The Wacky Neighbor

WN Regrets

2010-04-07T16:13:00.003-04:00

As WN was perusing over some past columns, there are some predictions or statements WN made that seem silly or wrong in retrospect. Others are sort of ominous. Anyways, WN will post some of these as they come up.

For starters, here's one from a column about 3 1/2 years ago on college football:

First, a quick note on the worst play of all time. Central Michigan was at home, trailing Boston College by 7 (31-24) with a little under 2 minutes to go. They had scored touchdowns on their last 2 possessions to close a 21-point gap. They had the ball at BC's 34, 1st down and 10 with the ball on the right hash mark. They lined up 5 linemen and 3 receivers on the left side of the field and lined up their quarterback, running back and a receiver near the ball (it appears the receiver may have been a tight end snapping the ball to the QB). BC put several players on the left, one player (a linebacker) over the snapper and a bunch of players in coverage. CMU snapped the ball, the snapper and running back and the receivers on the left side of the field go out for a pass. The linebacker - unblocked! - runs straight at the QB (the freshman backup QB), who scrambles and throws a horrible pass into a group of BC defenders for a game-killing interception.

Here's what the coach had to say: "It is one of those plays where we thought that we would get a shot at either BC calling a timeout or getting someone open, which in that situation was Damien (Linson) or Obed (Cetoute). Dan (LeFevour) [the freshman backup QB - WN] tried to make too much happen. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have a large reservoir of experience to pull from [being a freshman backup QB - WN], but after tonight he has a lot more. It wasn’t one play. [It was one horrible, dumbass play - WN] One play is what is generally looked at because it was at the end of the game [and because it was the worst play in college football history - WN], but there were a number of instances throughout the game where we needed to make a couple of plays here and there that we weren’t able to make.”

WN agrees with Jason Whitlock: this guy ought to be fired. It's one thing to call it when it was a terrible play. It's another thing to call it when you're on a roll and don't need it. It's another thing again to call it with a freshman backup quarterback. When you won't even come out and say that it was a horrible decision and you cost your team a shot to win the game, that's when it becomes a fireable offense.

The coach in question: yes, Notre Dame's most-recent hire, Brian Kelly. Yikes! (Also, Washington's ill-fated fake FG attempt last season may have overtaken this play as the worst of all-time. Still.) Suddenly feeling sick about the next season of Notre Dame football.

LSM - 4.6.10

2010-04-06T22:26:00.002-04:00

Rest of O's preview tomorrow, but usually it's not until the second half that we start blowing games like opening day. Arrgh.

Fake Prom

2010-04-06T15:01:00.002-04:00

A story on the incredible (as in, I can't believe actual people behave this way) conclusion to the story of Constance McMillen and Itawamba Agricultural High School's fight over whether Constance and her lesbian girlfriend could attend prom together:

http://www.salon.com/life/teenagers/index.html?story=/mwt/broadsheet/2010/04/06/constance_mcmillen_fake_prom

Long story short, there ended up being two proms: one was a "fake" prom with only a few students and the other was the "real" prom with everyone else. It is hard to imagine a crueler or more juvenile ending to this story. (What is there to make of the fact that two learning-disabled students were also at the "fake" prom? Did they not get the memo or were they excluded from "real" prom, too?)

Not the first to say this, but this seems like the sort of thing that happens in bad TV shows or movies about high school. Next time on Saved by the Bell ... Screech gets sent to fake prom! Just depressing to see kids and "adults" behave this way.

LSM - Orioles 2010

2010-04-06T11:50:00.003-04:00

In 2008, WN previewed the Orioles upcoming season with tales of woe and disaster. The O's held true to that prediction, finishing last in the AL East for the first time since the notorious 1988 season. At the end of that preview, WN wrote

Wacky Neighbor's final take: If in 3-5 years the Orioles are at
least improving and it's at least reasonable to consider the Orioles
getting over .500 in the standings and having a shot at making the playoffs,
then I'll take whatever lumps come this season. If in 2012 we're still
rebuilding, God help us.

So, here we are, half way to 2012 and wondering whether the Orioles are heading in right direction. Are they? Is .500 and playoff contention doable in 2 more years? Or are we headed to another rebuild down the road?

Catcher

You can say whatever you want about Matt Wieters. He's the franchise in Baltimore. All the tools to be an All-Star catcher, the pedigree at Georgia Tech, a few years of destroying every level of the minor leagues. The downside for Wieters at this point is probably that for some reason he can't stick at catcher and becomes a solid middle of the order hitter at first base. The upside seems limitless. WN thinks that 2010 is probably still going to be a developmental year for Wieters, only 24 and his first full-year in the majors, on top of catching a relatively young staff. But it's unlikely that the O's are going to make WN's timeline of contention in 2 years without him developing into a star catcher.

Rather than dwell on Wieters, let's just look at how bad the O's have been at catcher since 1997 (the last year they went to the playoffs). Here are the catchers that led the Orioles in plate appearances each year between 1998 and 2009 with their OPS:

1998: Lenny Webster, .751 (although Chris Hoiles had nearly as many PA and had an OPS of .833)
1999: Charles Johnson, .753 (acquired for Armando Benitez)
2000: Charles Johnson, .934 (wow, much better than WN remembers him)
2001: Brook Fordyce, .590 (unfathomable)
2002: Geronimo Gil, .632
2003: Brook Fordyce, .682
2004: Javy Lopez, .872
2005: Javy Lopez, .780
2006: Ramon Hernandez, .822
2007: Ramon Hernandez, .714
2008: Ramon Hernandez, .714 (not a typo, just consistently mediocre)
2009: Matt Wieters, .753

Obviously, it's been pretty bad. Sometimes it's been downright awful. Matt Wieters, in fact, wouldn't have to play much better to be a noticeable upgrade over what Baltimore has had at catcher. Craig Tatum won the backup job over Chad Moeller.

Infield

Brian Roberts is still the lead-off batter, second baseman, and mainstay of the infield in his 10th season in Baltimore. Of all of the decisions made over the last 10 years, the decision to stick with Roberts over Jerry Hairston turned out to be one of the better ones in Baltimore. That said, Roberts is 32 this year and battling back problems coming out of spring training. So we'll see.

The rest of the infield is patchwork. Literally. The O's signed Miguel Tejada and Garrett Atkins in the off-season as stop-gaps at third base and first base. Tejada is still a decent hitter and was pretty good in Houston last year - whether that carries over to the AL and a new position is the big question. Atkins had a few good years in Colorado before an awful year last year. At 30, he could still bounce back. Still, the O's are moving 2 players out of position and down the defensive spectrum, so it could be rough. Cesar Izturis returns at shortstop for the second year of a two-year deal. Last year he was pretty mediocre at the plate, but was by most measures a very good defensive shortstop - just about what everyone expected.

The bench consists of Julio Lugo (just acquired from St. Louis) and Ty Wiggington. Nolan Reimold has been getting a little work at first, too. While the Orioles have some prospects in the minors (Josh Bell at third, Brandon Snyder and Michael Aubrey at first, Scott Moore at third or maybe shortstop now), none of them are likely to make an impact this year. Of all of these players, Bell probably has the highest upside and might arrive by 2011. WN is optimistic but not really sold on Snyder and doesn't expect Aubrey or Moore to ever be impact players (that said, if Moore can make a go of it at shortstop in AAA this year, he might get a shot in Baltimore next year).

Outfield

Aside from Matt Wieters, the outfield is really the strength of the team now and over the next few years. The O's are solid in two spots with Nick Markakis (only 26) in rightfield and Adam Jones (only 24) in centerfield - five-tool, top-of-the-order players. That said, their numbers last year aren't overwhelming (Markakis actually seemed to take a step back) and Baltimore isn't going to move forward very far if they don't, either.

In fact, the best offensive numbers for the entire team may have come from Luke Scott last year. He's been sort of forgotten amidst the youth movement, but he hit the most home runs for Baltimore last year (25) and was one of the top 2 hitters by OPS for the Orioles amongst regulars. Scott is going to be the DH coming into the season, and he may see some time at first base or even left field. At 32, it's likely Scott isn't going to exceed what he has done the last few years, but he's been reliably solid over the last 3 years (since he saw regular playing time) and should be expected to put up similar numbers this year.

Left field is the one place where the Orioles might actually have a surplus of talent. Nolan Reimold actually led the team in OPS last year (.831, which isn't exactly killing the ball), but battled injuries late last year and into spring training. If he can recover, he could develop into a quality power bat for the O's, and at 26, one could expect improvements over the next 2-3 years, too. While Reimold was out, Felix Pie played splendidly down the stretch. Pie, who essentially washed out of the Cubs system, is only 25 this year and showed signs that maybe he's finally put it together last year. (Despite the fact he seems like a speed guy - he stole 118 bases in 632 games in the minors - he actually has a pretty bad success rate (about 62%) and only stole 1 base last year.) Whether there's room for both or not (plus Scott) remains to be seen. That said, it's been awhile since the O's have had anything resembling a surplus.

Speaking of which, it's unclear that career minor leaguer Lou Montanez will ever get a legit shot in the O's outfield, but he's next on the O's depth chart and will start in AAA. After that, it's pretty thin in the minors.

Bench

The bench to start the season will be Craig Tatum (catcher), Julio Lugo (infield), Ty Wiggington (infield), and Felix Pie (outfield). Lugo would likely be the first to see action at second base or shortstop and Wiggington would likely back up first and third base. If they were to go to a 5-man bench later, WN would expect that they would probably bring up someone they could use as a bat off the bench (Lou Montanez probably being the first choice, with Michael Aubrey not on the 40-man roster).

Overall Batting

The O's at least have some potential finally reaching the major leagues. They have 5 players under 27 who all have the potential to be above-average to excellent players: Wieters, Markakis, Jones, Reimold, and Pie. The hope is that they continue to develop this year, that Roberts is healthy and still one of the top second basemen in the league, and that the contributions from Scott, Tejada, and Atkins are enough to make the Orioles a good hitting team. In 2009, the O's were a bit below average for the league, so it's not unrealistic to expect the Orioles to climb at least to the middle of the league with the core of the team improving, if not slightly better than average.

Overall Fielding

In 2009, the O's were generally an average fielding team. The one area in which the O's did particularly well was in the outfield arm categories (which has a lot to do with Markakis). The one area in which the O's did particularly poorly was preventing runners from stealing, giving up the 5th most steals in the AL and having the 2nd worst caught-stealing percentage (22% - although, in fairness, the league average was only 26%). Hopefully Wieters will help with that. Otherwise, the only real question is whether Tejada can successfully make the transition to third base. The O's haven't gone wild on defense like some other teams recently (Seattle, Boston, Oakland), so it's unlikely that they'll be anything more than average again this year.

More on the O's pitching and predictions to come.

LSM

2010-04-05T12:15:00.001-04:00

Yes, let's try this blogging thing again.

Donovan McNabb to the Redskins. The buzz around Philadelphia trading McNabb had been heating up over the last few weeks (to make room for untested Kevin Kolb and seemingly after the Eagles' unsuccessful attempts to move Michael Vick earlier this year), but it's caught everyone by surprise that he went in-division to Washington. Angst has been equal between WN's Redskins and Eagles friends, although Skins' fans seem to be more upset. Why? WN thinks mainly it's that they're worried that this is the return of the bad Dan Snyder - trading or signing high-price free agents, ditching valuable draft picks, winning the off-season Super Bowl only to be mediocre. Plus, the consensus seems to be that Washington isn't all that close and that a QB doesn't solve all of their problems. That said, WN would at least wait to see what they get for Jason Campbell (as good as gone, but probably bringing back a mid or late-round pick) before evaluating the deal. And if they either trade back in the draft or bring in an offensive tackle, Washington (as much as it pains me to say it) might not be that bad.
As for the Eagles: Kevin Kolb better be looking pretty sharp by the time Washington rolls into Philly this season (destined for a Sunday or Monday night game now - rumors are Monday October 25). WN supposes that there is a legit argument that (1) McNabb was never quite "good enough" to win the biggest games and (2) Kolb is a better fit for Philly's offensive system and (3) this gives them a lot of value for McNabb now before losing him or Kolb in the offseason. All fair points, and given how many other players Philly has released to traded this year, Kolb probably does make sense. But you know that you're going to get 2 very tough games against Washington this year, and there's no guarantee that Kolb is as good as McNabb (short run or long run). It would also worry me that the original plan seemed to be shopping Vick and that the deal for McNabb only came once it became apparent that there was very little interest in Vick. We shall see.
Duke-Butler. This has been one of the worst NCAA basketball tournaments in memory. The first round and second round were great, but since then it's been a lot of ugly, uninspiring games. Butler-Michigan State might have been the worst Final Four games ever. The shooting has been so bad (not just in this game) that WN wonders if something is actually wrong with the rims. There has been exactly one great game since the end of the first weekend (Kansas State-Xavier, which wasn't on until really late on a Thursday anyways) and a series of forgettable or simply unwatchable games since. The top 3 teams (Kansas, Kentucky, Syracuse) failed to make the Final Four. 3 of the 4 regional finals games were awful (and even Kentucky's miserable shooting night against West Virginia didn't make for a great game). It almost makes one long for a basketball BCS. Not really.
As for tonight's game: Duke wins comfortably. Butler plays a very slow pace that Duke can play at, too. Butler will pick up too many fouls (there might be some eye-rolling calls tonight) and have to go their bench early in both halves, opening room for Duke to build up a lead against Butler (WN's guess: Butler's Matt Howard picks up 4 or 5 fouls and plays less than 15 minutes - assuming he plays at all). Butler isn't shooting well enough to hang around. Duke wins handily (say, 71-60), playing maybe 1 or 2 decent teams, the perfect ending to the worst NCAA tournament of all-time ... before they expand to 96 teams. Ugh.
Opening day for baseball. The Orioles open on the road ... in Tampa Bay ... on Tuesday. Blah. More on the Orioles later this week.

A Decade in Review

2010-01-01T12:03:00.002-05:00

Well, 2010 feels like a good time to try to start blogging again. So long to a very busy 2009. I feel like this is the last year of the future - that 2010 sounds futuristic in a way that no other year is going to be until maybe 2100. Where are the flying cars and hover skateboards?

Anyway, for the sense of nostalgia, WN thought rather than rehash lists of the most important or most memorable moments of the last 10 years that it would be more satisfying just to throw out some of the most overlooked things instead.

Most Overlooked TV Show - The Chapelle Show. WN couldn't find this on anyone's decade list. This was the funniest show on TV for its two (and a little more seasons). The fact that Dave Chapelle disappeared and then quit the show (did we ever really find out why?) ended the show on its way up. Sort of the Terrell Davis of TV in the '00s - very short career at an incredible peak. The Rick James episode may have been the funniest episode of TV (and constantly rewatchable) in the last 10 years. (Also, Arrested Development.)

Most Overlooked Movie - WN can't think of any movies in the last 10 years that WN both really liked and didn't end up on somebody's list. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind felt overlooked at the time and is one of my 5 or so favorite movies from the last 10 years, but several critics mentioned it on their lists, so it's not so overlooked.

Most Overlooked Sports Moment - Is anything in sports overlooked any more? Maybe not, but a few things seem to be remembered as less meaningful than they were at the time. The 2001 Arizona Diamondbacks - defeating the Yankees and sending them into a decade of World Series exile, the unbelievable dominance by Curt Schilling and Randy Johnson, overcoming two blown games by Byung-Yung Kim, Luis Gonzalez's flair off Mariano Rivera in Game 7. The 2005 Chicago White Sox (exercising their own postseason demons in a decade full of others). George Mason's basketball team in 2006 (making the Final Four as an 11-seed and knocking off North Carolina and a great UConn team in the process). The 2003 Fiesta Bowl (Ohio State upsets Miami for the national championship).

Most Overlooked News Moment - The Ukrainian Orange Revolution (2004-2005). It wasn't just Ukraine, but this looked like the epicenter of peaceful democratic revolutions across the globe - most of which seemed to have gone nowhere, lost opportunities. A controversial election, an attempted assassination attempt, a gigantic protest for days in Kiev - this was the biggest international story going for weeks. Since then, news interest has waned as Ukraine seems to have fallen back into more allegations of corruption and politicking and where it goes is very hard to say. (Also, the Kobe Bryant trial; anthrax; Jessica Lynch; gas and oil prices; not Michael Jackson).

Maine, Part II

2009-08-22T16:30:00.002-04:00

To further regale you, dear reader, with an honest account of WN's recent trip to Maine ...

WEDNESDAY

We enjoyed breakfast at our B&B and then headed back west towards Camden, a charming harbor town along the bay. We toured the park, the shops, and the waterfront of the town in the morning and then ate lunch at Cappy's, which claimed to have the best New England clam chowder in Camden. Challenge accepted - veritably, the chowder was very good (and nearly overflowing with clams). After lunch, we took a schooner ride on a ship named Surprise, a 90-year old vessel originally commissioned by a Wall Street tycoon-cum-yachtsman. The ride was beautiful and the fellow passengers and the couple that owned the ship were very nice. WN even got to help hoist the sails. Ahoy!

Afterwards, we stopped at Camden Hills State Park for a short excursion and to get some pictures overlooking Camden. The weather had cleared by the afternoon, giving us the chance to take some rather nice and easy pictures of the town and the Maine waterfront. In the hazy distance loomed Mount Desert Island, where Acadia National Park waited stoically for us. Soon enough.

We stopped at a lobster barn for dinner. It was a barn ... with lobster tanks ... and that was it. It was BYOE (bring your own everything), and we didn't have the time to fetch libations, but we still dined on fresh lobster and corn as the sun set over the bay's horizon (LOBSTER MEAL #4). That, in a lobster shell, is Maine.

THURSDAY

Following breakfast we set out for Acadia National Park. In the interests of keeping the travelogue (trave-blogue?) positive, WN won't recount the earlier part of the day, which included road construction backups, unhelpful signage, angry shopkeepers, unusual ATM fees, and the general waste of time getting there. Once there, we did end up driving around the park and some non-park parts of the island in the vain search for in-park parking (as it turned out, Acadia was substantially crowded and WN and WoWN didn't realize the usefulness of the bus system from the park entrance until far too late. Still, we eventually did stop near Thunder Hole - a rock cave where the tides create a crashing sound at some parts of the day. We walked there, further down the shore, and then set out for hiking. We hiked for about 3 hours, from the trailhead to Gorham Mountain, to the Bowl (a large mountain lake), and then to the Beehive (or what we could only assume was the Beehive, which, as best as we could tell, was a rock formation and not the ubiqutous hive of bees).

After the hike, we left the park (and saw a coyote!) and then ate dinner. WN, indeed, had a lobster (LOBSTER MEAL #5, THE LAST) and we shared a piece of Maine blueberry pie for dessert. A full day.

FRIDAY

We left Maine in the morning, driving to Augusta and then south to Portsmouth, New Hampshire for an ill-advised detour and stop - not that Portsmouth was not lovely in August, but just that it took far longer to make what was to be a quick stop. Through New Hampshire into Massachusetts, eventually onto the rolling parking lot that was the Mass Turnpike, south towards Hartford, through the Hartford rush hour, eventually to New York, over the Hudson River, into New Jersey, a short jaunt past the mansions that beset Ramapo College in Mahwah, New Jersey (you know your house is big when it the house has a name), finally into Pennsylvania to visit WoWN's mother and stepfather. One unfortunate stop in the ER and one stop at a 24-hour pharmacy later, we sat down for dinner at Chili's and ate before getting to their house for the night.

SATURDAY

We stopped off to visit WoWN's parents at work in the morning and then left around noon and travelled straight through to the WN Homestead (despite naming it, still not a mansion). That was the end of the trip. 7 days, 6 nights, 1800 miles, 5 lobsters.

Maine, Part I

2009-08-17T21:21:00.002-04:00

It's been a long time. Hopefully blogging will be consistent again, but WN isn't making any more promises.

PREMISE

WN and WoWN were set to leave on vacation for a week. All summer long we had been planning to go south to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. But with nothing booked 4 days before leaving and with temperatures forecasted into the 90's, we changed plans and decided to head for the lobster-filled and cooler shores of Maine. To be young and spontaneous - and to have procrastinated long enough to make a last minute decision.

SUNDAY

WN and WoWN left at 5:30 a.m. for the long drive to Portland, Maine. With a quick stop at Dunkin' Donuts for breakfast and coffee, we were off. The trip was largely uneventful, although it rained most of the way through New Jersey and we ended up detouring on the Palisades Parkway instead of going through New York City or around it on the Garden State Parkway.

We arrived in Boston around 1:00 p.m. to stop and visit friends who had recently moved to the city. We caught up with them for a leisurely lunch and chat. Very nice and welcome respite from the road.

From there, we drove to Portland and arrived around 5:30 p.m. We stayed at Howard Johnson's, which also had an attached Friendly's. A decent place to hang your hat for two days. Then we ventured into Portland proper.

The weird thing about Portland is that they did a lot to advertise their downtown area, but Portland seemed devoid of maps and signs. We ended up driving through a rather unremarkable part of Portland - was there really nothing to do or see here? - before finally stumbling upon the downtown area. It's not all that big, but it was nice and we had a good dinner and beers at Gritty McDuff's. WN enjoyed a lobster roll (LOBSTER MEAL #1). After dinner we walked around the area a little more before retreating to HoJo's and stopping by Friendly's for dessert.

MONDAY

We struck out in the morning, grabbed a small breakfast, and headed to South Portland and Cape Elizabeth. We enjoyed the morning near Two Lights State Park and Fort Williams, doing some light hiking along the rocks and enjoying the relaxing lapping of the waves of Casco Bay. We ate lunch at a lobster pound (the name of which escapes me), which claimed to have the best lobster rolls in Portland. Challenge accepted. WN and WoWN both partaked (partook?) lobster rolls, which were indeed delicious (LOBSTER MEAL #2).

After lunch, we went back to Portland and walked along the rail trail. Then we struck out for Freeport for dinner (at the Jameson Tavern, where allegedly the state charter or something similar was signed for Maine) and a stop by L.L. Bean headquarters, which is actually open 24-7. If you want comfortable outdoor gear and sensible casual wear at 3 in the morning in southern Maine, this is your place.

TUESDAY

Tuesday we packed up, grabbed breakfast, and headed up Route 1 to Boothbay Harbor. Boothbay was very nice and we strolled along the harbor before settling in at Captain Jack's Lobster Shack or something else so quaintly named. We had a lobster bake (although we got chips instead of a baked potato, but okay) and a pitcher of Shipyard Ale while sitting on the farside of the harbor. This was the best lobster WN had ever eaten - magnificent (LOBSTER MEAL #3). After lunch, we walked around the harbor, looked at the ships, stopped in some shops, had some ice cream (french maple? outrageous!) and then headed back to the car.

From Boothbay Harbor, we drove further on Route 1 to Searsport, which is along the northside of Penobscot Bay. We stayed at the 1794 Watchtide by the Sea Bed and Breakfast, a small but charming little B&B on the bay. We checked in, unpacked, and then headed down to Belfast for dinner. Most of Belfast was closed or closing by 8:00, but we did have an enjoyable meal at Darby's before retiring for the night.

Stay tuned for Part II, coming soon.

Paul Simon as Prophet

2009-06-24T17:24:00.001-04:00

Just a thought that could be applied to any number of news (or anti-news) stories in the last few days (or weeks, or months)

Somebody could walk into this room
And say your life is on fire
It's all over the evening news
All about the fire in your life on the evening news

-- Paul Simon, "Crazy Love, Vol. II"

WSJ Claims Millionaires Fleeing Maryland?

2009-05-27T18:30:00.001-04:00

This is at least the second time that this ballyhooed idea has come up within my purview in the last few weeks - namely, that the increase in the top marginal tax rate in Maryland last year is driving away rich people from the state.

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/107123/Millionaires-Go-Missing

Forget for a minute the fudging on how many people making over $1 million in 2007 no longer made over $1 million in 2008 in the midst of the biggest economic recession since the 1930's (since parsing out this effect would almost certainly give you some idea about the magnitude of the WSJ's complaint). While the 6.25 percent tax rate sounds high (and you can certainly argue about whether it is or is not too high), this article seems to be overstating the case.

Here are the Maryland tax brackets in 2008: http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/107123/Millionaires-Go-Missing

Take a hypothetical single filer who made $1.5 million in 2008 and assume that this person took no tax deductions or tax credits. The first $1 million was taxed at an average rate of 5.26 percent ($52,572.50). The next $500,000 is taxed at a rate of 6.25 percent ($31,250). Without the $1 million marginal tax rate, the top marginal rate would have been 5.5 percent ($27,500). The difference amounts to $3,750. In addition, state taxes are tax deductible (but filers are also subject to the alternative minimum tax, or AMT, which may very well apply in this hypothetical case).

Based on what I could find about pre-2008 tax rates (http://www.gov.state.md.us/pressreleases/070919.html), it looks like our same hypothetical tax payer would have paid 4.75 percent of all income above $3,000 in 2007 ($71,107.50), a total difference of $12,715 (or 0.85 percent of total income). Certainly that is higher than the difference resulting from the top tier, but it's also not at all the point that the WSJ is making.

Of course, there aren't any stories of Maryland teetering on the brink of economic collapse, either. While a $100 million shortfall in the budget would be notable (1) the recession itself is having a much larger effect on Maryland and every other state and (2) it's a drop in a bucket when Maryland's 2010 budget is about $32 billion.

Maybe the tax rate is too high/just right/not high enough; I just find it hard to believe that this many people with 7-figure incomes are leaving the state altogether over a matter of a few thousand dollars, at least without some better evidence. Better evidence is welcome here.

Ravens Sign L. J. Smith

2009-03-20T15:14:00.001-04:00

Apparently concerned that Todd Heap didn't drop enough passes at tight end last year, the Ravens have signed L. J. Smith.

Weather

2009-03-05T16:17:00.000-05:00

While WN finds few things more banal or insipid than idle talk about the weather, it is rather odd to see the biggest snowstorm of the year juxtaposed with a weekend that is supposed to have temperatures reaching 70 degrees. March: in like a lamb, out like a freaking lunatic.

Fun Fact of the Day

2009-02-27T08:57:00.003-05:00

The Planetary Foundation is sending some living organisms and some soil from the Russian tundra towards Mars and then back to see if life can survive in space. It turns out that NASA has a person whose official job title is Planetary Protection Official. That sounds like a cool job and and even cooler business card.

A Few Things

2009-02-19T14:34:00.000-05:00

1. I know there's a lot of controversy about the stimulus bill (more on that below), but what was The Today Show (or is it just Today) doing interviewing Karl Rove as its first guest on Tuesday to talk about it? What do you think he said? Why are they interviewing someone who is a campaign manager? (Surprisingly, Karl Rove didn't like the bill.) Perhaps not even worth asking, but why did Matt Lauer not press Rove when he accused Obama for the entirety of the recession and its related symptoms? (Rove says Obama immediately prevented regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac upon entering the Senate in 2005 and that the Bush administration was never against deregulation. Which, to my knowledge, is the only time anyone has really thought of anything positive that would follow the phrase, "If only Alan Keyes had won ...")

At least ABC and Good Morning America had the good sense to bring on Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman. It's not that Krugman is neutral, but at least somebody who knew something (well, plenty) about economics was asked to weigh in on this bill.

2. And, for that matter, why are talk shows and pundit shows always full of current and former campaign personnel? James Carville, Mary Matalin, Paul Begala, Rove, etc. Of course these people are going to stick to the party line (or whatever they think it should be). It's not that people who are clearly liberal or conservative shouldn't be brought onto these shows, but it would be useful to have someone who (a) might be the slightest bit objective and (b) actually knows what they're talking about.

3. Everyone is so down on the stimulus bill. Perhaps it's sort of scary to see a number that big ($800 billion!), but that's not even 10 percent of the U.S. GDP in one year. Over 10 years it's less than 1 percent. A little perspective. I don't think that this in and of itself should shoot down all criticisms of the bill (some of which are legitimate), but come on, people, did you think this wasn't going to be expensive?

4. As for other illegitimate criticisms, I'll only address this. People: this is not socialism. Socialism is an entirely different form of government. The government spending money - even if it's a lot of it, even if it's borrowing the money - is not socialism. Socialism is when the state controls all means of production - they would essentially own everything. If anything, I think both the Bush and Obama administrations have gone out of their ways to make sure nothing they do looks anything like socialism. Spending more money on roads and scientific research and health care (and, let's face it, a lot of this money is basically going to the States for things they were already doing - and some of the States have royally screwed up their budgets) - anyway, spending money on things we were already doing isn't going to be the sudden transformation from some robust free-market capitalist democracy to Soviet-style revolution. No matter what Newsweek or Fox News says. Perspective!

5. Yes, the woman who has 14 babies and sort of looks like Angelina Jolie and blah blah blah seems to be crazy. But isn't there some other news going on in the world? No matter what you think about her (I think she's a little crazy but completely delusional), she didn't do anything illegal. (Stupid ...) How about this: we leave her (and her 14 kids) alone, she leaves us alone. Good grief, you would think with all of the actual important news going on that this would be a blip on the radar (the economy, the stimulus bill, Iraq, Afghanistan) ... check that, this is exactly what you would expect.

