Trade-a-palooza

Man, this year's Trade Deadline was crazy!  I don't remember where so many teams were active and so many players moved.  And not just two-month rentals with expiring contracts, either.  Some BIG names changed teams.  Seriously, do the Cubs and Nationals have anybody left?!

So many teams were buyers that it's hard to keep track of who went where.  And, thanks to the Nationals and Cubs getting rid of every player in their respective organizations that you've ever heard of (except for Juan Soto), a lot of actual and wannabe contenders got significantly better.  For the most part, they all addressed obvious needs.  Which is gonna make the next two months very interesting.

The biggest winner of the Trade Deadline has to be the Dodgers.  Proving the old adage of "you can never have enough starting pitching," they just added another future Hall of Famer to their rotation, while also keeping him away from the Padres and Giants!  Beyond that, though, they got Washington to throw in Trea Turner!  They've had so many guys on the IL this year that it's enough to make your head spin!  Trea Turner's not a bad insurance policy to have.  He can play short while Seager's out, then move over to second, freeing up Chris Taylor to play the outfield.

Another big winner was the Yankees.  An argument could've been made that maybe they should've been sellers instead of buyers, but Brian Cashman proved that he's all-in on this season...by doing what Yankees fans have been begging him to do for months and getting left-handed hitters!  First it was Joey Gallo, then, as a last-minute surprise, he got Anthony Rizzo, too.  Suddenly a team with zero left-handed bats had two big ones.  Friday's lineup against the Marlins looked A LOT different as a result.

Sure, neither one of them can play center field, but that's a minor detail that can be worked out.  The left-handed power was a much bigger concern.  Although, Rizzo's gonna play every day, so I don't know what that means when Luke Voit comes back.  I also think it's safe to say the whole Clint Frazier experiment is probably over.  Because the most likely outfield configuration sees Judge in right and Gallo in left (Judge played center and Gallo right on Friday night, but that was because Stanton had to play left with no DH).

Not to be outdone, the Yankees' two biggest rivals took advantage of the fire sales, as well.  The Mets added Javy Baez, who can play short until Francisco Lindor comes back, then move over to second when he does.  And the Red Sox got the left-handed bat they were looking for in Kyle Schwarber (a guy who I've been saying all along needed to be in the American League since he's always been basically a DH).

Then there's Atlanta.  We all know what's going on with the Braves' outfield situation.  That's why they struck early and got Joc Pederson from, you guessed it, the Cubs!  They weren't done, though.  They brought back Adam Duvall, who was actually pretty successful for Atlanta in 2019-20.  They also swung a deal for Jorge Soler.  And another for Eddie Rosario.  Just like that, they have an entirely new outfield!

Two other teams worth noting are the Giants and Blue Jays.  With literally seconds to spare, San Francisco was the team that landed Kris Bryant.  Not only does he bolster their lineup, he can play literally anywhere on the field.  The Giants still might've been able to hold off the Dodgers and Padres even without Bryant, but now they've made sure that the NL West will stay a three-team race.

Toronto, meanwhile, made it very clear that they, too, still think they have a shot this season.  The Blue Jays were very active in addressing their biggest problem area...the bullpen.  They brought in a pair of veteran former closers in Brad Hand and Joakim Soria.  They also got Hyun-Jin Ryu some rotation help by snagging the Twins' top starter, Jose Berrios.

Berrios wasn't the only player Minnesota moved.  The Twins didn't go full Cubs/Nationals, but they definitely did some unloading.  They actually made an early deal with Tampa Bay, sending Nelson Cruz to the Rays before shipping Hansel Robles to Boston.  Incredibly, they were also able to unload J.A. Happ, with the Cardinals giving up two players for him for some reason.

Byron Buxton and Josh Donaldson are both still members of the Twins, though, so they either couldn't work out a deal, their asking price was too high, or they just weren't offered anything appealing.  So the Twins still have enough quality pieces to build around for another run next year.  Which means their road back to being good shouldn't be as long as those on the North Side and in DC.

Also, how crazy is it that the Cubs made two trades with the White Sox?  First it was Ryan Tepera, then Craig Kimbrel.  The Kimbrel trade, especially, is an intriguing one.  I'm curious to see how they're gonna set up their bullpen.  Does Hendriks stay the closer with Kimbrel as his set up man?  Do they share closer duties?  Does Hendriks move to the eighth inning so that Kimbrel can close?  Regardless, the White Sox bullpen is dramatically better today than it was earlier this week thanks to their cross-town neighbors.

Everyone knew what the Cubs and Nationals were going to do, so it wouldn't really be fair to call them the "losers" of the Deadline.  It would be fair to say that about the Rockies, though.  The two names everybody assumed were moving were Kris Bryant and Trevor Story.  Well, the Deadline has come and gone, and Story is still a Rockie.  They didn't make any significant moves as a matter of fact, which leaves you wondering exactly what they were thinking.

It's fun to pick on the Cubs and Nationals, but they weren't the only sellers who unloaded multiple pieces.  Two of the usual suspects who can be relied upon to provide contending teams with Trade Deadline rentals--the Pirates and Marlins--came through again.  This year, two American League teams joined them--Texas and Cleveland.

Gallo wasn't the only key guy the Rangers dealt.  They also sent three pitchers, including All-Star Kyle Gibson, to the Phillies.  Cleveland, meanwhile, picked up where it left off over the winter and sold off its remaining worthwhile pieces.  It won't just be a new name and new uniforms next season, there'll be a lot of new faces, too, when they officially become the "Guardians" (horrible name, even worse logo).

Will all of these trades work out?  History tells us the answer to that question is "No."  But that almost doesn't even matter.  Because this was one of the most exciting Trade Deadlines in years!  And a lot of teams honestly feel like they're significantly better today than they were 48 hours ago.

No Escaping the COVID Cloud

We all knew that COVID was going to hover over these Olympics.  There was no way for it not to!  The only question was how much.  Well, from the empty stands to the masks everywhere to the athletes being forced to withdraw, COVID is definitely still leaving its mark on what will forever be known as the "COVID Olympics."

I will say this, though, it's had little to no impact on the quality of competition.  That's such a huge credit to the athletes.  We really had no idea how much they'd be affected by all of the protocols, but, despite all that, they've still put on the type of show we typically expect to see every four (or five) years.  In fact, we've heard more athlete complaints about the heat than anything COVID-related.

When they unveiled all of the "playbooks" and outlined the procedures that would be used if an athlete tested positive, my greatest fear was that an athlete or team would have to be withdrawn from a quarterfinal or semifinal and lose their opportunity for a medal because they tested positive in the middle of their event.  Fortunately that hasn't happened.  There have been positive tests and some athletes have had to withdraw as a result, but those positives all happened before that athlete's competition began.  It's little consolation to them, of course, but it is proof that the IOC's COVID protocols are working.

In some cases, the athlete's positive test came early enough that they were able to be replaced.  This happened on the U.S. women's 3x3 basketball team, where Jackie Young got the call to replace Katie Lou Samuelson...and ended up winning a gold medal!  Likewise, U.S. beach volleyball player Taylor Crabb tested positive when he landed in Tokyo, so Tri Bourne became Jake Gibb's partner instead.  Same thing in golf.  Bryson DeChambeau tested positive before he left, giving Patrick Reed a chance to go to his second Olympics.  Hopefully there's enough time for men's pole vault alternate Matt Ludwig to get to Tokyo and take Sam Kendricks' place in the competition.

Unfortunately, the Czech women's beach volleyball team didn't have a substitute for Marketa Slukova ready to go, so they had to forfeit all three of their matches.  Other individual athletes have had to withdraw, too, having to give up their Olympic dream because of a positive COVID test.  But it seems like the daily testing of all athletes has achieved its purpose...to prevent an entire competition being disrupted.

Daily COVID testing is just one of the many things athletes have had to adjust to.  They also have to wear masks everywhere and can't mingle with athletes from other sports/teams/countries in the way they normally would.  I will say, though, it's great to see them attending the other sessions in their sport when not competing.  I was hoping that would be the case.  Because, even though the public's not there, having people in the stands at least creates some sort of atmosphere.

And, I've gotta admit, the video chats between the athletes and their loved ones have actually been a cool little feature (that otherwise wouldn't have been possible or necessary).  I was a little skeptical at first.  I thought it would come off as cheesy.  It's actually been just the opposite.  It's authentic.  They can't share the moment the way they otherwise would've, but they still get to share it with them.

Thanks to so many athletes who've posted photos and videos on social media, we've gotten a glimpse of what life is like in the Olympic Village.  (BTW, the view from the Village is absolutely breathtaking!)  And it seems like they still get some of that Village camaraderie.  I was worried that might not be the case.  There are far fewer people moving around than there otherwise would be, but Olympic Village life doesn't seem to be as restrictive as many feared.

Likewise, a lot of athletes wanted to go to the Opening Ceremony but couldn't...and can't go to the Closing Ceremony either!  That's because they're being extremely strict with the amount of time they're allowed to be in Japan.  They can only arrive a few days before their event and have to leave within 48 hours of the finals.  We saw far fewer athletes marching in the Opening Ceremony as a result, and I'd imagine athlete attendance at the Closing Ceremony will be even lower than that (a lot of athletes leave before the Closing Ceremony anyway).

