While this Golf.com article surveys the most overrated professional golfers, this Dave Berri post analyzes the most overpaid NBA players.
Guess who made the latter list?
Overrated
Reply
Monthly Archives: May 2008
And you thought the Mitchell Report was ugly?
So, the controversy over the Mitchell Commission Report has pretty much died down, right? Well, it looks as if another potential public relations nightmare is brewing for Major League Baseball:
Tucked away inside the United States attorney’s office in the Northern District of California are documents that link more than 100 major league baseball players to positive tests for steroids conducted in 2003.
The test results were meant to be anonymous, and a battle over access to them has wound its way through the federal court system. The players union has tried to protect its members by arguing that the government illegally obtained the information.
But now, more than four years after federal agents seized the test results as part of the investigation into the drug-distribution activities of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative, the government appears close to prevailing in the legal battle, which could set off another round of federal drug investigations.
According to a lawyer who spoke on condition of anonymity because the government’s plans are supposed to remain confidential, federal authorities will seek to question each of the 104 players about where and how they obtained the substance detected in their urine samples.
The authorities then intend to distribute the information they receive to federal prosecutors around the country.
Distributors, not users, have been the focus of the government’s investigations into performance-enhancing drugs ever since the authorities began seriously looking into the issue in 2002. But the 104 players would be asked to provide testimony — to federal agents or before grand juries — to lead investigators to the distributors. The players’ identities could become public if their testimony is used in government documents to obtain search warrants or to charge individuals. The players could also be called as witnesses at trials.
Regardless of how many of the 104 names eventually become public, the notion of simultaneous drug investigations being conducted by various federal attorney’s offices around the country would be a significant setback to Major League Baseball, which has struggled to get control of the issues related to performance-enhancing drugs. [. . .]
Read the entire article. The MLB Players Association has to be kicking itself for not insisting on the destruction of the "anonymous" drug tests, which were conducted during the 2003 season. Under public pressure to agree to some regulation of performance-enhancing drugs, the Players Association had agreed to the 2003 testing as a "survey" under which all players would be tested one time and 240 players would be randomly tested a second time with neither group being under any threat of punishment. Subsequently, discovery in connection with the investigation into the Balco case in Northern California transcended the deal between Major League Baseball and the Players Association, so now it appears that there is a good chance that a master list of all players who tested positive during the 2003 testing may well become public information. The list won’t be released tomorrow or even next week, so most of the mainstream media will continue to focus on such sideshows as the Mindy McCready affair. But you can bet that Major League Baseball and the Players Association can hear the clock ticking on this one.
The cost of Spitzerism
On Friday, February 11, 2005, shares of American International Group closed at $73.12 per share.
Last Friday, after Eliot Spitzer and the meltdown in the subprime mortgage markets, AIG’s shares closed at $39.34 per share.
James Freeman of the Wall $treet Journal, one of the only mainstream media outlets to expose Spitzer’s extortion of AIG for what it truly was, reports here on the massive reduction of wealth to which Spitzer’s unbridled regulation of AIG contributed greatly. Larry Ribstein, who was one of the first bloggers to shed light on this injustice, surveys the economic carnage here.
My question: Where is the rest of the mainstream media in reporting on this enormous destruction of wealth to AIG shareholders?
Nice comeback
Legendary defense lawyer Gerry Spence is defending Geoffrey Fieger on campaign finance charges in Detroit. Former Spence student Norm Pattis flew into the Motor City and took in a day of the trial last week. He passes along the following exchange that occurred while Spence was cross-examining a government witness:
Spence: "Can you tell me a case in the history of the world in which …"
Prosecutor: "Objection."
Spence: "Okay, the United States."
Pattis’ collected posts on the Fieger trial are here. Very interesting, to say the least.
Look at what Mary Flood has been reading
Chronicle legal reporter Mary Flood covered many of the Enron-related criminal trials, so it was only natural for her to pick up a copy of former Enron Task Force prosecutor, law professor and current Oregon attorney general candidate John Kroger‘s new book, which includes several chapters on his work in several Enron-related criminal cases.
You may remember Kroger. He is the fellow who tried early on to broker his experience on the Task Force to make a name for himself in academic circles. He was involved in preparing some of the worst carnage that the Task Force generated — the Arthur Andersen debacle, the Enron Broadband disaster, and the Nigerian Barge abomination.
Ms. Flood reports on her blog that the Enron-related chapters of Kroger’s book are downright bizarre:
[Kroger’s book] is a self-congratulatory look at Kroger’s years as a federal prosecutor. The four somewhat conflicted chapters on Enron talk alternately about his prowess, his lack of knowledge, how careful prosecutors were, how ruthless prosecutors were, how terrific his case against the Enron broadband executives was and how it hasn’t been successful in court. [. . .]
What may be most surprising about the book is Kroger’s admission of a lack of knowledge about how to go about these cases, an admission that the DOJ was out for quick scalps, and an admission that they threatened many witnesses. These are especially odd to see in print given that one of the allegations the defense made was prosecutorial misconduct in this case — too much threatening and coercing of witnesses. One witness in the 2005 case even testified a member of the task force tried coerce him out of testifying for the defense.