Hat in the Ring

2009-02-13T08:43:00.003-05:00

Okay, for the good of a nation, WN will inform President Obama that he is indeed interested in serving as Secretary of Commerce. I have paid all of my taxes through 2008, I have never had a nanny or housekeeper (so no immigration issues or anything like that to worry about), I am willing to pretty much do whatever they tell me, and I can't be too much worse than the third choice on the list, anyways.

Sort of a rocky start for the new administration. They certainly aren't the first administration to have a few Cabinet picks wash out (in fact, it's a veritable ritual in the first 100 days) and the problems we're having right now are certainly bigger than we've had at the beginning of a new presidency since at least 1980 (and the only other years that come to mind are 1932 and 1968). So ... what did we expect, anyways?

LSM - Ravens

2009-02-09T15:45:00.000-05:00

1. What a season! It's a shame that they had to play Pittsburgh for a third time - and lose a close game (with some dubious officiating) for a third time - but still an incredible run. 11-5 in the regular season (with a really rough schedule), 2-1 in the playoffs (all on the road), and (do I dare say) we have found our franchise quarterback for the next 12 years. (I like Joe Cool as a nickname, since he seems to be the least excitable football player in the league, but I'm still pushing for Bazooka Joe.)

2. Free agency: The Ravens have really 6 key free agents: Ray Lewis, Terrell Suggs, Bart Scott, Jason Brown, Jim Leohnard, and Dawan Landry. I don't know whether the Ravens will keep either Leohnard or Landry, but it would be nice to bring back one starting safety at a reasonable price. The Ravens would be well-served to either re-sign Brown or use the franchise tag to keep him, as he's arguably the most important offensive lineman on the team.

What the Ravens will do about linebacker is anyone's guess. It's hard to imagine them bringing back all three - particularly when the Ravens have several adequate young linebackers, too (Tavares Gooden, Jameel McClain, Antwan Barnes, Nick Griesen). Of the 3, Suggs would appear to have the most value - he's entering the prime of his career, he led the league in negative plays this year, and he is definitely the Ravens' best pash-rusher. Lewis played extremely well this year and is the clear leader of the team, but he is older. Suggs says he wants to say, Lewis says he's willing to look around. Scott, it would seem, is a back-up plan if the Ravens lose Lewis (not so much with Suggs).

It would be great to keep Ray Lewis, but if someone makes him a Godfather offer (you know, one he can't refuse), then who knows. It would not be cool to see Ray as a Cowboy or a Jet (or, heaven forfend, a Patriot or a Steeler). And it's much harder to predict how the team would react to losing Lewis than any other player (which is why even though Suggs might be a better player on the field over the next 3 years, Lewis still might be more important overall).

The Ravens could also release some players. I would assume Chris McAlister will be gone. It's also possible the Ravens would release (or more likely restructure) Samari Rolle, Todd Heap (it was never all that clear how he fit into Cam Cameron's offense, but he did play better in the second half), or Willis McGahee (although his cap number is the same whether they keep him or not, plus he was outstanding in the Pittsburgh game).

As for other free agents, it would be great if the Ravens could add a playmaker on offense, especially wide receiver. There aren't really any great receivers available - TJ Houshmanzadeh is probably the best, but there's likely a lot of competition for him, and after that the pickings are slim. The Ravens will probably have to lean on the draft for some help, although whether they can get an impact player for this year will be a big question, especially picking so late in the first and second rounds. Wide receiver, cornerback, and depth on the offensive and defensive lines are the biggest need areas.

Where Have You Gone, Alex Rodriguez?

2009-02-09T10:20:00.002-05:00

Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you, woo woo woo ...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/baseball/mlb/02/07/alex-rodriguez-steroids/index.html?eref=T1

At this point, it really wouldn't be much of a shock for any successful baseball player to be linked to steroids. I mean, really, is it that much of a surprise that A-Rod was doing steroids? (Particularly when baseball wasn't really doing anything about it.)

I can't say this is baseball's worst case scenario. Of all active players, Derek Jeter would probably be the most scandalous. (It does make me wonder whether the seemingly league-wide resistance to signing Manny Ramirez has anything to do with this list. Purely speculative.)

Well, a good start to the 2009 season.

Val Kilmer for America

2009-02-06T14:01:00.002-05:00

Here's a fantastic idea:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/news/bal-val-kilmer-governor-0206,0,3952020.story

Val Kilmer is considering a run for governor of New Mexico. WN doesn't think that Batman should be counted as one of his top 10 film roles, let alone get mentioned in the first sentence. But I think this is quite an exciting prospect, particularly if you have ever read Chuck Klosterman's interview with him (found in Chuck Klosterman IV) - as it turns out, he's sort of insane. Not in a dangerous way, but sort of a blow-your-mind sort of way. For example, Kilmer claims that as an actor (he is a famous method actor) he knows characters better than themselves. So, as Klosterman presses, Kilmer readily admits that he understands what it's like to be a fighter pilot better than an actual fighter pilot does because he played Iceman in Top Gun. (Which also leads Klosterman to getting Kilmer to admit that an actor playing a younger version of Kilmer in a Val Kilmer movie would likely understand what it's like to be Val Kilmer more than the actual Val Kilmer does.)

So, hey, this could be pretty interesting. There's something sort of gratifying about watching the star of Top Secret! become governor.

Fun Happenings at TED

2009-02-05T11:46:00.002-05:00

Bill Gates, performance artist:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090205/ts_alt_afp/usitinternethealthfinancegates

It helps to be the second richest person in the world if you're going to do something like this.

Toffees Win!

2009-02-04T17:45:00.003-05:00

Everton scores in the 118th minute (Dan Gosling from an Andy van der Meyde cross - which must be the first good thing van der Meyde has done for Everton) - they beat Liverpool 1-0 in the 4th round of the FA Cup.

Brilliant win! After poor showings in the UEFA and Carling Cups, Everton draws Aston Villa (to whom Everton lost with extreme disappointment in December) in the Round of 16.

SuperBowl Leftovers

2009-02-04T14:34:00.003-05:00

Bogus call of the game: the roughing the passer call against Karlos Dansby for hitting Ben "The Fish" Roethlisberger. If the Fish wants to scramble around like that, getting hit is going to be part of the game. WN has seen far worse than that hit go unnoticed by the refs.
Despite the Steelers' win (boo!), it was sort of gratifying to see so many overhyped players go virtually invisible: Hines Ward (2 catches, 1 cheap hit); Troy Polamalu (3 or 4 missed tackles, 1 massively-blown coverage); Willie Parker (nothing).
This should also put to rest the notion that the Steelers have some all-time great defense. An all-time great defense doesn't give up 2 touchdowns in the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl to blow a lead like that.
The Cardinals, while they played admirably, will probably follow a long line of Super Bowl losers who failed to make the playoffs the next year. On the other hand, they are in a terrible division, so maybe.
James Harrison: between Santonio Holmes' great final drive and that absolutely ridiculously cheap shot on Aaron Francisco in the 4th quarter, you probably cost yourself a shot at the Super Bowl MVP. Somehow those punches should have cost Pittsburgh more than 1 yard.
Definitely seemed to be most like Super Bowl 39 (Pats-Panthers): sort of a boring game with a flurry of scoring at the end of the first half, followed by a back-and-forth second half and a close win by the better and favored team.
Bad year to have anything other than 0, 3, or 7 in the squares. Would have loved to see a room with people who had 4-0, 0-0, and 7-7 on the Harrison INT-TD play at the end of the first half.
Super Bowl 44: Quick, meaningless prediction - Patriots 27, Falcons 13.

Lesson Learned

2009-02-03T16:31:00.002-05:00

Children, if you ever want to grow up to be a Cabinet member (or other high-ranking government official) - pay your taxes. Tom Daschle - out. (As is Jennifer Kilhefer and almost Timothy Geithner.) No word yet on who the new secretary (or director of the Office of Health Reform) might be.

Might I recommend TurboTax? In fact, H&R Block will stand by you in the event of an audit!

Long Time Coming

2009-02-02T10:39:00.002-05:00

It's been quite awhile, I know. But I'll try to be a little better here.

No sense recapping the last few months. I just wanted to say that this guy is an imbecile:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/02/navarrette.stimulus/index.html

Look, I'm sure there are ridiculous things in the stimulus bill. I'm sure there are reasonable (and even persuasive) arguments about the general idea of the bill. But apparently not enough that this bozo picks out child care on military bases, public health and STD prevention, and contraception (for a total of less than $1 billion, or about 0.1 percent of the total bill) as "ridiculous." Yes, clown, I'm sure child care for military families - with one parent working and the other parent off in Iraq or Afghanistan - is "ridiculous." Maybe their infants ought to toughen up and stop asking for handouts. Also, lovely little rant comparing the Democrats to Nazis. Really inspired stuff. Since the contraception isn't mandatory - as in, the government is making more available to people who might then use it and not have an unwanted pregnancy (and even lower the number of abortions - or is it only an issue when the Republicans make it an issue?) - it isn't exactly eugenics or any other nasty thing you could say.

Unreal.

Quick Thoughts on the Economy

2008-10-20T15:55:00.001-04:00

1. The bailout (or "bailout" depending on how you feel about it) has certainly been one of the most interesting and surreal political events of my lifetime. (The only other thing that compares is the 2000 election and subsequent "recount.") McCain "suspending" his campaign, the bizarre stories of the White House meeting last Thursday (where McCain allegedly said nothing for 45 minutes after swooping in to fix it), the House Republicans revolt last Friday, the failure to pass the bill the first time, rounds upon rounds of recriminations, and all amidst the turmoil in the stock market and the American economy. I sincerely hope you weren't planning to retire any time soon.

2. I think there are legitimate concerns about the bailout bill and that they shouldn't be easily dismissed. And in a way it's quite refreshing to see that some of our elected representatives do respond to their constituents. All of that said, I feel like there's one glaring and prevalent misconception about the current bill. Maybe not. Maybe it won't change your mind about it. But ...

The bailout isn't free money to Wall Street. The Treasury would be using $700 billion to buy assets and securities from banks and investment holding companies (whatever Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are now) or stakes in the banks themeselves - so there is an actual exchange going on. The theory (yes, theory) is that the Treasury would be able to buy these assets (which no one seems to want to buy right now) at prices banks would be willing to sell them but might also increase in value once the credit market/real estate market/economy improve. This would improve the existing credit market and help get the economy moving again (as credit is drying up quickly in all parts of the economy) and perhaps be a windfall to the U.S. government. (On the other hand, I think McCain's mortgage bailout plan - buying mortgages and refinancing - is not a particularly good idea, because the government would almost certainly end up paying much more than the houses are worth and payoff those who wrote the loans and then split them up and traded them - sounds nice, but not a particularly good idea.)

Now, yes, this is turning Treasury into something of a public hedge fund. Yes, there are certainly dangers (it might not do enough to improve the credit markets; the assets might not appreciate that much; no one knows how Treasury will buy the assets, so they could overpay; it could lead to a larger debt and/or more inflation). And there's certainly reasonable arguments beyond this (it's not the role of the U.S. government to do this; moral hazard of banks and investors; and more).

3. What will happen? I don't know. I don't think that we're in for a "depression" (which actually is technically milder than a recession - the Great Depression was coined as a joke at Herbert Hoover's expense, who referred to the economic disaster during his presidency as only a depression and not a recession) but the combination of economic fundamentals pointing downwards and the problems in the credit market will probably lead to some recession in the latter half of 2008 and into 2009. I think that the economy will likely rebound robustly. I don't know how quickly or how much the markets will rebound. So, that's all pretty blaise, safe predictions.

However, I think the bigger question is whether we see any new effective regulation as a result. The goal ought to be for this sort of intervention to not ever be needed again. Of course there's been far less discussion of that so far, but that's certainly something to think about, particularly after the election.

LSM

2008-10-01T10:31:00.002-04:00

1. So much for the Orioles. Another year, another late season swoon. And with the Rays (!) winning the American League East (and thankfully, joyously relegating the Yankees to third place and out of the playoffs), the Orioles have finished last in the division, too.

What was good this year: Nick Markakis looked pretty good ... Adam Jones is still sort of raw, but clearly has the talent to succeed and had a good second half (WN thinks the best Adam Jones comparison is a young Eric Davis - same build, similar skill set) ... Jeremy Guthrie showed he's no one-year wonder and pitched pretty well ... there is some talent in the bullpen (George Sherrill, Jim Johnson) if they can stay healthy ... Matt Wieters was a beast in the minors and could be an impact player as early as 2009 ... Melvin Mora and Aubrey Huff were good in the second half ... Brian Roberts is still good.

What was bad this year: Every other starting pitcher (Adam Loewen is done, Danny Cabrera is eternally confounding, and everyone else was sort of blah) ... the O's did virtually zilch at the trade deadline (they traded Chad Bradford, big deal) ... nothing at shortstop in the short or long-term ... still kind of an old team with a lot of contracts ending in 2009 ... the bullpen was avert-your-eyes awful in the second half.

2009: We'll see what the O's do in the off-season, although WN is guessing it won't be very much. There is a decent free agent class (including CC Sabathia, Ben Sheets, maybe AJ Burnett) but topped off with Baltimore-native first baseman Mark Teixeira. You'd think Baltimore would love to get him, but (1) he's going to be really expensive; (2) the Yankees, Angels, and a few other teams will be in the mix; (3) it's not really clear Teixeira solves the O's problems (although a legit 3 or 4 hitter would do wonders for the lineup).

The O's will have to see if any of the younger pitchers improve. Right now the only lock for the rotation would be Guthrie. The O's will probably have to add somebody in the offseason. There doesn't appear to be a lot in the high minors, although it will be interesting to see what the O's do with Chris Tillman (from the Erik Bedard trade) and Brian Matusz (this year's first-round pick). There are a lot of pitchers coming back from injuries (Matt Albers, Troy Patton, Chris Ray), so maybe Baltimore gets something out of them.

There's also some talk about trading Brian Roberts. Last year that looked sort of interesting. This year ... WN doesn't know. Roberts is definitely still good, and he's sort of the marquee player for the moment, and WN isn't so sure the trade market for him is going to be great (particularly as the Cubs, who were the most-rumored team to be interested, seem okay for now at second). Plus, opening a hole at second next to the hole at shortstop doesn't seem like progress.

The O's will certainly consider bringing up Wieters at catcher, making Ramon Hernandez either expendable or a backup. Nolan Reimold and Lou Montanez might get a shot in the outfield, but the O's have sort of an oversupply right now (Markakis, Jones, Scott, Huff, Payton). The O's also must get somebody to play shortstop full time. The Fahey-Cintron-Hernandez-Castro combination is not going to cut it.

2009 might not be much better. A lot of holes for the Orioles to fill and the AL East doesn't look any easier. So ... stay tuned.

2. The Ravens are 2-1. They lost a heartbreaker against Pittsburgh 23-20 in OT. They beat Cincinnati and Cleveland, but not all that convincingly. The defense looks good. The offense looks improved. It's still too early to tell what these Ravens will do, but they're certainly interesting.

If anything was evident in the Monday night game, it was these two things: (1) Joe Flacco has a shot to be a very good quarterback in the NFL - he was poised, didn't make any bad throws, and hung in there even though the Steelers started getting to him in the second half; (2) the Ravens desparately need another big play receiver - Derrick Mason is still remarkably good, but Mark Clayton and Demetrius Williams have been nearly invisible this year; in the past, the Ravens sort of got away with this because the passing game was bad anyways and because they could lean on Todd Heap at tight end - except Heap hasn't been very good this year, either (awful in the Cincinnati game and vanished in the Pittsburgh game). Anyway, the two points sort of go together. A big play receiver that could line up on the other side of Mason would both spark the Ravens offense and give Flacco a chance to continue improving. Something for next year.

As for this year - who knows. There are so many AFC teams that are either worse than everyone thought (Colts, Jaguars, Browns) or better (Titans) or simply confusing (Dolphins) that are all on the Ravens schedule - so maybe the Ravens have a chance at winning some of the games we thought were going to be tough. On the other hand, they play the NFC East (Giants, Cowboys, Eagles, and Redskins) - so they could easily go 0-4 in those games and struggle to get to 9 or 10 wins. Anyway, WN thought at the beginning of the season the Ravens would most likely finish with 5-6 wins; now 8-9 seems more likely and 10 doesn't sound ridiculous. (11 or more is incredible.)

New Month, New Goals

2008-10-01T10:28:00.002-04:00

Okay, so it turns out that September was a bad month for blogging. No big deal, but WN is sorry you had so little to read here that you had to turn to actual "news" or "books" or "magazines" to read. Profuse apologies, WN assures you.

So, new month, new goal: WN is going to try to write on a more regular schedule - at least once a week on sports, once a week on the election and political issues, once a week on something serious, and once a week on something less serious. For reals. Ideas welcome.

This Is Not My Beautiful Blog!

2008-09-19T18:55:00.000-04:00

Where has WN been? Traveling. Working. Sick. Distracted.

A lot of thoughts that have been building up (before some more blogposts):

Another season of baseball, another disappointing finish for the Orioles. Who are these guys?
WN thinks the Ravens got a raw deal with the game in Houston being postponed instead of moved. Since the odds were drastically against being able to play last weekend, why couldn't they have moved the game (say, the University of Oklahoma or the RCA Dome in Indianapolis)? Blah.
Gilbert Arenas, third knee surgery. And that big fat new contract. Another okay but ultimately unsatisfying season coming up for the Wizards.
The U.S. stock market ... uh, well, we certainly live in interesting times. Hope you didn't pull all your money out on Wednesday or Thursday morning. WN isn't sure anyone knows what the right answer is to any of this (although there are certainly enough people on TV who do) - it's sort of hard to navigate new waters. (On a related note, did you know that Bering's expedition to Alaska only stayed on Alaskan soil for 10 minutes before turning around? Wild.)
Sarah Palin #1 - If people want to be excited about her, that's fine. But don't pretend that anyone knew anything about her before she was picked. And we still don't know that much.
Sarah Palin #2 - Tina Fey, zow. WN isn't entirely sure how Sarah Palin could have seen that and laughed at it.
Sarah Palin #3 - For those who say, "She has more experience than Obama, she was a Governor!" - apparently being a Governor is so absolutely freaking important that the Republican primary voters also passed over 2 Governors to pick John McCain. But sure, it's really important.
The one issue that neither candidate is really addressing that WN would like to hear about: the budget. It's come up a bit this week after all of the bailouts, but let's face it - between short-run deficits, the national debt, the bailouts, and the long-term fiscal issues with Medicare and Social Security, there isn't exactly a lot of wiggle room to do much right now without either (1) dramatically cutting spending (and not in the "let's cut earmarks which are barely 1% of the budget and many of which will still get funded anyway" way) and/or (2) substantially raising taxes. Neither of these are very likely no matter who is elected. Argh.
Is there anything new on TV this fall that's worth watching? WN is kinda-sorta interested in checking out Worst Week, but it seems like it would be hard for that to be funny every week. Not a whole lot, so maybe it's worth giving something coming back a second look. (Oh, and for the record, Heroes, you better be pretty good right away. They could get rid of about 5 or 6 characters without losing anything. But bring back Kristen Bell.)
You should really check out Winterpills.

No More MTA Buses to Ravens Games

2008-08-16T17:46:00.002-04:00

The best way to get to Ravens games is apparently nevermore. Read more here.

WN is glad to know that the Federal government has solved enough problems that forcing the MTA to stop providing reasonably-priced and decent quality transportation to Ravens games. It seems quite dubious that they can't keep these buses going, since it means either taking more expensive private charter buses (which may or may not be cooperating with the Ravens) or driving (and then paying parking, and adding to traffic in a congested area already) or taking another, crappier public transportation option.

The light rail, for all intensive purposes, is a terrible way to go to the stadium. It's ground-level, which means it stops at lights, and it's also incredibly packed, which means you're waiting forever or pushing and shoving to get onto one of the first trains. And the Metro is both inconvenient to catch (as it's one line running from Owings Mills southeast to Johns Hopkins hospital) and it leaves you quite a long walk from the stadium if you get out at Lexington Market (which, also, isn't exactly the nicest neighborhood in Baltimore, either).

Whatever. More, happier blog posts coming soon!

Weekend Summary

2008-08-04T09:53:00.002-04:00

Friday

WN and WoWN went out to dinner at Chopsticks in Urbana. Extremely good, extremely nice service. WN had the Five-Flavored Chicken, which was excellent. WN strongly urges anyone in the area to go once and try it - it's a bit off the main road and tucked away in a shopping center, but it's worth the effort.

Also spent some time Friday and the rest of the weekend following the breaking story on the suicide of the possibly-alleged suspect in the anthrax mailings in 2001. Very weird, lots of dischordant information out there. Still trying to sort it out, but unless the FBI comes back with some concrete evidence, it seems like this still might feel unresolved, even if they close the books on the case.

Saturday

The main event was a baby shower for our friends. Inadvertently took the long way there - my mistake. It was a nice time and we got to see some other friends there, too.

The rest of the day seemed rather lazy. WN made a sort of quick dinner of grilled pork chops with grilled potatoes and green beans, but it was pretty late by the time we actually ate.

Sunday

We ran some errands in the afternoon, shopping for a few things. WN doesn't like to rely on anecdotes - but loves sharing them - so here it goes: Consumer spending looks miserable. We stopped in four stores. Old Navy and Kohl's were as empty as WN has ever seen them - now, maybe it's a function of the summer (and vacations) and people waiting to do back-to-school shopping. But it was still pretty empty. We also stopped in Payless Shoes, which wasn't particularly noteworthy. Then we went to Wal-Mart (or is it just Walmart now?) which seemed pretty normal. Does this say something broader about the economy? Or just something about shopping on a Sunday afternoon?

That's about it. The weekend felt like it went by incredibly fast.

LSM

2008-08-01T15:43:00.002-04:00

1. The Orioles were silent at the trade deadline yesterday. WN wasn't expecting to see George Sherrill or Brian Roberts go necessarily, but it was a bit surprising that a few useful veterans stayed - Kevin Millar, Aubrey Huff, Jay Payton, Jamie Walker, Chad Bradford. Maybe more will happen in August. Maybe the O's didn't need to move them for the sake of moving them. But it would have been nice to see them do something.

Meanwhile, Matt Wieters is tearing up AA while in Bowie.

2. The Ravens camp is open for business. A couple big questions - the health and play of their offensive tackles, who will be the #2 cornerback, and of course and as always, who will be the starting quarterback - hang over camp.

The offensive tackle problem is distressing, particularly since it's not clear what the Ravens are going to get out of Jared Gaither and Adam Terry and the depth is questionable, too. WN would guess the #2 corner out of camp is probably Samari Rolle (still absent from camp after the death of his father), but maybe Fabian Washington or Derrick Martin if either have a great camp.

As for quarterback, WN thought for awhile that Kyle Boller would probably start, but now WN is thinking that Troy Smith has the inside track. Smith is a bit more mobile and able to work outside of the pocket (even though Boller might be as fast or faster in the 40) and there isn't too much to lose if Smith doesn't work out. It almost certainly won't be rookie Joe Flacco, who has looked OK but not overwhelming so far.

It Is, How Do You Say, Yarrgh

2008-07-31T11:36:00.002-04:00

WN readers: How do you spell the sound that comes out of your mouth when you're completely frustrated? WN would posit that the word is something along the lines of "Yarrgh!"

Please help by adding your spelling or other sound of frustration. Yarrgh!

Skiing - Is a Season Pass Worth It?

2008-07-28T17:06:00.004-04:00

WN recently wrote that Whitetail, Roundtop, and Liberty Mountains were offering a joint Season Pass at a new rate - $399 for one person, $299 for each added family member before November 1. While a big improvement over last year's rates, you might be asking whether it's worth it or not. Rest assured, WN has done the math.

Assumptions

These are mostly to keep things simple.

1. Every time you ski at one of the 3 mountains, you buy an 8-hour flex pass on a weekend or holiday.
2. The Advantage Card is still being offered with the same conditions (40% off each ticket, every 6th ticket is free) and at the same rates.
3. Lift-ticket rates are the same as last year.
4. Not including the value of other benefits of Advantage Card or Season Pass in calculations.

Individual (Adult)

Cost of an individual lift-ticket (8-hour flex ticket, weekends/holidays): $55
Cost of lift-ticket with Advantage Card: $33
Cost of Advantage Card (before November 1): $84
Cost of Season Pass (before November 1): $399

Number of trips to come out even/ahead with Advantage Card: 4 (3.8 exactly)
Number of trips to come out even/ahead with Season Pass: 8 (7.3)
Number of trips to come out even/ahead with Season Pass relative to Advantage Card: 11 (10.5)

In other words, you'd have to go 11 times for the Season Pass to be a better financial choice than the Advantage Card.

Two Person Family (Two Adults)

Cost of an individual lift-ticket (8-hour flex ticket, weekends/holidays): $55
Cost of lift-ticket with Advantage Card: $33
Cost of Advantage Card (before November 1): $149
Cost of Season Pass (before November 1): $698

Number of trips to come out even/ahead with Advantage Card: 4 (3.4)
Number of trips to come out even/ahead with Season Pass: 7 (6.3)
Number of trips to come out even/ahead with Season Pass relative to Advantage Card: 10 (9.3)

Things work out a little better for a couple than a single in this case, but not dramatically.

So for someone who skis these mountains a few times a year, clearly the Advantage Card is a better financial decision. Now, if you place some value on the other benefits - particularly discounts at other mountains - maybe the Season Pass works out a little better.

The other added benefit of real significant value might be that a Season Pass would get a skier (like WN) to go more often. Because it's effectively free (except for time, gas, opportunity costs) to go skiing once you buy the Season Pass, maybe WN would go more often - nights or a few hour session on the weekends. In that case, maybe WN would go enough to get close to the breakeven point on the Season Pass against the Advantage Card.

Comments welcome. WN would be glad to run the numbers for others and their family status, too - let me know.

One Post on Brett Favre

2008-07-28T16:02:00.002-04:00

Not that WN really wants to go into this, since it's pretty much all you hear on ESPN or read in Sports Illustrated, but WN has two points.

1. WN doesn't really begrudge Brett Favre for wanting to come back, which is certainly his right and prerogative to do. The way he's going about it, though, has been quite clumsy. Sort of forcing Green Bay's hand and putting everyone in an awkward situation is really the problem here. As for whether he should stay retired, who knows. Time will tell.

2. Peter King of SI reported that one compromise might be to let Favre get in shape and wait for a team to have a quarterback injury during training camp or the first few weeks of the season. The issue here being that Favre doesn't really want to go to any of the teams supposedly interested and that Green Bay would OK as a trading partner (Jets, Buccaneers) - so this is a compromise so that Favre could, say, play for the Colts if Peyton Manning gets injured. As it is, Favre is skeptical of going to those teams and Green Bay won't trade him to any rival (most notably the Vikings) or release him to go play with a rival and get nothing in return. The rumor has been that Favre would prefer to play in Minnesota, which has a very good defense and running game and a young, inexperienced quarterback - but Minnesota is arguably Green Bay's biggest rival and Minnesota plays at Green Bay Week 1. The Packers, rather apparently, don't want Favre playing for their rivals in the first game of the season when they were supposed to be retiring his number.

Well, maybe this works, but it assumes that: 1) there is a serious quarterback injury before Week 6; 2) that team would be willing to take on Favre mid-way through the season, ahead of their own back-up quarterback and give up a third-round draft pick and believe that Favre could learn their offense. Big risks all around.

So, what about this (if you're Green Bay): release Brett Favre after Week 1. That prevents him from playing for Minnesota in the first week, plus it puts him on waivers, so the worst teams would have the first crack at taking Favre.

Of course, the bad teams might pass if Favre says he will retire again if a really bad team claims him; or the bad team might trade him (say, to Minnesota). Plus, it would be an extremely obnoxious, scorched-earth sort of thing to do to a player who has been the face of the franchise for 15 or so years. But, it might be a viable short-run alternative.

Nothing is Easy

2008-07-26T17:38:00.002-04:00

One of the lessons from the game The Sims is that stuff doesn't make you happy. The more your character buys, even though he or she likes it at first - the pinball machine, the hot tub, the cappuccino machine (ahhhh, mbbbmbmbmbbmbbm ahhh) - the more stuff breaks down, either depressing your character or possibly engulfing him or her in flame. Having friends is a much better way to keep your Sim a happy fellow - and from pissing himself.

Well, WN is at the point of shaking his fist and yelling some sort of Sim-like gibberish that is almost certainly profane.

1. The car - WN has gone into great lengths about how crappy the Passat is. Certainly no better. But WN hasn't been able to really figure out what to buy instead, despite some good advice, so it looks like that decision won't be made until next month at the earliest.