The masks on the medals stand are definitely an odd sight, too.  It's been a year and a half and I'm still somewhat confused about masking protocols.  It just doesn't make much sense to me that they can compete without masks, but have to put them on immediately after they're done, even though they're gonna have far more close contact with each other during the competition.  Then they still have to wear the mask during a medals ceremony with the same people they just competed against maskless!  But I will give the IOC credit for at least letting the athletes take their masks off for the pictures with their medals.

At the medal ceremonies, the athletes have to put on their medals themselves, which is also a weird thing to see.  Except in team events, they're not doing that.  One athlete is taking the medal and putting it around their teammate's neck and vice versa (or down the line for teams of more than two).  I'm not sure what team started doing it, but others have followed.  And I love it!

None of this, of course, has stopped the "these Olympics shouldn't even be happening" crowd from continuing to make noise (psst...we're almost halfway through, so that ship has most definitely sailed).  They keep citing the rising daily case numbers in Japan and are ready to blame the Olympics for what they anticipate is an inevitable spike.  (Again, I don't see how that would be possible when the Olympians and the public are being kept separate, but that's a whole separate argument.)  But the athletes have made the most of the situation.

These, hopefully, will be the only COVID Olympics (although I have a feeling February's Winter Games in Beijing will be, as well).  By the time the world gathers for the next Summer Olympics three years from now in Paris, COVID will hopefully be in our rear view mirrors and we can go back to the Olympics we're used to (and Tokyo expected).  Which means all of these pandemic-caused changes could be as much of a one-off as karate.

That's not to say all of these changes have been entirely bad, though.  Just like in all other aspects of life, the pandemic gave the Olympics a chance to rethink how to do some things.  And I wouldn't be surprised if some of them stick around.

Softball Shows It Belongs

When softball was dropped from the Olympic program in 2005 (by one vote!), I thought it was huge mistake.  I still feel that way 16 years later.  So, naturally I was excited when softball was included among the sports that the Japanese were adding for the Tokyo Games.  At last the sport was back on the Olympic stage, even if it was a one-off.

Unfortunately, softball won't be featured three years from now in Paris, but it's a good bet that it will be at LA 2028 and Brisbane 2032.  The challenge is keeping it in the Olympics beyond then...and that softball's place is permanent, not dependent on its popularity in the host country.  Because, as this tournament showed, softball belongs in the Olympics.

Was this tournament perfect?  No!  They were playing on a converted baseball field instead in a softball-specific venue (a concession to teaming up with baseball for a joint reentry bid) and the tournament only featured six teams instead of eight.  But did this tournament show that softball is worthy of being on the Olympic stage?  Absolutely!

There's nothing else that softball could've done on its end.  The tournament was competitive, exciting and, most importantly, high quality.  It's too bad there weren't any fans allowed.  Because just imagine how much that stadium would've been rocking during that thrilling USA-Japan gold medal game!

We'll see how the baseball tournament goes, as the sports' collective fates, for better or worse, are tied together.  That's the cruel irony of it all.  Softball was voted out primarily because of baseball, even though they were run by separate international federations at the time.  Now that they've combined their efforts into the WBSC, they're a package deal.  So, it's either softball AND baseball or neither one.  Which is a shame.  Because they're completely separate sports with completely different priorities.

Softball and the Olympics need each other a lot more than baseball and the Olympics do.  Baseball has the Major Leagues and the World Series.  It's completely impractical for the Major League to shut down in the middle of the season so that players can go to the Olympics.  The season structure in MLB is completely different than it is in the NHL or WNBA, so it's not realistic to make those comparisons. 

Likewise, the Japanese and Korean leagues DO shut down for the Olympics so their players can go.  But they also have fewer teams playing a shorter schedule, so it's much easier to make those adjustments.  (Japan and Korea are also significantly smaller countries size-wise, so the travel demands aren't anywhere close to what they are in the U.S Major Leagues.) 

Baseball also already has a marquee event where Major Leaguers represent their nations--the World Baseball Classic.  Is there room for both the WBC and an Olympic baseball tournament?  Of course!  But that doesn't mean Major League players need to participate in both.  After all, the Olympic soccer tournament and World Cup are able to peacefully coexist, and no one seems to have a problem with the best men's soccer players in the world not being at the Olympics.

For softball, however, the Olympics is the pinnacle.  No tournament will ever be bigger than this one!  If you want the best players in the world, you've got them!  And it means everything to them.  Which was plain to see for anyone who was watching.

Thirteen years ago, in the last Olympic gold medal game before this one, Japan upset the United States behind the masterful pitching of Yukiko Ueno.  Cat Osterman was in the circle for the U.S. that day.  Who were the starting pitchers in this time?  Yukiko Ueno and Cat Osterman.  They waited 13 years to have that moment again.  And when it finally came, it was definitely worth it.

What makes it so difficult, too, is the fact that softball waited 13 years to get back into the Olympics and now has to wait at least another seven more before the next tournament.  That's the toughest part.  It's impossible to gain any sort of momentum with all this starting and stopping.  There will be no bigger platform than the Olympics and the exposure that comes with it.  How do they expect the game to grow when, instead of disappearing between Olympiads, it only appears in the Olympics once in a 20-year period?  (While modern pentathlon and taekwondo don't have to worry about their Olympic status.)

One of their arguments when they dropped it was because softball doesn't have enough of a "global reach."  Well, you know how to increase its global reach?  By giving it a permanent place in the largest sporting event on the planet! 

It took until 1996 for softball to become an Olympic sport.  That only lasted 12 years before the sport was removed from the program, only to return 11 years later.  In between, an entire generation of softball players grew up playing the game waiting for a day that they hoped would come but feared never would.  Their dedication and perseverance was rewarded and softball made its Olympic return, only to have those Olympic dreams once again yanked away.

Hopefully we don't have to deal with this ever again and the Paris Games will be the last Olympics without a softball tournament.  Because if there was ever a sport that belongs, it's softball.  The world's best players proved that over the past week.

A Spectacular Start

We knew going in that this year's Olympic Opening Ceremony would be different than any we've ever seen before.  The Tokyo organizers were left with a seemingly impossible task--celebrating the start of the Olympics, a moment that the athletes and host country have waited years for, while also respecting the fact that these Olympics are taking place during a global pandemic that's still far from over.  It was a difficult balancing act.  And they pulled it off.

It wasn't the overblown spectacle we saw in Beijing, or even the more restrained but still extravagant celebrations in London and Rio.  They knew that wouldn't be appropriate.  But it also couldn't be too somber.  We've all been through so much over the past year and a half.  It's impossible to ignore, but we don't need to be constantly reminded of it either.  This was, after all, still a celebration!

As it turns out, they tackled the elephant in the room head on right away.  The ceremony began with a bunch of athletes "training" by themselves...in much the same way the Olympians had to after all of last year's lockdowns and closures forced them to improvise.  They knew the feeling all too well, and it was the organizers' way of saluting their resilience.

They had to keep it simple, and simple most definitely worked.  And they found the most beautiful way to acknowledge the reality of the past 18 months.  It was so much more than just having a moment of silence for all those we've lost (and the beautiful surprise touch of including the 11 Israeli Olympians killed at the 1972 Munich Games...the first time they've ever been so recognized).  They had front-line health care workers carry both the Olympic flag and Olympic flame, a fitting "thank you" from the entire world.

Their choice for the final torch bearer was a sign of the times, too.  Naomi Osaka has become known as much more than a tennis player.  She was one of the most unspoken athletes during last summer's racial reckoning, using her platform as a professional athlete to advocate for change.  Then, with her French Open media boycott, bringing attention to the mental health side of being a pro athlete.  She has her detractors.  She has her supporters.  But her selection is most definitely indicative of her role in changing the sports landscape.

Osaka's choice was a surprise, too.  Not because it wasn't a good one, but because active Olympians simply aren't picked for the honor very often.  The last time was 21 years ago in Sydney, when Cathy Freeman capped that incredible Opening Ceremony, then went on to win gold 10 days later.  I can't remember any other instance of it being a current athlete.  So the choice of Osaka is significant for that reason alone.

And, even though the cultural presentation had to be significantly scaled back, they were still able to put on a show that highlighted their heritage.  There were no sumo wrestlers (who played a big part in the Nagano Opening Ceremony for some reason), but there was a kabuki dancer, who blessed the stage, trying to rid it of a "curse."  Hopefully it worked!

I also loved the nod to the first Tokyo Olympics in 1964.  They raised wooden Olympic rings, which were made from the trees planted by competitors in those 1964 Games.  A simple, yet beautiful direct link between Tokyo's first Olympics and its second 57 years later.

That wasn't the only nod to 1964, either.  Those Olympics were the first to make use of sport pictograms, which have become such an integral part of every Games since.  Japan's obviously very proud of this contribution, and it led to my favorite part of the ceremony.  It was so cool, creative and unique to see the three "pictogram men" acting out all 50 of the icons that'll be used at these Games.  I absolutely loved it!

This being Japan, modern technology was on full display, as well.  And how could you not be in awe of that spectacular drone show?  They had drones in PyeongChang, but it was nothing like this!  A total of 1800 drones creating the Tokyo Olympic logo, only to have it transform into a giant globe.  Even though fans can't attend, these Olympics are still bringing the world together.

