What his lack of All-Star appearances and Cy Young consideration says is that he was never really considered among the best pitchers of his time while he was playing.  Blyleven had a very long and very good career, but he never was great, and greatness is the ticket to the Hall.  Blyleven has received, in my opinion, too much support in the last few years and I fear that he may get in this year, but I certainly don’t think he should

Edgar Martinez

Throughout his 18 year career in the majors, Edgar Martinez was a phenomenal hitter.  Also, throughout his 18 year career in the major, Edgar Martinez did little else.  Martinez spent the majority of his time as a designated hitter, which meant he spent minimal time in the field.  Now, I’m in no way suggesting that no DH belongs in Cooperstown.  There is room for that lineup spot in the Hall, but he better be a stone cold lock.  Martinez did appear in seven All-Star games, but most of his appearances came in American League ballparks, in which a starting DH must be elected.  He only finished in the top ten in MVP balloting twice, and was never even considered the best player on his team, let alone the game.  His .312 batting average is impressive, but he lacks any convincing accumulated number.  His 2247 hits are good for only 154^th all time, putting him behind Tony Fernandez, Jose Cruz, and Marquis Grissom.  And, while he may be remembered as a great run producer, his 1261 RBI are good for 115^th on the list, behind Paul O’Neill, Tino Martinez, and Moises Alou.  Martinez’s numbers are comparable to players who didn’t, or won’t, last a single year on the ballot.  As I said, a DH can find his way into the Hall someday, but if he’s not playing in the field, he better have way better numbers than Martinez.

Fred McGriff

Of all the players that I wouldn’t vote for this year, McGriff is the toughest.  He finished only seven homers short of 500, and, presumably, did so without artificial enhancement.  He was a five time All-Star, who finished in the top ten of MVP voting seven times.  He was one of the most feared hitters of his time, having led the league in homers twice, and finishing in the top five on five other occasions.  He’s 26^th on the all-time home runs list, and 41^st all-time in RBI.  However, there still remains the question of McGriff’s greatness.  He batted .284, which is good, but wasn’t really able to sustain his greatness throughout his career.  He stayed around way too long in an attempt to reach the 500 home run mark and, as a result, finished off his career in unimpressive fashion.  Also, there is no real case that McGriff was dominant, especially as he tended to be overshadowed by the steroid users of the 1990s.  Now, a lot of people support McGriff because he was, supposedly, steroid free and therefore, they conclude, deserves extra credit for his numbers.  I’m not sure I’m buying the idea that we need to give slack to clean players.  I’m really on the fence about the Crime Dog, and I think a few more years may be necessary to clear things up.  But, for now, I believe that if you’re unsure, there’s value in waiting.

Mark McGwire

We all know why McGwire isn’t in the Hall of Fame.  During his playing career, he seemed like a lock for Cooperstown; but then the steroid era changed our perceptions and McGwire embarrassed himself in front of congress, leading many to assume his guilt.  Now, there are rumblings that one or more steroid users may be in the Hall, and I have no doubt that eventually, more will find their way to Cooperstown.  Basically, I’m beginning to believe that PED use will eventually just count as another negative on a playing career, as opposed to an impenetrable reason for exclusion.  However, I still think that, even without the alleged PED use, McGwire’s candidacy isn’t as open and shut as it seems.  Yes, McGwire has 583 home runs, and yes, he was a very fearsome hitter in his time.  But a closer look at his numbers reveals some major flaws.  McGwire only batted .263 throughout his career, and has a meager 1,626 career hits.  That means over one third of McGwire’s hits were homers.  He would have among the fewest hits of any Hall of Famer, and many who have lower totals were either victims of baseball segregation, or gave up some years to serve in WWII.  But a man who has 583 home runs, should have a ton of RBI, right?  Wrong.  McGwire has only 1,414 RBI.  That means 41% of the runs he drove in were Mark McGwire.  Also, his RBI totals, while good for 66^th all-time, put him behind the likes of Andres Galarraga (who is up this year and probably won’t get enough votes to stay on the ballot), Joe Carter, and Luis Gonzalez.  For a man who was considered a dominant hitter, his career totals are pretty unimpressive.  Furthermore, he was basically useless in the field, and his Gold Glove award ranks among the most undeserved awards ever given to anyone in the history of the world.  In my mind, McGwire’s candidacy is anything but a sure thing, even before you factor in possible PED use.  For a guy that’s always been borderline in my opinion, the alleged steroid use is enough to keep me away.

Roberto Alomar

Alomar should be an easy choice, but I fear he may not get in this year because many voters don’t think he’s a “first ballot” Hall of Famer.  I’ve always found this position to be ludicrous; imagine if everyone thought this way?  Many deserving players would be dropped from the ballot entirely.  However, I still think Alomar has the best chance of anyone this year.  First of all, he played in twelve consecutive All-Star Games, starting in all but three.  He finished in the top ten of MVP voting five times, topping off at third, and won ten Gold Gloves.  While the ten Gold Gloves are impressive, he’s also among the top five offensive second basemen ever to play, and probably top three if you leave out Chase Utley and Robinson Cano (since they’re still young, there’s no guarantee that they’ll finish their careers with such impressive numbers).  He has a lifetime batting average of .300, with and OPS of .814, and an OBP of .371.  Middle infielders aren’t supposed to be that potent offensively.  Alomar should get in this year, but the voters may have something else to say.