2. The computer - WN has a iMac G4 (PowerPC), which is about 5 years old. WN supposes that it's pretty old by computer standards, but the computer itself runs well for the most part. About 2 years ago, the internal CD/DVD combo drive went up (and, rather unfortunately, a week after the Apple Care warranty ran out). So rather replace the internal one (it being a Mac, making it far more difficult to do than on a PC), WN bought an external Sony drive. For about 2 years it worked fine, but now it gave out this week. WN hasn't quite figured out what's wrong - it won't show up as connected on the computer (although WN can get it to show up as vend_device or unknown through the System Profiler) and now it won't even eject properly. That resulted in a homemade dismantling project, at which point WN was able to get the eject function to work properly, but nothing else ... and once put back together, it still doesn't want to work.

3. WN also has a 3-year old Toshiba TV that won't turn on anymore; a Playstation 2 that doesn't quite work (which WN thinks has to do with the height of the laser, because WN did get it working again for a short amount of time); and a cell phone that seems to miss quite a few calls, even when there are 3 or 4 bars in the area.

Look, I know that this stuff is incredibly complex inside - between both the electronic and mechanical parts - and that it's wonderful that we have access to such life-improving technology like computers and nice cars and everything else. But I just can't stand stuff breaking down or not working right. Is it just that it's so hard to make quality products that last that no one can do it (or that it would be prohibitively expensive)? Is it that WN is just unlucky or doing something wrong with my stuff? Or is it that things just aren't built to last?

Or maybe WN should just be glad that I'm not wetting myself and catching on fire.

Although it does seem like the former might be useful in the event of the latter.

Comcast Part V

2008-07-23T08:39:00.003-04:00

WN contacted Comcast this morning and talked with a Customer Service Representative about the account. After a few minutes of work, he said that he would adjust the bill by pro-rating it for the two weeks that were double-billed (which is fair by me). He said to check back in 5 business days to verify that it was correct. WN doesn't want to pay the lower amount and then get hit with a late fee or something like that on the next bill, so we shall see what happens.

That said, WN will try to contact the local Comcast office as well or perhaps some local newspapers to get the word out that this is happening, since Comcast doesn't seem aware of it at this point - or if they are, they haven't said anything about it.

Comcast Part IV

2008-07-22T22:44:00.003-04:00

You might remember the three-installment saga of switching my Comcast over from one county to the other (which was Comcast's decision, not mine). (See Part I, Part II, and Part III.)

WN just got the first new bill today from Comcast. As another inconvenience, the automatic bill-pay WN had been using no long works, so WN has to re-enroll in the program, which may take 1-2 months. Anyway, the new bill was really large, but the bill stated that it covered 2 months of service, from June 24 through August 23. Well, fair enough WN supposes, but not quite being sure of this, WN reviewed my past payments in statements to check it out.

Okay, well, since WN is writing about it, clearly the new bill isn't right. The last bill WN paid covered the period from June 8 through July 7. If WN is reading this right, then the new bill is double-charging me for the period of June 24 through July 7 (2 weeks, or about 1/4 of the latest bill).

So, WN will be making a third call to Comcast tomorrow to resolve the bill. WN will let you know what the results are. Hopefully this will be pretty easy and quick to resolve and they'll just credit my bill for those two weeks or send out a new bill, but who knows.

Weekend Summary

2008-07-21T15:54:00.005-04:00

Friday

Stopped off for a drink with some co-workers on the way home, celebrating that they passed actuarial exams. Ah, those were the days! WN and WoWN went out to dinner at Chopsticks, a new Chinese restaurant in Urbana (link?). Great service, great food, decent prices. WN would say that the food was as good as P.F. Chang's. For real. Seemed like they were doing a lot of take-out business, which is promising.

Saturday

Did some chores and ran some errands in the morning and early afternoon. Mowed the lawn and did some other yardwork, cleaned some things up around the house, returned some borrowed appliances and such, ate some leftovers, went out to purchase some wine and spirits. Very nice time.

In the late afternoon, WoWN's parents (MiLoWN and SFiLoWN for those of you with scorecards at home) came to visit for the weekend. We had dinner in, sat around and talked for awhile. We also looked at the VW - which actually did get A/C going for a little while, but it disappeared again even after we tried recharging it.

Sunday

We all went to church in the morning and then back to our house for breakfast. We also went to Lowe's and Home Depot to pick up a few things for renovating the master bathroom. Since the bathroom was fairly blah before - one of those cheap sliding mirror medicine cabinets and the walls were sort of a peach color that sort of made your skin look sort of orange - we set out to make it nice. We took out the old medicine cabinet, installed a new mirror and light fixture, a new outlet, and hung a separate medicine cabinet (and a towel rack). Next steps for WN are to paint the room, paint the sink cabinet, install a new light switch fixture, and patch up the walls a little bit. Very nice.

Sunday evening we went out to dinner at Miyako (excellent, as always) and then to the movies to see The Dark Knight. Wow, what a movie. Still trying to figure out what I think about it, but it was definitely worth good, definitely worth seeing at least once if not more.

News at Whitetail, Roundtop

2008-07-16T15:03:00.003-04:00

A break from car blogging (although there is a doozy of a story coming) to blog on skiing.

Whitetail made two announcements this year. One, they're adding a new beginner trail (Sidewinder, which was chosen in an online vote of what was apparently the six most generic names Whitetail skiers could think of). Two, they're adding a lift in the terrain park.

Now, while WN is only slightly interested in the new trail, WN is absolutely thrilled with the new lift. Whitetail's main section (see the map) is accessible from the Whitetail Express Quad, but that's also the only way to get to the Terrain Park (by going down Angel Drop and turning left where it splits between the park and Home Run). What this means is that you get almost all of the teenager snowboarders on one lift and one run, which makes the whole thing kind of miserable and dangerous. (Not to denigrate all snowboarders, mind you.) Plus, why should snowboarders who want to spend all day in the park have to go all the way to the top every time? Anyway, this is the best change Whitetail could make and WN thinks that it's going to make it significantly more enjoyable for everyone.

Anyway, now there has been some hinting at another major announcement at Whitetail and from sources it sounds like Roundtop will also be announcing something, apparently today (possibly tomorrow). There isn't anything on Roundtop's (or Liberty's) websites about it at all.

What could it be? Pure, complete, unadulterated speculation follows:

1. A new mountain in southern PA. That would be awesome if they could find somewhere cool, but the costs are so prohibitive that it seems like it would make more sense to plow the money back into Whitetail, Roundtop, and Liberty. Plus, building new ski resorts south of New England with the threat of global warming is kind of a non-starter right now. Odds: 1%.

2. A new season pass for Whitetail, Roundtop, and Liberty. Also doubtful, because between the Season Pass, the Night Club Card, and the Advantage Card, it seems like they have all of their bases covered. Odds: 2%.

3. A deal with other ski mountains. This might have more promise. In the past, the 3 southern PA mountains have offered deals with Wyndham (NY) and Stratton (VT) (maybe others, feel free to add in the comments) ... but it's possible they could make a bigger deal. Joint season-pass? Discounts to other mountain for pass holders? Of course, this all depends on what other mountains they would partner with. Odds: 20%.

4. New lodging. While possible, even though neither Whitetail nor Roundtop are really destination resorts, certainly they could expand on what they have. But real estate has been in a downswing and it seems kind of late in the year to be making this announcement. Odds: 5%.

Okay, so WN is stumped. The only other ideas WN has had would have to do with hosting specific events (a Pennsylvania race series?) or maybe expanding their ski schools or something. Other speculation (or inside information!) welcome.

Update: The answer is sort of #2. Whitetail, Roundtop, and Liberty are offering a pre-season discount for the Season Pass of $399 for an individual and $299 for each additional family member. WN will run the math on this later to figure out the break-even points against going with no card or going with the Advantage Card. Sort of cool, because it's definitely a better price than in past years (for example, last year the price for 2 people before October 31 was $920, whereas now it's $698 - after October 31 it was a whopping $1,120; this year the price after Halloween is $998). On the other hand, WN thinks that the new lift at Whitetail might still be better news!

Car Progress

2008-07-14T09:11:00.003-04:00

WN spent a lot of time getting very little done on the car front Sunday.

Stop 1: Carmax - Went to Carmax for the purposes of a) getting an initial price on my VW and b) test-driving some used cars where many different makes and models are available. Got an appraisal of the VW, which was exactly in the middle of the range WN expected. OK. Test-drove two cars: Honda Civic Sedan and Toyota Camry. The Civic was just too small, frankly - for example, given the meager trunk space and the seeming lack of fold-down back seats, it didn't appear possible to get a set of golf clubs in the car. The Camry was pretty nice. WN would have test-driven more, but the sales rep frankly wasn't very helpful and said he was about to go on break or something, so forget it. (Maybe we came across as just kicking tires, but on the other hand, it's Carmax, which is set up for people to come in and kick the tires, right?)

Stop 2: Honda - Drove from Carmax to a relatively local Honda dealership to test-drive a new and a used Accord and maybe a CRV. Started looking around the lot to see what they had when WoWN pointed out that the dealership looked rather closed. Indeed, they are not open Sunday. Rather inconvenient. (Readers: would you have simply assumed a car dealer was open on Sunday or would you have checked first?)

Stop 3: Home - Went back online looking up more information - used cars, new cars, specials, incentives, etc.

So, at least WN has a price on the VW, which would be enough for WN to sell it (although WN might shop it around a little more to see if there's a better price out there, but WN is doubtful) and WN has decided to go with a full-size sedan (Accord or Camry most likely) as the smaller sedan was too small (and the price wasn't any better, either).

Searching for a Car

2008-07-13T11:28:00.004-04:00

Thanks for all of the comments. They are very helpful. (Well, other than the fact WN probably isn't going to end up in the Aptera, but thanks anyway!)

So, here's WN's thought process on the next car:

A. Keep the VW - WN would really rather not keep the VW at this point given the list of problems WN has had, is having, and will continue to have with it. On the upside, WN doesn't need to look for another car and the immediate cash outlay is fairly low. On the downside, future cash outlays for maintenance and repairs could be a lot. And it's also pretty hot without A/C.

B. Get a new car - Pro: Could get exactly what WN wants (whatever that is); warranty; should be able to keep it for many years before needing to look for another car. Con: Most expensive option; need to figure out exactly what WN wants (don't know); another car payment.

C. Get an old used car - By this, WN means getting a car that's more than 5 years old with a substantial amount of mileage (say, over 75,000). Pro: Cheapest option; least depreciation; could run the car for 2-3 years and see how it goes, maybe scratch out another 2-3 years after that. Con: Other than keeping the VW, most likely to result in major problem with car; not likely to be as nice of a car; expect to have some maintenance costs upcoming; need to research safety options, etc. that might not be standard on older car.

D. Get a nice used car - Something within last 3-4 years, under 50,000 miles. Pro: Could keep car for several years; reasonable expense; may still have some warranty coverage; could get a nice car. Con: Still likely to have car payment; need to make sure car is in good shape; need to expect to get a few years out of it.

Of those options, WN is leading to D. While a new car would be nice (and if WN could find a good deal on one WN likes, maybe that'll be the solution), WN isn't interested enough in any new car (within our price range) to need or want a new car. (If money were no object, but it always is, an Infiniti M-series would be ever so sweet.) If WN gets a nice sedan in good shape, the car could be expected to last at least 4-5 years while still getting decent gas mileage and remaining affordable in terms of maintenance. There's also a bit of a timing issue, because it's reasonable to expect that sometime in the next few years there might be some little Wacky Neighbors, which means it's probably unwise to get something that's completely or nearly useless for kids (say, a small convertible or a 2-door coupe), but at the same time, unless we're either blessed with a litter of children (say hello to the Wacky Neighbor quintuplets!) or several teenagers in some sort of odd child aging process, we probably don't need a big car like an SUV or a van right away, either.

As for cars, WN is most strongly considering either a Honda Accord ('05-'08) or Toyota Camry ('04-'06). Reliable, decent price, good recommendations and ratings. Otherwise, WN would also consider a few other sedans (say, a good deal on an Acura or checking out the Nissan Altima) or some smaller cars (Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla, Mazda Protege/3-series). Probably not willing to go as small as a Honda Fit or similar (and the used car prices aren't really that great, anyway).

We'll be checking out some things today - getting the VW appraised, test-driving a few cars - and then re-evaulating tonight. Depending on the prices, WN may also look at what sort of deal is available on a new car, but that's something for later. More news later.

More on the Car

2008-07-12T16:45:00.002-04:00

So most of WN's friends and close relations know something about my disdain for my car. To start, it's a 2002 Volkwagen Passat GLS sedan with the 1.8 liter V4 Turbo engine. It's just about 6 years old with a little over 120,000 miles on the car.

In the last 6 years, here are the problems WN has had with the car (only the problems related to the VW and not external problems, like the golf ball that hit the front of my car on the highway):

1. I have burned out 3 light bulbs and melted one light manifold. The first 2 bulbs burned out in under 36,000 miles (and thus were under warranty). I have burned out 2 fog light bulbs, too.

2. I have had at least 4 times when the check engine light came on, twice that resulted in the car being questionable to drive. These were related to various tubes or hoses that needed to be replaced. This is currently the fifth.

3. I blew out 2 of the original tires: the first around 25,000 miles and the second around 45,000 miles. The first was shredded, the second merely flat. Neither was covered under warranty.

4. The air conditioning started failing last summer (around 100,000 miles) and now does not work whatsoever.

5. There have been at least 5 recall notices on the car. The latest recall is for a problem that could lead to the car catching on fire.

6. VW moved up the service date for changing the timing belt from 120,000 miles to 80,000 miles. Not a good sign.

7. The two dealer service centers I have used have been mediocre. The worst incident occurred during my 80,000 mile service. I took the car in for scheduled service on a Tuesday morning for the 80,000 mile service, which is one of VW's major service dates. I took the courtesy shuttle to work and then planned to use the shuttle or get a ride to pick up my car that afternoon. Instead, the shop called me at 4:00 p.m. and suggested getting the timing belt changed (as well as the water pump, since the engine would already be apart). VW was now recommending to have this done at 80,000 miles. Having seen a friend just have his car ruined by a bad timing belt, I said okay. I asked when it would be done and they said some time Wednesday.

Wait a minute. Since VW probably didn't change the service recommendation that morning, they knew when I took the car in that it would need to have the timing belt changed. So why did they wait until late in the day to call? So now I had to arrange rides home from work Tuesday and back to work Wednesday.

They called me around 5:00 p.m. Wednesday to let me know the car was ready (and of course for more money with all of the extra recommended service). Okay. So I asked for a pickup from the shuttle - except apparently the shuttle stopped running at 4:30 p.m. So now I had to arrange a third ride to get to the shop. When I got there, none of the paper work was ready, because "from the sound of [my] voice on the phone, it didn't sound like you were coming." Right, I was just going to leave my car there another day. So it was another 15-30 minutes of waiting to get my car. (I also noticed that they didn't send me a customer survey that time, even though they did for every other service visit. Interesting.)

8. Of course, since VW has so many custom parts, it's hard to find anyone else to work on the car, too. And the dealership prices are definitely higher. (More on that in a minute.)

9. Despite getting a ringing endorsement from Consumer Reports and other car magazines, the current reliability on the Passat as a used car from that model are worse than average (half-black circle). It is poor (the worst rating, a full black circle) for such things as electrical system, engine minor, and engine major.

10. On Friday morning, my car had problems starting. The battery is nearly dead. WN drove to work and was even able to drive home from work, stopping at a car shop on the way home (a national chain). WN called before leaving and asked if they could replace my battery, specifically asking if they had one that would fit a 2002 VW Passat with the 1.8L V4-Turbo (yes, you can see where this is going). "Yes," they said, "we have several in stock." Drove there, waited about an hour, and then they came back and said, "Sorry, we tried two batteries but none of them fit." So, aside from wondering why VW uses a non-standard battery and being completely dazed at this point, WN also wasted an hour even after specifically asking ahead of time whether they could replace the battery specific to my car!

11. Then WN went to a third dealership this morning, resigned to the fact that no one aside from a VW dealership could possibly work on my car. Called ahead, explained the problem; no problem, they said, we could have it done by 2 p.m. Dropped it off around 10 a.m.; no problem, probably the battery, we'll call you to give you an estimate, shouldn't take too long because we're not busy today. Ran some errands, ate lunch, ran some more errands. Now it's 1:45 p.m., still no call. WN calls: it took about 10 minutes, but talked with a manager, tech still has the paperwork, I'll call you back in a few minutes. Drove home from errands, waited. Now it's 2:30 p.m. Call again: OK, here's the estimate on the battery, will be done today, and we wanted to give you estimates on fixing some other stuff wrong with the car:

Timing belt (already had it done at 80,000 miles)
Clean headlights (which WN admits look dirtier than any other car WN has ever seen, even after trying to clean them myself): $100-$150 (no thanks)
A/C: $250 to diagnose what's wrong (not even fix) (no thanks)
Door latch (oh, is that why the one door looks like it's not entirely closed for the last 4 years): $100-$150 (no thanks)
Check engine light: $100 to run the diagnostic test (which, mind you, is just attaching that little computer thing that looks like a tricorder and then looking up the code that it returns) (no thanks)

[Note: yes, I forgot the headlight dirtiness and the door not sitting right as problems, add it to the list; oh, and the plastic Homelink buttons fell off about 2 years ago and the cover on the interior door handle is rubbing off or something. And they never gave me the keylock for my wheellocks, which meant they had to be stripped off when I got new tires.]

So the total cost was $370 for the battery, whereas the other shop (the one that couldn't actually replace the battery) quoted $180 for the same thing. And WN had to call twice, even though they said they would call twice and never did. And why were they asking if I wanted another $600 in service (plus however much it would be to actually fix the A/C and check engine light problem) at 2:30 p.m. on Saturday after I called them was hard to figure out - if you were trying to sell me on more work (which, while probably overpriced, isn't exactly unnecessary) why not call early when you might actually be able to fix it Saturday instead of late in the day when I would have to pick it up on Monday and take more time off from work.

So, in short, I've had mediocre experiences at three dealership shops (never horrible, but unpleasant), myriad problems on a 6-year old car that I thought was a nicer car (and on the more expensive side of the mid-size sedan market), all sorts of other stuff still yet to fix on the car, a horrible rating on Consumer Reports, and all of the stress that goes along with all of it. I know I drive more than average (about 20,000 miles a year, mostly highway), but it's not like I'm running the car into the ground, either. And it doesn't really help to be sitting in a car with no A/C and leather seats when the outside temperature is 95, too. Oh, and it's supposed to take premium gas, which I gave up on a few months ago as gas prices skyrocketed.

At this point, I'm just done with the car. I am going to sell it to a dealership or CarMax because in good faith I can't sell another person this car. I am telling everyone I know not to buy a Volkswagen until they improve the quality on their fleet of cars and get good ratings for several years in a row, because otherwise you're bound to get a car with all of these sorts of problems. The three VW dealerships I've dealt with - since it's seemingly impossible to find anyone else capable of working on the car for anything other than an oil change - have been mediocre and treated me poorly, even though I should be a potential customer for many years to come.

Volkswagen runs all of these great advertisements on TV to get you to think they're hip and cool and high quality, that you're getting something good for the money you buy. They have this reputation of being a great company. I still even like driving my car when everything is working well (which lately hasn't been often).

But my VW sucks.

Car - Deal of the Century

2008-07-11T11:30:00.002-04:00

Anyone interested in buying a great used car? No A/C, check engine light keeps coming on, needs new tires, brakes, the turn signals act a little batty, Consumer Reports gives it a half-black circle for overall reliability, it needs to go into the shop for the fifth or sixth recall (lost count), and may not actually start when I go out to drive home this afternoon.

Yes, I hate my car.

Goals

2008-07-02T17:27:00.000-04:00

Re-reading my posts on running and the Year of Many More Things to find some inspiration for the summer. More to come.

On a different note, this is my 400th post on Wacky Neighbor. Zow.

Weekend Summary

2008-07-01T16:16:00.002-04:00

Friday

No power at the WN Homestead. WN and WoWN went out to dinner at the Bonefish Grille, which we have been meaning to try for awhile now. Quite good, actually, and we both came away impressed and interested in returning. Good food, good wine, very nice service.

Still no power when we returned to the homestead. A call to the power company gave us the unusually specific estimate of power being restored at 10:13 p.m., which came and went without nary a flicker. Power came back on sometime in the middle of the night.

Saturday

WN and WoWN took care of some errands and chores in the morning and took the dog for a walk. In the afternoon, we caught up with some friends to see WALL-E (very good, even for grown-ups) and then to dinner at P.F. Chang's. Yum.

Sunday

We went to church in the morning. We spent some time planning for an upcoming vacation in the afternoon (the planning, the vacation isn't until later). WoWN went out for a church function in the evening and WN played Madden. So, actually a pretty nice weekend all in all, but it certainly seems like we did more than these few sentences. Ah well.

LSM

2008-07-01T15:01:00.002-04:00

Just a quick follow-up to the last LSM:

1. No sooner did WN write about the Orioles and their luck in winning close games (supporting their winning record despite a negative run differential) than did Orioles closer George Sherrill blow two consecutive saves (against the Nationals and Royals, no less). We shall see.

2. No sooner did WN write about the Wizards' prospects for next year (and beyond) than did they resign Antawn Jamison (reportedly 4 years and $50 million) and make an offer to Gilbert Arenas (reportedly 6 years and $100 million). That would not be the max deal that Gil wanted, but it's not clear anyone else is going to offer it to him - or at least nowhere you would think Gil wants to go - and it certainly seems like Arenas is worth the most to the Wizards and that the Wizards are probably the best team for Arenas. So, make of that what you will.

As for JaVale McGee, WN will say that if McGee turns into a good interior defender with the Wizards and can get them 15-20 minutes a night within the next 2-3 years, then maybe the draft pick isn't too bad. Still would rather have seen the Wizards do something else (Darrell Arthur, Chris Douglas-Roberts, or trade down and get an extra pick), but hopefully McGee can turn into something of a poor man's Tyson Chandler. (Still miffed that Washington sold Bill Walker, though.)

3. The Capitals resigned defenseman Mike Green. Nice move.

4. Not much on the Ravens ... still waiting for camp to come to figure out what the impact of new coach John Harbaugh will be and waiting for Opening Day to figure out who will be starting at quarterback and what that means for 2008-2009. WN has already heard Kyle Boller (which would mean giving it one more shot and trying to get to the playoffs with this team), Troy Smith (which means Boller is looking for a new job in 2009 and hoping to make the playoffs), and Joe Flacco (which means that it's the summer and people say silly stuff).

LSM

2008-06-27T14:15:00.001-04:00

1. The Orioles are 40-37 today and 7 games out of first in the AL East after just taking 2 of 3 in Wrigley Field against the Cubs, who came into the series on a 14-home game winning streak. Not too shabby. Baltimore has actually been interesting to watch this year for the first time in several years. They have some interesting young players, the vets are playing hard, and they can actually pitch a little bit, too. So nearing the halfway mark of the season, WN is ready to give them a B+ all the way around.

That said, let's wait to see how the second half goes. They still have a negative run differential, which suggests they're a sub-.500 team and probably playing a little over their heads. Some of that is due to the relatively good bullpen pitching, including new closer George Sherrill, but they've gotten out of some real jams lately and it's possible that with a bit less luck that the O's could lose some close games, too. Plus, if the O's do end up trading some veterans at the deadline (Kevin Millar, Aubrey Huff, Melvin Mora, Jay Payton, Chad Bradford, Jamie Walker, maybe even Brian Roberts) that might set the team back a bit, too.

But at least we're interesting again and it gives WN some hope that 2009 and 2010 have some potential for the Orioles to be relevant and competitive again.

2. Matt Wieters, after tearing up Single-A ball in Frederick and starting for the Carolina League All-Star Team at catcher, is up in Bowie. WN assumes if everything goes well, he won't be anywhere lower than Norfolk (if not Baltimore) by the start of the 2009 season.

3. WN doesn't know what the Wizards are going to do about Antawn Jamison or Gilbert Arenas. Arenas wants to come back and says he will if Jamison does, but it's also possible that with a relatively meager free agent group that someone else tries to get one or both. (On the other hand, the Wizards have a lot of cap space with Arenas and Jamison available as free agents, so cash shouldn't be the issue.) WN's feeling is that the team as constructed can be a solid playoff team and maybe advance one or possibly two rounds in the East (if they can stay healthy, which is one of the two big questions about Arenas right now) but probably isn't a real threat to win the Eastern Conference, behind Boston, Detroit, and LeBron James.

The Wizards' hope - if they bring back Arenas and Jamison - is that Arenas will finally be healthy, Caron Butler has become an All-Star, and they can get enough out of everyone else in the rotation to win consistently. But the team isn't that young and is not a good defensive team, either, so it's hard to believe they'll get that much better. So that means that younger teams like Orlando, Miami, and Chicago will probably be gaining ground as well.

If they don't bring back Jamison and/or Arenas without getting players of equal value, the team is likely to be dreadful. The Wizards would start Antonio Daniels, DeShawn Stevenson, Butler, Darius Songaila, and Brendan Haywood, with Roger Mason (also a free agent), Nick Young, Oleksiy Pecherov, JaVale McGee, and Andray Blatche coming off the bench (and who knows what they'll do with Etan Thomas). Not good. But, that said, WN can't imagine that Gilbert is going anywhere, given that the Wizards really need him back (I think) and that he's going to get paid here.

But to my main point: The Wizards' drafts (plural) suck. Their first round picks in the past 10 years (and over several GMs):

2008 JaVale McGee (18)
2007 Nick Young (16) - backup shooting guard
2006 Oleksiy Pecherov (18) - backup forward
2005 Sent to Orlando in 2001 deal for Brendan Haywood (which eventually goes to Denver for Julius Hodge (20))
2004 Devin Harris (5) - traded to Dallas for Antawn Jamison
2003 Jarvis Hayes (10) - now playing for Detroit
2002 Jared Jeffries (11) - now playing for New York
2002 Juan Dixon (17) - bouncing around the league (via New Orleans)
2001 Kwame Brown (1) - arguably the worst #1 overall pick of all-time; traded to the Lakers for Caron Butler in 2006
2000 no pick - no information available?
1999 Richard Hamilton (7) - traded to Detroit for Jerry Stackhouse after 3 seasons; Wizards got 96 games from Stackhouse over 2 years and traded him with Harris in 2004 for Jamison

So with 10 years of first round picks, the Wizards drafted no current starters; they were able to use 2 picks and Kwame Brown to get 3 starters (Haywood, Jamison, and Butler) and have 3 bench players. This is atrocious. Sure, it's a crapshoot when you get out of the lottery, but even their history in the lottery has been bad (and it would be downright scandalous if it weren't for the Brown-Butler trade).

Anyway, WN is totally unimpressed with JaVale McGee and trading Bill Walker (who has some potential) in the second round to Boston for cash seems foolish (maybe Abe Pollin is strapped for cash). So, who knows, but WN doesn't feel like the Wizards are getting any better after last night, which is kind of a shame.

Comcast - Part III

2008-06-26T12:01:00.002-04:00

Wednesday - The Coda

One more note on the switch from Comcast to ... Comcast. Wednesday afternoon we were unable to sign into our email accounts, either online or through Mail. WN went through Comcast's online help chat and the Comcast representative worked it out in a few minutes. He asked whether we had any changes or new orders on our account recently, which makes me think this was also related to the switch. Anyway, it's all worked out now and everything is seemingly back to normal, although WN can't quite figure out why this happened.

Comcast - Part II

2008-06-25T10:14:00.002-04:00

Tuesday Night - The Final Chapter

When WN got home Tuesday night, everything was working except for the cable modem. The TV with the cable box was working fine (although WN is still trying to figure out whether some of the channel display and channel changing settings can be changed, rather minor point). The cable modem was still showing no connectivity.

WN called Comcast and talked with a customer service representative or technician for high-speed internet issues. He checked the cable modem and found that it was still in the "new user" setting (something like that). He had me shut down the computer and then he changed the setting. After rebooting, WN was back on the internet. Just like that!

So, that's the end of the story. Kind of an anti-climax. I was very appreciative that this was resolved pretty easily by Comcast, although it could have been made more clear at some point, since I did get different answers before calling. For example, it could have said in the flyer: "If your connection to the internet isn't working after installing your cable modem, call Comcast because Comcast made need to activate your new modem remotely."

But overall, pretty decent. Some new channels that we like, but we have to figure out the new line-up. I'm also wondering whether we have to redo some of our Season Passes on TiVo since we now get a different Fox channel (in other words, will TiVo find the show on a different Fox channel - I'm not sure that it will). And WN really appreciates that Comcast is actually willing to listen to me in cyberspace and offer to help. This is the 21st century.

Comcast - Part I

2008-06-24T10:22:00.000-04:00

The background

The town WN lives in is split across two counties, which for awhile were serviced by two different cable companies: Adelphia (WN's county) and Comcast (the other county). Eventually Comcast bought out Adelphia (after Adelphia's top leadership/family was arrested and so on) and our cable service switched over to Comcast - however, Comcast kept the service between the two counties distinct.