Kroger frequently brags about his own prowess as an interrogator and lawyer, even guessing the broadband cases might be over now if he’d tried them. And he casts doubt on just about everyone else in the process.
Despite talking about the pressure the task force was under to get scalps and how aggressive they were, he creates a hypothetical conversation to illustrate how a defense attorney might try to trick a witness into saying no crimes were committed.
Amid the sometimes stunning hubris seems to be much angst about the decision of others to charge Lea Fastow in order to get to her husband and thus get to Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay.
He questions his colleagues, not just over the Lea Fastow charging decision (even including a mean-spirited comment a fellow prosecutor made about the Fastow children possibly winding up in foster care) but in general saying, in his career as a prosecutor he learned:
". . . that even well-intentioned prosecutors can present false testimony at trial, that a just process and a just result cannot always be obtained at the same time, that informants are both necessary and deceitful, that a certain small percentage of agents are corrupt, that our law enforcement policies often encourage crime rather than prevent it, and that successful interrogation requires the ethically questionable manipulation of other human beings.”
Just another chapter in the increasingly dubious legacy of the Enron Task Force.
Friday Musings
So, did you know that Taxi Driver is the greatest wealth-creating movie of all-time?
Speaking of movies, actor Mickey Rourke has been down on his luck for the past several years, but he sure had a good run of movies in the 1980’s.
Finally, singer-songwriter Hayes Carll, fresh off the release of his new CD, returns home to The Woodlands for a Friday night show at Dosey-Doe. I’ll be there, so come by and say hello!
Houston’s best 19th hole
Although Jack Burke‘s venerable Champions Cypress Creek Golf Course may arguably be a bit overrated, this Ron Kapriske/Golf Digest article rates the Champions Men’s Locker Room Bar as one of the 50 best 19th holes in the country:
Sit back and listen to Jackie Burke tell stories, especially the one about Jimmy Demaret at the bar in his birthday suit; the bar inside the locker room is three-sided to allow for "cross-counter shouting matches"; wood paneling is a "throwback to the country-club days of the 1960s."
I can attest that having the opportunity to listen to a couple of Burke stories is certainly worth a trip to the Champions Men’s Locker Room. A close second to the Champions Men’s Locker Room Bar among the best of Houston’s 19th holes — Lochinvar Golf Club’s Clubhouse.
The Chron’s continuing soccer stadium drumbeat
In this post from last week on the proposed downtown soccer stadium, I observed that the Chronicle should simply declare that it supports the public financing of the stadium and quit attempting to rationalize that such financing makes economic sense.
Well, based on this Glenn Davis/Chronicle column, it looks as if the Chronicle took me up on my suggestion.
Actually, Davis’ column is about as good a rationalization for the public financing of the soccer stadium as you will come across. He eschews the economic-benefit ruse and instead contends that it’s worth spending public money on the Dynamo because the club represents the city well internationally, particularly in Mexico and Central America. On the other hand, Davis stretches by suggesting that "the team deserves its own stadium [because it] would elevate the sport and city even more in the eyes of the world."
Just to be clear — there is nothing inherently wrong with public financing of sports stadiums. Davis might even have a valid point that it’s worth using public funds to invest in the Dynamo to bolster Houston’s image internationally, although it would seem that at least some consideration should be given to alternative investments before coming to the conclusion that financing a soccer stadium is the best way to achieve that goal. But let’s at least have truth in advertising during the remaining public discussion on this issue — the marginal economic benefit of a soccer stadium to the community is simply not a good reason to finance it publicly.
Ignoring the noise from next door
The problems that the obsolescent U.S. drug prohibition policy exacerbate along the Texas-Mexico border are a frequent topic on this blog, so this Mary Anastasia O’Grady/W$J article on the latest developments in the drug war just south of the border caught my eye:
American nonchalance about drug use stands in sharp contrast to what is happening across the border in Mexico. There lawmen are taking heavy casualties in a showdown with drug-running crime syndicates. On Thursday the chief of the Mexican federal police, Edgar Millán Gómez, was assassinated by men waiting for him when he came home, becoming the latest and most prominent victim of the syndicates. [. . .]
It’s no secret that the narcotics trade is like a roach infestation. If you see one shipment or dealer, you can be sure that there are many others that go undetected. That’s why such brazen behavior at [San Diego State University] should be disturbing to America’s drug warriors. The signs of an infestation are everywhere, making a joke of their 40-year claim that any day now they will wipe out American drug use. [. . .]
The upshot: Americans underwrite Mexico’s vicious organized crime syndicates. The gringos get their drugs and the Mexican mafia gets weapons, technology and the means to buy off or intimidate anyone who gets in their way. Caught in the middle is a poor country striving to develop sound institutions for law enforcement.
The trouble for Mexico is that, even if it understands that U.S. demand is not going away, it cannot afford to cede large swaths of the country to the drug cartels. Thus Mexican President Felipe Calderón has made confronting organized crime a priority since taking office in December 2006. His attorney general, Eduardo Medina Mora, told me in February that the goal is to reclaim the state’s authority where it has been lost to the mafias.