Andre Dawson

Dawson is the leading returning vote-getter on this year’s ballot, having notched 67% of last year’s votes.  With no slam-dunk newcomer on the ballot this year, The Hawk could finally get the call after nine years in limbo.  What many people don’t realize is that Dawson is one of the most complete players in the history of baseball.  He is one of only three players in MLB history (the other two being Barry Bonds and Willie Mays) to have recorded 400 homers and 300 steals in his career.  He’s won the Rookie of the Year Award, the MVP Award, and eight Gold Gloves.  He played in eight All-Star games, starting in seven, and finished in the top ten of MVP voting three other times.  The bottom line is that no other player in Dawson’s era, with the exception of Barry Bonds, was more of a well-rounded threat than The Hawk.  Very few players in history were so adept in hitting, running, and fielding as Dawson.  The problem Dawson has is that he only appeared in the playoffs three times in his illustrious career, and floundered in Montreal for an unfortunately large chunk of it.  However, the Hall of Fame is an individual honor, and not a team reward, and Dawson is as deserving as anyone on the ballot.

Barry Larkin

Barry Larkin, like Andre Dawson, is another former MVP who deserves enshrinement this year.  Like Alomar, he played in twelve All-Star Games, and won three Gold Gloves, which is impressive considering he was playing shortstop the same time as Ozzie Smith.  He’s a nine time silver Slugger, who also registered in the top ten in stolen bases five times.  Also, like Alomar, he was a ridiculously good hitter for his position, given his era.  While we have become accustomed to tough hitters playing shortstop, like Derek Jeter and Miguel Tejada, Larkin played in an era in which middle infielders were, essentially, defensive players.  Larkin, along with the likes of Roberto Alomar and Ryne Sandberg, proved that middle infielders could hit and play solid defense, which led to the existence of the Jeters and Utleys of the world.  Where Alomar has the advantage over Larkin is that Alomar was undoubtedly the best second baseman in his league, whereas Larkin was often overshadowed by Ozzie Smith.  I don’t know if he gets in this year, but he should be in within the next five.

Don Mattingly

I know I’m in the vast minority on this one, but Don Mattingly is a Hall of Famer.  The knock on Mattingly is that his career was too short and he was often injured.  While he certainly didn’t enjoy the 21-year career of Andre Dawson, there was a four-to-five year period in which Mattingly was the best player in baseball.  He won the MVP in 1985 and was a six-time All-Star, and nine-time Gold Glover.  He was in the top ten in Batting Average five times, hits seven times, and RBI five, which is impressive considering he played the majority of his career on the most dreadful Yankees teams ever.  He only appeared in the postseason once, despite a very productive career.  It’s unfortunate that his back problems caused an end to his career, as a few rings with the Yankee dynasty would have made him a shoe-in.  Despite his impressive career, his voting numbers continue to decline, and I don’t really see any hope for him making the Hall.  That doesn’t, however, make him undeserving.

Tim Raines

The last of the five deserving candidates is Raines, who finished with a disappointing 22.6% last year.  Raines is a seven time All-Star, who, in various seasons throughout his career, led the league in doubles, runs, batting average, steals, and on base percentage.  He is fifth on the all-time steals list, behind Rickey Henderson, Lou Brock, Billy Hamilton, and Ty Cobb, all of whom are Hall of Famers.  As often cited in his candidacy, Raines is the only eligible player with more than 1,500 runs scored that is not honored in Cooperstown.  Furthermore, he has accumulated 2,605 lifetime hits and reached base 38.5% of the time.  Every other player who has reached base that much and that often is enshrined in Cooperstown.  Like Mattingly and Dawson, Raines is handicapped by the fact that he consistently played on crummy teams.  In fact, it took Raines a few years with the Yankee teams of the late 1990s to make a significant splash in the postseason, as he only made two prior appearances.  Raines, unfortunately just wasn’t that visible to the mainstream media during his time in Montreal and Chicago.  And when he finally did find himself a winning situation, it was at the tail end of his career, and he was merely a role player on a team of stars.  However, Raines, at his prime, was among the best players of his generation, and belongs in the Hall.  He won’t get it this year, or any time soon, but don’t write off his chances just yet.  There’s plenty of time to get the word out there about Raines.  In fact, for more info on Raines’s qualifications, please check out the excellent http://raines30.com and you’ll be a believer.

That’s it for today.  Tomorrow I’ll look at those borderline players who just don’t make my cut.

The Teams: The Netherlands, Denmark, Japan, Cameroon

The Stars: Dirk Kuyt (NED), Giovanni van Bronckhorst (NED), Samuel Eto’o (CMR), Jean Makoun (CMR), Nicklas Bendtner (DEN), Shunsuke Nakamura (JPN)

Group E should be yet another tightly contested group, featuring four teams who really impressed during qualifying.  The number one team in the group is The Netherlands, led by a devastating striking force, featuring veteran Dirk Kuyt, Robin van Persie, and youngster Ryan Babel.  The Dutch also feature a good, young midfield, led by Real Madrid’s Rafael van der Vaart and Manchester City’s Nigel de Jong.  Traditionally, the Dutch weakness had been defense, but their back line, featuring team captain Giovanni van Bronckhorst was remarkable, conceding only two goals throughout qualification.  This is especially impressive, considering the relative inexperience of the team’s goalkeeper, Maarten Stekelenburg.  Admittedly, the Oranje didn’t play the best competition, having come out of a weak group by UEFA standards; they still look like, potentially, the best team in Europe.  They should be able to make it through this competitive group at the top of table.

Joining the Netherlands in Group E is fellow UEFA group winners, Denmark.  The Danes, like the Dutch, feature a strong attacking tandem, with 33 year-old veteran Jon Dahl Tomasson teaming up with 21 year-old Nicklas Bendtner.  Tomasson has over 100 CAPs for the Danish National team, while Bendtner has scored ten goals in 31 appearances.  The midfield will be anchored by Christian Poulsen, of Juventus, and his golden locks.  However, outside of Poulsen and Daniel Jensen, the group manning the middle of the pitch is relatively inexperienced and appears to be a bit vulnerable.  The defense is in a similar situation, with Liverpool’s Daniel Agger and Fiorentina’s Per Koldrup hoping to lead the Danes to the knockout stages.  Manning the net is veteran keeper, Thomas Sorensen, who should face some challenges with an inexperienced back line.  The Danes certainly were impressive in qualification, but they do have some weaknesses that can be exploited by a talented attacker.