In the spring, Comcast reorganized my county's cable service, changing the channel line-ups and such - but carved out my town, so our line-up and service remained the same. This kind of screwed with our TiVo, which thought that our line-up had changed, so a lot of our high-numbered channels got jumbled. (TiVo was really good about finding the old line-up and making it available again.)

So, other than that, basically we've had Adelphia/Comcast digital cable and cable modem for the last few years without any real issues.

Friday - "Exciting Changes"

Friday we get a visit from a Comcast representative: Comcast is adding us onto the other county's cable service. This will be effective Monday. The changes include:

A new cable line-up (sidenote: why can't cable companies let me select my own channel numbers for different channels? why do I have to use their numbers in the 21st century?)

Video-on-Demand

The other Fox affiliate, which carries 2 Ravens games a year that WN otherwise misses

A cheaper bill (unbelievable!)

As part of the change, we have to take our digital box and cable modem to the local elementary school Monday between 10 a.m. and 7 p.m. to exchange them for new ones. Once that's done, we would (probably) have to call Comcast to activate the new service by sending a signal to our cable box and modem. At some point (Monday or later), our old cable service won't continue to work.

Monday - The Big Switch

Comcast trucks and vans everywhere, all day. Very weird. Are they planning a take-over of our small town?

Monday evening, WN takes the old cable box and modem to the elementary school. (By the afternoon we had also lost all cable service - so much for Monday or later.) Technicians are working in our neighborhood (but WN knows for a fact that we were already wired for both county's cable system and knows people who have been on the other county's system for awhile now, so who knows what they were doing?).

WN gets to the elementary school. Good news - everything is being done outside and it's starting to rain. The Comcast guys have a tent and a big RV ("It's Comcastic!") but everyone else is standing in line, about 25 deep. Fortunately, the rain passed pretty quickly.

Comcast is helping 2-3 people at a time, but it takes awhile because they need to write down all of the serial numbers of the old and new equipment and some people have 2 or 3 or even 4 boxes. So maybe they've helped 6-8 people in the first 20 minutes WN is waiting in line.

Of course, every great story like this needs some wrench in it to create tension. The head Comcast guy steps out and says that they have no more HD-DVR boxes left and only 3 HD boxes left. Now, fortunately for WN, I'm apparently something of a TV-luddite, since we don't have HDTV and don't need one of these boxes. But, for the 20 or so people in front of me, holding 1-3 HD boxes each, this is a problem.

Now people starting yelling at this guy all at once - "What does that mean?" "Why can't I get my box tonight?" "How come you don't have enough for everyone?" "When can I get the box I need?" - which doesn't make things any easier. Everyone is pissed off. Here's what we find out:

1. Comcast will be there everyday (every day or every weekday?) through next Wednesday. Like everyone else, WN didn't realize that there were choices other than last night, since the Comcast rep and the flyer didn't say anything other than Monday. It's also impractical since they're already changing service over Monday.

2. They didn't anticipate this much demand on Monday. When everyone was told Monday, though, it makes sense that everyone would show up on Monday.

3. You can either drive to their main office 20-30 minutes away to pick up a HD box or come back later in the week. For people who already stood in line for 60 minutes or more, this was not particularly comforting.

4. Some people were told there was something at the middle school as well, and apparently flyers also stated that (confirmed by WoWN). This was not correct.

So now everyone is upset. Because the Comcast reps are trying to calm the line down, they're now only actually serving one person at a time. A few people left, but most stayed. Then they split the line between HD and non-HD customers. WN gets into the non-HD line, which has three people in it: one person already being helped; a guy in front of me with an HD box (shaking head); and WN. The HD line isn't much of a line and they don't look very happy.

Now another Comcast rep pulls the head Comcast rep aside. They talk for a minute. Head Comcast guy comes back to the HD line: Good news, we have 20 more HD boxes. (Did they magically appear? Did they find another box in the truck? Did someone whisk them into our town to stave off a riot? Were they HD-DVR's?) So everyone with an HD box could get 1 HD box, but it wasn't clear what they were going to do with people with multiple boxes.

Anyway, so about 5-10 minutes later, WN gets to the front of the line. WN exchanges the cable box and the modem and signs away hopefully no more than my life. WN did ask the Comcast rep whether I would need to call Comcast and get them to send a new signal to the box and the modem (like Friday's rep said); the answer is no. WN then headed home, leaving people apparently with 1 or more really nice TVs behind. 45 minutes later. WN is just glad it didn't rain.

WN eats dinner and then heads downstairs to install the new cable box and modem. Pretty easy, but still no service. One call to Comcast, 3 minutes of menus: "There is currently an interuption of service in your area ..." WN did reconfigure the TiVo channel changer in the meantime.

Tuesday - A New Day Dawns

So as of Tuesday morning, here's what we have:

Our small TV in the kitchen (no box) is working fine with a new lineup.

Our small TV in our bedroom (no box) is getting one channel. WN runs the channel set-up guide on the TV and it's working fine. Aces. (During previous cable outages, the TV needed the same thing to work.)

Our main TV (with the box) didn't seem to be getting any channels. WN ran the TiVo new line-up guide this morning, but WN left before seeing whether that would solve the problem. (Probably not, but needed to be done anyway.)

Our computer (with the cable modem) is not connected to the internet. Opening the browser took WN to a cached Yahoo page; refreshing that took WN to a Comcast set-up page. Apparently now we have to install some Comcast software (don't know why, as we haven't had to before). Ran the installation program, but no connectivity. The guide suggets checking the physical connections - cable wire to modem, ethernet cable from modem to computer, power source, all connected. Still no connectivity. WN restarts the computer and tries again. Still no connectivity.

By then it was getting late and WN needed to go to work. So the saga will continue tonight. WN's first guess is that we need to call Comcast and see if they do need to send a signal, with the two responses WN received so far being "probably" (Friday) and "no" (Monday). After that, your guess is as good or better than mine. More updates to come.

All things told, probably one of the better experiences anyone has had with Comcast.

Weekend Summary

2008-06-23T09:51:00.003-04:00

Friday

WN and WoWN went out for dinner and a movie. A quick dinner at TGI Friday's, which was actually quite decent, and then to see Get Smart. Certainly not a perfect movie and a bit flat in spots (could have pretty much done away with any of the political jokes), but quite entertaining. Steve Carell is a funny guy, but who knew he was an action hero?

Saturday

Sick. WN has been fighting off a cold of some sort all week, but it was at its worst Saturday morning. Slept in and then got up, moved around a bit, started feeling a little better. Ran some errands with WoWN in the afternoon. Saturday night we went out with friends for dinner and hung out for awhile - very enjoyable night.

After they left, WN and WoWN finished Season 2 of The Wire. We'll resume with Season 3 soon, especially since there's nothing on TV anymore (although WN reminds you, again, that Burn Notice premiers July 10 on USA).

Sunday

Church in the morning. Took the dog out for a long walk in the afternoon. After that, we headed to the garden and nursery for some more gardening supplies - dirt, mulch, flowers. The front yard is essentially done for this year.

Weekend Summary

2008-06-11T16:00:00.000-04:00

Friday

Came home from work and did a bevy of cleaning, organizing, and preparing chores and tasks. WN and WoWN went out to dinner at IHOP - pancake dinner! Otherwise, we stopped at Party City, went to the grocery store, went to the liquor store, went home, cleaned the house, cleaned the coolers, prepped food, cleaned up the backyard and the deck, hung some pictures, moved some things around, and cleaned some more.

Saturday

WN started out by dropping off the thermostat (will update more on this later). Painless. Then WN stopped at Home Depot and Target for a few last minute things.

Then it was home and WN barbequed some chicken. It took about 4 hours, but this was one of my better BBQ experiences (aside from standing in 100-degree heat with a 350-degree fire going). In the meantime, WN cleaned some more and got some things together. Once the chicken was done, WN ran out to the store for drinks and ice.

Saturday night, under the guise of a party related to WN's actuarial exam completion, we instead hosted a surprise party for one of our dear friends who was about to turn 30. The party was great fun and lasted until 10 or 11. It was so nice to see so many of our friends together, as well - very good times.

Sunday

Slept in after the late party and cleanup. We headed out to go out to lunch with some friends for another birthday celebration - even though where we thought we were going for lunch instead turned out to be closed on Sundays. No matter, as we did find lunch elsewhere and then set out for drinks afterwards.

Monday

Extra weekend! WN headed out with friends to New York City to see a game at Yankee Stadium, now in its final season. The game was quite good - albeit very hot - and the Yankees lost (to the lowly Kansas City Royals, no less). While Yankee Stadium wasn't quite as fun as Wrigley Field, it was still a good experience to see one of the last old stadiums before it goes. Pretty cool.

A Cautionary Tale (for Actuaries)

2008-06-06T14:10:00.002-04:00

For any of WN's actuarial readers (or readers otherwise interested in actuarial matters), here is an article in the New York Times summing what could be a rather sordid tale of actuarial malfeasance. As a sidenote, the changing rules on how local governments have to account for post-employment benefits (pensions and retiree health care) is likely to be a fairly serious issue in the coming years.

I'm Not Dead Yet

2008-06-04T10:28:00.002-04:00

So now that all of the primaries are done, apparently there still isn't an official Democratic nominee for President. Well, WN supposes technically there's no official Republican nominee, either, since it doesn't become official until the conventions, but practically speaking everyone acknowledges that John McCain will be the Republican nominee ... you know what I'm trying to say ... even though most people acknowledge that Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee, it's sort of different ...

Moving on.

WN isn't entirely sure whether it's baffling or entirely predictable that Hillary Clinton didn't drop out last night. Obama still hasn't secured all of the delegates needed to win, but it's extremely close and could happen any day now. (Even if Clinton then contends that it's still not official until the convention when they vote.)

So, now starts all of the hand-wringing for Clinton supporters. First, they have to decide who they will vote for in the general election. WN is a bit surprised how many Clinton supporters seem to be going towards McCain at this point - there's tremendous vitriol between Obama and Clinton supporters, which seems odd, because it doesn't seem like Obama and Clinton are that different on issues. (It's not as odd as, say, 1968, when the Vietnam War was a far more divisive issue within the Democratic Party and the candidates had substantially different views on it.) WN's guess is that over the next few months that Clinton voters are more apt to start supporting Obama than McCain, but then again, it's been a pretty strange 18 months already.

Second, there's the post-primary review. Why did Clinton lose? What does this say about the 1990's and Baby Boomers and Bill Clinton and women presidential candidates and the future of America? Well, maybe someday we'll realize that this primary election really did say something about what was happening in our country and our world in 2008. But maybe not.

Look at it this way: the Democrats ran two very strong candidates for President in the same year. That's the result of two careers reaching similar points at the same place and time and the conditions that made 2008 a favorable year for Democrats to run (namely, President George W. Bush's relative unpopularity and what seemed like a weak Republican field). At the end of the day, the primary election was fairly close - in votes, in States won, in delegates, in overall support. A few things break differently and perhaps Clinton wins. Or perhaps Obama wins convincingly. But we (as a society, as media) have a tendency to exaggerate the strengths of winners and the weaknesses of losers after the games end.

Take the Super Bowl for example. What did the Super Bowl really tell us? That the Patriots had some fatal flaws as a football team or that the Giants were really the best team for all of 2007 and 2008? That the Giants' team design and game plan were perfect and the Patriots' plans sucked? Not really - it told us that the two teams were pretty closely matched in talent and coaching and that the Giants were that much better on Super Bowl Sunday. Does that mean that everything the Patriots did - drafting, free agent signings, coaching, game planning - was wrong? Or that every team should emulate the Giants next year? Not really.

The same for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Does this election mean that all of Clinton's preparations and fund-raising and speeches and platforms and campaigning were wrong or bad? Or that Obama was perfect and is the model for future campaigns? Not really - we just know that Obama, for whatever reason, did a little better winning over delegates and primary voters and caucusers than Clinton. Maybe he did better raising money or spending it or was generally more popular than Clinton.

What it does say is that at least in 2008 we're at a point where both a woman and an African-American man are viable candidates for President. We have never seen such a strong woman candidate or black candidate or seen them do so well. It doesn't mean that we're necessarily past race or gender issues (we're almost certainly not, collectively), but we can look back at history and realize that we've made some progress.

Anyway, that's 2008. Some things are better. Some things are worse. Some things are pretty much the same as before. But hey, it's kind of interesting and WN knows that we've probably all learned more about the Democratic primary process than we ever thought there was to know.

Where Not to Buy a Toyota

2008-06-03T13:59:00.004-04:00

Where not to buy a Toyota: Castle Toyota! For more, read here: Firm Reneges on Scholarships

Apparently, Castle Toyota was going to give 4 $2,100 scholarships for students from Patterson High School in Baltimore to go to Baltimore City Community College. Disputes arose when the school closed the graduation ceremony to the media following the death of their JROTC teacher and they wanted to make the ceremony more solemn. (Howard Castleman, president/CEO of Castle, said that disputes over advertising and PR had already started before this.) Because the media would not be allowed to attend, Castle pulled the scholarships (Castleman said it was because of "attitude"), even though the students receiving the scholarship had already been told they would be getting the money for school. Patterson High has promised to help raise the money some other way.

To be fair (as difficult as it is to do), Castle is giving the money to the Community College of Baltimore County. And while there's probably a bit more to the story than the Sun report uncovered and WN is open to the possibility that dealing with the school was difficult, it's pretty shameful for Castle to promise this money and then pull out of it over some sort of PR problem - even cynics could admit that this has bought well more than $8,400 of bad PR. If Castle had, say, quietly decided not to do it again next year, who would have ever known? To put 4 students in the middle of this is awful.

Anyway, WN thinks that the last quote from Castleman (referring to the scholarships and past Christmas parties he has sponsored with the Steve McNair Foundation for kids in poor families) is the one that puts this story over the top:
"I'll never, ever, ever give money again. This is it. I'll never have another Christmas party for these kids. It doesn't pay."

Nice. Anyway, if you're in the market for a Toyota, something to think about.

Update: Thanks to Kim for linking to this update in the comments section. The school received many donations, which far exceeded the original $8,400 donation from Castle Toyota. Castle Toyota offered to restore the $8,400, but the principal of Patterson High School refused the money. Now, while Castle (and Howard Castleman) are still suspect in WN's opinion, WN will give them credit for at least trying to do the right thing, even if it took public pressure to get them to do it. (Isn't that what public pressure is for?) And, that said, WN thinks it's a bit shameful of the principal to refuse the donation from Castle - perhaps there's a principle here, but that's still money that could help send her students to college, right?

Thermostat Replacement and Recycling

2008-06-02T16:57:00.001-04:00

Information on why and how to replace your thermostat and what to do with your old one:

1. WN replaced the old thermostat in the house this weekend with a new programmable thermostat. Given the cost of energy these days, it's likely to be a good investment. They cost anywhere from about $25 to $100, with more expensive thermostats allowing for more programming flexibility and some feature remotes. We went with a $35 thermostat that allowed for four programming periods per day and allowed you to set programs for weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays (5-1-1). You'll want to be sure to pick a thermostat that works with your heating and air conditioning system, too.

They claim that you can save $100 a year with one of these; since that probably assumes massive energy usage that we don't need in our townhouse and with sensible air conditioning and heating settings, WN is expecting something closer to $20 to $30 a year, which is still a pretty good return on the investment.

Anyway, installation is fairly straightforward and took about 2 hours to do a quality job, which included shutting off power to the furnace and taking care to label all of the wires. WN still needs to caulk the holes from the previous thermostat and touch up the paint, but as far as home projects, it's fairly easy.

2. The unexpected difficulty was that WN discovered that the old thermostat contained two vials of mercury. Not particularly cool. Mercury, of course, is very toxic and even small amounts can lead to serious health problems.

Because it took me 30-40 minutes to find the right information on properly disposing of the mercury thermostat, I'm putting together what I found to save you some time. It's kind of distressing that the information out there isn't easier to find, as I can't imagine everyone is willing to spend that much time on what's essentially a piece of garbage.

First, be very careful not to break the mercury switches. You do not want the mercury in your house. Put the thermostat in a glass or plastic bottle and put it somewhere safe where it will not be broken. If you do create a spill, DO NOT TOUCH THE MERCURY. Get everyone out of the room so that kids or pets don't go near it. There are ways to clean it up safely if it is a small amount, but you should call emergency services first for instructions and how to dispose of it properly. (More information from the EPA here.)

Second, DO NOT THROW THIS IN THE TRASH OR THE DUMP. Mercury is toxic and a spill can contaminate soil or water very easily. A lot of mercury still ends up in dumps, but it's not particularly good for the environment.

Third, there are some ways to dispose of it safely:

i. You can check out your town, city, county, or state health or environment websites to find information:

ii. You can go to the Thermostat Recycling Corporation's website to find collection sites. (This is what WN eventually did.) A lot of HVAC contractors and wholesalers will take these, but it's best to call and find out ahead of time.

iii. You can check out Earth911.org for information on recycling any number of things and other information if you're trying to be good to the environment.

WN will post some more info over the next few weeks as we also try to get rid of a television set that doesn't work (but might not be cost-effective to repair) and a paint can of mystery substance left by the previous homeowner (paint thinner? paint? holy water?).

Talent Search

2008-06-02T15:45:00.000-04:00

A thought that's been on my mind recently:

There are many current TV shows that are out searching for the next big thing (not the least of which is American Idol) - singing, dancing, stand-up comedy, acting, sports, etc. And there are millions and millions of dollars spent in a variety of industries - especially entertainment - trying to figure out who might be good and/or popular. Think about the numerous layers of recruiting and evaluating in Hollywood - agents, talent agencies, producers, networks and studios, entry-level jobs in acting or writing or directing - thousands of people all trying to figure out who (and sometimes what) is going to be successful enough or popular enough to make everyone money. Whether that has something to do with quality is a different argument, but WN would argue that quality and popularity aren't completely at odds with one another. The same can be said of publishing or music or sports.

It's not surprising to me that so much money and time and effort goes into this. It's that even after all of that, these people do a terrible job. How come we can't identify talent?

1. J.K. Rowling's first volume of Harry Potter (Harry Potter and the Potential to Make Us Richer than the Queen of England) was rejected by 12 publishers. This was one of the most popular book series of all time. Kids and adults loved these books. It made Rowling and Scholastic (who finally picked it up) extremely rich, on top of the licensing revenue and the movies and whatever else comes next. It's not that 12 publishers didn't realize it would be perhaps the most profitable book series ever; it's that they didn't even think this was worth pursuing because it wouldn't make enough money to be profitable.

I'm sure it was revised between submissions and that most books probably get rejected at some point, but how could so many people get this wrong? It's not like they rejected a marginally-profitable book (which one imagines must happen all of the time), but they missed out on the most profitable book in history (although one does wonder how much money has been made off of Dianetics).

2. Tom Brady is one of the two best quarterbacks in the NFL today and one of the top five or ten players in the NFL at any position, if not the best. But he was taken in the sixth round as the 199th pick in the draft in 2000 by the New England Patriots - the seventh quarterback taken that year, the seventh player the Patriots took that year - and yet he's indisputably one the best quarterbacks in the league. Okay, so maybe it's one thing if everyone can't figure out whether a particular movie will be popular or not, because crowds and their tastes can be fickle and hard to predict. But how is it that no one thought Tom Brady was going to be a good quarterback coming out of college? Wouldn't we expect that so many experts - the hundreds of scouts and coaches who make these decisions - could determine the physical tools and psychological/emotional make-up necessary to be good at sports?

On the other hand, the other quarterback currently in the top two in the NFL is Peyton Manning, who was picked first overall in 1998. But even Manning had his doubters; in 1998, many scouts and coaches - the experts - thought that Ryan Leaf would be a better quarterback and should be the first pick. Instead, Leaf went second and had a miserable career that lasted only a few seasons. Again, while the Colts made the right pick with Manning, many experts couldn't determine that one player would become one of the best quarterbacks in the league and that another player would become one of the biggest draft busts ever.

Surely there are many more examples. And this phenomenon, you would think, would have to spill over into all areas of life - selecting students for admission at a college, hiring decisions for a company, choosing a spouse, deciding on which auto mechanic or real estate agent to use, et cetera.

So, WN has two preliminary thoughts on this:

1. Maybe success is dependant on many more things than the individual. It could be that there is a lot to developing talent. The situation, circumstances, chance, the people around you - maybe that has a lot to do with it. Maybe it's being on the right team. Maybe it's having a good coach or producer. Maybe it's that your skills or talents improved dramatically. Maybe it's having your book come out at just the right time and getting a lot of promotional help. Maybe it's picking the right song.

WN certainly believes that this has to be part of it, but if it's the majority of it, then why aren't those things controlled (or controlled moreso) than they are now? Why don't teams figure out how to best develop players? Why don't producers pick better roles or better songs for their talents? Why doesn't a book or an album get enough marketing? These questions lead right back into the original question.

Of course, one could argue that perhaps trying to determine what will be popular is much harder than trying to determine what will be successful. For example, figuring out which 10 students out of 100 that are likely to be successful in college - graduate, get good grades, stay out of trouble - or which professional athlete will be successful - can he hit? does he understand the game? will he make the team better? - seem like tasks that are more straightforward than figuring out which song a bunch of teenagers are really going to like or which TV show is going to be a hit.

That said, no less money goes into those sorts of things, and yet every year we see absolutely terrible TV shows and movies. (Maybe that's the way the market is designed.)

2. Maybe people are really bad at finding talent or evaluating future success. It almost seems self-evident to some degree, but it also seems like it ought to be improving and brief observations suggest that it's not. These questions all sort of assume that making these determinations is possible, but maybe it isn't.

Now, that said, WN wants to say that the fact we can point to people or organizations that are good judges of talent and ones that aren't suggests that this is a real skill and it's possible. And yet, the results still seem so mediocre. Maybe the results are dependant on many environmental factors that either the public can't see or no one can really measure. The latter says that it's apparently random but really uncontrollable; the former says that it's definable and perhaps the skills of judging talent and developing talent are linked (maybe or maybe not inextricably).

Apocalypse or The Coolest Thing Ever?

2008-05-29T10:16:00.002-04:00

WN reports, you decide:

Monkeys use brains to control robots

Decemberists Note for the Weekend

2008-05-16T17:21:00.004-04:00

Just a short note for the weekend: finally Googled around to see what the lines from the middle of the Decemberists' song "California One/Youth and Beauty Brigade" were. ("I've heard of ghosts, good ghosts ...") It turns out it's from the movie Archangel. According to IMDB, it's a surrealist Canadian movie set in the Russian Arctic during WWI - sufficiently eclectic, I suppose.

Also, worth checking out in a notably short WN Recommends: Winterpills, "Broken Arm."

Weekend Summary

2008-05-12T09:48:00.002-04:00

Friday

With WoWN off to visit her mother for Mother's Day and birthday, it was Home Alone for WN. Played some Madden, hung out with BoWN 1, watched some mediocre boxing on TV, played some more Madden.

Saturday

Slept in, ran some errands in the afternoon. Played some more Madden. Had pizza for dinner. Hung around with WoWN once she returned.

Sunday

We went to church in the morning and then made breakfast when we got home. After that, we waited for MoWN and the rest of the family to arrive at our house before going out to a Mother's Day lunch. After lunch, we came back to the house for dessert and some time to talk and catch up. Everyone left in the early evening and we settled in to do some chores and watch The Wire.

Primary Update

2008-05-08T17:08:00.003-04:00

Barring some sort of unforeseen event or collapse by Barack Obama, it certainly looks like McCain-Obama (or Obama-McCain) for the general election. Despite whatever is going on, Hillary Clinton for all intensive purposes is done for 2008.

There's something tragic, perhaps, about Hillary Clinton. I didn't feel bad for her when she cried in New Hampshire, I didn't feel bad for her during any of the debates, and I didn't feel bad for her while SNL was making fun of her. I felt bad for Hillary Clinton when I saw her taking that shot of whiskey, trying to fit in with the potential voters at the bar. It was sad - she wanted so desperately to fit in with these people that she would do anything, including knocking back a shot. It was like some sad movie about high school where the brainy, nerdy girl gets wasted at a party with all of the cool kids, except that never comes off as really cool.

Aside: At the risk of feeding into a stereotype or reigniting some material from earlier in the primary campaign, what's the obsession with the president being one of us or being someone we want to drink a beer with? Thinking back on the presidents since 1900, there are only 3 I can think of that seem like the type of person who would be interesting and willing to have a beer with regular people: Theodore Roosevelt; Harry Truman; possibly Jimmy Carter (if he drinks). Is that really that big of a deal? Why is it so important that the various millionaires running for president come off as regular folk? I get that people want a president who cares about and addresses issues that effect everybody, but why does that somebody have to be knocking down boilermakers in a bar on a Friday to (vainly) attempt to prove that?

Anyway, I have no idea whether Hillary Clinton will run for president again (2012, 2016). I seriously doubt that she will be Obama's VP nominee. Fare thee well.

As for McCain, I saw that he joked about choosing Dwight Schrute from The Office as his VP nominee. Which is the more interesting question:

1. Does John McCain really watch The Office, and if not, does it make the joke more or less funny?

2. Does choosing Dwight actually say something about the potential McCain presidency, and if so, what?

(My answers are: 1) No and less funny; 2) Yes but I can't quite put my finger on it, whether it means McCain is like Michael Scott or McCain is like Dwight)

Lindsay Lohan, Coat Thief

2008-05-08T09:59:00.002-04:00

Saw this story recently on how Lindsay Lohan is being sued after (allegedly) stealing a mink coat while at a club, which was eventually returned three weeks later. Certainly the picture trail (maybe the paparazzi do serve a useful purpose) seems to suggest she emerged from the New York club with a coat that she didn't have on the way in and then was seen wearing it later in the week.

Anyway, not really interested on taking a swipe at Lindsay Lohan or her family (which you can catch on E! this summer, no joke) ... but here's what gets me: the fur coat belonged to a Columbia University student, who received it as a gift from her grandmother. I can guarantee in college that the coats of everyone I knew didn't total $12,000 and we certainly weren't hanging out in swanky nightclubs that were frequented by celebrities. Different world.

WN Quickie Take on American Idol

2008-05-07T10:22:00.003-04:00

WN doesn't watch American Idol. WoWN does and WN just happens to see parts of it while doing something far cooler and superior ... Anyway, a quick take:

Jason Castro is awful. I don't know what sort of career he could carve out aside from doing the American Idol tours and such. I thought Randy was going to kill him after he mangled "I Shot the Sheriff" last night. Also, he forgot the easiest words to "Tambourine Man" ("jingle jangle morning"). Other than either the Vote for the Worst group or desperate tweens, I can't figure out who's voting for him. He hasn't even been in the bottom 2 or 3 the last few weeks. Maybe Constantine can get him a job on a soap opera or as a seat-filler.
Syesha is OK. If she hooked up with the right writer or producer, she could probably have one or two decent records. Her biggest problem is that she keeps choosing iconic songs from other female singers (like Tina Turner last night or Mariah Carey or Whitney Houston) and does mediocre renditions of them. I'm surprised she lasted this long.
David Cook, out of everyone, strikes me as the most radio-ready. I'm not a big fan of his, I don't think he's quite a sure thing, and I know he keeps ripping off other people's rock-ish covers of songs, but he actually sings songs that sound like what you might hear on the radio. I think he could kind of be a light version of Daughtry, maybe in the "post-rock portion of the Goo Goo Dolls" mold. He even kind of has the same hair. He even chose rock songs on rock night (although "Teenage Wasteland" was substantially better than "Hungry Like the Wolf," which just made me laugh).
David Archuleta ... what's up with this? I'm sure he's popular because he seems like a very pleasant kid and he has some talent and I'm sure that the 9-17 year old female audience (as well as their moms) love him. But what has he done so far that sounds remotely, at all like an actual song people would listen to or buy? (His fans will say "Imagine," but if you would choose that version over John Lennon's, I weep for you.) Everything he sings sounds totally schmaltzy and is from 30 or 40 years ago. Even last night he picked "Stand by Me" and "Love Me Tender" on rock night, which aren't exactly "rocking" songs (at least in this century). Unless he realizes his ultimate career destiny (which would be playing Zac Efron's little brother in High School Musical 4, 5, 6, 7 ...) I think he's going to be a bust. Also, I think he'll win.
Of everyone who has been kicked off: I think Carly Smithson would be OK except I can't figure out what she's going to do as a professional musician ... I think Michael Johns (improbably bounced after the American Idol Gives Back show) could have a decent career if he scraps the ascots ... I think Brooke could probably scratch out a career like, say, Vanessa Carlton or some sort of indie singer-songwriter if she can write songs (and stay away from her head-shaking cover of "I'm a Believer"), but I don't know if you can really be indie after being on TV for three months ... I think Kristy Lee Cook is probably going to be a mediocre country star, since there's at least one of them per season (Josh Gracin, Kellie Pickler, etc.). Everyone else apparently was quite forgettable (except the guy who said "Some people weren't liking it" and they play it all the time on The Soup to much derision and laughter).