But after 17 months of engagement, while San Diego students party on, victory remains elusive and the Mexican death toll is mounting. Most of the drug-related killings since Mr. Calderón took office seem to be a result of battles between rival cartels. Still, the escalating violence is troubling. The official death toll attributable to organized crime since the Calderón crackdown began now stands at 3,995. Of that, 1,170 have died this year.
Especially alarming are the number of assassinations among military personnel and municipal, state and federal police officers. The total is 439 for the 17 months and 109 so far this year. Many of these victims have been ordinary police officers whose refusal to be bought off or back off cost them their lives.
But as the murder of police chief Millan makes clear, high rank offers no safety. Two weeks before he was gunned down, Roberto Velasco, the head of the organized crime division of the federal police, was shot in the head. The assailants took his car, which leaves open the possibility that it was a random event, but most Mexicans are not buying that theory. Eleven federal law enforcement agents have been killed in ambushes and executions in the last four weeks alone.
If U.S. law enforcement agencies were losing their finest at such a rate, you can bet Americans would give greater thought to the violence generated by high demand and prohibition. Our friends in Mexico deserve equal consideration.
The most troubling aspect of all this is that spillover violence toward U.S. authorities would probably just be met with beefed-up prohibition efforts. Are the vested interests who benefit from the outmoded-but-lucrative prohibition policy simply too entrenched for there to be serious Congressional consideration given to a more humane and cost-effective drug policy?
The Players trumps the Masters
Well, he didn’t do it with a belly putter, but Sergio Garcia fulfilled my prediction after last year’s British Open that it was just a matter of time before he won a big-time tournament.
On Sunday afternoon, the 28 year-old Garcia won The Players in a one-hole playoff against journeyman Paul Goydos (169th in the World Golf Rankings) as he shook off — for the most part, at least — the putting woes that have bedeviled the former prodigy over the past several years. The victory is Garcia’s first on the PGA Tour since 2005 and easily the most important championship in his career to date, reflected by the fact that his World Golf Ranking went from 18th to 10th with the win. For the record, Garcia burst on the scene as a 19 year-old when he went toe-to-toe with Tiger Woods before taking second place at the 1999 PGA Championship at Medinah. Few who saw him play in that tournament would have predicted at the time that it would take him nine years to win a tournament of the The Players’ stature.
By the way, fourth-place finisher Briny Baird summed up as well as anybody the final day of The Players, which saw contenders such as Phil Mickelson (78) and Kenny Perry (81) flame out: "I don’t care who wins the tournament," Baird said. "The wind won. It kicked everybody’s butts."
Although Garcia’s unexpected victory and Goydos’ stirring play were compelling story lines, the big winner this week was the tournament itself, which provided a much more entertaining product than the Masters for the second straight year. Dean Barnett notes the main reason why:
Particularly when paired against the Masters, The Players shows some strength. The field of competitors is stronger at The Players; indeed, it’s the strongest field in golf on an annual basis.
The Masters’ history also has to give The Players some encouragement. The Masters is a relatively new tournament, ostentatiously and boldly designed to achieve major status some 70 years ago. And the plan worked. The Players has the same sort of dynamic, plus the additional benefit that the venue and the tournament belong to the PGA Tour. In other words, The Players truly is the players’ tournament. In a manner of speaking, they own it.
Where The Players actually belongs to the players, the Masters and Augusta National belong to a bunch of weird guys who are prone to despotism. Additionally, the Masters has looked a bit long in the tooth in recent years. In a misguided effort to modernize the course, Augusta National unleashed a supremely mediocre architect to modify one of the best and most original golf designs ever.
The changes to the course have been horrendous on a number of levels. The most damaging has been the fact that the changes sucked the drama out of the tournament in the name of “defending par.” Augusta is now so long and difficult, there are few birdie opportunities and the players take over five hours to make their way around the course in twosomes. If the lords of Augusta National were capable of embarrassment (which they almost surely are not), this last fact would shame them no end. The course is now harder (and more boring), but is it a better and fairer test of golf? Does it effectively identify the world’s best golfers? Leader boards the last couple of years populated almost exclusively by no-names and an angry Tiger Woods suggest otherwise.
Meanwhile, The Players takes place at the Tournament Players Club (TPC), a course that is also very difficult, but still manages to identify the best golfers and be fun. The trademark short 17th hole with its island green is pure fun and excitement. (Journalistic integrity compels me to confess to playing the Tournament Players Club this winter and effortlessly parring the 17th by hitting a nice easy nine iron to the center to the green. I’m not sure why the pros have so much trouble with the hole. Maybe it has something to do with having hundreds of thousands of dollars on the line.)
Although a beautiful venue, Augusta National is currently so long and difficult that it provides a disincentive for the players to take risks, similar to the type of golf that has long been played in the usually boring U.S. Open. The Stadium Course at TPC Sawgrass, on the other hand, is much shorter than Augusta National and most U.S. Open venues, and the course continues to encourage creative risk-taking. A course that encourages risk-taking will usually produce a more entertaining tournament than one that does not.