Another way they brought the world together was that incredible performance of "Imagine" across all five continents.  They did something similar with "Ode to Joy" when Nagano hosted in 1998, but this was different.  "Imagine" has become sort of a staple over the past few Olympic Opening Ceremonies, and you can see why just by looking at and thinking about the lyrics.  "And the world will be as one" has never rung more true!

The Parade of Nations obviously had to be scaled back, too.  So many athletes wanted to be there but couldn't because of COVID protocols, and those who were had to wear masks.  But, as they said during the NBC broadcast, even though they were wearing masks, you could still "see" their smiles.  That was so true!  And it was all the proof you needed that cancelling these Olympics entirely would've been the absolute cruelest solution possible for these athletes.

A new wrinkle for this year's Parade of Nations was the flexibility (aka., not-so-subtle suggestion) to have co-flag bearers, one male and one female.  I was lukewarm about this when they first announced it, and I was curious to see how it would work.  Most teams took this option, and they went about it different ways.  Some carried it together, some passed it back and forth.  I was pleasantly surprised by the level of creativity the different countries used, and it actually didn't bother me nearly as much as I thought it would.

Frankly, Teams USA bothered me more!  For the second straight Summer Olympics, the flag bearers weren't actually at the front of the delegation!  In Rio, you could barely see Michael Phelps because he was surrounded by everyone else, and it was the same thing here.  At least this time, Sue Bird and Eddy Alvarez had white jackets while everybody else had blue!  Seriously, what's so hard about letting the people who've been voted to lead the delegation actually get to, you know, lead it?  Even with a team as big as the U.S., is it really that difficult to have the flag bearers go, then everybody else 30 seconds later?  You know, the way EVERY OTHER COUNTRY did?

Even though there weren't any fans, there were still dignitaries and media members there, so they weren't walking into a completely empty stadium.  But the absence of the fans was definitely felt during the Parade of Nations.  Just imagine the roar that would've erupted when Japan entered!

Obviously, none of this was the plan.  They had to pivot tremendously from the Opening Ceremony they originally envisioned.  But, you know what?  The Opening Ceremony that they actually did put on was absolutely perfect!

Japan's Games Are Here

I read an article this afternoon that sums up these Olympics in a nutshell.  It told a story of two years ago, when an enthusiastic group of children were on a soccer field holding up signs at the "One Year to Go" celebration.  Virtually all of Japan was excited, as their country was finally going to host the Olympics again.

One year became two, and that joy disappeared.  The Japanese people's near-universal excitement has turned to anything but.  A mixture of fear, resentment and anger are the main feelings, as more than a few people have questioned the wisdom of holding these Olympics altogether.  And, sure enough, COVID has found its way to the Olympic Village, forcing athletes who are already in Tokyo to drop out.  (It's taken out a good portion of the Czech team.)  I can only imagine how heartbroken they are, especially after already having to wait an extra year for this opportunity!

It's also been heartbreaking to watch those preliminary softball and soccer games played in empty stadiums.  Under normal circumstances, the stands would've been packed with fans, cheering raucously as Japan won its opening game of each tournament.  Instead...silence.  Certainly not the celebration the Olympics are supposed to be.
 
But, if you ask any athlete whether they'd rather have this--no fans, no family, all these precautions--or no Olympics at all, I'm pretty sure you all know what they'd say.  They'll do whatever it takes.  Because they've been waiting five long years since Rio, and the day is finally here!  The Olympics, at long last, are starting!

That has to be a huge sigh of relief for the IOC and Tokyo's organizers.  After all that work, an extra year, having to completely change every plan, dealing with problems that were no fault of their own (some of the scandals are of their own making, but most of these issues were not), it's finally time to see the fruits of their labor.  This isn't exactly the Olympics that Japan envisioned.  But this is the hand they've been dealt.  And if anybody's prepared to handle it and deliver an Olympics that's still memorable, it's the Japanese.

And, after having heard nothing but negative story after negative story about these Olympics ever since the word "COVID" entered our vocabularies, here's hoping that once the cauldron is ignited and competition begins, the focus shifts back where it belongs...on the athletes!  Because none of this has anything to do with them!  It wasn't their call whether the Olympics would be held.  And they're the ones who have to compete under less-than-ideal conditions!

Whether you agree with holding an Olympics during a pandemic or not, they're happening.  And, frankly, the athletes deserve their moment.  It was taken away from them last year, and they're sacrificing so much just to participate.  But they were all willing to do it.  Because it's the Olympics.  And, for many of them, the Olympics are a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

For so many, that once-in-a-lifetime opportunity doesn't even include the Opening Ceremony.  It's not because they don't want to go.  It's because they're not allowed to go.  The protocols that everybody has to follow are very strict, and they're very specific about when you can enter Japan.  So, if you're not competing until the second week of the Games, you have to watch the Opening Ceremony on TV like the rest of us (even some athletes who are already in Tokyo won't be able to participate if they haven't finished their mandatory quarantine yet).

With all of these outside factors and everything everybody has been through over the last 18 months, this is perhaps the hardest Olympics in recent memory to make any sort of predictions.  Will Japan still have the home field advantage when there aren't any fans there?  How will not having fans and the excitement they bring affect performances?  Will the silence make athletes think about the Olympic pressure even more?

We also have no idea what type of an impact COVID will have.  Athletes will be tested daily, but a positive could knock out an athlete or an entire team (as it almost did for South Africa men's soccer).  And, if a big name can't go because of a positive COVID test, that changes the entire medal picture in that athlete's event(s).  So, the best we can do is hope that the preventative measures in the playbooks are effective and no competitions are cancelled.

Speaking of the competition, this is the biggest Olympics ever.  There are 11,000 athletes and 339 events, which are both by far the largest number in Olympic history!  That means there are over 1,000 medals at stake in sports from the traditional (track & field, swimming, gymnastics) to the new (skateboarding, sport climbing, 3x3 basketball).  The 613-athlete strong U.S. team isn't just the second-largest American delegation ever, it's the most athletes any country has ever sent to an Olympics on foreign soil!

They should bring plenty of hardware home with them, too.  Led by incredibly strong swimming and track & field teams, the U.S. should take its customary place at the top of the medals table.  The number should be well over 100, and the total number of gold medals should hover somewhere around 50.

Even without the crowds, Japan should enjoy the customary home team bump.  And not just because they're strong in the sports that were added just for these Olympics (which were obviously chosen intentionally).  The most medals Japan has ever won was 41 in Rio.  Their all-time high for gold medals is 16, set the first time Tokyo hosted in 1964 and tied in Athens 2004.  Both of those numbers may be in jeopardy.  In fact, I'd be surprised if Japan doesn't finish in the top five in the overall medal count.

Expect to see all of the usual suspects filling out the rest of the top 10.  China may get a slight boost from being so close to home and not having to make the time zone adjustment like everybody else, but still shouldn't challenge the U.S. for the top spot.  The country without a name, meanwhile, should still finish with a solid haul despite having a smaller team than usual as a result of the sanctions.

Australia's only won eight gold medals at each of the last two Olympics, but they have a very strong swim team this year (especially on the women's side), so that number should be higher in Tokyo.  After becoming the rare country to actually increase its medal haul the Olympics after hosting, Great Britain likely won't win quite as many this time around.  It should still be enough to put them in the top five, though.

Here's my complete top 10, which I fully admit will probably be way off.  (I've got 82 countries winning medals.)  Not that it matters though.  The Olympics are finally here!  That's the most important thing.

1. United States                  50-28-40         118
2. China                              32-21-19          72
3. ROC                               25-23-17          65
4. Japan                            22-19-23          64
5. Great Britain                  16-18-21          55
6. Australia                        15-19-13          47
7. France                           12-11-23          46
8. Italy                                 9-15-17          42
   
9. Germany                       12-14-17          41
10. Netherlands                  11-14-12          37

The 96 Effect

As crazy as it sounds, today marks the 25th anniversary of the start of the Atlanta Olympics.  How was that 25 years ago already?!  Yet, it also feels like it was a lifetime ago!  Because there's no denying the impact that the Atlanta Games had and is still being felt today.

The biggest impact was the performance of the American women.  As the Peacock documentary "The 96 Effect" pointed out, that was the first generation of female athletes who felt the full benefit of Title IX.  So their success wasn't an accident and shouldn't have been a surprise.  Beyond that, though, 1996 was just the beginning.  The United States has been the dominant force in women's soccer, basketball, softball and gymnastics ever since.

And they had no idea how big those sports would become, either.  The women's soccer gold medal game sold out the University of Georgia's football stadium.  As it turns out, that was nothing.  When the Women's World Cup was in the U.S. three years later, it was NFL stadiums they were selling out...for an entire month!  There were 100,000 people at the Rose Bowl for the final!

A dominant run in women's basketball, meanwhile, led to the launch of not one, but two professional leagues!  And the WNBA isn't just still going, it's thriving!  What's even more incredible is that today's WNBA stars either don't or barely remember a world without a WNBA.  All because of the 1996 Olympic team, whose marquee members became the WNBA's first stars.

In fact, almost every memory of the Atlanta Olympics that immediately comes to mind involves American women.  Sure, there were plenty of memorable Olympic moments authored by women before Atlanta, but I can't remember there being so many from a single Games.  From the soccer team to Dot Richardson's energy to Kerri Strug's vault, which is perhaps Atlanta's signature competition moment.