Occupying the third slot in the group is Asian powerhouse, Japan, who features a team full of home grown talent, as very few of their players play outside their home country.  One exception to that rule is Espanyol midfielder Shunsuke Nakamura, who will look to lead his team to the knockout stages for the second time.  He’ll face a difficult task, as most of the Japanese-based players on the team have less experience playing against top level competition on a weekly basis.  Also, Japan lacks a real defined offensive attack, as no striker, outside of Keiji Tamada, has established himself as a real attacking threat.  The Japanese have an opportunity to make a run at the Round of 16, but it seems unlikely.

Returning after an unfortunate absence in the ’06 Cup, is the final team of the group: The Indomitable Lions of Cameroon.  They will be led by all-world striker Samuel Eto’o who should be feared by any defender and goalkeeper, as he has the type of talent to carry a team on his back.  Luckily for Eto’o, he probably won’t need to carry the whole load, as he has a wealth of talent behind him.  Jean Makoun and Alexandre Song will anchor a formidable midfield, as defenders Geremi and Rigobert Song will look to defend the net of Idriss Carlos Kameni.  Unlike the Japanese, the Lions have a team comprised of players that appear weekly in the top leagues of the world.  As a result, they should be slightly more competitive against the big boys in the Cup.  However, the team is still relatively young and will ask a lot from some youngsters, like Andre Bikey and Benoit Assou-Ekotto. They have a good a chance as any to make it to the final sixteen, but it will depend on some strong play from the veterans, and inspired performances from the youngsters.

Prediction: 1) The Netherlands, 2) Denmark

Group F

The Teams: Italy, Paraguay, New Zealand, Slovakia

The Stars: Fabio Cannavaro (ITA), Andrea Pirlo (ITA), Roque Santa Cruz, (PAR), Paulo da Silva (PAR), Chris Killen (NZL), Martin Skrtel (SVK)

This group should pose little threat to the defending World Cup Champions.  The Italian squad, familiarly based on stalwart defending and a timely goal should easily win this group.  In fact, it wouldn’t be inconceivable if Italy were to go without conceding a goal in the group stage.  Leading the back line is team captain, Fabio Cannavaro, the most capped player in team history, and keeper Gianluigi Buffon.  Fabio Grosso, Gianluca Zambrotta, and Giorgio Chiellini round out a defensive front that could stop any striker in the world.  The midfield is also quite impressive, boasting the likes of dead ball specialist, Andrea Pirlo, Mauro Camoranesi, Daniele de Rossi, and Gennaro Gattuso.  Where the Italians do tend to struggle is the offensive end, as their team is, essentially, built to score one goal and play for a clean sheet.  The (lack of) scoring should come from the likes of Alberto Gilardino, Vincenzo Iaquinta, and Antonio di Natale.  While the Azzurri should have no problem advancing to the knockout stages, their low-scoring mentality could be their undoing, especially if they were to meet up with a strong attacking unit in the later rounds.

Joining the Italians is a very impressive Paraguay team, who breezed through South American qualifying is stunning fashion, finishing second to Brazil.  Looking to lead the South Americans to the next round is Manchester City’s Roque Santa Cruz, who has scored 20 goals for the team in 66 CAPs.  Joining him up front will be, most likely, Salvador Cabanas of Club America.  The midfield is young and inexperienced, and will look to veterans Edgar Barreto and Christian Riveros for leadership.  The Paraguayan defense boasts an experienced core, led by Paulo da Silva and Denis Caniza.  While they’re nowhere near as intimidating as the Italian defense, they are a veteran group that will not be intimidated on the grand stage.  If they can sustain their strong run of form, they can move on to the Round of 16 and, potentially, beyond.

The third team of the group (and the team I mocked in the title of this article) is New Zealand.  To say I have little faith in the All White’s chances is an understatement.  They had a ludicrously easy road to qualification, besting New Caledonia, Fiji, and Vanuatu, before squeaking past Bahrain in the Oceania-AFC playoff.  When a team’s toughest competition on the road the South Africa includes two small island nations that served as the setting of Survivor, I am less than impressed.  Chris Killen and Shane Smeltz scored quite frequently in qualifying, but have yet to experience the type of defending they can expect from the Italians.  Leo Bertos proved against Bahrain that he is dangerous with a dead ball, and can deliver some nice crosses into the box, and team captain, Ryan Nelsen, plays with Blackburn in the EPL, but the Kiwis really lack any sort of talent that could propel them into the next round.  They’ll be lucky to get a point in this group.

The final team in the group is a surprising Slovakia team that won their group in UEFA qualifying.  They will feature some strong players, including defenders, Marek Cech and Martin Skrtel, who will be asked to protect the net of whichever inexperienced keeper they decide to feature in the cup.  Of their most recently called up goalies, not one has more than 13 caps.  Needless to say, the World Cup is not really the venue in which to rely on an inexperienced net minder.  Robert Vittek and Stanislav Sestak will look to provide the scoring up front.  While both have proven to be capable scorers, neither name will inspire fear in a top notch defender.  Their midfield will be anchored by the Miroslav Karhan, who has appeared in 95 games for the Slovakian team.  While they certainly impressed in qualifying, this would be a particularly difficult team to bet on when it comes to picking the winners.

