Weekly Sporties

-With the Major League Baseball All-Star game quickly approaching next week it was time for the managers of the AL and NL squads to fill out their rosters. While there are always one or two players who end up feeling snubbed (that is going to happen any time teams are picking sides), it is a fairly straightforward process, as the managers of the teams which played in the last World Series run the teams and are very careful about not stepping on anyone's toes during the selection process, because they may need one of those guys down the road. However, Tony LaRussa retired after the Cardinals won the World Series and as such can pretty much do whatever her wants because he'll be headed back off the diamond as soon as this is over. So, when he didn't pick a couple of Cincinnati Reds for the All-Star game, Reds' manager Dusty Baker immediately accused LaRussa of holding a grudge based on some bad blood the two teams had when LaRussa was still managing in St. Louis. This is yet another reason that I never watch the All-Star game. These players aren't mad about not playing in the game - they are mad about not getting a bonus which I'm sure is written into their contracts. Also, I just can't take the whining. It is a little like when teams get annoyed at not being invited to play in March Madness - you had all season to make yourself invaluable and you didn't take advantage of it. If you are in a spot where picking you become a toss up situation you can't blame the guy picking the rosters. The only person you have to blame is yourself.

-The NBA offseason has begun in earnest. The first big domino to fall occurred early in the week when Atlanta Hawks guard Joe Johnson was traded to the New Jersey Nets for a whole heap of nothing. Atlanta was just looking to get out from underneath Johnson's massive contract and, in that regard, mission accomplished. (It still blows my mind that in a free agent class which saw LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, Chris Bosh, Carlos Boozer and countless others become free agents all at the same time, it was Joe Johnson who came away with the biggest contract.) When Johnson was offered that much money, I remember Tweeting that his agent should yell "No take-backs!" into the phone and hang up quickly, lest ownership smarten up in the next 15 seconds. Well, now the Hawks had to be feeling that way about finding someone willing to take Johnson off their hands. (He's not a bad player. He's just not good enough to justify his contract. In the NBA, that's saying something.) The weird part was that the deal wasn't going to be finalized unless Deron Williams re-signed with the Nets first. That had to make for an awkward phone call to Johnson: "Hey Joe, just wanted to let you know we're potentially very excited about you coming to New Jersey, as long as we can team you with Deron. If we can't, well, you can stay in Atlanta and rot because we wouldn't touch you with a 10-foot pole otherwise." Being the centerpiece of a trade which is contingent on another player's wishes has to be one hell of a blow to his ego. But, if you want to pay me that much money you can insult me any time.

-For a while it looked like Johnson might be the biggest name to change teams this week, but then Steve Nash was traded to the Los Angeles Lakers and Jason Kidd decided to sign with the Knicks. Now, we'll take these moves one at a time. Everyone is talking about how Kobe and Nash should transform the Lakers into the favorites in the Western Conference. If it was still 2007 I might be inclined to agree. However, it is currently 2012. I have no doubts that Nash still has something left in the tank and he'll be better than Derek Fisher was for the Lakers, but considering their main problem in the playoffs was getting run over by a team led by a couple of phenomenal players in their early 20s, I don't see how adding a guy in his 16th season is going to cure that problem. (There is talk the Lakers' next target is Grant Hill. I know I root for an old Celtics team, but even I think that is too much 'veteran leadership' for one team.) Still, I would endorse that move a lot more than the Knicks signing of a 39 year-old Jason Kidd. Kidd didn't appear to have much left last year, only no one noticed because the Mavericks were mostly irrelevant while still enjoying a post-title glow. The Knicks claim his main job will be to serve as a mentor for Jeremy Lin, but the Knicks need players, not very expensive assistant coaches. This is the kind of move I would have expected from the Celtics in the early 2000s and if you remember the way the Celtics played in those days you know that was not meant as a compliment.

-Earlier this week, the New Orleans Saints players suspended in the wake of a bonus-for-hits scandal filed a lawsuit against the NFL, seeking an injunction which would get their suspensions either reduced or completely thrown out. The players claim that the NFL hasn't provided enough evidence to prove that a bounty system was ever in place and that the League has refused to release the evidence. I would be with the players, save for one small detail: the Saints' coach, assistant coach, general manager and former defensive coordinator have all admitted there was a bounty system in place. Do the players think the coaches admitted to something which wasn't there because they all wanted to take a vacation? Gregg Williams, who is staring down the barrel of an indefinite suspension, has the most to lose by these suspensions being upheld and he has yet to file an appeal because he's probably thinking the best way to get back into the league is to shut up, do his time and act like he's sorry. The NFL is full of powerful people who I doubt like it very much when you try to air private business out in the public, so this is the wrong way to go about this. Also the players contend that the suspensions should be thrown out because Commissioner Roger Goodell acted as judge, jury and execution. I agree - that is a terrible system. But it is also the system the players agreed to as part of the last labor negotiations. If they want to be mad at someone, they need to be mad at the people who let that provision in. And they need to be mad in quiet, because I'm tired of hearing about this story.