Softball and women's soccer weren't the only sports that made their Olympic debuts in Atlanta, either.  Beach volleyball did, too.  It's crazy to think that beach volleyball is still so new to the Olympic program, yet it has become one of the signature sports.  Kind of like snowboarding at the Winter Olympics (which debuted two years later), beach volleyball just fits in so perfectly that it feels like it's been there all along.

Unfortunately, the celebration was briefly marred by tragedy when a bomb erupted in Centennial Olympic Park over the middle weekend.  The Games went on, though, and there were plenty of other memorable performances in store, as the Olympic spirit prevailed.

Michael Johnson immediately comes to mind.  Usain Bolt before Usain Bolt, Johnson pulled off the never-before-or-since done 200-400 double, capping it off with an electrifying world record in the 200!  Carl Lewis won his fourth straight Olympic long jump title for his ninth career gold medal.  The former tied a record that a certain American swimmer matched in Rio.

Andre Agassi won the gold medal in tennis.  It was the first time a former Grand Slam champion won the men's tournament, legitimizing tennis as an Olympic sport.  Lindsay Davenport won the women's gold medal.  It was the biggest win of her career at the time.  Two years later, she'd be No. 1 in the world.

It was also a transitional Games.  Lewis and Jackie Joyner-Kersee were two of the biggest athletes of the 1980s.  Janet Evans, a breakout star in 1988, was so popular that she was chosen as the second-to-last torch bearer before Muhammad Ali.  It was her last Olympics, too.  Evans now works for the LA 28 organizing committee.  Dan O'Brien, meanwhile, is now best known as a TV commentator.  But in Atlanta, he was crowned "The World's Greatest Athlete" as winner of the decathlon.

Atlanta also saw the Olympic debut of 24 countries, 11 of which were former Soviet republics, including one that became a powerhouse--Russia.  It was also the first time that South Africa competed under its own flag at an Olympics since 1960.  And, with no more Soviet Union or East Germany, the U.S. finished atop the medal table for the first time at a fully-attended Olympics since 1968.  That's been the expectation at the Olympics ever since.

While Atlanta is still one of the randomest Olympic host cities ever, they actually left an example that future host cities followed.  A number of events were held at the Georgia World Congress Center.  Holding several sports in a large convention hall is a model that's been followed ever since.  Centennial Olympic Stadium became the Braves' Turner Field (and was very obviously a baseball stadium during the Olympics).  What's amazing is the Braves only spent 20 years there before leaving for Truist Park, with Centennial Olympic Stadium now on its third life as Georgia State's football stadium.

If there's one enduring image of the Atlanta Olympics, though, it's Muhammad Ali lighting the cauldron.  Dick Enberg let out perhaps his biggest "Oh My!" ever when he saw The Greatest come out of the darkness, get the torch from Janet Evans, and send the Olympic flame on its way to the cauldron.  It didn't have the wow factor of 1992's flaming arrow or 2000's waterfall, but it was awe-inspiring nonetheless.  Muhammad Ali's mere presence was enough!

Sydney's Olympics four years later were so spectacular that the Atlanta Games sometimes get lost in the shuffle.  They'll never be forgotten, though.  Because Atlanta's Olympic legacy endures and is still going strong 25 years later!

Farewell, My Friend

When the Manhattan women's basketball team went to Montreal on its foreign tour in 2010, I wanted to check out Montreal's Olympic Stadium, so I went one afternoon when we didn't have a game.  Sonia Burke, our Associate Head Coach, decided to go with me.  (Andrew Cornicello, our trainer and my road roommate for so many years, came too.)  The result was the above photo, which was taken from the observation deck of the magnificent inclined tower at the top, overlooking the entire city of Montreal.

Four years later, we returned to Montreal on another foreign tour.  I kept a blog on the website that was written by a different team member each day.  I wasn't planning on having an entry for the day we left...until Sonia decided she wanted to write one (and detailed the waiter knowing her breakfast order because it had been the same all week!).

Those are just two of the many stories like that I have from road trips with my great friend, who passed away today after a battle with cancer.  Sonia left an indelible imprint on the Manhattan women's basketball program, where she was on staff for more than a decade and, as the recruiting coordinator, was responsible for so many great players becoming Jaspers.

She easily could've left to become a head coach somewhere else, but I got the sense that she didn't want to.  She loved the team and the players too much!  Not that she wasn't capable, though!  She was the defensive coordinator for a team that allowed just 51 points per game and ranked third nationally in scoring defense, then she was the offensive coordinator for a team that scored in the high 60s/low 70s every night a few years later.

Sonia knew her stuff, and everybody knew it!  She was from Barbados and had been on the Barbadian National Team during her playing days.  She was so proud of that Barbadian heritage, too, and while the rest of us suckers were enduring the Northeast winter over Christmas break every year, she'd always come back refreshed after spending a few days at home in the Caribbean.

We were on the staff together for eight years under two different head coaches, and I sat behind her on the bus that entire time!  We didn't have "assigned" seats, but, she always took the fourth seat on the right and, since the one behind it had the outlet, the fifth seat on the right was mine.  Which led to plenty of whispered conversations when we were the only two awake (or didn't want anybody to hear us!).  And if anyone tried to take either of our seats, there would be some definite hell to pay!  It eventually got to the point where everyone just knew those were our seats!

Every year when the team took their headshots, she always took a new one.  I'm not exactly sure why.  Because every year, without fail, she decided that she wanted to leave her existing one on the website...to the point where it became a running joke between us!  Every year, it was the same too.  She'd take a new one, say she liked it, but end up sticking with the one from her first year anyway!

This wasn't the only headshot
Sonia ever took, but it's the only
one that ever made the website!

Her taste in football teams (or, I guess more specifically, her taste in quarterbacks) left something to be desired.  Although, it did make it easy that year I got her for Secret Santa.  As much as it pained me to stand in the checkout line with a Tom Brady t-shirt, she definitely enjoyed her gift!

It wasn't just Brady, though.  My first year, we played at Siena on Super Bowl Sunday, and one of the parents set up a team dinner after the game.  Our head coach suggested I drive up myself so that I could leave after the game and be home in time for the Super Bowl.  Guess who hopped in the passenger's seat?  (And the Patriots weren't even playing!  It was the Steelers-Cardinals Super Bowl!)

Another thing that I learned about Sonia during all my time working with her was not to bother her at 1:30!  She took lunch at the same time every day and shut the door to her office.  Why 1:30?  Because that's the time The Bold and the Beautiful came on, and the TV in her office was tuned to CBS!

Some of my favorite memories from Manhattan were just going into the women's basketball office and hanging out with the staff.  I'd go in there with an actual reason, completely forget what it was, and still spend 45 minutes in there!  We'd just talk about stuff and/or make fun of each other.  We were all truly friends, and I cherished those relationships.

After she left Manhattan, Sonia ended up across town at Fordham.  The first time Fordham visited Manhattan after she joined the staff, I asked her if she was lost.  She had gone to the visitor's locker room was sitting on the wrong bench!  As soon as she heard my voice, she turned around and gave me a big hug.  We hadn't seen each other in a while, but it was like we'd just seen each other yesterday.

I haven't worked a game at Fordham in a few years, but a friend of mine who's a regular member of their gameday staff noticed that she wasn't on the sidelines for most of last season.  He assumed the reason was COVID-related.  It wasn't until one of the Fordham players set up a GoFundMe page for her that we found out it was cancer.  Having already lost my mom to cancer and knowing about the toll chemotherapy can take on people, I donated and wished her the best, hoping that she'd beat it.

Unfortunately, Sonia lost her battle, and the world has lost a wonderful woman.  She was as great a friend as she was a basketball coach, and I'm lucky to have not only known her, but also to have had the privilege of calling her a friend.  I'll miss you, my friend.  Rest in peace.

NHL Schedule Scenarios

As Seattle prepares to get Kraken on building its inaugural roster (I'm gonna make that joke a lot, so you'd better get used to it), the NHL has another pressing matter that should be settled by the expansion draft--next season's schedule.  More specifically, next season's divisional alignment and schedule formula.

Let's start with the divisional alignment.  As everyone knows, they had to temporarily realign the divisions last season because of the cross-border travel restrictions, resulting in the all-Canadian North Division.  Not surprisingly, some teams (especially the seven in Canada) really liked those divisions and want to keep them.  That seemed unlikely to begin with (there are only seven Canadian teams, so there would have to be an American team in that division regardless, which would defeat the whole purpose!).  And, now that the border is finally reopening, I'd say the chances of last season's temporary divisions becoming permanent is pretty close to zero.

So, it looks like we'll be going back to the 2019-20 divisions with one minor change--Arizona moving to the Central with Seattle taking the Coyotes' place in the Pacific.  That's been the plan ever since Seattle was awarded a franchise, and there's no reason to change it now.  It also allows the NHL to go back to having Eastern and Western Conferences after last season's mix-and-match playoffs that saw two teams ordinarily in the same division playing in the Cup Final.

The schedule, however, is something that they'll definitely need to figure out.  The current formula doesn't completely work because adding Seattle to it would give everybody 84 games.  And, since the NHL seems to prefer keeping it at 82 instead of playing those two extra games per team, some modifications are necessary.

They've proposed two different schedule formats for next season, one of which is far superior to the other.  Option 1 is basically the same schedule they currently play with two division games taken away to account for the home-and-home with Seattle.  Here's the breakdown: 2 vs. other conference (32 games), 3 vs. conference (24 games), 4 vs. 5 division teams (20 games), 3 vs. 2 division teams (6 games).  More significantly, the playoffs are conference-based under Option 1.