Prediction: 1) Italy, 2) Paraguay

Group G

The Teams: Brazil, North Korea, Ivory Coast, Portugal

The Stars: Kaka (BRA), Robinho (BRA), Didier Drogba (CIV), Kolo Toure (CIV), Cristiano Ronaldo (POR), Deco (POR), Hong Yong-Jo (PRK)

We hear about it every year: The Group of Death.  This group features three teams that have legitimate shots at winning the entire tournament in Brazil, Portugal, and The Ivory Coast.  The Brazilians are considered the favorites, and should be, but it’s no given that they will even advance out of this group, considering the talent of the other teams.  Leading the Brazilians is star midfielder, Kaka, who has scored a goal in over 1/3 of his appearances for the Green and Yellow.  Joining him in the midfield is an experienced group, consisting of Gilberto Silva, Julio Baptista, and Elano.  Looking to score the goals will be some combination of Adriano, Robinho, and Luis Fabiano, all of whom can score with the best of them.  And, for a change, the defense actually looks tough, with Lucio and Juan anchoring an unusually solid defensive front.  This team, who finished top of the table in South American qualifying, is actually being criticized for lacking the traditional flair of the Brazilian squad.  In its place, the team seems to be playing good, fundamental team soccer, which will really only benefit them in this competition.  It’s important that the Brazilians continue this run of unselfish play if they want to advance out of the group, let alone win the Cup.

Welcome back to the World Cup, North Korea!  The Korean squad is full of young, unknown, and inexperienced players that really have no chance against any of their opponents.  Their squad doesn’t contain a single player with more than 50 caps, and all of them, with the exception of striker Hong Yong-Jo play in Asian leagues.  Given their relative inexperience and surprising qualification, just making the tournament itself should be their Holy Grail.  The only question is whether they can hold one of their opponents to fewer than three goals.

With the World Cup being held in Africa this year, and the surge of talent coming from that continent, many people believed this could be the year that an African team hoists the trophy.  I was one of those people, and, like many, I expected that that team would be The Ivory Coast.  However, for the second consecutive year, the Elephants have drawn the Group of Death, and will struggle to make it out alive.  If they do make it out, it will be on the shoulders of their star strikers, Didier Drogba, Salomon Kalou, and Aruna Dindane.  Those three strikers, as well as veteran Adbul-Kader Keita, form one of the most potent attacking fronts that could even rival the Dutch in might.  Their midfield, while probably their weakest link, is no joke either, with Sevilla’s Didier Zokora and Barcelona’s Yaya Toure.  We can only hope that all-name team member, Gilles Yapi Yapo, will make an appearance alongside his midfield brethren.  The defense will be anchored by veterans, Kolo Toure and Emmanuel Eboue, who will look to lead a young back line to prominence.  I would pick the Ivoirians to advance easily from any other group, but this one will be a challenge.

The final team in this ridiculously stacked group is the struggling, but always dangerous, Portuguese.  They boast, arguably, the world’s best player in captain Cristiano Ronaldo, who was battling injuries and poor form throughout their qualification.  Ronaldo will be joined by Nani and Simao, who will look to lead a deadly offensive attack.  The midfield is also impressive, featuring the creative veteran, Deco, and Juventus’s Thiago.  The defense is experienced, but spotty, and will have to rely on the duo from Chelsea, Ricardo Carvalho (whom Didier Drogba calls the most attractive member of the team) and Paulo Ferriera.  They will need to be strong in order to protect the inexperienced Eduardo in goal.  Portugal is a team that can beat anybody in the world, but they’re also a team that, given recent form, could lose to almost anyone (except North Korea).  They’ll need to find their hearts and hope their star gets healthy to get the results they need to move on.

Predictions: 1) Brazil, 2) Ivory Coast

Group H

The Teams: Spain, Switzerland, Honduras, Chile

The Stars: Xavi (ESP), Fernando Torres (ESP), David Suazo (HON), Wilson Palacios (HON), Alexander Frei (SUI), Mark Gonzalez (CHI)

The eighth and final group of the 2010 world cup features the reigning European Champions, Spain.  While any team can come in second, the Spaniards should be heavily favored to win this group outright.  They will feature a seemingly unstoppable striking combination of Fernando Torres and David Villa, who have combined to score 58 goals for the Red Fury.  Their midfield is congested with talent, as Xavi, Xabi Alonso, Cesc Fabregas, Andres Iniesta, and David Silva will all compete for a role in the starting eleven.  On the defensive end, they are anchored by a top-five keeper, in captain Iker Casillas and the hulking defender Carlos Puyol.  The Spanish team is one in which  it is almost impossible to find a weakness and is considered by many to be the favorites to win it all.  Given the talent and completeness of the squad, it would be unfathomable if the Spaniards did not cruise through to the knockout stages.

Switzerland is yet another strong, yet enigmatic European team to qualify for this year’s Cup.  The Swiss are a veteran team, that plays smart, solid soccer, but lacks star power at most positions.  They will expect captain Alexander Frei to do the majority of the scoring, as he has netted 40 goals in 70 caps for his country.  Outside of Frei, it’s hard to find where the scoring will come from in this group.  Midfielder Hakan Yakin is the team’s second leading scorer among active players with twenty goals, and only one other player, forward Marco Streller has scored double digit goals for the senior team.  That means the Swiss will have to rely heavily on keeper Diego Banaglio and defenders Philippe Senderos and Patrick Muller.  They play a strong brand of soccer, but in order to advance, the team must score, and that could be a problem for them.