Okay, so maybe WN has watched a tiny bit. But I swear I've never voted.

April 29

2008-05-05T17:13:00.003-04:00

Scoured Wikipedia and Google for more on April 29: not a whole lot. Some suggestions made to me:

Jerry Seinfeld's birthday
Release of Grand Theft Auto IV
Possibly some sort of psychic or prophetic vision into the future

I'm pretty sure that none of those are it, but the last one at least sounds like the interesting premise of some sort of short story, be it science fiction (in which April 29 has nearly been systemically erased from everyone's collective consciousness by a shadowy government agency/aliens/machines) or some sort of cleverish plot device or reoccurring premise in a regular fiction piece.

Still perplexed, though, so help is appreciated. Could April 29 be from some sort of fictional story? Like is April 29 Judgment Day from The Terminator or something?

Update: According to Wikipedia, Skynet from the Terminator movies becomes self-aware on August 29, 1997 ... which is kind of close, but I still don't think that's it. As a further sidenote, how come the first thing computers decide to do once they become self-aware is to try to kill all of humanity? I'd like to think that my iMac and me have a nice little thing going, you know?

Local News Update

2008-05-05T15:27:00.002-04:00

On the heels of Frederick County passing a resolution making English the official language of Frederick County, today will henceforth no longer be known as el cinco de mayo and the holiday will now be known as the Fifth of May. Also, Coronas and margaritas will be replaced with Budweisers and grain alcohol. That is all.

Pet Peeve

2008-05-05T14:53:00.002-04:00

We were in PetSmart over the weekend picking up a few odds and ends for Brighton, the Official Dog of Wacky Neighbor (who is almost 1 full year old now). Looking at the gigantic variety of treats available, I noticed that there are some filet mignon-flavored treats.

Now, I'm sure that dogs have different preferences and such and that the marketing of these treats is to the humans and not the dogs (thus the numerous organic and health-conscious foods and treats available as well), but filet mignon? Really? They can't just say 'steak' or 'beef'? Dogs don't exactly have the most refined palate, and yet they're pitching a $40 choice cut of steak for them? My dog will eat or lick: dirt; paper; clothes; bugs; garbage; whatever falls onto the floor; itself. It does not need filet mignon treats.

Weekend Summary

2008-05-05T10:01:00.002-04:00

Friday

Trekked to Baltimore to see Iron Man at the Senator. Great theater, thoroughly enjoyable movie. As super hero movies go, this was certainly one of the better ones - entertaining, funny, cool, well-paced, and well-acted. Robert Downey was very good. Afterwards, we grabbed dinner and drinks at Ryan's Daughter before heading home in the wee hours.

Saturday

Slept in. Ran some errands in the early afternoon, including a bit of research on building a retaining wall for our front yard in the near future. Came home, hung around the house and did some chores. We watched Schindler's List - which WoWN had never seen. I saw the movie once towards the end of high school and I forgot so much about it. An incredible movie. (Although, I would say this: we got this through Netflix and it came on two DVDs, as in, you have to change DVDs to watch the last part of the movie - come on, Steven Spielberg, isn't it time for the updated Schindler's List on one DVD?)

Sunday

Went to church in the morning. Came home and did some more chores around the house. Went out to play golf in the afternoon - beautiful day to be out. Came home, grabbed some dinner, and then watched another episode of The Wire.

WN Thought - Obama

2008-04-30T10:14:00.001-04:00

At least the whole flap with Jeremiah Wright should finally put to bed the rumors that Barack Obama is a Muslim. He's not!

WN Thoughts

2008-04-29T16:53:00.000-04:00

While the idea of unmoderated debates is perhaps mildly interesting, particularly in light of how bad ABC's last debate was, is anyone really interested in the 22nd debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton?
So I heard all about the shocking Miley Cyrus (Hannah Montana) sex tapes and Playboy photographs this week and ... oh, you mean that there's a picture in Vanity Fair of her apparently uncovered back, like as much as you would see on a backless dress? From all of the morning show commotion, it was hard to tell.
As for what to tell the kids who look up to Miley and ask about the pictures - I would ask what a 9 year-old kid is doing reading Vanity Fair in the first place. Is there some sort of Vanity Fair for Kids?
Jeremiah Wright, who couldn't possibly being doing more to make sure Barack Obama doesn't get elected. WN was absolutely incredulous that there was a Slate post yesterday (in Trailhead, Slate's campaign blog) trying to put forth an argument that maybe Wright is helping Obama. This isn't playing very well - to say the absolute least - even after Obama's press event today trying to distance himself from Wright.
Is it just me or is traffic getting worse in the last few months in the Baltimore-Washington metro area?
Is there any more banal subject to discuss with an acquaintance or a stranger than the weather? Frankly, I'd rather not talk then try to sound pleasant by talking about the weather. No offense, really, but it makes me feel like we gave up on trying to have any sort of actual conversation but can't stand being in a meeting room or an elevator with it being quiet.
NBA Playoffs MVP - DeShawn Stevenson. Never has one player raised his profile so much on a team that loses 4-1 (after Tuesday) in the first round. On the other hand, it's been a long time since one player called out the best player in the league and somehow started a rap feud between Jay-Z and Soulja Boy. At least no one can say that the Wizards rolled over to LeBron James and the Cavaliers.
What's better than the NFL Draft? 2009 mock drafts are out! The biggest surprise - that Maryland WR Darrius Heyward-Bey is consistently in the top 15 or 20 picks in a lot of these drafts. As politely as possible, I'll say: really?
I have this nagging feeling that something really important is associated with April 29. I know it's not my anniversary or WoWN's birthday, so I think I'm safe from real danger, but I can't shake that feeling ...

LSM

2008-04-28T15:00:00.001-04:00

1. Lesson for the Washington Wizards: Don't make LeBron James angry. You wouldn't like him when he's angry.

2. NFL Draft - This was as active as the Ravens have ever been. The Ravens spent Saturday afternoon trying to move up to #2 to grab Matt Ryan, but balked when St. Louis asked for a 1st round pick next year (as well as the Ravens 1st, 2nd, and 4th round picks this year). So instead, Ryan went to Atlanta at #3.

When New Orleans traded up to #7 with the Patriots, WN figured that the Ravens weren't going to be able to move down. At that point, it looked like either the Ravens would reach and grab a quarterback or take someone else (Leodis McKevlin, Ryan Clady). Instead, Jacksonville traded up from #26 and the Ravens also picked up two 3rd round picks and a 4th round pick. Jacksonville picked DE Derrick Harvey, which most of the analysts seemed to think was a bit of a reach.

At this point, it seemed like the Ravens were either going to stay put at #26 or move back up and use the pick on a QB. WN would have guessed the Ravens had them ranked like this: Chad Henne, Joe Flacco, Brian Brohm. The question would be whether another team would pick a QB first - certainly Detroit, Chicago, Kansas City, and Tampa Bay could have (all picking ahead of the Ravens) and likewise another team could have traded ahead of the Ravens (the Jets were rumored to be trying to move up).

The other quarterbacks slide past Detroit, Chicago, and Kansas City. (The fact that neither of these three teams took a quarterback will go down as one of the most confounding decisions in this draft when we look back at this in 3 years.) At #18, the Ravens traded with Houston, giving up the #26 pick and a 3rd round pick. The suspense, who's it going to be? Then ESPN cuts to Joe Flacco's house, where Joe is on the phone and someone is giving him a Ravens cap. It's Flacco.

So, what to think of Joe Flacco. He played football at Delaware, which he took to the NCAA Division I FCS championship game (formerly known as I-AA) and posted very good stats over two years. He's very tall (about 6' 6 1/2"), looks to be reasonably mobile for a guy that big, and has a huge arm. Some think that Flacco has all of the tools to be a good to great quarterback in the NFL - big arm, fairly accurate, mentally tough, smart. Others criticize Flacco because he played at a lower level of football (transferring from Pitt) and he played a lot in the shotgun and his footwork is not very good. (The semi-famous Lewin Report from Football Outsiders does projections of 1st and 2nd round quarterbacks based on statistical analysis of their college performance; the two most important variables in this analysis end up being number of starts in college and completion percentage, both the number itself and its comparison with previous quarterbacks from that school. David Lewin has suggested the best comparable for Joe Flacco is Andrew Walter, currently a backup QB for Oakland. Ouch.)

In some ways, the comparison to Kyle Boller is a little disconcerting. A tools guy with a big arm who never really stood out in college until the draft workouts started. (Yes, WN almost went into a coma when ESPN showed video of Flacco throwing the ball 70+ yards in workouts, with its uncanny similarities to Kyle Boller's 60 yard throw through the goalposts from his knees before he was drafted.)

It's very strange. Virtually everywhere else, the Ravens are pre-eminent in the NFL at drafting very well and their scouting seems to lean heavily on production in college and being a very good football player, even when guys are labeled too small for their position (Ray Lewis) or too slow (Terrell Suggs) or any other knock that doesn't seem to have much bearing on their football ability. But at quarterback, the Ravens are spending their 7th pick in the last 10 drafts (Flacco, Troy Smith, Derek Anderson, Josh Harris, Kyle Boller, Wes Pate, and Chris Redman) and the two 1st rounders - Flacco and Boller - were picked almost entirely based on their potential and not their production.

So, how will Flacco do? Although WN's general inclination is to go with the stat guys, WN is willing to say that Flacco will be pretty good. Maybe not All-Pro, but a good to very good starter. The Ravens see a lot of potential there and other analysts say he was clearly the most talented quarterback in the draft (some say that talent-wise he was well-above Matt Ryan). Plus, the Ravens actually have a coach with a track record for developing young quarterbacks in Cam Cameron (new offensive coordinator) - Cameron coached Jim Harbaugh, Elvis Grbac, Todd Collins, and Antwaan Randle El in college and then coached Gus Frerotte, Trent Green, Drew Brees, and Philip Rivers in the NFL. Cameron was allegedly the biggest supporter of Flacco, so he must think there is something there. So hopefully the confluence of a) talent and b) good coaching will win out here. That said, we probably won't know the answer on this one for 3-4 years.

The rest of the Ravens draft: liked Ray Rice, even if backup running back wasn't one of the Ravens' most pressing needs; really like Tom Zbikowski from Notre Dame at safety; filled in some depth at wide receiver and offensive line; didn't do anything to address tight end (still no word on whether Quinn Sypniewski is done for the year or not); traded a 4th round pick for Oakland CB Fabian Washington, who hopefully will at least play nickel back and maybe press Chris McAlister and Samari Rolle at the starting positions.

So, a lot of potential for the Ravens, but it will probably be 3 years before we can really say whether this was a good draft for Baltimore or not.

Update: A little more on Flacco. There seem to be two main criticisms out there for the Ravens taking Flacco at #18. WN has some measured rebuttals.

1. The Ravens didn't need to trade up and could have taken Flacco (or one of the other quarterbacks) with the #26 pick or in Round 2. I don't think they gave up that much to move up (#26, a 3rd round and a 6th round pick - and they picked up another 3rd round pick by moving back in the 2nd round). But even then, I don't think it's really clear that Flacco would have made it to #26. Tampa Bay (at #20) certainly seemed interested in a QB (which turned out not to be Henne or Brohm) and there were rumors the Jets were interested. On top of that, waiting until the second round also would have meant waiting for Miami and Kansas City getting another shot at Flacco. So I certainly don't think the Ravens could have waited until Round 2.

If the Ravens really liked Flacco more than Henne or Brohm (it seemed like it must have been close between Henne and Flacco, with Brohm a bit further back in fourth), then I think the Ravens have to take a shot to get Flacco and not say, "Well, we'll be happy with either guy." Additionally, I don't think it was obvious at the time that Henne and Brohm would fall to the end of Round 2. There was some shock they lasted that long during the draft broadcast and it's certainly easy to envision a scenario where all 3 could have been gone by pick #38 (the Ravens' original second round pick), which would have been a disaster.

Whether Flacco is the right guy or not is another debate, but I don't think you can complain that the Ravens made the wrong moves in Round 1.

2. Flacco is such a project because he went to a I-AA school. Certainly would have felt better if Flacco had gone to a top football school - USC, LSU, Georgia, Michigan, Notre Dame, etc. - but is there really that much of a difference between Delaware and a mid-tier MAC school or somewhere in the Sun Belt? Would we feel better if Flacco had gone to, say, Central Michigan or Troy and led a team to a 8-4 record and an appearance in a pre-Christmas bowl game like the GMAC Bowl? If anything, the last season demonstrated that parity is creeping into college football (Appalachain State beating Michigan in Michigan being the shiniest example). As for transferring from Pitt and not starting ahead of Tyler Palko, let's remember that: a) Pitt has sucked and the extra years of coaching from Dave Wannstedt and Matt Cavanaugh might not have been beneficial and b) coaches make bad decisions all the time. Why didn't Ben Roethlisberger play QB until his senior year of high school? (coach's son played QB) Why was Michael Jordan cut from his high school basketball team his freshman year? (insanity) Why didn't Tom Brady get a vote of confidence to start ahead of Drew Henson at Michigan or Drew Bledsoe in New England?

There might be reasons to think Flacco isn't going to work out - accuracy, decision-making, footwork, etc. - but this isn't it.

LSM

2008-04-23T17:35:00.000-04:00

As WN tries to drown the sorrows of the Capitals' ill-fated Game 7 loss in an ongoing stream of tonic and Grey Goose vodka:

1. The Ravens face a very important draft on Saturday and Sunday. They have two picks on Day 1 at 8 and 38 and then a bevy of picks on Day 2 (with four compensation picks and most of their original picks as well, although notably lacking their third round pick in last year's Willis McGahee trade).

With Jake Long (OT, Michigan) off the board and going to Miami, here's how the next 7 picks look to WN:

2. St. Louis Rams: The buzz here is that they'll go with LSU DT Glenn Dorsey, although it's possible they'd pick Virginia DE Chris Long as well. Not a lot of talk that they'd go with Matt Ryan or Darren McFadden here (with Marc Bulger and Steven Jackson already on the team), nor much talk about Vernon Gholston, offensive linemen, or any of the corners. Dorsey seems like the pick, though.

3. Atlanta Falcons: Kind of two schools of thought on the Falcons; one is that they really need a quarterback and that they'd be crazy to pass on Matt Ryan (Boston College), the other is that they can pass on Ryan, use one of their second rounders or trade up to get somebody else (Brian Brohm, Joe Flacco, Chad Henne), and use this pick on either Dorsey or Chris Long. I tend to think they're going to go with Ryan.

4. Oakland Raiders: Vernon Gholston, DE/LB, Ohio State. No doubt in my mind. They'll pass on McFadden since they already have four running backs and they're not going to pick Chris Long. (Of course, being the Raiders, I guess you never can really know.)

5. Kansas City Chiefs: Could be Chris Long. Could be an offensive lineman (Brendan Albert, Virginia or Ryan Clady, Boise State). Also some thoughts that it could be Sedrick Ellis (DT, USC) or that Kansas City could trade down out of this spot, but it's not entirely clear who wants to move up to this spot (and who they would want). If Darren McFadden (RB, Arkansas) fell this far, there could be a team or two that would be interested in jumping ahead of the Jets and taking him, but the price might be too high. The one other interesting possibility (although certainly a longshot) would be if Kansas City picked a QB here even if Matt Ryan were off the board - although KC could wait until the second round, picking someone like Brian Brohm here would shake up everything.

6. New York Jets: If McFadden is still there, it seems like a great fit. Some sentiment that Matt Ryan would go here if he's still on the board. Otherwise, it's hard to say. Ellis, Clady, Albert, maybe Keith Rivers (LB, USC) or a cornerback are possibilities. Some talk out there that they could trade out of this pick and that teams like Cincinnati, New Orleans, and Philadelphia are interested in moving up.

7. New England Patriots: They love to trade down, so they could definitely move down if someone interesting was still here (McFadden, Ryan, Ellis). Cornerback would make sense (Leodis McKelvin, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, probably not Aqib Talib) and could see them taking Ellis if he's there or an offensive lineman. Keith Rivers another possibility.

8. Baltimore Ravens: Everyone tends to think the Ravens will pick Ryan here if he's available. I don't think he will be, and even if he is, I don't really know - some scouts have suggested Ryan might not be worth a first-round pick period, and it's possible that the Ravens could have someone higher on their board (Brian Brohm, Joe Flacco, and Chad Henne, who Peter King linked to the Ravens this week). Now, the Henne story could be a ruse to try to keep someone from moving up ahead of the Ravens and taking Matt Ryan (Detroit, Minnesota - although if Minnesota signs and trades for Jared Allen as expected, they probably don't have the picks to get him).

Anyway, I don't think the Ravens should pick Ryan. They definitely need a QB, but it's not really clear that Ryan is even the best QB in the draft. While he had a good record in college and seems to have the intangibles that scouts and football insiders like, he also threw 19 interceptions last year in one of the bottom two BCS conferences and his reputation seemed to be based heavily on Boston College's strong record in the early portion of the season. WN thinks the Ravens would do better by passing on Ryan here. Of course, they'll be ripped to shreds by the punditocracy if they don't take him.

(That said, the recent news from Peter King on SI that the Ravens like Michigan QB Chad Henne and might move up from the second round to take him and some rumors about continuing interest in Delaware QB Joe Flacco tend to make WN think that they really are interested in Matt Ryan, since there is a lot of deception that goes on around the draft. By this theory, the Ravens are trying to get teams from the middle of the first round to think the Ravens will also pass on Ryan and thus not trade up - with, say, New England - to get him, allowing him to fall to Baltimore at 8. The other possibility is that the Ravens really like Brian Brohm and think they can get him in the second round. Or that Peter King is right and is a pretty fine reporter.)

(And, that also said, WN likes Brian Brohm a lot. WN likes Chad Henne. WN is wildly undecided about Joe Flacco but would rather pass. WN thinks Josh Johnson is intriguing, but too much of a project for the Ravens. WN thinks Dennis Dixon would be an intriguing choice in the fourth round, who would be in the discussion if not for a torn ACL last fall. WN thinks that Andre Woodson is re-underrated (after going from underrated to overrated last year). And WN thinks that it's odd that USC QB John David Booty isn't getting any love, despite being a very solid quarterback at one of the premier college programs for the last two years.)

If they stay at 8, I think there's a good chance they'll take Leodis McKelvin (or another top-rated cornerback) or Sedrick Ellis, even though Ellis isn't really a need pick. If you've followed the Ravens, though, they are a team that goes for the best available early in the draft. Rarely do they trade back in the early rounds, but someone could want to move up to take Ellis (Cincinnati, New Orleans). Could also go for someone like Ryan Clady, despite the woeful Wonderlic score.

The most interesting dilemma would be if Darren McFadden is available. Taking a running back that high is questionable and they already have McGahee, but he would be extremely tempting to add and certainly add a big-play threat to the offense. He could also be worth a lot to a team that wanted to move up (say, Dallas and their two low first round picks).

So, if Matt Ryan is there, it'll definitely be a very interesting (and important) 10 minutes on the clock for the Ravens. If he's gone, the decision is a little simpler, although it would be really nice to trade down and get an extra first day pick. If the Ravens were somehow able to come away with a haul on the first day of their new franchise quarterback and a top defensive player or offensive lineman, that would be quite good. If they somehow parlayed it into three picks and say came away with something like Brian Brohm, Antoine Cason (Arizona, CB), and a third player, it would be outstanding. If they trade up to get Matt Ryan, ugh.

2. As for Steve McNair, it was time. No criticism from WN, because he took the Ravens as far as we've been in a long time, getting to the second round of the playoffs in 2006-07. Perhaps the wheels came off during that bye week, because he played poorly against Indianapolis and was never quite the same the next season. Best of luck.

3. The Orioles are a feisty 11-9. WN still thinks that this team isn't going to stay competitive in 2008, which might be a good thing if it keeps the Orioles in the rebuilding mindset a little longer and helps them in trading Brian Roberts and some other useful veteran players who deserve a chance to play for one more contender (Melvin Mora, Aubrey Huff, Steve Traschel, Jay Payton, Ramon Hernandez, the bullpen) - although keeping Kevin Millar as sort of a first baseman/DH/bench coach might be kind of useful for the team.

It's been a bit up-and-down overall. It's been promising to see some of the pitchers at Norfolk doing well (Garrett Olsen, for one) and Matt Wieters (Frederick, catcher, last year's first-round pick) has been killing the ball since the season started, which might mean he won't be in A-ball much longer.

Anyway, even if the team sinks as the year goes on, at least they're interesting again.

4. Just a quick note on the Wizards. If things were reversed and LeBron James was just returning from a season-long injury while Gilbert Arenas had played all year long, WN thinks that things would at least be a bit different, but WN feels like everyone is ignoring this - the Wizards went without (arguably) their best player almost the entire year and are trying to bring him back on the fly in the playoffs, but he's not quite back yet. The Wizards are probably good enough to steal one game and lose in 5. What this means for the offseason (when they have to make decisions about Antawn Jamison and Arenas) - no idea.

5. The Capitals ... it's still too soon.

WN Updates

2008-04-22T14:03:00.003-04:00

Nothing truly spectacular happening over the last few weeks, which doesn't really excuse the lack of blogging.

Weekend Summaries

We've done quite a bit over the past few weekends since Easter - caught up with many friends, gone to a few 30th birthday parties, eaten at a variety of different restaurants, and run some errands. For the most part, it's all been relatively local.

One of the highlights was a trip to the 9:30 Club to see Colin Meloy, lead singer of The Decemberists. Very good show. We were standing about two rows of people away from the stage, just off center. WoWN was very impressed. And it was WN's first trip ever to the 9:30 Club.

Sports

Plenty to talk about ... the Caps making the playoffs and then rallying back to force Game 7 tonight against the Flyers ... the Wizards getting tough and then getting beat down against the Cavs (again) ... the Orioles actually keeping things interesting through the first 3 weeks of the baseball season ... the Ravens have seen Steve McNair retire and are prepping for this weekend's draft with the #8 overall pick. More to come.

Entertainment

Aside from the concert. TV has been a bit thin recently, but returns of How I Met Your Mother (top 5 all-time episode featuring the NCAA-style bracket of former girlfriends/flings that might be stalking Barney) and The Office and 30 Rock (kudos to the excellently done MILF Island) have made TV watchable again. Really looking forward to the return of Lost on Thursday (and actively avoiding reading EW's article from last week on what happens the rest of this season). Plus, we're on our way through The Wire: Season 2.

As for movies, the only big thing we've watched recently has been Shine a Light, Martin Scorcese's movie/documentary/behind-the-scenes of the Rolling Stones in concert. Very cool; it's actually quite amazing that they're in as good of shape as they are at their age, even Keith Richards. Also the best seats any of us will ever be able to afford to see the Rolling Stones.

Politics

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton still running for the Democratic nomination, even though it looks very likely that Obama will win the nomination. Today, Pennsylvania; tomorrow - Indiana, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, Oregon, one of the Dakotas!

Still trying to figure out what Obama meant when he used the word "bitter" about some voters in Pennsylvania (WN quickie take - are they bitter? yes, but don't necessarily agree with Obama over cause/effect). Still trying to figure out why Clinton is still in the race and whether she thinks she can win. Still trying to figure out why John McCain has confused Sunni/Shiite and alleged Iran/al Qaeda working together - perpetual slips of the tongue or loose grasp of what's going on?

Other

Lots of stuff going on around the WN Homestead over the next few months. Some upcoming travel. Some new things at work. Might go get a snack in a little while.

O Steamboat!

2008-04-14T17:55:00.001-04:00

Wacky Neighbor officially became a Fellow of the Society of Actuaries in February. Huzzah, huzzah! And, as WN's first official act as an FSA, WN and WoWN embarked on a week's vacation.

Sunday March 2

WN and WoWN flew to Denver, Colorado on a rather easy flight courtesy of Southwest, made slightly nicer with use of a free flight earned through their Rapid Rewards program. From Denver, the plan was to rent an SUV and drive about 3 hours to Steamboat, which was a bit northwest of Denver (and generally due north of most of the other major Colorado ski resorts). WN followed the plan, but unfortunately it was snowing west of Denver along I-70, which reduced traffic to a 20 mph crawl for quite a long stretch. After a brief stop to regain our sanity in Silverthorn, we continued uneventfully but cautiously through the pitch black and wintery landscape that was a seemingly uninhabited section of Colorado. WN and WoWN eventually arrived in Steamboat, but after something closer to a 4 1/2-hour drive. The Mitsubishi Endeavor we rented performed admirably in the conditions.

WN and WoWN rented a one-room condo at the Snow Flower, conveniently located in the heart of Steamboat. We checked in, unpacked the car, and then headed out for some basic groceries and then dinner. For dinner, we headed up to the Slopeside Grill for their late-night happy hour, with half-price beers and pizzas. The beer was good, the pizza was excellent, and it was a welcome respite from the long day of travel.

Monday March 3

First thing in the morning, we headed to downtown Steamboat to pick up our rental skis. (While Southwest apparently counts ski boot bags and skis as one item, WN and WoWN decided to forgo the hassle and potential risk of bringing our own skis with us.) We rented from One Stop Ski Shop - they were extremely nice and helpful and we were set up with Dynastars. In retrospect, I wished that I had gotten something a bit fatter (only 71 mm), but they were still quality and did the job. Then we headed back up to the mountain for day one of skiing.

Steamboat is about 3500 feet in elevation for skiing (the base is about 7000 feet and the peak nearly 10500 feet). To start the day, the easiest and most obvious way up the mountain is the gondola, which is a 9 minute ride that takes you up about 2000 feet - just halfway up the mountain. So we hopped on the gondola and got ready for the day.

The good news for Monday was that all of the snow that was so painful to drive in on Sunday resulted in 17 inches of new snow in Steamboat. Ye gods, there was powder everywhere! Much of the new snow had been torn up on Sunday, but it was generally packed powder Monday. We spent most of our day Monday in a couple areas - Elk Head, Sundown, and Sunshine. And despite our vows to take it easy on Day 1, we did do a bit of tree skiing the first day, too and skied a lot of the black runs.

After skiing until well into the afternoon, we headed back to the condo and slept for awhile. So much for apres-ski for us old folk. For dinner, we headed across the street to La Montana, a Mexican restaurant with an upscale menu. WN had the fajitas, which were good but very filling.

Tuesday March 4

Well, it was snowing. That was the upside for Tuesday. The downside was that it was very windy and it wasn't particularly easy to see that far ahead. It became quickly apparent that WN was going to need some new goggles, since the other ones were still in our room and the blue tint wasn't going to cut it anyway. So WN splurged on some new goggles (which I wanted anyway) and we headed back out to ski. By 11 or so they had shut down all but one of the lifts going to the top, so we skied around mid-mountain for most of the day. We did manage to get up to the top and come down Storm Peak - despite being completely alone on the run, it was kind of awful. The wind was blowing up the mountain, leaving small drifts everywhere and whipping the new snow into our faces. After that arduous run, we took a lunch break and relaxed a bit.

We did a few more runs in the afternoon as the weather improved a bit, but it was probably our shortest day of skiing that week. There was still enough to be entertained, more than enough to be challenged. Yes, we were hard core.

After skiing, we hit the hot tub for a little while and then headed out to dinner at Saketumi (get it?), which was a little sushi restaurant that was within walking distance. Very good sushi and sake.

Wednesday March 5

It had continued to snow overnight, so by the time we hit the mountain that morning, there was still ample fresh powder to ski. Fantastic - great day for taking some pictures and skiing the steeps that Steamboat had to offer. We spent a time Wednesday around Storm Peak, Sunshine, Morningside (Steamboat's smallish but challenging backside) and around Pony Express. We pretty much spent all morning on the blacks, which were clearly as challenging as we were willing to go (not being in the mood to hike to the double diamonds in Christmas Tree Bowl and go beyond what we could realistically ski safely), but we both ripped off some very good runs.

We took a long lunch and did a couple more runs after lunch. It's worth mentioning that Steamboat only groomed roughly 1/3 of their runs, which meant after the powder had been skied through, virtually everything else was bump skiing, so we had plenty of practice skiing moguls that week. The bumps out west, though, are much softer and more fun to ski than the hardpack, icy bumps that we tend to get in the east. Still, quite a workout.

WN forgets what the original dinner plans were that night, but we went to some restaurant that was full. The hostess sent us upstairs to the bar, saying we could be seated and eat up there. The upstairs was hosting a private party in one area and the bar side looked crowded and the upstairs hostesses weren't very helpful. We left, unimpressed with the lack of service. We headed back to the Slopeside Grill (from Sunday) and ate there. Nothing fancy, burgers and such, but satisfying.