Option 2, meanwhile, is similar to this season's schedule in that it's division-based.  The conferences are essentially ignored, as each team would only play two games against each of the 24 opponents outside its division.  They also have six "rivalry games," which is somewhat ambiguous.  Here's how Option 2 breaks down: 2 vs. all teams outside division (48 games), 4 vs. division (24 games), 6 "rivalry games".  Option 2 would also keep the division-based playoff format intact.

I've got so many questions regarding Option 2.  Who are these "rivalry games" against?  Does ESPN (and/or TNT) get to decide what constitutes a "rivalry game?"  Would they be different every year?  If they're against division teams (I'm assuming Rangers-Islanders, Canadiens-Maple Leafs, etc. would count as "rivalry games"), are those in addition to the four matchups those teams would already play against each other?  (Also, why not just have them play everybody in their division five times, except for the one team they'd only play four?)

There are so many reasons why Option 1 is clearly better.  For one, the players loved the back-to-backs against the same opponent in the same city, and the NHL has indicated that would continue.  But, it would be impossible to do if they only visit an opponent for one game.  With Option 1, however, they'll have two games in one city against 15 different teams, which doesn't just make the back-to-backs doable, it makes creating the schedule as a whole much easier (a team could theoretically come to New York, stay for a week, play four or five games, and never have to change hotels). 

Is there a downside to Option 1?  Yes, but it's so minor that it's not even significant.  Playing a division rival only three times means one of you gets only one home game against the other.  But, again, not a big deal.  Especially since that's luck of the draw.  And I'd imagine they'll draw up a formula similar to the one they used to determine who got the extra home game during those years you played some of your division rivals five times.

Most importantly, though, Option 1 features the return of the conference-based playoffs!  This is something I've wanted for years!  And I don't think I'm the only one.  Because the division-based system may sound nice in theory, but is actually an incredibly flawed format.  And those flaws have been exposed repeatedly over the past few years.

How many times did the Capitals and Penguins have the two best records in the NHL, but, because they're both in the Metropolitan Division, end up playing in the second round of the playoffs?  Or, how about this year, when Carolina, Florida and Tampa Bay, who were all in the same division, had the third-, fourth- and eighth-highest point totals in the league, forcing the Panthers and Lightning to play in the first round?  And, of course, Colorado and Vegas tied for the best record in the league, but had to play each other in the second round because of the division-based format.

Upsets are always going to happen in the Stanley Cup Playoffs.  That's part of the beauty of them.  But teams were reseeded in the conference-based format, ensuring the best teams didn't face each other until the later rounds.  Just as importantly, though, if the third- and fourth-best teams in the conference were in the same division, you wouldn't have one eliminating the other in the first round!  It also means that you can finish fifth in a strong division and still get the playoff seed you deserve, which has always been one of my biggest frustrations with the current format!

While I have no idea which format the NHL will ultimately choose, I'd be very surprised if they don't pick Option 1.  I'm not the only one who's frustrated by the current playoff system, especially since it's such an easy thing to fix.  Option 1 does just that, while also maintaining the league's pre-COVID schedule format as much as possible.

Also of note, the NHL is developing two versions of the 2021-22 schedule--one with an Olympic break, one without.  Here's hoping they use the one with an Olympic break in it!

Goodbye Dumb Rules

There was one piece of information that came out of Rob Manfred's All*Star Game press conference that I think most baseball fans were waiting for.  The common reaction to that news was one word: "Finally!"  So what was this news that drew such a response?  That extra innings and doubleheaders will be returning to normal next season.

Both changes, of course, were introduced last year because of the pandemic.  With the sheer number of games they were trying to cram into such a short amount of time, they knew there were likely going to be a lot of doubleheaders in 2020.  Especially when you consider the fact that there would be COVID pauses, as well as the standard weather-related reasons.  So, as a way of making it so teams didn't completely kill their entire pitching staff, they reduced doubleheaders to seven-inning games, meaning they'd only have to play 14 innings in a day instead of 18.

The free runner at second base was the other controversial change introduced last season.  The thought process there was similar.  By starting each extra inning with a runner on second, that made it more likely that a team would score.  More scoring would then, theoretically, eliminate those long extra inning games that take all night.  They wanted games to end quicker so that teams wouldn't spend as much time at the ballpark, and this was their way of doing it.

Even the people who didn't like these rule changes accepted them as a necessary way of navigating through a baseball season during a pandemic.  Especially since it was "only going to be one year."  We could deal with it for 60 games.  We were just happy that there was a baseball season at all.

So, needless to say it was more than a little disappointing to find out that these one-year-only changes were coming back in 2021.  Meanwhile, the universal DH, the rule change that virtually nobody had a problem with and seemed like was inevitably coming within the next few years anyway actually was a one-and-done.  Pitchers were back to batting for themselves, but we still had seven-inning games and free runners.  For a full season this time.

Yes, I do understand that some people actually do like these rules and wanted to see them implemented permanently.  They were a vast minority, however.  Most fans hate them with a passion and many wish they'd never been implemented in the first place.  It was change for the sake of change, and change that was too drastic at that.

Manfred's main rationale for keeping those rules in place this season was the state of the pandemic.  Things hadn't improved enough that he felt comfortable pulling back the COVID restrictions, which included the doubleheader and extra inning rules.  Things, of course, are much different now than they were at the start of the season, but he said that he can't simply change it back in the middle of the year.  Hence having to wait until 2022 for the return to normal. 

While I don't like either rule, I definitely have a bigger problem with the doubleheaders.  As I said at the start of the season, it's simply not necessary during a full season, when teams are only going to play a handful of twinbills over the course of six months.  This isn't last year, when the Cardinals and Marlins were seemingly playing one every other day in an attempt to make up all the games they missed during their long COVID pauses.

Likewise, last year, when you were playing in empty stadiums, it really didn't matter.  You weren't losing ticket revenue by playing a straight doubleheader, so what was the difference?  And playing two games back-to-back is definitely easier than playing a split, which involves spending pretty much the entire day at the ballpark.  They were trying to keep players and coaches at the ballpark for the shortest amount of time possible, too, so that all but ruled out split doubleheaders.

This year, however, fans are back in the stands.  Which means we're back to having split doubleheaders, which are two separate admissions.  Except the price of the ticket is the same.  So fans had to pay 100 percent of the ticket price to see 78 percent of a game.  (The counterargument is that with a straight doubleheader you'd see 14 innings for the price of nine.  That's true.  But it's also true that a straight doubleheader was 18 innings for the price of nine until 2019, so it's still a net loss of four.)

And, sorry, but I don't by the argument about "saving the pitching staff."  Again, it made sense last year when there was no Minor League season, so teams were shuffling guys back and forth from their alternate site every day.  That's not the case this season, however.  And, again, navigating a handful of doubleheaders over the course of six months is significantly easier, especially when you consider how many relievers teams carry!  Simply put, it doesn't put any extra "burden" on your pitching staff to play a doubleheader.

Some people argue that the seven-inning games put more of an emphasis on starting pitching, but I don't agree with that assessment either.  If anything, knowing they can go to the bullpen two innings earlier makes mangers less likely to stick with their starter.  Case in point, the Tampa Bay Rays' no-hitter (that doesn't count) last week, when they used five pitchers in seven innings!

Don't get me started on Madison Bumgarner either!  The no-hitter that wasn't is further proof that the seven-inning games are stupid!  He doesn't get credit for a no-hitter because he didn't go nine innings, even though the game was only scheduled for seven?  How does that make any sense at all?  It's somehow his fault that the game was two innings shorter.

As for extra innings, it's a gimmicky tournament rule.  That's where it should stay.  In those tournament-type situations, it's absolutely necessary to have some sort of tiebreaker so that they can stay on schedule.  It's always felt out of place in the Majors, though.  Worse than that, it felt forced.  The Majors aren't a tournament!

Beyond that, though, how many long extra inning games are there in a given season?  People always freak out when a game goes 14 or 15 innings, but, on the average, there's probably no more than 15 a year.  And that estimate's probably high.  (Those are also the fun ones where crazy things happen like position players pitching and pitchers pinch-hitting.)  Most extra inning games are usually over in either the 10th or 11th anyway.  And this is without a free base runner that completely changes your extra-innings strategy!

When Manfred kept these two dumb rules in place for this season, I was actually worried they were on their way to becoming permanent.  Fortunately, that's not the case.  Once the 2022 season starts, they'll be nothing more than a part of baseball history.  And all I have to say about that is: "Good riddance!"

MLB's Midseason Best

It's pretty clear who the biggest story of the 2021 season so far has been.  As we hit the All*Star Break, we're all continually left in awe of Shohei Ohtani's nightly exploits.  As incredible as it seems, he's got Angels fans saying "Mike Who?" about their other superstar, who until about two months ago was heralded as the game's best player.  (Just imagine what would happen if the Angels were ever actually good!)

This season has been about so much more than everybody's favorite Japanese sensation, though.  It's been the Year of the No-Hitter.  There have been seven of them, plus the unofficial seven-inning ones thrown by Madison Bumgarner and the Rays.  It's also been the Year of No Offense, which may or may not be a reason for all the no-nos.