-If you needed any more proof that the NHL is kind of an odd league, look no further than the fact that it is probably best served when a team like the Minnesota Wild, who have only been in existence since the year 2000, are very good. Yes, the league gets a bump when the Bruins or Rangers are competitive, but I don't expect this year's run to the Cup by the Los Angeles Kings to translate into making hockey suddenly more popular than baseball in the second-biggest TV market. This is why the fact that the Wilds signed both of the marquee free agents of this season, Zach Parise and Ryan Suter, is probably better for the NHL than if they had landed on the Panthers or in Nashville. (Additionally, you can make the case that both openly wanting to play for Minnesota is another oddity. Minneapolis is a great city, but it is not usually a free-agent destination in any sport.) However, it's the way the deals are structured which make me slightly uneasy. You see, the both players signed identical 13-year, $98 million dollar deals. That averages out to about $7.5 million a year, which is how much they will count against the cap. Except in reality the deals are ridiculously front-loaded, because no one expects theses guys to play for another 13 years. Basically, it is a way to pay them a ton of money without killing your salary cap while they are still good. Now, the deals are totally legit under the current rules, only the collective bargaining agreement is up this September at which point everyone anticipates deals like this becoming a thing of the past. Basically, this is a case of the Wild getting while the getting is still good. And here I thought only the big-market teams were capable of such shady transactions. Told you - the NHL is a weird league.

-After another round of goals which weren't ruled as goals due to the officials being in at a bad angle during the most recent UEFA Tournament, FIFA officials have finally agreed to use goal-line technology, starting on a trial basis in December and which should be fully in place by the next World Cup. I guess I should start by saying better late than never. However, my congratulatory nature is hampered by the fact that this seems like such a basic thing that it should have been done years earlier. But, what is annoying me the most is that FIFA seems awfully proud of themselves for finally embracing technology, when the fact that they hadn't done it before now is actually something they should have been very embarrassed about. Oh, you're finally getting around to using the best available resources to make sure you get the one and only part of your game that means anything correct? How gracious of you. Even Major League Baseball, which adopts change at the speed of a glacier, has approved instant replay for homeruns because they know the score is the most important part of any sporting event. That importance is only going to be magnified when there are only four goals for the entire game (and that's being generous). Opponents are worried this will slow the games down too much, but the NHL has been doing this for years and it takes about 2 minutes to double-check replays and they have much smaller targets to work with. Trust me - it won't make halves that much longer. Besides, if FIFA was really worried about a match taking so long they would do something about players flopping around like they've been shot for 10 minutes because someone on the other team ran by them too fast.

-After a line of severe storms rolled through the area overnight, last Saturday the PGA was forced to play the third round of the AT&T National tournament with no spectators. There were simply too many downed trees, limbs and power lines to risk people coming out to the course - not to mention that if those people had come out there was no place for them to park, as crews had spent the night clearing the tournament course, not the parking lots. The only people there were family members, members of the grounds crew, a few volunteers who made their way to the grounds and members of the country club who were not going to be denied. Honestly, it made for a very strange scene as most groups played in front of only a handful of spectators. Estimates had the crowd around 100 people and about 70 of them were following Tiger Woods. Many of the players mentioned how odd it was, but I never heard one guy complain about it, least of all Woods. (However, it did make the few times I saw players need to back off from shots just that much more ridiculous.) A couple weeks ago Phil Mickelson complained to Commissioner Tim Finchem about too many fans breaking the cellphone rule the Tour has in place by taking pictures on their phones. At the time I said Phil was just going to have to learn to live with it, because these days fans simply can't unplug for hours at a time to wander a golf course and since the rule was in place attendance at tournaments was up. I was going to suggest that Finchem tell players that Saturday at the AT&T was what Tour events would be like if they went back to banning cellphones. But after thinking it over, I don't think that would upset them all that much. He may just want to stick with telling them to get over it and move on.