Thursday March 6

More snow. It snowed overnight and was still snowing when we woke up around 6 or 7 a.m. It took us awhile to get going, fighting the tiredness and soreness from the previous 3 days, but we rallied as the snow kept coming down. Real, honest to goodness snow. We could actually see the whole snowflake - six points, delicate design, no two alike - amazing. It kept snowing until 1 p.m. or so that day, giving us even more fresh powder skiing. We skied some ridiculous runs (not always particularly well in my case) - we even had some runs in thigh-deep powder and were able to get some face shots (when you turn through the ski fast enough that the snow splashes up into or over your face). Wild stuff, not like anything we had skied before.

Being our last day and our traditional Thursday ski rally, we stayed out for a long time before grabbing lunch. We eked out two or three more runs before the end of the day, soaking it all in one last time.

After skiing, we hit the hot tub for a little while. Then we cleaned up and headed back downtown to drop off our skis, shop for souvenirs, and get a nice, big steak dinner at some nice but kind of empty restaurant. WN actually opted for the elk, which was also very good. Very nice, filling meal at the end of a long day and week of skiing.

Friday March 7

We shipped out early in the morning to head back to Denver. It only snowed for a little while through Rabbit Ears Pass, so the ride back was much easier. We got to see what we didn't see on our drive up - which wasn't actually much, just some very small towns and some ranches between Steamboat and Kremmling (itself a small town) and Kremmling and Silverthorne. Dropped off our trusty Mitsubishi Endeavor (the word is indeed getting around) and waited for our flight back to Baltimore. The flight was pleasant and we were in Baltimore on time. After picking up the car, we ended up at Bertucci's for dinner and then headed home.

All in all, it was a great trip. They got 17 inches of snow on Sunday and probably another 20 inches or so between Monday morning and Thursday evening. No possible way to complaing about 3 feet of snow in what turned out to be a record year for Steamboat! A few things I'll add in the event you find yourself contemplating a trip to Steamboat:

1. It's probably worth at least considering flying into Steamboat rather than driving from Denver. The drive in optimal conditions was a good 3 1/2 hours. Between the cost of the rental car and gas, the cost for 2 people might have at least been worth comparing. The downside is that you wouldn't have a car in Steamboat, but you have the option of staying close to the mountain itself or utilizing the reasonably convenient public transportation to get around town. (Walking from the mountain to downtown would be a very long walk, though.)

2. For the most part, everything felt kind of expensive. Probably not that big of a shock given that there isn't anything around Steamboat and it's a vacation town, but food and such was a bit more expensive than I had expected.

3. It was definitely nice staying within walking distance to the lifts. Highly recommended if it fits your budget or your other options while out there.

4. Great tree skiing. We haven't skied enough places to say it's the best tree skiing, but there can't be many places better. Definitely worth going for the tree skiing, and definitely worth trying out if you're out there.

Quick Shots

2008-04-03T16:38:00.002-04:00

1. The Orioles are 1-1. Huzzah!

2. The Capitals are making a furious rally trying to make the playoffs. 9-1 in their last 10 games, the Caps still sit 1 or 2 points out of the playoffs with 2 games left to go. Alexander Ovechkin has been phenomenal, with 63 goals this year and leading the NHL in goals and points. It's not your father's Capitals, anymore.

3. The Wizards look destined to face Cleveland in the first round of the NBA playoffs, even though they could realistically fall to sixth (and draw Orlando, a terrible matchup for them) or seventh (and draw Detroit, an interesting but nonetheless bad draw for the Wizards). If Gilbert Arenas had come back sooner (after missing a whopping 66 games this year with a knee injury), maybe Washington would be hitting their stride and be the dreaded "team noone wants to play." As it is, WN thinks that it's probably going to be hard to work Gil back into the mix (particularly given the role he has in the offense) and it's probably one-and-done.

4. What's up with the weather? Every day has been a different season lately.

5. Kind of busy at work, sort of in the middle of several projects of various sizes. Yup.

6. More some time soon.

Orioles 2008 Preview

2008-03-31T09:20:00.001-04:00

In 1997, the Baltimore Orioles led the AL East wire-to-wire and finished 98-64 and may have gone on to win the World Series if it wasn't for Armando Benitez's epic collapse in the ALCS against the Cleveland Indians (Benitez was 0-2 with a 12.00 ERA in 4 appearances, including giving up game-winning home runs to Marquis Grissom and Tony Fernandez as well as a game-winning hit to Sandy Alomar in Game 4). Since then, the O's have bounced between 63 and 79 wins a season, finished third once and fourth 10 times in the AL East, and watched attendance drop from first in the league (3.7 million in 1997) to 11th (2.1 million in 2007). In the meantime, the Orioles are on their fifth manager since firing Davey Johnson after 1997 (who won AL Manager of the Year) and their sixth general manager (if you count both Mike Flanagan and Jim Beattie). In the offseason, the Orioles traded away arguably their best hitter (Miguel Tejada) and inarguably their best pitcher (Erik Bedard) for packages of prospects, and have been allegedly trying to trade arguably their best remaining hitter for more prospects (Brian Roberts).

So no, this probably isn't going to be a good year.

Catcher

Ramon Hernandez returns after being injured for much of last year. He'll be 32 this year, which is certainly nearing the point at which catchers start becoming ineffective. If he plays like he did his first year here in 2006 - career-highs in home runs (23), RBI (91), on-base percentage (.343), and slugging percentage (.479) - everything would be okay. If he plays like last year - 9 home runs, 62 RBI, batted .258, and slugged under .400 - he would be a pretty serious disappointment with about $15 million left to pay over this year and next. He's hitting .256 in spring training this year with no power in 18 games, which isn't a great sign for a rebound.

Backup Guillermo Quiroz has a hard-to-pronounce name and isn't expected to do much. He has had very limited major league experience and he's a career .220 hitter in the majors.

Infield

All signs point towards Baltimore keeping Brian Roberts for the time being, which means he'll lead off batting and play second base. He has certainly been one of the better players in recent history - he hits for good average, is among the league leaders in doubles, and has turned into a very good base stealer. If the O's do trade Roberts, the next options within the organization are Oscar Salazar, Eider Torres, or possibly Brandon Fahey. Which means the Orioles will probably either be looking for a second baseman in the deal itself or from elsewhere in baseball to fill second base.

At first base, the Orioles will probably go with Kevin Millar and Aubrey Huff, with the other getting the majority of time as DH. Both are slightly-better-than-average hitters at this point in their careers, but that's probably not enough to make a difference on the Orioles. One could argue that Millar as a righty and Huff as a lefty would make a great platoon for one spot, but Millar has actually been better against right-handed pitchers in his career than left-handed pitchers, which would render the platoon useless. That, and the Orioles really need both of them in the lineup at this point. Huff is a little more versatile (he could also play the corner outfield spots and fill in at third) and Millar is known as a great clubhouse guy. For what it's worth.

Melvin Mora is still here and slotted to play third base. From 2003-2005, he was actually quite good at the plate and was very versatile, filling in adequately in the outfield and shortstop until he became the full-time third baseman in 2004. His last two seasons have been medium and rather indistinguishable from each other. While there's not a lot of reason to think at 36 Mora is going to get any better, he has had a very good spring.

The full-time shortstop job looks like it's going to Luis Hernandez. Luis hit an empty .290 last year (no power and virtually no walks) and is hitting .184 in spring training (with a mind-blowing .500 OPS). Hernandez is supposedly here for his fielding, but he also has 5 errors in spring training. The upshot is that he turns 24 this year, but it's not clear he can hit enough to be a productive major leaguer even with his glove, and that clearly hasn't been working right this year, either.

As for the other options here, it looks like the O's will keep Brandon Fahey as a utility player on the bench. He's young with more versatility than Hernandez (he could probably do anything other than catch), with a slightly better bat and probably not as much potential at shortstop. Scott Moore, who came over in the Steve Traschel trade, has looked great in spring training and is young enough at 24 to be considered a prospect. His position is third and he could play first, but for now he's blocked by Mora and Millar. With Jay Gibbons cut, Moore will start the season in the majors.

Outfield

The Orioles will likely go with an outfield of Nick Markakis, Adam Jones, and Luke Scott. Markakis has been great the last two seasons, especially in the second half. At 24, he's also likely to continue improving, too. He should be a mainstay as the 2 or 3 hitter for years, depending on whether he continues to develop his power. The fact that he had 43 doubles last year should be seen as a positive sign that he could become a 30 or 35 homer hitter.

Adam Jones was the stud prospect that came over in the Bedard trade. He hasn't done much in the majors to date, but he's only 22, will play center field, and has all 5 tools to become an All-Star caliber player. Almost certainly the best everyday prospect the Orioles have had since ... since ... maybe Jeffrey Hammonds, but with a much higher ceiling.

Luke Scott comes over in the Tejada deal and will play in left. Some think that with a full season he'll develop into a pretty good hitter, but it's not likely he'll be much more than an average left fielder this year or going forward.

Jay Payton will play sparingly. He was injured last year, didn't do much when he was healthy, hasn't done much the last few years, and he's 35 this year. No one should expect a whole lot this year.

Pitching

To start the year, the O's will go with Jeremy Guthrie, Daniel Cabrera, Steve Traschel, and Adam Loewen in the rotation, still waiting to make a decision on their fifth starter. Jeremy Guthrie is apparently the staff ace. The O's took a shot on him last year and he went 7-5 with a 3.70 ERA. While everyone seems to be high on Guthrie this year, watch out, because he isn't a big strikeout guy (even though he does have very good control), he gives up quite a few home runs, and he'll be 29 this year - which means he might not get all that much better, if at all.

Steve Traschel is back after a one-year stint with the Orioles last year. He's adequate and maybe he'll fetch another prospect this summer, but it's not a good sign for all of the AAA starters that the O's felt compelled to bring him back during spring training this year.

Adam Loewen is back after injury sidelined him for most of last year. He's only 24 this year and he has a ton of potential, but the biggest thing for him will be cutting down on the walks allowed. He gave up 88 walks the last two years in 142 2/3 innings, which is a serious red flag. If he gets the walks down, he could be a very good pitcher this year.

Daniel Cabrera ... who knows? It's not just start to start with him, it's almost pitch to pitch. No one has any idea of how he's going to pitch at any given point, showing signs of complete brilliance at points and then looking out of control or immature or even clueless on the mound. In 2007, he led the AL in starts (34), walks (108), losses (18), and earned runs (126) and finished second in hit batsmen (15). On the other hand, he's pitched well enough at points that other scouts have raved about him and he clearly has enough potential to be a dominant starting pitcher. At 27 and in his fifth season in the majors, it's probably now or never for Cabrera here. But who knows?

The fifth starter spot is left between Matt Albers (who came over in the Tejada deal) and Brian Burres, with a slew of guys in AAA, too (including Hayden Penn, maybe Jon Leicester, Garrett Olson, and Radhames Liz). Neither Albers or Burres is likely to be outstanding, but they could become useful pitchers in Baltimore.

The bullpen is looking like George Sherrill (via Seattle in the Bedard deal) will close, with Chris Ray and Danys Baez on the DL all season. The rest of the bullpen will include Jamie Walker, Chad Bradford, Dennis Sarfate (via Houston in the Tejada deal), Rule V pick Randor Bierd, Greg Aquino, and whoever doesn't get the fifth starter spot. Probably not a great bullpen, but if they can avoid overworking them early (unlike last year) and with Baez out (who was simply awful last year), they might be decent.

Overall

The Orioles claim to be making a youth movement, with the Tejada and Bedard trades being the beginning. Many of the veterans' contracts run through 2009, including Ramon Hernandez, Gibbons, Mora, Huff, and Payton. So in some ways, it's probably unreasonable to expect a massive turnaround this year.

On the other hand, out of the Orioles 13 position players coming out of camp, 7 will be 30 or older this year - Hernandez (32), Millar (36), Roberts (30), Mora (36), Payton (35), Huff (31), and Scott (30). On top of that, even some of the players competing for a position aren't particularly young - Fahey (27), Tike Redman (31), Chris Roberson (29), Freddie Bynum (28). Out of the potential starting pitchers, Cabrera and Burres are 27, Liz and Albers are 25, Loewen and Olson are 24, and Penn is 23 - but that still might mean 4/5 of the staff will be 27 or older.

So while the O's might be heading in the right direction, this year is a small first step. The team would almost certainly be better served clearing room for some younger players - and cutting Gibbons and keeping Moore in the majors is a great first step - although it's worth delaying judgment to see if management clears some room as the year continues. It's also worth holding off judgment to see what the O's might get back in the Brian Roberts deal (if it ever happens) - rumored deals with the Chicago Cubs seem to be off for now, with players like Sean Marshall, Sean Gallagher, and Ronny Cedeno being mentioned (whether Felix Pie has ever really been offered is even less clear).

Wacky Neighbor's final take: If in 3-5 years the Orioles are at least improving and it's at least reasonable to consider the Orioles getting over .500 in the standings and having a shot at making the playoffs, then I'll take whatever lumps come this season. If in 2012 we're still rebuilding, God help us.

But that said, WN thinks this season is going to be epically bad. Everyone - everyone - is picking them to finish last in the AL East. Some are going so far to say that the O's might finish last in the AL and might be one of the two or three worst teams in baseball. WN would be honestly surprised if the Orioles win more than 65 games this year and WN thinks the final win total will be 55-60. 50 wins might not be out of the question.

Quick NCAA Post

2008-03-24T16:19:00.003-04:00

WN didn't do a full-blown NCAA preview this year, given the recent UMBC hubbub, but here's a quick rundown of what WN had in his brackets and what's coming up:

East

WN has North Carolina to win the region, beating Louisville in the Elite Eight. WN didn't have any real upsets here, and with the exception of Arkansas beating Indiana in the first round, it's been all chalk. That said, WN thought that this might be the toughest region with Tennessee (SEC champ) as one of the tougher 2 seeds, Louisville as one of the best 3 seeds, and easily the two best 8-9 seeds (Indiana and Arkansas).

South

WN has Texas beating Memphis in the Elite Eight. This has been another fairly smooth region, although it's also one chock full of teams WN wanted to pick against this year ... yet they all ended up in this bracket (Stanford, Michigan State, Marquette, Kentucky). Aside from Michigan State beating Pitt, another region that's gone pretty much according to the seed (albeit with some exciting games).

West

WN had UCLA over Purdue, which was my darkhorse Elite Eight pick. Well, now Purdue is out, but at least Duke is, too. Duke almost got beat by Belmont (ye gods!), which should make one consider whether either: a) the ACC is overrated or b) could the officiating in favor of Duke in the ACC be that biased? WN tended to think this was the weakest region by quite a bit (Duke as the weakest 2, Xavier as the weakest 3, and without particularly strong 4 or 5 seeds). As it turns out, the region was full of upsets (Western Kentucky over Drake, San Diego over Connecticut, and West Virginia over Duke) and has two high seeds in the Sweet 16. UCLA has the easiest road to the Final Four of any team left.

Midwest

WN has Kansas picking off Wisconsin in the Elite Eight as the last Final Four team. The pick is looking good right now. The only big upset WN had in the first weekend was Davidson making it to the Sweet 16, which they did (although yes, WN went with the heart and picked UMBC in round 1). On top of that, Villanova beat Clemson and then Siena (who already beat Vanderbilt) to make it 2 12-seeds in the Sweet 16. Another messed up region.

Going forward

The bad news for Villanova and Western Kentucky: since 1985, 12-seeds are 0-13 against 1-seeds. The only time a 12-seed advanced to the Elite Eight was in 2002, when Missouri beat 8-seed UCLA before bowing out to Oklahoma. Villanova might not be your average 12-seed, but history isn't very kind, here. History also doesn't bode well for Davidson, where 10-seeds are 3-7 historically against 3-seeds (despite being a whopping 15-17 against 2-seeds since 1985). Also worth noting: since 1985, 1-seeds are only 9-11 against 3-seeds. The fact all 4 3-seeds advanced to the Sweet 16 might not bode well for those top teams.

Another interesting (and related) note: This is the first time since 1991 that no 6-seed has advanced to the Sweet 16. The last time other high seeds have gone without making the Sweet 16:

7-seeds: 2002
5-seeds: 1992
4-seeds: 2003
3-seeds: 1997

No year since 1985 has gone by without at least 1 1-seed and 1 2-seed making the Sweet 16.

Anyway, WN has no reason to change my picks now, so here it is: Kansas over UCLA in the finals.

One Shining Road Trip (UMBC)

2008-03-24T12:05:00.001-04:00

Friday March 21:

6:45 a.m. WN and friend depart for Raleigh, North Carolina to see UMBC take on Georgetown in the first round of the men's NCAA basketball tournament. It's UMBC's first-ever appearance, following their spectacular run through the America East regular season and conference tournament. UMBC has drawn Georgetown, a tough Final Four team from last year and certainly a contender to return to the Final Four again this year. Undeterred by the odds, WN - as a faithful alumnus - heads off to see the game.

6:46 a.m. It appears that the turn signals on WN's 2002 Volkswagen Passat are not working properly.

6:55 a.m. A quick stop at Dunkin Donuts for coffee and a bagel.

12:00 p.m. Arrive in Raleigh, NC for the game at the RBC Center, home arena of the North Carolina State Wolfpack. (All in all, the drive was surprisingly good and easy with minimal traffic until we arrived at the arena parking lot.)

12:05 p.m. Head back to the car to get the tickets.

12:30 p.m. Get food at Hardee's, which are exceedingly popular across the south and inside of the RBC Center.

12:35 p.m. Take our seats to watch Gonzaga and Davidson, the first game this afternoon.

One thing about the crowd: Here's the breakdown of the approximate percentage of fan affiliation in Session 1 (Gonzaga-Davidson, Georgetown-UMBC)

Duke: 2 percent
Indiana, Arkansas, Mount St. Mary's: 3 percent (total)
UMBC: 5 percent
Gonzaga: 5 percent
Georgetown: 10 percent
Davidson: 15 percent
North Carolina: 60 percent

Even though North Carolina didn't play until 7:00, the crowd was overwhelmingly Tarheel. WN supposes once the sub-regional tickets went on sale (and well before the teams were announced), North Carolina and Duke fans raced out to buy them hoping or expecting they would be placed there. Good for UNC fans, bad for Duke fans. Anyway, the bigger point is that given that Davidson is also located in North Carolina, the crowd was overwhelmingly rooting for Davidson over Gonzaga. So much for being the higher-seeded team.

Here's a basic rundown of the game from being there: Throughout the first half and the early second half, Gonzaga would hold a lead between 2 and 11 points. Davidson would get behind between 6 and 11 points, rally back to draw it within 2 to 4 points, and then Gonzaga would race out to a bigger lead again. Finally in the second half, Davidson started feeding the ball to Stephen Curry, who had only scored 10 points in the first half (4-7 shooting). Curry went crazy in the second half, scoring 30 points (40 for the game) - including a 3-pointer with 10 minutes left that tied the game at 62 and another 3-pointer with 1 minute left that gave Davidson the lead for good. He reminds me a bit of Rip Hamilton - smallish shooting guard, very good off screens, quick release on his shot - but if Hamilton had to score 30 of his team's 46 points in the second half. The crowd loved him.

2:30 p.m. Davidson wins 82-76. There are 30 minutes until UMBC takes on Georgetown!

The game blog will be timed using the game clock.

Introductions: Probably not a good sign when every Georgetown starter appears to have a good 3 to 4 inches on each UMBC starter. The game announcer must have been incredulous at UMBC's height, announcing point guard Jay Greene at 6'8" (when he's 5'8").

First half, 19:30 remaining: Roy Hibbert, the Hoyas' 7'2" center, hits an easy shot to put Georgetown up 2-0. He's tall.

18:00: UMBC scores to make it 5-2, and then gets a steal and a basket to make it 5-4.

15:30: Matt Spadafora hits a 3 pointer after a long dry spell by both teams to make it 7-5, UMBC. Oh my, UMBC is ahead! Use the four corners offense, guys!

14:30: UMBC makes it to the first TV timeout tied 7-7. We're actually in this game!

11:30: UMBC takes a brief 12-9 lead, but Georgetown gets it back and it's tied 12-12 at the second TV timeout. Maybe we can make a game of this yet.

7:00: Third TV timeout, Georgetown leads 21-17. UMBC is still in the game, but every shot UMBC is taking is being heavily contested and the Hoyas seem to be getting some better looks.

1:30: Georgetown is now ahead 31-17 as UMBC has gone ice cold. Georgetown is looking a bit erratic on offense - they'll have a few good possessions in a row, then a few bad ones - but they're defense is extremely tough. They close extremely quickly on screens and no one can get open, plus Hibbert is really imposing inside.

1:00: UMBC finally hits a basket, 31-20. If they can close it to within 10 at the half, they'll be in decent shape.

0:12: UMBC gets a dunk from Cavell Johnson and it's 31-22! We're within 10! (Yes, perhaps WN's expectations have been lowered.)

0:00: Georgetown's Chris Wright hits an off-balance, fall-away 3 at the buzzer. It's 34-22 at the half. So much for momentum and the single-digit lead.

Halftime: Not much to say. UMBC is playing tough, but Georgetown looks way better - more talented and better execution. Even if UMBC can play defense well enough to keep Georgetown from pulling away, UMBC needs to get some better shots and hit a few - plus a few 3's - to stay in the game. (Also, the UMBC dance team draws rave reviews from the crowd. Kudos.)

Second half: Okay, the second half is generally a blur. Georgetown starts hitting some shots, UMBC still can't get anything done. The non-UMBC and non-Georgetown crowds file out, no upset in sight. At this point, WN is just rooting for UMBC to keep it within 20. Fortunately, UMBC obliges and loses 66-47.

It's not the way WN would have liked to see UMBC go out, but as far as 15-seeds go, at least UMBC showed up and played hard and didn't get routed by 30 or 40 points. Maybe UMBC gets back next year, maybe not. Hard to say. (As for Georgetown, they would go on to lose to Davidson on Sunday in a fairly big upset, led by Stephen Curry's 30 points. As for Roy Hibbert, the star of this Georgetown team, WN isn't sure what to make of him in the NBA. He's certainly tall and moves pretty well for a guy his size and shows pretty good touch passing the ball out of the post. On the other hand, he's fairly thin and didn't really dominate the UMBC game, which makes me wonder what he can do once he's playing against NBA centers. No chance that he's quick enough or has the shooting range to play forward. Probably still a lottery pick this year, but it's not clear to WN anyway whether he'll be a star at the next level or just a serviceable starting center; might depend heavily on which team gets him.)

5:00 p.m. Well, that's it in Raleigh. Now we head back to the car through the parking lot, which is now one gigantic, extended Tarheel tailgate party.

5:30 p.m. Stop for gas at what appears to be a combination of a BP station and an independent video rental store.

8:45 p.m. After holding out hope throughout the Richmond area, we finally find a Chick-fil-A for dinner.

11:00 p.m. Return home. An extremely successful road trip, a valiant effort in a loss by UMBC, and all on less than two tanks of gas.

UMBC v. Georgetown

2008-03-16T18:26:00.003-04:00

UMBC will meet Georgetown on Friday in Raleigh, NC. All in all, WN is pretty happy - even though they drew a 15-seed, they avoided a 16-seed and they're relatively close in the event WN can swing the trip. (WN's early guess is that they'll play in the early session, because North Carolina will also be in Raleigh and almost certainly be one of the featured prime-time games.)

Watch out Hoyas!

UMBC - Where Will We Go?

2008-03-16T14:11:00.002-04:00

So Retriever fans, WN is sure you're anxiously awaiting tonight's selection show to figure out where you need to be to see UMBC play in the first round of the NCAA tournament. Well, since that's still a few hours off, here's Wacky Neighbor's Way Too Much Time Analysis on where UMBC might be going.

First, what seed will UMBC be? There are effectively 5 16-seeds (with the play-in game), which ESPN is projecting to be Coppin State, Mississippi Valley State, Mount St. Mary's, UT-Arlington, and American. WN is pretty comfortable that these will be the 16-seeds - UMBC has better profiles than all of these teams, plus a regular season win over American.

So UMBC won't be worse than a 15-seed. ESPN is projecting the 15-seeds will be UMBC, Belmont, Austin Peay, and Portland State, with 14-seeds for San Diego, Cal State Fullerton, Boise State, and Winthrop and 13-seeds for Cornell, Siena, George Mason, and Oral Roberts. Admitting massive bias, WN tends to think that WN stands a decent chance of moving up to the 14-seed. If you go by RPI, WN is ahead of Boise State and Winthrop (although behind Austin Peay, Belmont, Portland State, and just behind Cal State Fullerton). Anyway, it's pretty close amongst a lot of teams between the mid 60's and mid 80's in RPI. UMBC won 11 of its last 12 and won its conference regular season, which hopefully count for something as well. So it's possible UMBC moves up to a 14-seed, but a 13-seed is almost certainly out.

So, where does UMBC go? There are 8 first and second round sites (by proximity to Baltimore): Washington DC, Raleigh, Birmingham, Tampa, Little Rock, Omaha, Denver, and Anaheim. Let's rule out UMBC as a 16-seed, which means they'll miss these most likely 1-seeds (with where they would most likely go):

North Carolina (Raleigh) - if they beat Clemson today
UCLA (Anaheim)
Memphis (Little Rock)

The fourth 1-seed could be either Tennessee or the winner of today's Big 12 game (Texas-Kansas). But the other 2 are almost certainly 2-seeds. Tennessee will probably go to Birmingham (or maybe Little Rock), Texas to Little Rock (which would put Tennessee in Birmingham) and Kansas to Omaha.

The other 2-seeds are going to be made up of some combination of Georgetown, Wisconsin, and Duke. The odd team out of that group will be a 3-seed, along with 3 teams out of Stanford, Xavier, Pitt, Louisville, and maybe Indiana (which ESPN actually has a 5-seed).

So here's WN's guess of the 2-seeds and 3-seeds and where they will be playing (let's say Kansas beats Texas and takes the fourth 1-seed):

Texas (Little Rock)
Tennessee (Birmingham)
Georgetown (Tampa) - Georgetown can't go to DC because it's the official host of that sub-regional
Wisconsin (Omaha)

Duke (Raleigh)
Stanford (Anaheim)
Pitt (DC)
Louisville (Birmingham)

(If Xavier or Indiana move up to a 3-seed, I think they both have pretty good chances of going to DC as well.)

By that projection, that puts UMBC in potentially 7 places (if Texas becomes a 1-seed, Little Rock is probably out; if Tennessee is a 1-seed and Louisville misses a 3-seed, Birmingham might be out unless Georgetown ends up there).

The biggest problem for UMBC going to DC is that they have to be a 14-seed; there are virtually no scenarios that put a 2-seed in Washington. There is a pretty good chance for UMBC to get to DC if they are a 14-seed, though (Pitt, Xavier, or Indiana); there's also a chance of being sent to Raleigh to play Duke. If UMBC is a 15-seed, WN thinks that Birmingham or Tampa or the most likely landing place for UMBC. The good news is that Anaheim and Denver - the two furthest sites - are extremely unlikely, and Omaha and Little Rock are fairly unlikely as well.

WN's final guess is Tampa to play Georgetown if they're a 15, DC to play Pitt if they're a 14. No need to thank me.

More on UMBC

2008-03-15T17:25:00.002-04:00

WN will do a more thorough analysis Sunday of where UMBC could expect to play next week (and who their opponent might be). For now, it certainly looks as if UMBC will not be any worse than a 15-seed, who are 4-88 in the first round since 1985 (most of the mock brackets - ESPN, Sports Illustrated, CBS Sportsline, Yahoo, CollegeRPI.com have UMBC as at least a 15). There's a reasonable chance UMBC will be a 14-seed.

In their favor: they won their conference 13-3 and won convincingly in the finals. Plus, a few #1 seeds from other small conferences have lost this week, ensuring relatively weaker profile teams will make the tournament (UC Santa Barbara in the Big West, Utah State in the WAC, and Stephen F. Austin in the Southland) - so if you're rooting for UMBC to move up, the best chance this weekend if for UC Irvine to beat Cal State Fullerton in the Big West (New Mexico State in the WAC would also be more likely to help UMBC, and the Southland winner probably won't pass UMBC).

Against UMBC: No signature wins, with only 2 wins against likely-tournament teams (Morgan State, American) and a few bad losses (at Central Connecticut State, home against Maine) mean that UMBC might have a reasonable RPI in the high 80s or low 90s but still without anything likely to wow anyone on the tournament committee.

UMBC!

2008-03-15T13:58:00.002-04:00

The Retrievers are dancing after smoking Hartford 82-65 in a game that was never in doubt. Can't wait to see where UMBC gets seeded and which unlucky big-conference team has to take us on next week!

Politicking

2008-03-13T11:22:00.000-04:00

1. So it's come to John McCain on the Republican ticket and it seems like many (perhaps not all) of the conservatives who voiced their great disdain of McCain are starting to back away from it now that it's clear he's the nominee. (Brilliantly played by Stephen Colbert and his segment: "Hating McCain; You Will Be Missed") WN has no speculation about the vice-president pick here, although WN would be utterly shocked if McCain were to pick Mitt Romney (who has some of the same problems as McCain - questionable social conservative - and it seemed like most of the Republican nominees hated Mitt during the campaign season). Plus, the track record of recent Republican VP picks (Dick Cheney in 2000, Jack Kemp in 1996, Dan Quayle! in 1988) seems to suggest that it's not particularly easy to guess who will be the eventual choice.