Mostly, though, it's simply been a relief to have a "normal" baseball season again.  Sure, the Blue Jays are still playing in Buffalo and we still have the two stupid pandemic rules (in case you couldn't tell, I really hate seven-inning games!), but last year's 60-game sprint is thankfully a thing of the past.

Last season was what it was, so I'm not gonna discount any of the major award winners or attach any sort of asterisk because they did it in a shortened season.  But the 162-game season feels so much more complete and gives you a much larger body of work with which to judge players.  Especially when you consider that most teams have played in the 90 game range so far.  That's 30 more games than the entire season last year!  Which means the numbers we're seeing at the All*Star Break, even in a season lacking offense, are back to what we're used to seeing.

And that, frankly, makes midseason award decisions both easier and harder.  Midseason "awards" aren't an actual thing, of course.  And the "winners" often aren't even in the conversation when it comes time to vote for the real awards in November (especially for Rookie of the Year).  But that doesn't mean we can't recognize them, anyway!

Out of the eight awards, there's only one that would be considered a "no-brainer."  That's obviously Jacob deGrom for NL Cy Young.  For everything else, there's either multiple candidates or a legitimate debate between two leading contenders.  Awards like AL MVP, which is a pretty good place to start...

AL MVP: Vladimir Guerrero Jr., Blue Jays-Is Shohei Ohtani the most electric player in baseball?  Yes!  Is Shohei Ohtani doing things never seen or done in 100 years?  Yes!  Is Shohei Ohtani the midseason AL MVP?  No!  That honor goes to Toronto's Vladimir Guerrero Jr., who leads the AL in batting average and RBIs, is tied for second in hits, ranks second in runs scored, and trails only Ohtani in homers.

AL Cy Young: Lance Lynn, White Sox-Unlike in the National League (more on that later), there's no clear-cut leader for AL Cy Young at the break.  I'm gonna give the nod to Lance Lynn of the White Sox, who seems like a good candidate to start the All*Star Game.  He leads the AL with a 1.99 ERA, is second with nine wins and a .189 batting average against, and has 105 strikeouts in just 90.2 innings.  Every year, it seems like Lance Lynn is in the conversation for every contender that needs a starter at the deadline.  That won't be the case this season.  Because he's already anchoring the rotation of a contender.

AL Rookie: Adolis Garcia, Rangers-Only two rookies were selected to play in Tuesday night's All*Star Game.  One is Marlins pitcher Trevor Rogers.  The other is Adolis Garcia.  The Rangers' center fielder has 22 home runs and 62 RBIs, which are both tops among AL rookies by a wide margin.  It's not like he's all power and nothing else, either.  He's got 84 hits and a .270 batting average in 80 games.

AL Manager: Tony La Russa, White Sox-Sorry, but I can't in good conscience say Alex Cora.  Even though the Red Sox are clearly a much better team with him as their manager, I can't get over the fact that they basically condone what he did in Houston.  Besides, how can you not be impressed with the job Tony La Russa has done?  It's been a decade since he managed, and baseball has changed a lot in that time.  All he's done is lead the White Sox to the best record in the American League.  Should we be surprised, though?  The man's in the Hall of Fame for a reason, after all!

NL MVP: Fernando Tatis Jr., Padres-Remember way back in 2019-20 when HE was the biggest story in baseball?  Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it?  Anyway, Tatis is among the National League leaders in pretty much every category.  He's a bit of a throwback, too, ranking first in both homers (28) and stolen bases (20).  There have only been four 40-40 seasons in history.  Could this be the fifth?

NL Cy Young: Jacob deGrom, Mets-Talk about an easy one!  Whenever a pitcher is in the MVP conversation, it's pretty obvious that he's the leading contender for Cy Young, too.  And deGrom deserves it after putting up insane numbers during the first half.  His ERA is a microscopic 1.08, and challenging Bob Gibson's legendary 1.12 from 1968 is definitely a realistic possibility.  Plus, he's actually getting some run support this year, resulting in a 7-2 record!

NL Rookie: Jazz Chisholm, Marlins-There have been rookies who came up and made a splash for a few weeks (the Cubs' Patrick Wisdom, for example), but none have been as consistent as Jazz Chisholm, who also has the best name!  He played in 21 games last season and is now a regular in the Marlins' lineup, playing both second and short.  Miami's leadoff hitter, Chisholm has 11 homers and 11 stolen bases in 66 games.

NL Manager: Gabe Kapler, Giants-San Francisco plays in the same division as the Dodgers and Padres, the two teams taht were widely considered to be the best in the National League heading into the season.  Yet it's the Giants who lead the NL West at the All*Star Break!  And they aren't just in first place, they have the best record in the entire freakin' Major Leagues!  Honorable mention to Craig Counsell, who's once again working his magic in Milwaukee.

A Made-for-TV Olympics

In the end, the Japanese people got what they wanted.  Even with foreign spectators banned months ago, public health officials and the Japanese public at large was still worried about the Olympics being a super spreader event and insisted that if the Games were going ahead (which they eventually realized was going to happen), the "safest" way would be to hold them behind closed doors.  Now, with the state of emergency in the Tokyo area extended until mid-August, that's exactly what will happen.

Olympic officials and Tokyo organizers were still holding out hope that they'd be able to have at least a limited attendance, while knowing that the no fans at all option was a last resort.  Things changed quickly, too.  It went from 50 percent capacity to a maximum of 5,000 to no one at events that end after 9 p.m. within a matter of weeks.  Then the state of emergency was extended, making the last resort a reality.  Which probably left the medical people (many of whom didn't want the Olympics to happen at all) breathing a sigh of relief.

There's a lot to unpack here, starting with some obvious questions.  Their fear was about all of the people from all over the world, who may or may not be vaccinated, coming into Japan.  But, once foreign spectators were banned, the only people coming into Japan would be those associated with the Olympics in some way...and a majority of them will be vaccinated.  Plus, they're being kept in a bubble-like environment, with little to contact with anyone outside the bubble.  So, was the concern that the athletes would give COVID to the Japanese people or that they'd get COVID from the Japanese people?

Likewise, why is Japan's vaccination rate so bad?  Vaccines have been available since December.  A number of countries are doing a great job with vaccinations, including the United States and a good part of Europe.  Yet Japan is lagging behind.  How come?

The ironic thing is that this is the exact opposite situation as it was early in the pandemic.  While the U.S. and Europe were still in lockdowns and holding sporting events in empty arenas, the Asian nations seemingly had a hold on the virus and were reopening their economies.  Now, it's the U.S. and Europe where things are getting back to normal while in Japan it's surging.

It's also another cruelly unfair blow to the Tokyo organizers, who, by all accounts, were among the best-prepared Olympic hosts in history.  That preparation has definitely been tested with a one-year delay, scores of virus counter-measures and, now, no fans in the stands.  Their budget has already become even more massive because of all those extra costs...costs that they won't be able to recoup with ticket revenue! 

Simply put, Tokyo can't just be looped in with Sochi and Montreal, which critics will inevitably do.  Some of the cost overruns were their fault (the National Stadium being the obvious example).  But, what's happened over the past 18 months was entirely unforeseen, so they can't be blamed for them!  If anything, they should be applauded for being willing to take on those costs when they knew there was a possibility they wouldn't make any of it back in ticket sales.

You've gotta feel for the athletes, too.  This is NOT the Olympic experience they signed up for!  They work their entire lives to qualify for the Olympics, to mingle with athletes from all corners of the globe in all different sports, to walk out into the stadium behind their national flag with 75,000 people screaming for them, to watch their teammates in other sports and explore the host city.  They'll get to do none of that! 

Although, if the athletes have shown us anything over the past 18 months, it's that they're resilient.  We saw all those photos and videos of their improvised pandemic training.  Some athletes had COVID themselves, yet found a way to train through it and get back into Olympic shape.  All this while also having to adjust mentally, taking the disappointment of 2020 and readjusting their focus to 2021.  None of which could've been easy.

They've also shown that they can still perform in empty stadiums.  When sports returned late last summer, there were no fans anywhere.  They've gradually returned at different levels, which has obviously brought back an atmosphere that can't be replicated.  However, virtually all of these Olympians had the experience of competing in that quiet in front of nobody.  Which will be incredibly beneficial.  It's off-putting.  And you don't want your first time doing it to be in the biggest competition of your life!

While anyone would obviously take a packed house over empty stands if given the option, the lack of spectators may actually be beneficial to some athletes, too.  It may take some of those Olympic nerves away.  After all, they don't have fans there when they practice!  And some or all of the competition in many Olympic sports (marathon swimming, rowing, canoe/kayak, sailing, road cycling, mountain biking, triathlon) takes place in areas that are hard or impossible for fans to access anyway, so things may not seem that much different for them.

And, unlike those events, which were held in completely empty venues, there will at least be some live people at the Olympics.  How many remains to be seen.  But VIPs and officials will still be allowed to attend.  So will the media (although far fewer than they'd otherwise see).  And, of course, their coaches and teammates (nothing's been said about non-competing athletes being allowed to attend other sessions in their sport, but I'm assuming it'll be allowed).  Is that the same?  No!  But at least it won't be silent.

As we've seen over the past 18 months, if everyone's committed to it, the bubble concept can work.  It's been used effectively all over the world in all different sports.  And, if the only two options on the table are a behind-closed-doors Olympics in a bubble or no Olympics at all, I think everyone would choose the former.