Joining the Europeans in group H is Honduras, the third place finisher in the CONCACAF region.  Honduras isn’t a team to be slept on, as they do feature some dangerous players, including the striking tandem of Carlos Pavon and David Suazo.  Unlike the Swiss, Los Catrachos will have a reliable offensive force.  The midfield is experienced and talented, led by team captain, Amado Guevara, who has an astounding 130 caps for his home nation.  Joining Guevara will be Tottenham midfielder Wilson Palacios and Julio Cesar de Leon of Torino.  The front six of this team are certainly capable of competing with the other teams in the group.  Where the Hondurans will struggle is on the defensive end, where a lot will be asked of Wigan defender Maynor Figueroa and veteran keeper Noel Valladares.  Other than those two dependable stalwarts, the Honduran defense is largely home grown and can be porous.  Essentially, they’re the exact opposite of the Swiss team and will need to do some serious defending in order to move on.

The final team in the group is Chile, who almost missed out on the competition due to a controversy in their home league.  Chile played very well in CONNMBOL qualifying, but did suffer some injuries to their key players along the way.  They will have to hope that keeper and team captain Claudio Bravo can anchor a defense that doesn’t boast too many impressive names.  Claudio Maldonado and Matias Fernandez will lead a relatively inexperienced midfield, while Humberto Suazo, Mark Gonzalez, and Alexis Sanchez will be counted on to score the goals.  The names on this team aren’t very familiar to most fans of the European or American leagues, but they proved in qualifying that they are more than capable of holding their own against the best in the world.  They’ll have to continue this impressive form and find a few goal scorers if they want to advance to the knockout stages.

Prediction: 1) Spain, 2) Honduras

So that concludes my analysis of all 32 World Cup teams.  Many of these groups were impossible to predict, and there are some unfamiliar countries that can really make a name for themselves in this tournament.  More than ever, this can be a year in which some smaller and lesser known countries can pull of a magical run.  The second tier European teams, which were so impressive last year, don’t seem like strong bets, which could allow teams from CONCACAF, Asia, and Africa to advance deep into the knockout stages.  Keep on checking back, as I’ll be continuing my Hall of Fame conversation and will look deep into the American and English national teams, and give my take on who should make the cut.

Group A

The Teams: South Africa, Mexico, Uruguay, France

The Stars: Thierry Henry (FRA), William Gallas (FRA), Blanco (MEX), Rafael Marquez (MEX), Steven Pienaar (RSA), Diego Forlan (URU)

Proving that Karma doesn’t exist in international soccer, France, a team that notoriously clinched its spot in the World Cup finals with a blatant handball from Thierry Henry, received the draw that every nation in the Cup was hoping for.  South Africa, seeded in the top eight teams based entirely on the fact that they are the host nations, is clearly one of the weaker teams in the entire tournament.  As a result of the draw, the French avoid having to play the likes of Brazil, England, Spain and the other top teams in the world.  Joining them in this group is Uruguay, another team that advanced on a goal that was clearly scored from an offside position.  Having qualified by the skin of their teeth, both teams face a very favorable draw in the opening stage of the Cup.  Rounding out the group is second-place CONCACAF finisher Mexico, who looks like the best team of the group, based on recent form.

The Mexican squad looked to be struggling during the middle stages of CONCACAF qualifying, losing to Jamaica, and looking unimpressive in the opening stages of the final group of six.  However, the team has looked strong in their last few matches, led by veteran striker Blanco, and anchored in the back by Barcelona defender Rafael Marquez.  They have a wealth of good, young players, including Aresnal’s Carlos Vela, and Tottenham’s Giovanni Dos Santos to mix in with veteran players like Gerardo Torrado, Carlos Salcido, and Israel Castro.  Given the recent poor play of the French, Mexico is looking like the top team of Group A, and the favorites to move on to the knock out rounds.

The likely second place finishers are the recently vilified French squad, led by the now infamous Thierry Henry.  Les Blues have, by far, the most star power of the group, featuring a dynamic offensive attack, including Henry, Nicolas Anelka, Andre-Pierre Gignac, Florent Malouda, and Sidney Govou.  Complementing their star strikers is a solid defensive unit, featuring William Gallas, Patrice Evra, and Bacary Sagna.  On paper, France is one of the best teams in the world, but they have looked less than stellar in their qualifying campaign.  They were never really in contention to win their group and barely squeaked past Ireland in the controversial playoff.  They could possibly finish first and sweep the group, but they could also finish in the bottom and miss the knock out stages entirely.

The wild card of the group is South Africa.  Historically, every host nation has advanced to the second round, but many think the streak will come to an end this year.  Everton’s Steven Pienaar is among the most underappreciated players in the world, and can provide a real spark with his runs down the wing.  Also, veteran striker Benedict McCarthy will most likely make a return to the squad in the hope of making a magical run in the tournament.  However, aside from those two stars, South Africa is experiencing a serious draught of world class players.  In fact, the host nation even failed to qualify for the African Cup of Nations, the equivalent of the CONCACAF Gold Cup.  Home pitch advantage tends to mean a lot in this competition, but not enough to get the South Africans through.

The fourth team in Group A is Uruguay, a team that, like France, qualified on a dubious decision from the officials.  The Uruguayan team has won two previous World Cups, but that was almost 60 years ago.  Recently, they’ve been a middle-of-the-pack team in the CONNEMBOL region.  They do feature some strong players, including Diego Forlan, Luis Suarez, and Diego Lugano, but they struggled in the latter stages of qualifying and were quite fortunate to get past a very game Costa Rican squad.  Given the overall quality of the group, they do have a chance to squeak into the knockout stages, but it seems unlikely given their recent form.