2. The Democratic primaries are still up in the air and it may be that way even leading up to the convention in the summer. Barack Obama has a lead in delegates to date, but all of the intricacies of superdelegates and second chance primaries in Florida and Michigan seem to make this a wide open race between Obama and Hillary Clinton. WN still has a strong feeling that Clinton will eventually win out, for better or for worse.

The campaigns have been fairly disappointing over the last few weeks. The "issues" have either been with what unfair thing another campaign's volunteer or staff said about the other candidate or whether lame advertisements have been fair or not (or whether relatively mundane and unfunny Saturday Night Live skits have any impact on the debate). When it actually does come down to policy, the debates often tend towards the frivolous: the fact is that policywise, by and large Obama and Clinton are fairly similar, which means to create differences they need to exploit either less important policy points or argue over who means it more (or less).

WN doesn't really have the time - although WN does have a limited inclination - to go into every issue and debate that has come up over the last few weeks. So if you are interested in WN's opinion on a particular issue, ask for it in the comments and WN will do his best to address it there or in a future post.

However, as the most recent "issue" has been Geraldine Ferraro - still around, who knew? - and her comments (of which this is merely one): "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color), he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." Needless to say, people on both sides are pretty riled up about this and Ferraro has since left the Clinton campaign where she was a fundraiser.

Two points:

1. For the sake of argument, let's assume Ferraro is completely right that Obama would not be a serious presidential candidate if he were white or a woman. But at that point isn't it at least arguable that Clinton wouldn't be a serious presidential candidate if she wasn't a woman? Isn't being a woman helping her out with the female vote? If that's the case, then what's the point of singling out Obama and race when the equivalent point could be made about Clinton and gender? (And it's a point Ferraro made about herself and being the vice presidential nominee in the ill-fated Walter Mondale candidacy in 1984.) So even if one believes this point (more on that below) or assumes it to be true, WN thinks that there's some bitterness or resentment behind the statement and that's it's not simply a statement that comes from sort of neutral, intellectual curiosity. (Whether they merit ridding the campaign of Ferraro, WN could not care less.)

2. Is it true that Obama is in this position because he's black? WN would argue no; Obama is a serious candidate for president because he's a good campaigner and has done significantly well at generating enthusiasm for his presidency, especially among younger voters. (Whether that has anything to do with being a good president WN will leave to the readersand another discussion.) If being black was so important, then why is Obama the first black candidate to do this well in the primaries? (One could argue that it's all about timing, but WN would argue that the timing argument only goes so far.) So while WN would be willing to cede that Obama might be helped by being black or might have gained attention he otherwise would not have for being black, he's the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination because his campaign has done a better job than Hillary Clinton's. Frankly, anyone who would have given the speech he did at the 2004 convention would have jumped to the top of the list for presidential candidates regardless of race or gender.

Legendary or Toxic

2008-03-11T15:22:00.002-04:00

Yes, How I Met Your Mother fans (all 100 of us) - Britney Spears is scheduled to appear on a future episode of the show. No word yet on whether this is how Ted actually meets his wife, but somehow I suspect that this may end up being a very Barney-centric show. Suit up, indeed.

Follow-up: Apparently Britney's appearance has caused Alicia Silverstone to drop out of the same episode (citing the potential - well, let's face it, utterly predictable chaos of having Britney and her entourage around for filming) and has now been replaced with Sarah Chalke (Scrubs, apparently not done with the whole "doctor that is romantically linked with goofy, whiny, but likeable guy with crazy hair" thing). Anything that brings more attention to one of my favorite shows probably is good, right?

On a related sidenote, WN is disappointed Alicia Silverstone dropped out, because it would have brought together the yin and yang of the two greatest examples of how Hollywood has no idea who will eventually be famous (recent young actress edition). The second greatest example has been Alyson Hannigan (who plays Lilly on How I Met Your Mother) at least for the time being passing Sarah Michelle Gellar (where Hannigan was Willow to Gellar's Buffy on Buffy the Vampire Slayer) [Disputable? Is Alyson Hannigan really bigger than Sarah Michelle Gellar at this point?] and the greatest all-time example being how Brittany Murphy completely lapped Alicia Silverstone after Clueless, at which point Silverstone looked like she was bound to be the next big thing and Murphy was the weird, not really attractive girl - and then Murphy took off and Silverstone failed with a series of bombs like Batman and Robin, Blast from the Past, and the short-for-this-world Miss Match.

Recent Ski Jaunts

2008-03-07T17:50:00.001-05:00

WN has logged a mere 7 days on the slopes this year - which means it looks like my preseason goal of 15 days is going to go wanting (due in no small part to the very mild winter in the mid-Atlantic to date), but the winter isn't over yet. Here is where we skied (with a list to the side of all the places WN has ever skied coming to a new sidebar eventually):

Whitetail
Roundtop
Liberty (twice)
Sno Mountain (formerly Montage, and with an umlat)
Blue Mountain
Camelback

Sno Mountain (Thursday)

On the first day of our 3-day tour of northeastern Pennsylvania ski resorts, WN and WoWN drove up towards Scranton to ski Sno Mountain. The mountain itself isn't particularly big, roughly the size of Roundtop, and it has a rather curious layout. The easy and intermediate trails are uphill from the lodge, but the most difficult trails are all to the side and downhill of the lodge. When you think about how mountains are usually shaped - most steep at the top, least steep at the bottom, it's a bit odd.

There were two upshots to Sno - first, there was virtually no one else there. We saw maybe 100 people all day until we left; second, they were running a special for $14 lift tickets. Unbeatable!

We skied all of the blues at the beginning of the day - freshly groomed with a good amount of snow, but definitely hardpacked. Then we went to the bottom and skied the blacks until lunch. Definitely had a lot of fun on Challenger with its very cool drops, as well as the other runs on the downhill. White Lightning was bumped up, but the bumps were nearly all ice, which made it unpleasant to ski.

Lunch was good - definitely not crowded, which is a nice perk of mid-week skiing. More on that later.

In the afternoon, we skied the blacks a few more times and then did one or two runs on the blues to end the day.

I should also mention we ran into our friends Jenny and Doug, too - they were there skiing, so we chatted and hung out with them for awhile, too. Which means we were about 4 percent of the people at Sno Thursday.

Blue Mountain (Friday)

WN will break this up a bit differently and forgo the chronological recap.

Blue Mountain is a great mountain for skiing. It had a lot of different runs - some good tough runs (although by the afternoon the double-diamonds were getting a bit icy), some great cruising runs, and one of the best bump runs WN has ever skied - long, not too steep, and pretty nice moguls. While we were skiing on the mountain, we had a great time.

However, WN was completely displeased with almost everything else. The line for lift tickets was long and right at the entrance inside the lodge, which resulted in a giant mass (or mess) of people either waiting in line or trying to fight through the line to get in or out of the lodge. The lift lines were somewhat long (not too bad), but very disorganized with minimal (if any) help from the lift attendants. The ski check at lunch was free (nice) but totally and completely disorganized. It might have taken 10 to 15 minutes to get someone to check our skis in a giant hoard (herd) of people. The cafeteria was packed (which isn't unusual) and the bar area was almost non-existant. The bar area only served a limited selection of food (soup, pre-made sandwiches), which meant you had to go back to the cafeteria to get food. I waited at least 5 to 10 minutes at the bar to get drinks, was ignored by the bartenders (even though they could see me), and finally gave up.

WN knows that these sound like petty complaints, particularly on a Friday before a holiday weekend with clearly some schools being off, which led to some pretty big crowds. Okay, WN acknowledges that. But you really had to be there to see the disorganization (and in some places chaos) to understand how much of a damper this tended to put on the day. It felt like Blue Mountain had gotten too big too quickly and had not adjusted to be able to handle large crowds like these. It couldn't have been unpredictable that this particular day would be very crowded, so either it's a matter of having more staff on hand or doing some more planning or bringing in some people to make sure things run smoothly.

That said, the skiing was still really good, so maybe there's hope yet. But maybe it's good we weren't there Saturday once the holiday weekend officially started.

Camelback (Saturday)

We got there a bit before noon after buying tickets through AAA and get our skis tuned. It was definitely very crowded, as we made a rather lengthy walk from the last parking lot to the main lodge with all of our gear. The ticket line was long, but fortunately we weren't among those renting gear (the line to get rental skis was rumored to be 90 minutes long - no joke). Also bewildering to see tourists (once can assume from the greater New York metro area) dropping upwards of $1000 on ski gear like it was nothing at the local ski shop. WN's obvious advice - probably the worst time to buy ski gear is at the beginning of a busy holiday weekend, mid-season, right before you're going to ski. (Well, the worst time might be immediately after you broke a leg or something, but that's probably too obvious.)

To Camelback's immense credit, though, the day of skiing was extremely smooth. The liftlines, while long during the day, were pretty easy to navigate. The runs were in good shape and were cut nicely - many of the blues and blacks were interesting and felt different, so it didn't feel like you were doing one or two runs over and over again.

In the evening, the rest of WoWN's family came to join us - well, actually, we took a short break before that. WN's one gripe was that the bar was way way way too loud (it probably didn't help that guys were playing quarters in the back) and the cafeteria was very crowded, but it's what you might expect on a holiday weekend. Anyway, so we skied until well into the night with everyone and then we headed off to dinner at Siamsa (which is Irish and has a lot more accent marks in the name than I can figure out how to type here). Good times.

More on skiing very soon.

Las Vegas Recap

2008-02-26T16:55:00.003-05:00

WN and WoWN returned from 4 days and 3 nights in Las Vegas, Nevada for a long-awaited vacation. Thus, the lack of blogging this week. What follows is an unofficial and mostly true description of what we did while we were there.

Monday

We left on a morning flight out to Las Vegas. Virtually uneventful flight, save for seeing someone who could be best-described as a semi-famous local businessman. WN won't name him here, but if you've sold, bought, or seen signs for real estate in the central Maryland area, it's not too hard to figure out who this might be. Other travellers waiting for the flight in the same business were quite fascinated by him and tried in vain to appear casual when he walked by them and greet him as if they had just seen him instead of watching him for 10 minutes beforehand and discussing how much they wanted to talk with him. Certainly better entertainment than an in-flight movie.

We arrived in Vegas around 11 local time. They have slots in the airport - now you know where you are. We waited for our luggage, came the closest to any real celebrity that we would all week (some guy claimed to see Chuck Norris getting into a limo at the airport), and then headed off to pick up our rental car. We left from there to go to the Flamingo, where we would be staying for the week. To get there, we cruised up the Strip, which was completely cliche but pretty neat, too.
So here's the biggest complaint I have about Las Vegas. It is the worst driving I have ever seen in my life. I don't know whether it's because people are too distracted while driving, or the roads and lights are laid out horribly, or Vegas attracts a disproportionate share of bad drivers and/or stupid people, but it's an absolute mess. I am shocked that I didn't see a car accident while we were there. There are plenty of examples (getting cut off, people turning out of the wrong lanes, cars running red lights, horrible signage) but WN won't bore you with such trivial and inconsequential details here. Our car - a Chevy Cobalt with a satellite radio (WN forgets which one) - did quite admirably for the week.

Anyway, we parked at the Flamingo and headed over to Margaritaville for lunch. Too bourgiouse? Perhaps, but it was nearby and we were hungry and could appreciate the joy of a mid-day drink on vacation. The lunch was fine but rather unremarkable; or rather, I simply chose not to make any more remarks.

At some point after wandering around the Strip, we went back to the Flamingo and checked in. The front desk at any of these hotels is a rather impressive operation, given the sheer number of people checking in and out of the hotel everyday. We checked in and decided to pay for an upgrade to a Go room with a Strip view. The Go room is the Flamingo's more mod/hip room - and in fact, we were quite happy with the room. Amongst it's features, it had a flat-screen HD TV, cool lighting, and an in-mirror bathroom TV. As we checked out the room, I said, "The only thing that could make this better would be if there was a switch that opened the curtain." Lo and behold, I flipped a conveniently-placed switch, and the curtains opened, revealing a great view of Caesars and if you looked as far to the left as possible, you could see the Bellagio and its fountains. Very nice digs for the price and the location.

We checked out a few other places that afternoon, the Venetian and the Wynn most notably. I was not particularly impressed by the Wynn - sure, it was extremely nice and clearly expensive, but otherwise, I don't really remember much about it. The Venetian was extraordinary - everything about it looked top-notch, from the gondola outside to the elaborate decor inside. (As an aside, the Venetian also has the most attractive casino waitresses. If one cares about such things.)

We went out and played some low-limit Let It Ride, in which we were down a bit, and then decided to do the buffet thing for dinner. The buffet was good, but I don't think it was as spectacular as buffets in Vegas are oft made out to be, but still a nice dinner given how hungry we were.

We also walked into Bally's (nice, but nothing that really stands out) and Paris (nice, but the theme is a bit too heavy and I think I'd get tired if I spent too much time in there).

We weren't able to stay up late enough to watch the Frontier implode at 2:30 a.m. Indeed, by the next morning the hotel was no longer there, only a pile of rubble and dust. My biggest Vegas regret.

Tuesday

One interesting thing about mornings in Vegas is that no one else is up. At all. We were up by 7 a.m. and everything looked deserted. Another thing about Vegas is that it was very difficult to find breakfast all week. Did we just not know what we were doing?

Fortunately, we decided to strike out for the south end of the Strip and head for a discount-ticket place. If you're not overly picky about choosing a show - particularly if you don't need to get into the newest or most popular show - then you can get a fair discount off the ticket prices. (Alternatively, you could sit through a time-share presentation - offers abound EVERYWHERE - or start playing with the black chips for awhile in the casino to get free tickets; being neither willing to waste two hours of our vacation on a commercial or being wealthy and risk-loving enough to try gambling $100 per hand, we went for discount tickets.) We ended up parking behind some shopping center in what might have been a private parking lot, but a man wearing a hat and shirt for some hotel/resort and driving a nice golf cart said it was okay, then drove us to a place to eat breakfast and even sat us and gave us menus. I have no idea where we exactly ended up, but it was decent and almost entirely empty.

At some point we got tickets, although I don't remember if that was immediately next or some time later. But we did get tickets for a Cirque du Soleil show for that night.

Then we spent the rest of the morning and early afternoon wandering around the south Strip (very odd just spending time checking out various hotels, but hey, they're pretty amazing). Most impressive was Mandalay Bay, which just looked really really nice all the way around. Less impressed by MGM Grand (which was just gigantic) and New York New York (which looked like New York as imagined by people who had only seen New York by watching episodes of Friends). The Tropicana was what I expected, which was basically old, although not without a certain charm. Short and lousy blackjack session before leaving quickly.

We headed back to the Flamingo and I eventually worked up the nerve to go play poker. I ended up in a $1/$2 no-limit Hold Em cash game. After some amount of time in friendly games and hours on-line playing for free, I figured I had enough game to take a shot at playing for real.

The first 7 or 8 hands I folded, playing tightly and not wanting to chase anything bad. I spent time watching the play at the table, which generally appeared to be decent but with a lot of people chasing cards and sticking around to see the flop. Finally I caught a hand on the button with A-K. It was folded around to me and I thought I raised to 5, but either missing some sort of etiquette (or more likely the dealer not really paying attention), he treated it as a call. The small blind folded and the big blind checked.

The flop came up A-Kh-10h - and I held the ace of hearts. The other player checked. I figured that top two pair was a good shot to be ahead, but there were also a lot of draws on the table, too. So I bet 5 and he called.

The turn came up with a blank (maybe 4c) and he checked again. Putting him on maybe missing his draw, I bet the pot again (15) and he called.

The river came up 9h. Not a good card for me, since it could have filled in his flush. Immediately he bets 20. Now - does he have the flush or is he just jerking me around? I decide that I can't let it go for 20, so I call. He says, "I don't have crap." I am happy and about to show my hand.

That's when he turns over the queen of hearts and the jack of hearts. Yes, friends, that is a king-high straight flush, which is more than a little bit better than my two pair. It's also the best hand I've ever seen anyone have (live or online) and the Flamingo's hand of the day, which earns him a bonus, too. I am no longer happy.

A few more hands go by and I win a small hand along the way. Then I get dealt A-K again. A few callers in front of me, so I raise to 7 and end up with 3 callers.

The flop comes up Q-10-9 rainbow (all different suits). It gets checked around to me (I'm last to act) and I check, too, not wanting to make seeing another card more expensive. The turn comes up a second 9. The first player bets 5 and the next two players fold.

What could he have? The fact he bet probably means he doesn't have a monster hand that he's slow-playing, so I figure it's probably not a full house - he would have just checked. If he had a pretty good hand (trip 9's, straight) he would have bet more to push people off of draws. I figure that he probably has a medium hand that he thinks now might be best (Q with a weak kicker or a 10) or he's on a draw (probably with a J, maybe something like A-J, Q-J, or J-10). So, given this and the relatively small bet, I call.

The flop comes up J. Perfect. I have the top straight (A-K-Q-J-10). He bets 15. Now my only concern is do I raise to 30 or go all-in? I raise to 30, he pushes me all-in, and I call. He flips over K-2 and I'm about to rake in the hand when I see that they're both diamonds, matching the queen from the flop as well as the second 9 and the jack. Flush. I flip over my cards anyway (at least getting a few sympathy groans) and leave, not interested in rebuying.

Out of the 44 cards left in the deck, I would have won with any non-diamond (35 cards). Any low diamond probably would have gotten me to chuck my hand. I probably would have called if it had been the ace of diamonds (with aces and 9's). So the jack of diamonds was the one card that would have cost me big, and unfortunately for me, those are the breaks.

So, after going back to my room and crying it out, we struck out for dinner and a show, that most Vegas of experiences. Everything at TI was either not what we were looking for or booked for a private party, so we wandered down to the Mirage and ate at Japonais. It was phenomenal. We had a mix of small dishes, which were all outstanding. And we saw the same local quasi-celebrity at the restaurant, too.

After dinner, we headed back to TI for the show - Mystere, one of the many Cirque du Soleil shows in Vegas. The plot was borderline incomprehensible (this was the show that Seth Rogen trips out watching in Knocked Up) but the performances were amazing. There were people who climbed poles upside down with only their hands - extraordinary. Highly recommended.

Following the show, we headed back to the Flamingo and played some more Let It Ride. This was easily the best session of the trip, as we did pretty well and hung around for a few hours until it was well well past midnight.

Wednesday

We toured a few more casinos in the morning. Caesar's is absolutely gigantic, complete with an extraordinarily high-end mall attached. However, we struggled to find anything to eat for breakfast in Caesar's, too. In short, Caesar's is huge. Then we headed to the Bellagio, which was as nice as Caesar's is huge. The gardens are incredible inside, which is where we spent most of our time.

We headed towards the Planet Hollywood hotel and the mall area there for lunch. I forget exactly where we ate, but it was so-so and relatively expensive for what we got.

Moving on, we drove up to the Stratosphere that night and then took a cab to Fremont Street and the old downtown Las Vegas. The neighborhood between the Stratosphere (the north end of the Strip) and downtown is to be avoided at all costs.

Downtown Vegas is very cool. The Golden Nugget, Binion's, Four Queens, Fitzgerald's - a lot of old but still very nice casinos and hotels and definitely the image I had in mind when I thought about Vegas. Tons of people milling about, all sorts of little bars and shops and street performers. We watched two of the Fremont Street Experience shows - a light show overhead that is definitely a bit hokey, but fun all the same. Definitely worth checking out and probably worth holding your wallet or purse close (nothing like thousands of tourists starting straight up for 5 minutes, not paying attention to anything else, and walking around with cash on hand for pickpockets). We couldn't find a place we really liked, so we settled on Tony Roma's, which was decent.

We headed back to the Stratosphere and then bought tickets to the top. Absolutely you have to go to the top of the Stratosphere (unless you have a real fear of heights) - you could see forever around Vegas at night and were literally looking down onto the rest of the hotels and casinos. We got a lot of great pictures here. We also skipped the rides, which while likely safe, looked like a bit too much excitement for us.

Thursday

Got up, packed, and left. We did claim our comps - a whopping $3 applied to our hotel bill, wow! Then we went to Denny's for breakfast (which was packed, which we took as confirmation that there aren't enough breakfast places in Vegas) and then drove out to Red Rock Canyon. We walked and drove around there for a few hours and it was almost the polar opposite of Vegas - quiet, undisturbed, isolated - in some ways a welcome relaxation from everything else. Plus, it was truly impossible to take a bad picture.

After that, we drove back to the airport and got ready for the flight home. As we were boarding the plane, who did we see but ... the same local quasi-celebrity! What a symmetrical finish to our vacation.

So, yes, we have done Vegas. And I finally got to blogging it, only 3 months later.

Way Behind

2008-02-19T15:49:00.002-05:00

So between:

1. Being sick two weeks ago

2. Travel

3. Being busy at work when I'm in the office

The WN blog has gotten a bit backed up. So, WN promises, here come a few posts this week:

1. The final Las Vegas post - some of the memories are fuzzy by now, so hopefully that will give the post a certain dazed and meandering quality that will make it substantially more enjoyable

2. Some more on skiing, including a few new places WN skied last week

3. Something on politics, although an unpublished post ("Why I Voted for ...") is a bit too dated to be useful at this point

4. Possibly something on the economy, including my opinions on where the economy is headed in the short-term and one very disturbing trend that it feels like too many people are overlooking

Weekend Summary

2008-02-03T23:00:00.000-05:00

Friday

It was cold and rained all day. Yuck.

WN and WoWN stayed in and had dinner at home, which was nice. Then we settled down and watched Michael Moore's Sicko, his take on the U.S. health care system. It's probably more of a Rohrshach-test of a movie than anything - if you like Moore, you will probably like this; if you can't stand him, you probably won't like it.

That said, WN would recommend it, at least to the extent that one should consider the overall argument he makes - namely, that the U.S. health care system does an insufficient job at providing health care for people without insurance and even for people with insurance, while other countries are able to provide health care for everyone. There are certainly small and large holes in Moore's arguments and it's certainly not sufficient proof that his ideas of what the U.S. healthcare system should be are right, but if you watch the movie and can truthfully conclude that the current system is working well ... what can I say?

Saturday

WN and WoWN got up early in the morning and headed off for Ski Liberty for a few hours of skiing. Reasonable size crowds and decent weather were definite perks. The conditions were odd - between the machine snow and the rain and icing the day before, the trails turned into Slurpees during the day, which was tough to fight through in spots. We spent the whole day on the backside, including some great runs down Ultra. Strata was entirely iced over, but they opened it around noon and we got "first tracks" - which was mainly some big S-turns on ice. Still, a very good day at the mountain and the first time we have ever skied Liberty, Whitetail, and Roundtop in the same season!

We came home and then straightened things up for company coming over later that night. Friends of ours who worked as missionaries with refugees in Europe were back in the area and visiting friends. We got to see some other friends, too, that we had not seen in too long of a time, which was really nice.

Sunday

We went to church in the morning and then hung around the house in the afternoon, cleaning up from Saturday and watching endless pre-game shows. We watched the game with WN's brothers and mom. WN's heart was not with either team, but as the game moved on WN was drifting more towards the Giants. It turned out to be one of the more exciting and well-played Super Bowls and the Giants won, too. No shock that this might turn out to be the most-watched Super Bowl of all-time.

Anyway, more thoughts from the weekend may follow later in the week. Stay tuned.

Recent Dated Phrases

2008-02-01T12:08:00.000-05:00

A list of not-too-old phrases that still make one seem out of touch, unless you use them ironically:

"Show me the money!"
"How 'bout dem apples?"
"Boo-yah!"
"Waaaaaazzzuuuuuuppp!"
Any word unnecessarily ending in "izzle"

Soliticing more suggestions in the comment section.

Blog Changes

2008-01-31T15:32:00.000-05:00

Glad to see some people like the new template. It's okay, but WN couldn't find one that I really liked elsewhere, so this is it.

WN will be adding some more links to the right in the coming days and hopefully a few widgets as well. Stay tuned.

Tangential Britney Spears Question

2008-01-23T11:18:00.001-05:00

Absolutely trivial, WN knows, but why do reports about Britney Spears' sons always refer to them as "Sean Preston" and "Jayden James" when they could just refer to them as "Sean" and "Jayden" - isn't that weird? It's not as if there are other kids they're being confused with or that other celebrity children are always called by their first and middle names ... but WN has yet to see an article about Spears and her kids that doesn't do this.

Blog Updates

2008-01-22T14:44:00.000-05:00

Bear with WN this week as there will be some new formatting and such. WN realizes that a lot of the external links have been lost, but they will reappear shortly, as well as some new bells and/or whistles.

LSM - Harbaugh is New Ravens Coach

2008-01-18T22:13:00.000-05:00

John Harbaugh has been named the next head coach of the Baltimore Ravens. Press conference on Saturday.

WN is mixed about this hire. There has certainly been some good buzz about Harbaugh and WN has confidence in the Ravens front office and management team, but it's still hard to get over the fact that Harbaugh has never even been a coordinator, let alone a head coach.

That said, WN is glad the Ravens didn't: a) simply pick a retread coach because he has experience (not that a retread coach is always a bad pick, but it's not always good, either) and b) pick an offensive genius for the sake of trying to improve the offense first.

No word yet on the staff, but they'll have to fill it out entirely. Stay tuned.

WN Asks - Skiing in Colorado

2008-01-18T15:30:00.000-05:00

WN and WoWN are taking a trip to ski in Colorado this winter, but we're not entirely sure which mountain or mountains we're skiing or where we're staying. We're flying into Denver and will have a car. So, for both WN's regulars who have skied in Colorado and for visitors who stumbled on this site searching on skiing or Colorado:

1. Where would you recommend skiing while in Colorado?
2. Where would you recommend staying while in Colorado?

WN is certainly interested in value, too - while confident that Vail or Aspen would be nice, it's not really within the WN vacation budget.

Any recommendations or suggestions are welcome.

The Worst Interview Question Ever

2008-01-18T11:55:00.000-05:00

On a roll this week.

WN absolutely hates this question in an interview: "What's your biggest weakness?" It came up in this week's Democratic debate in Nevada. Here's how the 3 candidates answered that question. (Full transcript here.) [italics added where they talk about weakness]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RUSSERT: You said each of you have strengths and weaknesses. I want to ask each of you quickly, your greatest strength, your greatest weakness.

OBAMA: My greatest strength, I think is the ability to bring people together from different perspectives to get them to recognize what they have in common and to move people in a different direction.

And as I indicated before, my greatest weakness, I think, is when it comes to — I’ll give you a very good example. I ask my staff member to hand me paper until two seconds before I need it because I will lose it. You know, the —- you know…

(LAUGHTER)

And my desk and my office doesn’t look good. I’ve got to have somebody around me who is keeping track of that stuff. And that’s not trivial; I need to have good people in place who can make sure that systems run. That’s what I’ve always done, and that’s why we run not only a good campaign, but a good U.S. Senate office.

RUSSERT: Senator Edwards, greatest strength, greatest weakness?

EDWARDS: I think my greatest strength is that for 54 years, I’ve been fighting with every fiber of my being. In the beginning, the fight was for me. Growing up in mill towns and mill villages, I had to literally fight to survive. But then I spent 20 years in courtrooms fighting for children and families against really powerful well-financed interests. I learned from that experience, by the way, that if you’re tough enough and you’re strong enough and you got the guts and you’re smart enough, you can win. That’s a fight that can be won. It can be won in Washington, too, by the way. And I’ve continued that entire fight my entire time in public life. So I’ve got what it takes inside to fight on behalf of the American people and on behalf of the middle class.

I think weakness, I sometimes have a very powerful emotional response to pain that I see around me, when I see a man like Donnie Ingram (ph), who I met a few months ago in South Carolina, who worked for 33 years in the mill, reminded me very much of the kind of people that I grew up with, who’s about to lose his job, has no idea where he’s going to go, what he’s going to do. I mean, his dignity and self-respect is at issue. And I feel that in a really personal way and in a very emotional way. And I think sometimes that can undermine what you need to do.

RUSSERT: Senator Clinton?

CLINTON: Well, I am passionately committed to this country and what it stands for. I’m a product of the changes that have already occurred, and I want to be an instrument for making those changes alive and real in the lives of Americans, particularly children. That’s what I’ve done for 35 years. It is really my life’s work. It is something that comes out of my own experience, both in my family and in my church that, you know, I’ve been blessed. I think to whom much is given, much is expected. So I have tried to create opportunities, both on an individual basis, intervening to help people who have no where else to turn, to be their champion. And then to make those changes. And I think I can deliver change. I think I understand how to make it possible for more people to live up to their God-given potential.