Not holding the Olympics as (re)scheduled this year was never an option.  The IOC generates way too much of its revenue from TV rights.  And the Olympics are a made-for-TV event in most of the world anyway, so while not having spectators isn't ideal, it wasn't a deal breaker either.  Especially not when we've seen how well a made-for-TV major sporting event can be pulled off.

Of course, they went into those events knowing they would be in empty stadiums, which allowed them to try different things with camera positions and microphones.  Since the call to have no spectators at all was made so late, they may not be able to do as many of those things as they otherwise would've, but you'd still have to think they'll come up with something to make the experience memorable for both the athletes and the worldwide television audience in the billions.

We already knew that these Pandemic Olympics would be unlike any other before.  Just add another thing to the list.  The Tokyo Olympics: the first to be postponed, the first to take place during a pandemic, now the first to be held without spectators.  But the world will still be watching.  And the biggest TV event of the year just became that much bigger.

Sorry, No Sha'Carri

The U.S. Olympic track & field team has been officially named, and Sha'Carri Richardson is not included.  This shouldn't have come as a surprise to anybody.  Even though she was eligible for the 4x100 relay, her agent indicated over the weekend that they weren't thinking about it.  So the decision to leave her off actually wasn't a hard one.

That hasn't stopped social media from its collective freak out that's been going on ever since Richardson's suspension was first announced a few days ago.  Unfortunately for all the outraged people on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, demanding her reinstatement wasn't actually gonna do anything.  (For one thing, she admitted her guilt and accepted her suspension, so that really was the end of it right there.)

All that the "arguments" on Richardson's behalf show is how much people don't get it.  Whether it's plain ignorance or simply not understanding how the whole process works, this isn't USA Track & Field's "fault."  Nor is it Jenna Prandini's.  Prandini was treated especially unfairly.  This has nothing to do with her!  And she didn't "take" Richardson's spot on the team.

Some of the comments towards and about Prandini were particularly vile, but the ones directed at USA Track & Field and the USOPC really didn't make any sense.  There was the "why don't you want another gold medal?" crowd, as if the result of the women's 100 in Tokyo was a foregone conclusion (Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce was gonna have something to say about that even if Richardson was there).  Almost as prevalent was the "your rules suck" crowd who seem to think that USATF and the USOPC arbitrarily made this decision and could just reverse it.  (You can't pick and choose which rules you follow!)

One of the most common rationales people gave for why Richardson shouldn't have been suspended is because marijuana is legal in Oregon, where the Olympic Trials took place.  So what?  It's also legal in a number of other states.  Which is a completely irrelevant fact!  Because, as crazy as it sounds, the world anti-doping code isn't based on Oregon state law!

Likewise, there was the "marijuana isn't performance-enhancing" crowd.  That argument is at least a little stronger than the "it's legal in Oregon" argument, but it's still somewhat dubious.  Not everyone is in agreement with that point, but, even if they were, that too wouldn't matter.  Because, peformance-enhancing or not, marijuana is still on WADA's banned substance list!

Now, whether pot should be on the banned substance list is a completely different debate.  And it's probably one worth having.  But it's not gonna happen now, and they're not gonna make any exceptions to it either!  So, whether the rule is stupid or not, and whether everyone agrees with it or not, it's still the rule.

Then there's the most idiotic argument of all--that she was somehow being targeted.  While it's true that in the real world, the majority of marijuana arrests are people of color, that's yet another irrelevant statistic in this situation.  Every athlete who competed at the Olympic Trials was subject to drug testing.  Richardson is no different.  And it became even more likely that she'd be tested once she made the team...just like everyone else who made the team!

Even President Biden was asked about it, and his answer summed up the situation perfectly: "It's unfortunate, but the rules are the rules."  It's really that simple.  Marijuana is listed as a banned substance under the WADA code.  It's been that way for years.  Richardson knew this and she decided to light up anyway.  So, regardless of who you want to blame, the fault is 100 percent her own.  And she knows it.  Which is why she owned up to her mistake.

It was actually kind of refreshing to see the level of maturity she's displayed through all this.  No excuses, no declarations of innocence.  She owned up to what happened and explained why.  We can all empathize with her.  (I was a mess when my mom died!)  As a means of coping with her grief, she made a poor choice.  And she's paid dearly for it!

And what did Richardson have to say after having to put her Olympic dreams on hold (again)?  Three words.  Three words that said it all.  "I am human."  She made a mistake.  She knows it, she's sorry about it, and she regrets it.  She also acknowledged that she's only 21, so it's not like Tokyo was going to be her only Olympic chance.  She even vowed to dominate the sport heading into the Paris Games, when she'll still be just 24!

Also worth noting here is that the timing is the real issue.  Her suspension is only for one month.  If it happened at any other time of the year (or in any other year), we might not even know about it until after it happened.  (Michael Phelps once served a three-month marijuana suspension that nobody knew about until it was over.)  But because it happened at the Olympic Trials, which took place less than a month before the start of the Olympics, it became a problem.  And that's why America's collective panties got in a bunch.

However, even if Richardson's suspension had somehow been lifted by USATF or the USOPC, that wouldn't have put her on the team anyway.  Her result at Trials was voided, and the top three finishers at Trials are the ones who make the team.  So, she would've also needed to have her Trials result reinstated...and that would've looked awfully suspect everywhere else in the world.

Of course, the 4x100 relay in Tokyo is scheduled for after her suspension expires, and USATF had two discretionary picks for the relay.  They normally go to the fifth- and sixth-place finishers at Trials, but that's not a requirement.  USATF could've included Richardson in the relay pool if they chose to.  But that would've opened up a whole new can of worms!  (Besides, as her agent's comments indicated, I'm not sure she would've wanted to go just for the relay.)

So, people can be as outraged as they want on social media.  They can threaten to not watch the Olympics all they want because of how unfair they think it is.  But that doesn't change the situation.  And the only person actually affected by all of this seems to be at peace with it. 

Sha'Carri Richardson made a mistake.  She knows it, and she has accepted the consequences.  Even though those consequences mean missing the Olympics!  Is she disappointed?  Of course!  But she isn't blaming anybody else either.  Unlike her online "supporters," she's taking responsibility.  We can all learn something from her.

The All*Star Game Is Back

Why, oh why, do people insist on voting for players they know are injured for the All*Star Game?!  Mike Trout's been out since mid-May and will be out until mid-July, which not only means he'll miss the All*Star Game, it means he was injured during the entire voting period!  Yet people voted for him anyway!  Use your "he's the best player in the game" excuse all you want.  Voting for him was just stupid and a wasted vote!

Among the players who actually will be taking the field as starters next Tuesday in Denver will be first-timers Vladimir Guerrero Jr., Shohei Ohtani and Fernando Tatis Jr.  It's a little hard to believe that none of them have been All*Stars before...until you consider the fact that they all would've been All*Stars last year had the All*Star Game not been cancelled.

There were also some surprising-on-the-surface selections.  Until you look at the stats and see the selections of Adam Frazier, Nick Castellanos and Jesse Winker actually are warranted!  And how about three Blue Jays getting the nod?  Guerrero was a no-doubter, but Marcus Semien and Teoscar Hernandez, too. 

Three Blue Jays and zero Houston Astros.  Despite having the most players in the final round of voting, no Astros will be starting.  When I saw that, I thought it was possible some fans had actually put the sign-stealing behind them, but I'm glad to see that isn't the case.  I'd imagine the Astros will be booed as loudly as the players from the other NL West teams during player introductions.

While it's probably not a stretch to say the Astros will be loudly booed, I'm curious to see what type of reaction Nolan Arenado gets.  He pretty clearly wanted out of Colorado, but he was the beloved Face of the Rockies for a long time.  Will he be welcomed back the way he deserves, as a franchise icon?  I hope so!

Frankly, I can't wait for this year's All*Star Game, and not just to see this new generation of stars make the first of what should be many appearances.  The fact that the game's likely to be a homer frenzy like Denver's previous All*Star Game in 1998 will make it fun, too, but that's not the reason either.  Mainly I'm just glad to see our annual summer celebrations return.  There was definitely something missing last year with no All*Star Game (for the first time since World War II).

But who'll be there?  We know the starters, but that's it.  Here's who I think fills out the rest of the teams (including replacements for Trout and others who were likely selected but are currently injured)...

AMERICAN LEAGUE
C: *-Salvador Perez, Royals; Gary Sanchez, Yankees
1B: *-Vladimir Guerrero Jr., Blue Jays; Yuli Gurriel, Astros
2B: *-Marcus Semien, Blue Jays; Jonathan Schoop, Tigers; Jose Altuve, Astros
SS: *-Xander Bogaerts, Red Sox; Bo Bichette, Blue Jays
3B: *-Rafael Devers, Red Sox; Jose Ramirez, Indians
OF: x-Mike Trout, Angels; *-Aaron Judge, Yankees; *-Teoscar Hernandez, Blue Jays; Cedric Mullins, Orioles; Michael Brantley, Astros; Mitch Haniger, Mariners; Alex Verdugo, Red Sox (injury replacement)
DH: *-Shohei Ohtani, Angels; J.D. Martinez, Red Sox; Nelson Cruz, Twins
SP: Dylan Cease, White Sox; x-Shane Bieber, Indians; x-Aaron Civale, Indians; Zack Greinke, Astros; Jose Berrios, Twins; Gerrit Cole, Yankees; Chris Bassitt, Athletics; Kyle Gibson, Rangers; Lance Lynn, White Sox (injury replacement)
RP: Matt Barnes, Red Sox; Liam Hendriks, White Sox; Ryan Pressly, Astros; Diego Castillo, Rays; Kendall Graveman, Mariners (injury replacement)

I'm not entirely sure how they'll pick Trout's replacement in the starting lineup.  If they go by who was next in the fan vote, it'd be Michael Brantley.  If they go by the highest finisher in the player vote, we don't exactly know who that is, but Cedric Mullins would stand a pretty good shot.  He's also the only center fielder I've got on the AL roster (although Judge and Hernandez have both played center this season), so that would work in two respects.