Prediction: 1) Mexico, 2) France

Group B

The Teams:  Argentina, Nigeria, South Korea, Greece

The Stars: Lionel Messi (ARG), Carlos Tevez (ARG), Mikel John Obi (NGA), Obafemi Martins (NGA), Park Ji-Sung (KOR), Angelos Charisteas (GRE)

Group B is yet another unpredictable group in which any team has a chance to win.  The top team in the group, based on both FIFA World Rankings and star power is Argentina.  The Argentine team, led by soccer legend, Diego Maradona, was anything but world beaters in their qualifying campaign, barely avoiding a play-off with Costa Rica on a last day victory.  However, looking at the team, they are absolutely packed with world class players, including reigning FIFA World Player of the Year, Lionel Messi.  Joining Messi up front in a formidable attacking partnership is Manchester City striker Carlos Tevez, whose “bulldog-like” approach should intimidate any defender.  Their midfield is anchored by the tenacious ball-winner, Javier Mascherano, and their defense is formidable, featuring veterans Javier Zanetti and Gabriel Heinze.  No one can question the talent of the squad, but everyone should question their recent achievements.  On paper, they should have finished comfortably ahead of Paraguay and Chile in CONNEMBOL qualification, and they don’t seem to be meshing well as a unit.  Even given their recent struggles, it seems foolish to suggest that Argentina will sputter out in the group stage.  They should easily make it through to the knock-out stage.

Joining the Argentines in group B are the Super Eagles of Nigeria.  The Nigerians surprisingly failed to qualify for the ’06 Cup, and barely edged past Tunisia in this year’s qualifications.  The Nigerian squad is ranked 22^nd in the world, but that ranking seems quite generous given their most recent performances.  They do have some talented players, especially up front, with the likes of Obafemi Martins and Yakubu.  There’s even a chance that the Super Eagles will dust off revered veteran (and my favorite player) Nwankwo Kanu, for one final World Cup run.  Chelsea midfielder, Mikel John Obi is as talented a ball-winner as anyone in Africa and could cause fits for his opponents.  The defense could be a bit porous, but there is some talent there, including EPL players, Danny Shittu and Joseph Yobo, but that may not be enough to keep up with the ultra-talented strikers they could face if they move on to the next round.  Also, the Nigerians have reason to worry, given the recent rumors of poor team chemistry and a lack of respect for their coaching staff.  If this is true, it would be a shame to squander such a talented squad due to egos.

Manchester United’s Park Ji-Sung will look to recreate the magical run the Koreans had when they hosted the tournament back in 2002.  Joining Park on the South Korean squad is a number of talented players who play for top teams, including Seol Ki-Hyeon, Lee Dong-Gook, and Lee Young-Pyo.  Given the struggles of the other teams in the group, strong veteran leadership, and a player with the class of Park Ji-Sung, the Koreans could be a sleeper team to win this group.  If they can stop their opponents from scoring, they could make some real noise in this tournament.  They’re not a team to take lightly.

The Greeks are in the tournament by virtue of a mild upset over Ukraine in the UEFA play-offs.  This team, more so than any other in the tournament, is almost impossible to predict.  They won the European Championship in 2004, but failed to qualify for the 2006 World Cup.  In fact, this is only their second appearance in the World Cup finals.  The majority of their team plays in Greece, so they don’t have as much experience playing against top players from other nations.  In fact, a disproportionate amount of their team plays for Greek powerhouse, Panathinaikos.  Among those players is team captain and midfielder, Giorgos Karagounis, who has 90 CAPs for the Greek Squad.  In order to win, the Greeks will have to find a way to score behind strikers, Georgios Samaras, Theofanis Gekas, and Angelos Charisteas.  They certainly have the talent, as they proved in 2004, but they have very little experience playing on the world stage, and that makes them a shaky bet.

Predictions: 1) Argentina, 2) South Korea

Group C

The Teams: England, United States, Algeria, Slovenia

The Stars: Wayne Rooney (ENG), John Terry (ENG), Clint Dempsey (USA), Tim Howard (USA), Nadir Balhadj (ALG), Milivoje Novakovic (SVN)

This group represents the favorable draw the United States were hoping for, as well as the challenge the fans were demanding (supporters gathered at Nevada Smith’s soccer bar in New York enthusiastically chanted “We Want England” before the draw).  While the states will challenge for top of the group, England is clearly the class of these teams, and should be regarded as the favorite to advance.  However, Algeria and Slovenia can’t be counted out, as they both turned in gritty performances to win their respective play-offs.

The England team has looked as impressive as ever under the reign of Fabio Capello.  The English boast some impressive options at striker, including Wayne Rooney, Jermain Defoe, Emile Heskey, Peter Crouch, and Gabriel Agbonlahor.  It seems likely that one of those five players could miss out on the team.  The midfield is also stacked with strong options, not the least of which are the familiar faces of Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard, and Gareth Barry, who seem like locks for the starting eleven in 2010.  They also have a wealth of talented options on the wing, with youngsters Ashley Young, Theo Walcott, Shaun Wright-Phillips, and Aaron Lennon competing with veteran David Beckham for a spot on the World Cup roster.  If the Three Lions have a weakness it’s on the defensive end.  They still have yet settle on a number one goalkeeper, with David James, Scott Carson, Ben Foster, Robert Green, and Joe Hart competing for the starting position.  Unlike the competition for striker and midfield, the battle to be England’s number one keeper is the result of not having a true stopper in the net.  Furthermore, England’s starting back four seems to be relatively set, and quite formidable, but they really lack depth in the defensive front.  In fact, the lack of quality in backup defending has led to a tongue-in-cheek petition, asking for Capello to consider Watford defender Lloyd Doyley for the squad.  If that doesn’t show a lack of confidence in the defense, nothing does.  However, even counting their defensive shortcomings, it would be insane to consider England anything but the favorites in this group.