I get impatient. I get, you know, really frustrated when people don’t seem to understand that we can do so much more to help each other. Sometimes I come across that way. I admit that. I get very concerned about, you know, pushing further and faster than perhaps people are ready to go.

But I think that, you know, there is a difference here. I do think that being president is the chief executive officer. I respect what Barack said about setting the vision, setting the tone, bringing people together. But I think you have to be able to manage and run the bureaucracy. You’ve got to pick good people, certainly, but you have to hold them accountable every single day. We’ve seen the results of a president who, frankly, failed at that. You know, he went in to office saying he was going to have the kind of Harvard Business School CEO model where he’d set the tone, he’d set the goals and then everybody else would have to implement it. And we saw the failures. We saw the failures along the Gulf Coast with, you know, people who were totally incompetent and insensitive failing to help our fellow Americans. We’ve seen the failures with holding the administration accountable with the no-bid contracts and the cronyism. So I do think you have to do both. It’s a really hard job, and in America we put the head of state and the head of government together in one person. But I think you’ve got to set the tone, you’ve got to set the vision, you’ve got to set the goals, you’ve got to bring the country together. And then you do have to manage and operate and hold that bureaucracy accountable to get the results you’re trying to achieve.

RUSSERT: Senator Obama, Senator Clinton invoked your name. I’ll give you a chance to respond.

OBAMA: Well, there’s no doubt that you’ve got to be a good manager. And that’s not what I was arguing. The point, in terms of bringing together a team, is that you get the best people and you’re able to execute and hold them accountable. But I think that there’s something, if we’re going to evaluate George Bush and his failures as president, that I think are much more important. He was very efficient. He was on time all the time, and you know, and had…

(LAUGHTER)

You know, I’m sure he never lost a paper. I'm sure he knows where it is. What he could not do is to listen to perspectives that didn’t agree with his ideological predispositions. What he could not do is to bring in different people with different perspectives and get them to work together. What he could not do is to manage the effort to make sure that the American people understood that, if we’re going to go into war, that there are going to be consequences and there are going to be costs. And we have to be able to communicate what those costs are; and to make absolutely certain that, if we’re going to make a decision to send our young men and women into harm’s way, that it’s based on the best intelligence and that we’ve asked tough questions before we went into fight. I mean, those are the kinds of failures that have to do with judgment. They have to do with vision, the capacity to inspire people. They don’t have to do with whether or not he was managing the bureaucracy properly. That’s not to deny that there has to be strong management skills in the presidency. It is to say that what has been missing is the ability to bring people together, to mobilize the country, to move us in a better direction, and to be straight with the American people. That’s how you get the American people involved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 4 ways to answer this question.

1. Open and honest. This is giving an actual weakness - I'm often late, I'm lazy, I don't get along well with others, etc. Obama comes closest to this - being messy and disorganized is an actual, real weakness that isn't particularly flattering. When a job interviewer asks you this question (which is a horribly lazy question), they usually don't want this type of answer. Of course, now Obama is being criticized over being messy and disorganized (which is fair enough), but that's why you don't want to give an answer like that.

2. Here's a great thing about me that I'll say is a weakness. This is what all of the interview books will say you should do - Sometimes I'm too committed to my work, I work too hard, I'm too demanding of myself, etc. Edwards and Clinton try to take these tacts, although not as egregiously as the examples above (in fact, in some ways, the fact Edwards gets too emotional and Clinton is too impatient with people might nicely sum up some of the concerns people have about them), but they still try to spin them like strengths. The problem is that this type of answer is clearly canned and says nothing about the person except that they knew enough not to answer this question as honestly as possible.

3. I have no weaknesses. The worst answer you could give. Everyone has weaknesses and an answer like this just shows that you aren't self-aware and probably an egotistical jerk, too. Definitely say you have a weakness.

4. Why are you asking me this question? The tactic WN would love to give, but probably never will. What's the point of this question? Any real weakness that you give is going to hurt your chances of getting the job. A fake weakness just shows that you were ready for the question, which only confirms that someone thought about the interview for at least a few minutes before showing up. No weakness is a red flag. If you're really supposed to open up and give an honest answer to people who are (most likely) total strangers and making a decision on whether to hire you, then they should be open about either their weaknesses or their organization's weaknesses.

WN would love to answer it like this: "I don't mean to be rude, but I don't know what sort of answer you want from me. I know that the advice for answering these questions is to frame a weakness like it's a strength, like saying I work too hard or I'm too driven, but those aren't really weaknesses and they don't tell you anything about me. I know my weaknesses and the things about me I want to improve over the next few years of my career - I'm good at developing new ideas and thinking about the bigger vision for my organization, but I struggle sometimes at seeing things through to their completion; I like being involved in different types of work and projects, so sometimes I let myself get stretched to thin or lose enthusiasm for some things I'm working on; I like working with people, but there have been times where I have struggled at getting teams to work together or put in the same effort to finish projects. I'm not a punctual person, either, which is something I have been working on getting better at. But if understanding my weaknesses and being willing to answer this question honestly is going to hurt my chances of being hired, then frankly I'm not interested in working here." [Not that I actually have the nerve to do this, but I think I would come up with a more reasonable and far less antagonistic answer to this question.]

Not that WN thinks that the answers given are useless or should be dismissed, but shame on Tim Russert for asking such a crappy question. He interviews people all the time and yet he still asks this sort of drivelly question.

LSM - Last Comment on Garrett

2008-01-18T10:25:00.000-05:00

It doesn't bother WN that Jason Garrett eventually decided to stay in Dallas and get paid a lot of money (as much or more than the head coaches of the 3 of the remaining 4 teams in the playoffs) or that he said he decided he would rather stay in Dallas, continue to learn and develop as a coach, and then be a head coach some day. Fine.

But did it really take two interviews with the Ravens and another two interviews with the Falcons to determine that he really still wanted to be in Dallas? WN even understands the first round of interviews, but exactly what did he learn by coming back to Baltimore and back to Atlanta that made him decide he preferred Dallas?

WN guesses then that the rumors that Garrett was using the head coaching opportunities as leverage to get a raise from Dallas (as well as some more assurance that he would be head coach in Dallas some day), but it just jerked two teams around for an extra week. Thanks for nothing.

LSM - Garrett Staying in Dallas

2008-01-17T10:51:00.001-05:00

No sooner does WN get up a post on the Ravens coaching search and then ESPN reports Jason Garrett is staying in Dallas. So, on to Plan B.

The buzz is that the Ravens will turn towards Eagles assistant John Harbaugh (brother of Jim Harbaugh, one-time Ravens quarterback in the ill-fated 1998 season). Harbaugh was a long-time special teams coach and then coached the defensive backs this year, but Harbaugh hasn't even been a coordinator at this point in his career. Eh? Not that it means he couldn't be a good head coach, but it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence (although, yes, WN was willing to go with Garrett who had one year as a coordinator).

If not Harbaugh, then who? WN supposes that the Ravens could interview additional candidates - Redskins defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, Seahwaks defensive coordinator Jim Mora, Jr., or maybe wait until after the next round of the playoffs to interview any Giants assistants (assuming they lose to the Packers).

More to follow, I'm sure.

LSM

2008-01-17T10:10:00.000-05:00

1. The Ravens' coaching search continue. The buzz is that Baltimore offered Cowboys offensive coordinator the head coaching job Tuesday, but that he has not decided to take it. Since then, he visited Atlanta again and is back in Dallas talking with the Cowboys. One rumor has it that Cowboys' owner Jerry Jones is promising Garrett the Dallas head coaching job when current coach Wade Phillips retires (or, who knows, gets fired) and will match the money from the other offers. If Garrett doesn't come to Baltimore, the next candidate could be Philadelphia defensive backs coach John Harbaugh. (Harbaugh has also been linked as a potential defensive coordinator under Garrett.) Other rumors have Ravens defensive coordinator Rex Ryan and former head coach Marty Schottenheimer out of contention, as well as Colts assistant head coach Jim Caldwell (fueling speculation that Colts head coach Tony Dungy might retire).

WN sympathizes with Garrett to some extent - with only three years as an assistant coach and being 41 years old, it's not as if this will be Garrett's only chance at a head coaching job and he might not feel ready for this job yet. Fair enough. At some point, though, he has to make a decision, particularly because the dawdling makes it look like Garrett is just angling for more money from somebody.

As for whether Garrett would make a good head coach - WN says yes. Being a good head coach in the NFL is less about X's and O's (which can be left to the assistants) than creating a successful organization - from players to assistants to game-day management. Garrett seems to be very smart and has a great understanding of football from playing in the NFL, which seem to be the right recipe for success. Moreover, WN is less concerned about hiring a head coach that is a good offensive coordinator than hiring a good offensive coordinator - there are plenty of NFL teams with defensive head coaches that have great offenses (see, New England Patriots and Indianapolis Colts).

The last wild card - if Mike Holmgren retires (and doesn't turn around and hire Jim Mora, Jr.) that could also be an enticing job for someone like Garrett. Hopefully the Ravens can close the deal before that becomes a factor.

2. A couple of rumors that won't die swirling around the Orioles. One rumor has second baseman Brian Roberts going to the Cubs for three prospects (Sean Marshall, Sean Gallagher, Ronny Cedeno) - all three of them played with the Cubs at some point last year, so it's presumably major league ready talent (or close to it). Whether it's real or not and then whether it happens or not, WN doesn't know - but WN would probably do it. Marshall and Gallagher are both good pitching prospects, but there's a bit more value given that they have some major league experience. Interestingly, it seems like fan bloggers from both teams hate the deal (although Orioles fans a bit moreso than Cubs fans) - for O's fans thinking they can get Rich Hill in the deal or Cubs fans that expect throwing in Matt Murton will get Erik Bedard in the trade as well, keep dreaming.

Rumors continue to swirl around Erik Bedard as well. The rumors with the Dodgers seemed to have died down (deals involving Jonathan Broxton or Clayton Kershaw and others), but there still seems to talk with Seattle (a deal centering around Adam Jones) and possibly Cincinnati or Cleveland. All long shots for now and none of them wow me unless the O's pulled in a 3-player package with Los Angeles. To some extent, this might be held up by the ongoing Johan Santana negotiations - if Santana ends up moving (particularly if it's to the Yankees, Heaven forfend!) then it might get the Mets and some other teams back into the Bedard sweepstakes. Otherwise, the O's can hold onto him for another year and consider deals next winter.

The problem with holding back Bedard - if you're really committed to trading him (instead of resigning the best O's pitcher since Mike Mussina - and arguably since Jim Palmer) then waiting until next winter might be a mistake. Check out the list of free agent pitchers from this blog - Harden, Lackey, Lowe, Pedro Martinez, Penny, Sabathia, Sheets - assuming some of these players are re-signed before the end of the season, it's still a pretty serious group. If you wait until 2009 and even a few of these players are available, you're more likely dealing Bedard into a buyer's market, which as we all well know is bad economics.

As currently constructed, the Orioles aren't a better team than they were last year, but if the team is really committed to rebuilding, then one or two more trades might put the franchise in a better long-term position in 2008.

3. The Capitals signed Alexander Ovechkin to a 13-year, $124 million deal, the biggest ever in terms of total dollars in NHL history. Well done. Now to get another scorer or two and some big help at defense and we'll be in business.

4. How did the Wizards beat the Celtics twice in a week without Gilbert Arenas - and then turn around and lose to the Knicks? What gives?

Michigan Quickie Politics Roundup

2008-01-16T18:00:00.000-05:00

Mitt Romney wins the Republican primary in Michigan and Hillary Clinton beat "uncommitted" by enough not to be embarassed. What does it all mean?

For the Democrats, WN thinks that Nevada and South Carolina are interesting, but irrelevant (except for John Edwards, who will almost certainly be done if he loses in South Carolina). Unless either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama can win both of those States with significant margins of victory (say, +10) then the attention is going to be on Florida on January 26 - and trying to figure out exactly what will become of Florida's delegates since the Democratic National Committee stripped them of their delegates when they moved their primary ahead of February 5 (like Michigan). WN doesn't know what happens, but Florida will likely have a much bigger impact heading into Super Tuesday on February 5. There are almost enough delegates available Ferbuary 5 that Clinton or Obama could win the nomination outright with a near sweep.

Here's the problem for Obama, though: let's assume he wins Illinois and Clinton wins New York (safe bet). That's about a net 100 delegate gain for Clinton. He's trailing in California badly (according to Slate's poll roundup), which is about 20 percent of what you need to win the nomination. Those two alone would push Clinton up to over 1/3 of the delegates needed to win. That would force Obama to win about 3/4 of the remaining delegates that day (including some bigger States like Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Georgia) just to keep pace. If he and Clinton break even on the rest instead, he'll have his back up against the wall, because Clinton will have about 60 percent of the delegates needed to win and momentum going forward. For Obama to win, he needs to either win California or have a great run through the rest of the States on February 5. Clinton could probably afford to the next 3 States as long as she keeps it close and can maintain a strong lead in California, though.

On the Republican side, it's wide open. South Carolina is probably most important for Mike Huckabee - a loss there (particularly if it isn't close) might weaken him too much. It will have been nearly a month since Iowa, making that seem more unique and dated as Huckabee's only win, and South Carolina - as a southern, religiously conservative State - is a State where he should be expected to do well. John McCain and Romney could probably more afford a loss. Fred Thompson almost has to win there if he's still going to stay in the race.

WN thinks it all comes back to Florida, too, for the Republicans. It's a bigger State and will be the last showing before Super Tuesday. Rudy Giuliani is basically all-in in Florida - but if he could win there (while polls might still have him ahead, the trends aren't good), he could use Florida as a springboard to February 5, with a shot at winning a couple key States (New York, New Jersey, maybe California) which would be enough to make him relevant and probably have some sway at the convention if nothing else. Huckabee, Romney, and McCain need the win to take the lead, knock Giuliani out for good, and build their own momentum.

WN thinks that Huckabee also probably needs Florida more than Romney or McCain - if Giuliani is knocked off, WN would expect that it would give Romney and McCain more help in winning big States on February 5 than Huckabee (just my thoughts). So if Romney or McCain win Florida, it probably hurts Huckabee a little more. In that case, if Huckabee isn't going to win Florida, it's probably to his advantage if he finishes second to Giuliani - he can write it off to Giuliani spending all of his time and money in Florida while keeping McCain or Romney from running away with it.

To WN, the wild card for the Republicans is Texas. It doesn't go until March 4, but it has about 12 percent of the delegates needed to win the Republican nomination, which might be very significant if the next few big States are split (say Giuliani wins Florida, New York, New Jersey; McCain wins California; Romney wins Massachusetts; Huckabee wins several midwestern and southern States). As the biggest State left by far (Texas has more delegates than are up for grabs on any other date after February 5), it could be very interesting if the nominee hasn't been decided by then.

If WN had to guess again today: Clinton-Romney. It's certainly not set in stone, but Clinton is still the favorite given her leads in California and New York; Obama would need several things to break his away over the next 3 weeks to win. Romney - WN thinks he's probably the biggest benefactor Giuliani being knocked out of the race if he could turn around and win New York or New Jersey. If the race is still going after February 5, though, he'd have to win all over New England and the midwest, because he probably can't count on Texas to clinch the nomination. There's a very real possibility of a split convention for the Republicans, though, which would make for some fascinating TV this summer.

Two Stupid Articles

2008-01-16T10:50:00.000-05:00

Coming in with barrels blazing:

1. An article from Glenn Beck (who WN doesn't tend to agree with) on his personal experiences with the American health care system. In short, Beck's comments that the solution to the problems related to healthcare in this country are for providers (and in this case hospitals) to be more caring. Everything else (government agencies, regulation, money, problems with insurers) is pointless and things would be fixed if nurses and doctors just cared a little bit more.

Is this supposed to be some sort of fairytale?

My sympathies go out to Glenn Beck that he had a bad week or two in the hospital and WN certainly agrees that there is room for improvement by all types of providers, but if he really believes this, he's still delusional from the drugs he was taking before. Nicer doctors aren't going to provide health insurance to the 40 million or so Americans without it. Happier nurses aren't going to change problems people have with their insurers. A little more effort and a better attitude aren't going to fix the long-term funding problems of retiree health benefits or Medicare. In fact, it's questionable how much any of these things would do to improve the quality of care, since at the end of the day we still don't have very good or reliable ways to do that.

Other than that ...

2. An article from Steven Landsburg (who might be WN's least favorite public economist - geeky, yes) on why the fair tax (as supported by Mike Huckabee) is a great idea.

WN has read on the "fair tax" (which, when you drop the voter-friendly spin name for it is really a national sales tax with defined deduction to allow for living costs) and never liked the idea. Now that Landsburg supports it, WN is sure that it's a crackpot idea.

WN will point out that Landsburg spends most of the article discussing how a national sales tax would be the same as an income tax with an unlimited IRA contribution. Some economists think that this would be a good idea, ergo, the "fair tax" is a good idea. It's a logical statement, but it's also an easy way to ignore all of the real criticism of the "fair tax," which he attributes to journalists who don't understand it. (Read more about the "fair tax" idea here.)

My contentions with this are numerous and lettered:

A. The 23% tax figure is simply incorrect. It's a 30% tax, which means 23% of your spending would go to taxes. (If it was a 100% tax, we wouldn't call it a 50% tax, either). People in Maryland freaked out about a 1% tax hike (from 5% to 6%) - so it's not as if you can write off 7% as meaningless. And if the tax is so innocuous, why does one have to deliberately lie about the size of it? (Maybe somebody would ask Mike Huckabee that at a debate.)

B. If it's really revenue-neutral (the same amount of tax revenue is collected under either plan), then it means that either everybody is paying exactly the same as before (which would seem to defeat a lot of the pure economic theory behind doing this) or someone ends up paying more or less than before. So it's a fair question to ask who is paying more or less.

It certainly isn't obvious that people who pay the most taxes - generally people making the most money - would pay more under this system. Notice the slight of hand in the second linked article:

FairTaxers respond that Gale isn't taking into account the huge economic growth they believe would occur once the tax system started encouraging investment. And besides, they add, whatever rate you'd pay is comparable to what you now pay. Counting Social Security and payroll taxes, your marginal rate may be north of 30 percent. "To talk about [sales tax rates] independent of what we're currently facing is slightly unprofessional," says Boston University economist and FairTax supporter Laurence Kotlikoff, speaking of Gale. [emphasis added]

Marginal tax rate (the amount you pay on the next dollar earned) is much different than the total tax rate (total taxes paid divided by total income). Additionally, 30% of your income could be much different than 30% of what you spend. So you can't just compare the rates - you have to compare what you pay in taxes.

C. You also have to factor in that you'll almost certainly be paying higher prices. Basic economic theory states that a tax will raise the price of goods, which reduces demand and supply. Proponents of this will argue that it's OK because you'll effectively feel like you have a big raise (true), but it certainly will eat into a lot of the raise if the after-tax price of everything you buy goes up 15 to 20 percent. (Again, more dubious arguments arise:

Part of the problem is the way Boortz and Linder are using the idea of embedded taxes. In an eight-year-old study paid for by AFFT, Harvard economist Dale Jorgenson noted that because the taxes paid by everyone in the chain of production are embedded in the cost of goods, prices could decline an average of 20 percent if all those taxes were scrapped. The FairTax Book devotes an entire chapter to this idea.

What The FairTax Book fails to mention is that prices can only fall this sharply if companies cut wages. I asked Jorgenson about this, and he agreed. Say your salary is $100,000 a year today, but you take home $80,000 after taxes.

Your company is still paying that extra $20,000. In a FairTax world, it will save that money, and be able to lower its prices accordingly, only if it can reduce your salary to $80,000. In other words, your take-home pay is the same as before. Sure, you'd get to "keep 100 percent of your paycheck," as Boortz and Linder repeatedly write, but it would be a smaller paycheck. That's kind of a big thing to leave out.)

So, either prices don't increase and your salary gets slashed - or prices on everything go up. Either way, it's not quite as rosy as it sounds. (As for the argument that you actually get your paycheck - well, there are still so many other deductions - 401(k), insurance, other benefits - as well as State income taxes - that it's not exactly as if you will see your final take home pay in the check. The desire for a slightly easier to read paycheck isn't that overwhelmingly exciting to WN.)

WN doesn't know who pays more or less - but the debate seems kind of rigged in this case to make it sound like everyone comes out ahead. That can't happen, unless there's another source of revenue.

D. One argument for the national sales tax is that people who don't get their income taxed already would have to pay it - drug dealers, pimps, thiefs, mobsters, uh ... ex-Soviet arms dealers. Fine and dandy, except:

i. Are we really proposing to re-engineer the tax code to force drug dealers to pay more in taxes? Isn't this the social engineering libertarians and small-government types decry?

ii. Wouldn't actually catching these people be a more effective way to end these associated problems rather than tax them?

iii. Doesn't the government catch so many mobsters on tax evasion? What happens if there aren't taxes to evade? (Credit to my friend D.F. for this untouchables-esque point.)

And in the end, how much revenue would this actually provide. Are there so many people beating the current system that their participation in a new national sales tax would really be significant? Even 1% would be a lot, but it's hard to imagine that 1% of all spending in the U.S. is by criminals that evade income taxes.

E. There is a reasonable argument that there are some significant savings from having a simpler tax code - less spending on tax enforcement (in theory, if black markets that get around the sales tax don't crop up), less money on tax preparation and legal fees, less stress on people trying to figure out the tax code, etc. How much money this is, WN doesn't know. However, since the Federal government expected to collect about $2.6 trillion - trillion - in 2007, it would have to be quite a lot in savings to put any noticeable dent into the amount left to collect through the sales tax itself.

F. There's also an argument that somehow the government being out of what people make and more into what people buy is better and less government. WN doesn't think there's that much difference (unless you start taxing internet purchases, which would certainly change things, too).

G. Right now, the government makes more money when you make more money, so the government's incentive is to get you make more money (or to ask for more of it). Under a national sales tax, isn't the government's new incentive to get you to spend more money? WN thinks that it's a perverse but potential incentive. For those who would argue that the government just raises the tax rates now, WN would argue that there isn't anything to prevent them from doing that with a national sales tax, either.

H. Practically, there are a lot of issues to overcome (and a serious proponent of such a plan should expect a president to have considered): How will you set the rate? Are you going to exempt anything (which will further increase the tax rate)? Will you account for everybody buying as much as they can immediately before the tax goes into effect? What happens if consumer spending drops and revenue targets aren't met? How do you fund Medicare and Social Security once the payroll taxes are eliminated? How will you index the cost-of-living subsidy? How will you issue those checks? How will you prepare vendors and consumers for the new tax? How will you enforce the tax and prevent black market non-tax sales? How will you account for those things in setting the rate?

It's not that these issues are insurmountable or necessarily deterrants - but is somebody who just jumped on the "fair tax" wagon really thinking about this? If not, who's deciding this?

I. So in the end, who pays more and who pays less. Because one tends to spend less of their income as one makes more money, the marginal rates actually tend to flip as compared to the current system - as one makes more money, their tax rate (as a percentage of their income) will actually start to decrease. Which means the burden is going to start to feel lighter on people with the highest incomes and heavier on people in the middle (how it will effect people with lower incomes will ultimately depend on how big the subsidy is). Maybe some think that this would be a good tax system, but it is most clearly not as progressive as the current system.

A bigger tax than they are saying, the government more involved in every transaction, either smaller paychek or higher prices (or both!), and then all of the associated effort, hassles, and inevitable transition problems, and a tax that could very well end up being regressive - WN is not sold in the least.

If the real problem is that the tax burden is too heavy or that the tax code is too complicated, then come up with solutions that address those problems. There are certainly ways to do it. This sort of overhaul, though, is being sold as some sort of economic panacea - increasing government revenue, decreasing taxes on all law-abiding citizens, promoting investment and economic growth - and with a catchy, meaningless name no less and sort of endorsed by one presidential candidate and my least favorite economist.

Sorry for a post that's entirely on health care reform and the tax code. Not Wacky, not Wacky at all.

Quickie Primary Take

2008-01-09T10:12:00.000-05:00

Not too much to say, because WN isn't in the business of speculating on whether Hillary Clinton briefly crying or Gloria Steinem's shrill Times op-ed or if people said they would vote for Obama but then didn't because of hidden racism has anything to do with last night's results - frankly, it's all anecdotal flim-flam and speculative poppycock ...

BUT WN will say this. Isn't it a bit too early and much too silly to try to draw out broad trends in either race when Obama won Iowa by 8 or 9 points (but only by 1 and 2 delegates over Clinton and Edwards) and Clinton won New Hampshire by 2 points (and tied Obama with 9 delegates)? For the most part, this has been a tie in the first two contests. (Not for Edwards, who is dragging well behind.)

Of course, one of the interesting trends WN sees is that Clinton has a substantial lead over Obama amongst superdelegates (who aren't tied to any primary results) - she has nearly 20% of superdelegates already (with most already committed), which is about 8% of the total delegates she would need to win the nomination. Keep in mind nearly 2/3 have not committed or pledged at all yet, but Obama is already starting from behind in some sense.

Anyway, the point is that there shouldn't be much to read about the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary aside from the fact that it's very close between Obama and Clinton with Edwards in a distant third. WN supposes the people on TV need to say something deeper than that (although a tie isn't boring - it means that thankfully more than 2 States are going to decide the presidential nominee this time!), but it's really the big story.

On the Republican side, you would think Mitt Romney must be nearly dead ... but he actually has almost as many delegates (30) as Huckabee (21) and McCain (10) combined. It's partly owed to Romney's virtually ignored win in Wyoming, but he's finished second in Iowa and New Hampshire. Whether continually finishing second (which he could do in the next 4 or 5 primaries and caucuses) is enough to win, WN doesn't know, but he has the money to keep competing and isn't getting blown out of the water yet. Giuliani, on the other hand, hasn't picked up a delegate in either of the first 2 States and is sitting on 1 unpledged superdelegate right now. If he can't win Florida, he might be in big trouble.

Anyway, just a little sanity and perspective in an otherwise insane world.

LSM - Ravens Coaching Search

2008-01-08T11:10:00.000-05:00

So as best as WN can tell, here's who the Ravens have interviewed so far:

Tony Sparano, assistant head coach, Dallas
Jason Garrett, offensive coordinator, Dallas
Rex Ryan, (former) defensive coordinator, Baltimore
Brian Schottenheimer, offensive coordinator, New York Jets
Jim Caldwell, assistant head coach, Indianapolis

and who they're planning to interview:

John Harbaugh, defensive assistant, Philadelphia
Jim Schwartz, defensive coordinator, Tennessee
Marty Schottenheimer (maybe), former head coach, San Diego, Washington, Kansas City, Cleveland

and who has declined interviews with the Ravens:

Rob Chudzinski, offensive coordinator, Cleveland
Josh McDaniels, offensive coordinator, New England
Kirk Ferentz, head coach, Iowa

On top of that, there are a few more names floating around out there (Bill Cowher, Mike Singletary). Beyond that, there aren't any other really obvious candidates. WN can't imagine the Ravens dredging up any other former head coaches (for example, Dennis Green or Steve Mariucci or Marty Mornhinweg or someone like that). They had a chance to talk coordinators from the top 4 teams last week (Dallas, Green Bay, New England, Indianapolis) and of the other 4 remaining playoff teams (New York Giants, Seattle, San Diego, Jacksonville), there are a few former head coaches in assistant roles and other usual candidates, but none that WN would really want as head coach (such as Jim Mora, Jr., Mike Shula, Mike Tice, Kevin Gilbride, Dave Campo, Ted Cottrell).

Anyway, Mike Preston (big-time Brian Billick hater, by the way) wrote this morning that the Ravens really need Marty Schottenheimer and outlined a potential (and realistically attainable) staff. WN disagrees. First, the whole premise of this article is based on the premise that the Ravens can get Marty to change a bit - which hasn't happened yet and it's a pretty big "if" to hire him. Second, if the idea behind bringing in Marty is to give it a shot next year because this is a veteran team, then why does Preston think it's a good idea for Marty to run off or antagonize the veterans (particularly Jonathan Ogden, who may or may not come back)? Third, what's going to change about "Martyball" in Baltimore? He's 5-13 as a head coach in the playoffs and has never even made it to the Super Bowl.

WN's take is that Steve Bisciotti is not going to go with Schottenheimer. He's looking for someone willing to do things his way, which both Billick and Marty definitely are not. (And by that, WN means in the non-game plan sort of way, not in the calling plays or making all the personnel decisions in the Dan Snyder-Jerry Jones sort of way.) It's probably going to be someone not obvious, someone with some new ideas and willing to be flexible and open-minded, and someone who is going to get along with everyone. (Based on the admittedly very little WN knows about Bisciotti.) Marty would be competent, but hopefully the Ravens are looking for something more than that.

That said, if Bill Cowher were interested, the Ravens would have to really consider it (although WN doesn't know if he can take it after being Pittsburgh's head coach for so long). Otherwise, WN thinks that Garrett (if he's willing to leave) or Schwartz (who Peter King from SI is in love with) or maybe Harbaugh are more likely picks for the Ravens.