Your guess is as good as mine as to who'll be the starting pitcher (it won't be Ohtani if that's what you're thinking).  It might come down to who's the most rested.  And, with both Indians injured, I actually think it could be Gerrit Cole.  Or it could be Cole's former Astros teammate Zack Greinke, who's starting Saturday, which would put the All*Star Game on his throw day.

NATIONAL LEAGUE
C: *-Buster Posey, Giants; Willson Contreras, Cubs
1B: *-Freddie Freeman, Braves; Max Muncy, Dodgers; Paul Goldschmidt, Cardinals
2B: *-Adam Frazier, Pirates; Ozzie Albies, Braves
SS: *-Fernando Tatis Jr., Padres; Brandon Crawford, Giants; Trea Turner, Nationals
3B: *-Nolan Arenado, Cardinals; Eduardo Escobar, Diamondbacks; Justin Turner, Dodgers
OF: *-Ronald Acuna Jr., Braves; *-Nick Castellanos, Reds; *-Jesse Winker, Reds; Raimel Tapia, Rockies; Andrew McCutchen, Phillies; Bryan Reynolds, Pirates; x-Kyle Schwarber, Nationals; Juan Soto, Nationals (injury replacement)
SP: Walker Buehler, Dodgers; Clayton Kershaw, Dodgers; Trevor Rogers, Marlins; Freddy Peralta, Brewers; Jacob deGrom, Mets; Yu Darvish, Padres; Kevin Gausman, Giants; Jack Flaherty, Cardinals; Max Scherzer, Nationals
RP: Craig Kimbrel, Cubs; Kenley Jansen, Dodgers; Josh Hader, Brewers

The National League starting pitcher should be easy.  Jacob deGrom hasn't just been the best pitcher in all of baseball...he's arguably been the NL MVP!  So, of course, the stars didn't align for him to make the All*Star start.  He's scheduled to pitch Sunday, which knocks him out of not just starting, but probably pitching entirely.

So, if not deGrom, who should get the start then?  How about somebody from a team that's been one of the most pleasant surprises of the first half?  Kevin Gausman of the Giants.  He's 8-2, and if not for deGrom's ridiculous sub-1.00 ERA, we'd be talking about Gausman's almost-as-crazy 1.68.  Not sure how San Francisco's rotation lines up, but if Gausman can start, he'd be the choice.

As for the NL DH, that should've-been-easy choice has also had to change.  Kyle Schwarber would've been an obvious call, but he's out with a "significant" hamstring injury.  Ordinarily I'd then suggest a Rockie so that the home team is represented in the starting lineup, but Raimel Tapia definitely WON'T be starting at DH.  Instead, I'll say Max Muncy and get the defending champs represented (there should be plenty of Dodgers starting in 2022).

With that in mind, here's the way I'd set up the lineups for next Tuesday night, when the All*Star Game returns:

AL: Semien-2B, Ohtani-DH, Judge-RF, Guerrero-1B, Brantley-LF, Bogaerts-SS, Devers-3B, Perez-C, Hernandez-CF, Greinke-P
NL: Acuna-CF, Freeman-1B, Tatis-SS, Arenado-3B, Muncy-DH, Posey-C, Castellanos-RF, Winker-LF, Frazier-2B, Gausman-P

Golf, Tennis and the Olympics

For most Olympic athletes, a gold medal is the ultimate.  It's what they work their entire career for, knowing their chance for it only comes around once every four (or five) years.  Sure, there are World Championships and other major events outside of the Olympics, but none of them hold anywhere near the same prestige.  That's why, outside of an injury, you rarely, if ever, see an athlete in any of these sports turn down a chance to go to the Olympics.

In tennis and golf, however, that's not the case.  Numerous top tennis players and golfers have opted not to play in Tokyo, for various reasons.  This isn't a new development.  In fact, it's fairly common in those two sports.  Because in golf and tennis, the Olympic gold medal isn't the ultimate prize.  It's still something the top players would like to add to their resume, but it's not incomplete without it.

This isn't the fault of the golfers and tennis players.  The Grand Slams have always been the focus in those sports.  For a long time, the Grand Slams were all there was.  Tennis was out of the Olympics for 64 years before finally returning in 1988, while golf is still new to the Olympic program, only being added back to the program five years ago in Rio.  So, for a long time, tennis players and golfers had no reason to think about the Olympics.

The Grand Slams, meanwhile, have always been there.  Four major championships a year, all of which are soaked in history and prestige.  Winning a major is everything.  And if you want to be one of the all-time greats, you need to win a bunch of them (preferably different once multiple times each).

Of course, in tennis, the Olympic gold medal is one level slightly below that.  And the Olympic gold creates a whole new category of the five most prestigious titles in the sport: the "Golden Slam."  Only four people have won the career "Golden Slam"--Steffi Graf (whose calendar-year "Golden Slam" in 1988 is one of the greatest achievements in tennis history), Serena Williams, Andre Agassi and Rafael Nadal.

Wimbledon obviously still needs to play out, but Novak Djokovic could potentially go to Tokyo with a chance to join Graf as the only players to complete a calendar-year "Golden Slam."  His only career Olympic medal was a bronze 13 years ago in Beijing, when he wasn't Novak Djokovic yet, so his motivation to win gold in Tokyo is pretty high.  Which is one of the reasons why he'll be there.

Then there's Andy Murray, who used the Olympics to finally get over the hump.  Less than a month after losing the 2012 Wimbledon final to Roger Federer, he was back on Centre Court beating Federer for Olympic gold.  He then won his first Grand Slam title a few weeks later at the US Open before finally winning Wimbledon the following year.  In 2016, Murray won his second career Wimbledon, then became the first player to defend Olympic gold in tennis.

Another Brit--Justin Rose--was enthusiastic about playing golf in Rio while so many other top players weren't.  He predicted that those who were indifferent about Olympic golf would change their tune once they found out what they missed.  There are still a good number of high-profile withdrawals for this year's Olympic golf tournament, but you'd have to think the pandemic might've had something to do with that.  The real test of Rose's theory will be three years from now in Paris.

Every player has their own reason for whether they choose to play in the Olympics or not.  For some it's an injury.  For some it's the travel.  For some it's the timing.  For some, like Rory McIlroy, it's a matter of avoiding an awkward decision about what country to represent.  (McIlroy is from Northern Ireland, which doesn't have its own Olympic team, so would've had to choose between representing Ireland or Great Britain.)  And for some, yes, it is true that the Olympics simply aren't a priority.

But to think that this dilutes the Olympic golf and tennis tournaments in any way is a completely cynical (and wrong) view.  Is the field the same quality as a Major?  No.  But it was never going to be.  Not when the Olympics grants universality places to players from smaller countries who otherwise wouldn't qualify.  And how do those lower-ranked players affect the quality of the tournament?  Not at all.

Likewise, the players who are there get it.  They want Olympic gold.  One of Rose's reasons for playing in Rio was because he wanted to be the first Olympic golf champion in 112 years.  Monica Puig's tennis gold in Rio, meanwhile, was the first Olympic gold medal EVER for Puerto Rico.  You think that didn't matter?

One of the arguments against golf and tennis is that they don't need the Olympics like athletes in some other sports do.  Golfers and tennis players are some of highest-earning athletes in the world, not just because of endorsements, but because of the amount of prize money available at the Majors and other top tournaments.  And, frankly, it really says something that they still show up for the Olympics despite the fact that the tournament doesn't offer prize money or ranking points.  The honor of representing their country and prestige of the gold medal are motivation enough.

Tennis players and golfers are also some of the most famous athletes at the Olympics.  You may not know the name of a single other person on the entire Serbian Olympic team.  But you'll know Novak Djokovic.  Ditto with Roger Federer and Switzerland (should he participate).  And who's Fiji's most famous athlete?  That would be Vijay Singh.

Would it be great if Olympic golf and tennis were like the other sports, where all the best in the world are there?  Of course!  And it's true that the high number of Olympic opt-outs is pretty much limited to golf and tennis.  The thought of deciding to not play in the Olympics when given the chance is completely inconceivable to athletes in most other sports.

Fans of golf and tennis get it, though.  The four Majors are the most important events.  Always have been, always will be.  Which isn't to say the Olympics don't matter.  It's just that they don't matter as much as the Majors.  Which isn't a bad thing.  (As much as hockey players want to win Olympic gold, they'd all be the first to tell you that getting their name on the Stanley Cup matters more.)

I'm willing to make a prediction, too.  Once we get to Tokyo, who is and isn't playing in the golf and tennis tournaments won't be a point of discussion anymore.  And whoever wins the gold won't downplay its significance.  It may not be a Major, but it'll be pretty close.