The United States seems positioned to be the runner-up in this division, which would put them in the knock-out stages following a disastrous campaign in 2006.  However, there are some question marks surrounding the Stars in Stripes heading into South Africa.  Two key players, Charlie Davis and Oguchi Onyewu, were badly injured leading up to their qualification.  Davies, having suffered serious injuries in a deadly car accident will not make and appearance in the World Cup, but Onyewu’s prognosis is a bit more favorable.  However, it remains to be seen whether he will be at full strength for the big stage.  The injury to Davies has left the U.S. without a strong compliment to striker Jozy Altidore.  US manager, Bob Bradley, has given plenty of opportunities to fill the void, but no one has looked particularly impressive.  Meanwhile, Onyewu needs to be healthy to anchor the defense alongside captain Carlos Bocanegra.  The American defense has been their weakest link.  Winger, Steve Cherundolo has been impressive since returning from injury, but Bradley doesn’t seem to have much confidence in him.  The left back position is almost wide open, as is almost every backup spot.  The one advantage that the U.S. does have over the English is Tim Howard, a legitimate, lockdown, number one keeper.  Howard has the ability to singlehandedly keep the USA alive in games, which will be a huge asset, given America’s Swiss cheese defense.  The midfield is strong, with Landon Donovan and Clint Dempsey, playing alongside coach’s son Michael Bradley. If the US can overcome their injuries and sure up their defense, they have a great chance to make some noise.

The Algerian team is one that is relatively unknown to the world, but they do have some good players and are currently ranked 28^th in the world.  Their two key players are Portsmouth defender Nadir Belhadj and striker Rafik Saifi, who has scored 18 goals in 55 appearances.  They also boast players who play for some impressive teams, including team captain, Yazid Mansouri, Karim Ziani, Khamel Gilas.  They showed a lot of heart and guts in their playoff win over a favored Egypt side, and could upset one of the big two, should they get overlooked.  However, it seems unlikely that any neutral fan could expect Algeria to get through.

Another relatively unknown squad, Slovenia shocked Russia to qualify for the World Cup.  They lack recognizable players, yet still outplayed a heavily favored Russian squad.  However, based purely on talent, this is one of the weaker European sides, and a very favorable matchup for both the US and England.  Slovenia is a massively inexperienced team, without a single team member registering over 50 CAPs for their country.  Striker Milivoje Novakovic has scored 13 goals in 36 CAPs and will most likely play alongside Auxerre’s Valter Birsa.  Newcastle’s Robert Koren has played well for both club and team, but, in the end, the Slovenians should fall short.

Prediction:  1) England, 2) United States

Group D

The Teams: Germany, Australia, Serbia, Ghana

The Stars: Michael Ballack (GER), Bastian Schweinsteiger (GER), Michael Essien (GHA), Sulley Muntari (GHA), Tim Cahill (AUS), Nemanja Vidic (SRB)

Group D is a very tough group, and any of the four teams has a shot of getting past the group stages.  The clear favorite is Germany, a disciplined, hard-nosed team than tends to play well in the big competitions.  They will be led by a strong midfield, containing captain (and Matt Damon look-a-like) Michael Ballack and Bastian Schweinsteiger.  They also possess a scary attacking unit, with veterans Miroslav Klose and Lukas Podolski being joined by youngster Mario Gomez.  This is a German team that is capable of putting up high scores, but will still likely stifle opponents with strong defense.  They suffered a huge blow with the tragic death of former number one keeper, Robert Enke, and will be looking for a new net minder.  But, their defense should still be tough, with veterans Phillipp Lahm and Arne Freidrich leading the way.  The Germans certainly didn’t receive the easiest draw, but they look to be the favorites to finish top of the table.

Die Mannschaft will be challenge by Australia, a member of 2006’s final 16 teams.  The star of the squad is Everton midfielder, Tim Cahill, who looks to return the Socceroos to the knockout stage for a second consecutive year.  Joining him in the midfield will be Mark Bresciano, Brett Emerton, and Jason Culina, which is, undoubtedly a very strong group.  Scott Chipperfield and Lucas Neill will lead an experienced defense and try to protect the net for Fulham’s Mark Schwarzer.  Where Australia will struggle is on the offensive end, as they lack any real top class strikers.  Archie Thompson is their leading active scorer, but rarely plays against top competition, and Alkmaar’s Brett Holman has scored only one goal in 29 CAPs.  If Australia wants to repeat last year’s success they’re going to have to find some way to put the ball in the net.

Also in the top 16 of the previous World Cup, Ghana’s Black Stars boast, perhaps, the best player in the group, in midfielder Michael Essien, who possesses excellent defensive abilities and a cannon of a leg.  He will play alongside veteran and team captain, Stephen Appiah, who already has 53 CAPs at age 28, and Inter Milan’s Sulley Muntari, in a midfield that rivals Germany’s on talent.  Asamoah Gyan and Matthew Amoah are more than capable strikers who should find the back of the net a few times before the end of the tournament.  Junior Agogo (who has, perhaps, the best name in the whole tournament) will be a nice third piece of the striking puzzle.  However, like many African teams, the Black Stars struggle in defense.  They’ll ask a lot from Fulham’s John Painstil, as they’ll expect him to defend and push the pace on the offensive end.  Other than Painstil and veteran John Mensah, Ghana lacks real quality and experience on the defensive end and it could be their undoing.

The final team in the group is Serbia, who bested France to finish top of the table in their qualifying campaign.  They boast, perhaps, the world’s best defender in Manchester United’s center back, Nemanja Vidic, to go along with a solid back line of Branislav Ivanovic, and Ivica Dragutinovic.  Inter’s Dejan Stankovic is the class of a midfield that is relatively inexperienced and unknown.  Veteran striker Nikola Zigic will be expected to do the majority of the scoring.  Like Australia, it will be interesting to see where the goals come from, as the Serbians lack a real top-notch striker.  In a battle for second place, it will be interesting to see Australia’s and Serbia’s strikers take on Ghana’s defense.  Something has to give.

Prediction: 1) Germany, 2) Ghana

Look for Part two of this article tomorrow, as well as more in-depth analysis of the US and England teams.  Following part 2, I’ll be going back to my Baseball Hall of Fame analysis, and other reflections on topical sports news.

However, the hand ball wasn’t the only reason the Irish team was furious following their defeat.  Historically, the playoff matches in the UEFA division were selected by blind draw, with any team having an equal chance of playing another.  Yet, when it became clear that traditional powerhouses France and Portugal would not qualify out of the group stages, FIFA and UEFA officials began to sweat.  In a move as transparent as Sue Storm, the governing bodies decided to seed the teams, so that the four “best” nations (France, Portugal, Russia, and Greece) would not have to face each other.  Admittedly, seeding the teams is probably the right move, as most people would admit that the World Cup is both better and more marketable, if players like Thierry Henry, Cristiano Ronaldo, and Andrei Arshavin are present in the event.  However, what rubbed the Irish the wrong way (and most likely the other three expendable teams) was the timing.  The rules were changed just weeks before the playoffs draws were to be announced.  In the past, and during the qualifying, Ireland could have hoped for a more favorable matchup against the likes of Slovenia or Bosnia-Herzegovina.  The luck of the Irish quickly ran out, as the Boys in Green drew arguably the best team in the playoffs.  Despite the overwhelming odds, the Irishmen turned in a spirited performance in the first game of the two game series, losing only after a fortunate deflection of a Nicolas Anelka strike.  The Republic and its fans still had hope, albeit slim hope, of making the trip to South Africa.

In game two, Ireland was clearly the better team.  Robbie Keane made the French sweat early with a goal, sending the Irishmen ahead.  France, throughout most of the match, seemed unable to build up an effective attack or convert their chances.  Meanwhile, the Irish continued to threaten the Frenchmen, with chances by Keane, John O’Shea, and Damien Duff just missing the net.  It was likely that a goal on any of those strikes would have rendered the French passports useless.  At the end of regulation, Ireland was ahead 1-0, evening up the aggregate score.  Extra time and, potentially, penalties loomed in the near future.  The overtime was hotly contested, as the Les Bleus seemed more offensively potent, and the Irish seemed to survive with a combination of heart and stout defending.  A heart-stopping moment came when Anelka, attempting to take advantage of a breakaway, fell to the pitch inside the penalty area.  The French appealed for a penalty only to be denied, and rightly so.  Instant replay showed little, if any contact, and seemed to incriminate Anelka more than Irish keeper, Shay Given.  After surviving a few scares and an apparent dive, penalties seemed inevitable.  However, Irish fortunes would quickly sour.

The French won a free kick from a threatening area.  The kick, clearly carrying too much pace, seemed destined to skip harmlessly away for a goal kick.  Yet, somehow, the ball found its way to the feet of William Gallas for a goal that broke the hearts of a nation.  The Irish team, led by Given, rushed to the official, appealing for a handball.  Based on Given’s reaction, and live footage, it was barely even necessary to check the replay to confirm the accusations: Thierry Henry had handled the ball.  It was blatant.  It seemed intentional.  And it happened twice.  In a play that would remind fans of the infamous “Hand of Maradona” debacle, Henry stretched his arm out once to keep the ball in play, and a second time to help assist Gallas’s game winner.  Gallas seemed embarrassed to have scored in such a way, turning in a conspicuously understated celebration.  Irish players screamed foul play and accosted the referee, pleading for the goal to be disallowed.  The official remained steadfast in his decision, and allowed the goal to stand.  It was in this underhanded fashion (pun not intended), that France booked their tickets to South Africa.  The game ended 1-1, with an aggregate score of 2-1, favoring Les Bleus.  And, in a scene that would arouse anger in many fans around the world, Thierry Henry, the game’s greatest villain, attempted to comfort a despondent Richard Dunne, Ireland’s best defender, as he sat on the pitch with his head hung low.

Many Americans who do not follow soccer may not understand the outrage surrounding Henry’s dishonorable antics.  We exist in a culture in which cheating is somewhat tolerated.  We are quick to embrace the World Series heroics of Andy Pettitte and Alex Rodriguez, forgetting their links to performance enhancing drugs.  The New England Patriots received a ridiculously lenient punishment for spying on other teams.  And, according to a good number of American sports fans, it is acceptable to overlook minor violations committed by our greatest basketball stars, while enforcing those same rules on lesser players.  Whereas most American sports accept rule breaking to get ahead, soccer is a game built on fair play and mutual respect.  It is a game in which a player will kick the ball out of bounds to let their opponents tend to an injured player.  It is a game in which teams are rewarded by the governing bodies for “fair play.”  It is a game in which one can be penalized for pretending to be fouled.  It is a game whose greatest crime is handling the ball.

Thierry Henry has admitted to handling the ball that broke Irish hearts everywhere, and was quick to point the blame at the official, not himself.  He also claims that he is not a cheater.  As much as Henry can deny his dishonest play, and plea for goodwill from the international soccer community, the fact of the matter is that Thierry Henry is a cheater.  He blatantly and purposefully broke a sacred rule of the game in order to gain a competitive advantage.  He used a dastardly trick to wrestle a World Cup spot away from a group of underdogs who were outplaying a superior opponent.  And most unfortunately, he lost the respect of a sporting community that once held him as a soccer idol.  It is unfortunate that a world class player like Henry could have acted in such a classless manner.